is celestia vegan?

[krossbow]

just wondering based upon http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0498.html

"they don't let you eat them around here anyways"; so are they allowed to eat meat at all? is the good afterlife against eating other living beings and forced to eat tofu?

or do they just not eat celestial fish? in that case, why is it good to eat EARTHLY fish?

[MReav]

just wondering based upon http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0498.html

"they don't let you eat them around here anyways"; so are they allowed to eat meat at all? is the good afterlife against eating other living beings and forced to eat tofu?

or do they just not eat celestial fish? in that case, why is it good to eat EARTHLY fish?

Animals with the celestial template are sentient.

And no one needs to eat and there are plenty of ghost clerics and angels with clerics spells that can summon food pretty easily.

[Aldrakan]

Well they don't need to eat, what with not having physical bodies. I suppose you could hold that killing creatures to eat them isn't evil if you're doing it for survival, but just doing it for pleasure isn't really on.

[Solaris]

... That's it, I'm joining Team Evil.

[chiasaur11]

Don't see why it'd need to be if they can make meat that wasn't ever part of an animal.

Also: Could it be called heaven without bacon?

[Porthos]

Oh I think that the existence of All Steaks Go To Heaven (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0492.html) suggests that meat eaters get to indulge themselves if they want to. :smallwink:


Well they don't need to eat, what with not having physical bodies. I suppose you could hold that killing creatures to eat them isn't evil if you're doing it for survival, but just doing it for pleasure isn't really on.

Roy's Archon specifically talks about how the first level (at least) of Celestia is partially devoted to getting those impules out of your system (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0493.html). :smallwink:

[krossbow]

Roy's Archon specifically talks about how the first level (at least) of Celestia is partially devoted to getting those impules out of your system (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0493.html). :smallwink:



FASCISM! PURE AND UTTER FASCISM!

[Da'Shain]

I'd imagine food in Celestia can be whatever you want it to be, and doesn't actually require the harming of any living thing -- plant or animal.

I've never gotten the whole "won't eat animals for moral reasons" thing myself. Plants are alive too. I can understand being a vegan as a diet that you think is better for you (although I'd disagree), but I see nothing worse about eating animals that are killed as humanely as possible than eating plants.

[Porthos]

FASCISM! PURE AND UTTER FASCISM!

Errr. OK, whatever you say. :smallsmile:

*backs slowly away from the guy with a bow and arrow in his hands*

[Cracklord]

All steaks go to heaven is a facility for eating.
So I am going to go with no.

[Katana_Geldar]

Sara Greenhilt can make jambalya for Roy and Roy can eat it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0600.html).

And isn't jambalya usually made with meat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jambalaya)?

[Porthos]

Sara Greenhilt can make jambalya for Roy and Roy can eat it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0600.html).

And isn't jambalya usually made with meat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jambalaya)?

They probably get the meat from the cows that like to be eaten (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_characters_from_The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_ the_Galaxy#Dish_of_the_Day). :smallwink:

[charl]

I'd imagine food in Celestia can be whatever you want it to be, and doesn't actually require the harming of any living thing -- plant or animal.

I've never gotten the whole "won't eat animals for moral reasons" thing myself. Plants are alive too. I can understand being a vegan as a diet that you think is better for you (although I'd disagree), but I see nothing worse about eating animals that are killed as humanely as possible than eating plants.

Never mind that. Plants are about as far from us as life can get (discounting viruses and non-eukaryot lifeforms). What I really don't get is why vegans don't refuse to eat fungi and fungi-derived foodstuff, including anything alcoholic. Of course, doing that would essentially be suicide since penicillin is derived from fungi, but still. Fungi are relatively speaking pretty close to animals, and they share many similarities with us. An argument could be made that they can't feel pain, but neither can creatures like sea cucumbers and sponges and they are clearly off-limits to vegans.

So... yeah.

And also: Celestials eat meat. Primes don't really count, as any cutter can tell you. It would mean you'd have to import it, but anyway. Plus, you could always eat evil creatures, not that fiendish animals are particularly tasty or anything.

EDIT: And Celestia, while good, is not pacifist. It has no problem with killing as such. It has a problem with murder.

[Larkspur]

They've got whole dungeons full of just-challenging-enough-to-be-fun monsters. So a) they can kill things up there and b) maybe they eat those? It's not very LG to waste meat, after all.

[krossbow]

Plus, you could always eat evil creatures, not that fiendish animals are particularly tasty or anything.



Ooh, now that seems a bit neutralish there; deciding its okay to kill and devour someone as long as they think differently from you kind of seems out of line. its kind of like miko's arguments about when its right or wrong to kill a dragon :smalltongue:




that being said, all steaks go to heaven seems to confirm one could eat meat; but at that point, it would have to be imported earthly meat wouldn't it? meat made through magical means would be somewhat similiar to artificial crab or something, just of an exceptional quality and likeness:smalltongue: (even if chemically identical to meat, it technically wouldn't be meat per se unless its pulled off an animal)

[charl]

Ooh, now that seems a bit neutralish there; deciding its okay to kill and devour someone as long as they think differently from you kind of seems out of line its kind of like miko's arguments about when its right or wrong to kill a dragon :smalltongue:




that being said, all steaks go to heaven seems to confirm one could eat meat; but at that point, it would have to be imported earthly meat wouldn't it? meat made through magical means would be somewhat similiar to artificial crab or something, just of an exceptional quality and likeness:smalltongue:

Artificial crab is actually fish, though. So something has to die.

There are experiments with laboratory-grown meat. It hasn't gotten far yet, but in the future...

As for the above, my view on the planes is heavily flavoured by Planescape, in which that kind of logic is often invoked.

[Katana_Geldar]

I like the idea how you can eat just for the pleasure of it and not worry about all the other stuff that comes with eating (panel 6) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0499.html), after all, you don't have a body anymore.

[Mugen Nightgale]

Eating and other mundane pleasures are futile for higher Celestians I guess.. So I don't think they are vegans or anything like that. Just beings that look down on body needs. Roy was in the first part of the mountain that's supposed to be a place for lower(not enlighten souls) his grand father was in a higher place.

[Ichneumon]

Most food is just created out of thin air, I guess, so you can eat meat without any animal involved. If the fish was celestial (and therefore shouldn't be killed) or not and what it means to the Good side's view on veganism, is uncertain. Mostly because any type of creature can be summonded, just look at Roy's dad.

[SageAllen]

On a plane whose entire reality is shaped by belief, there is likely no source for the meat other than a petitioner's wish to have meat.

[Cracklord]

It's all in your head. i mean, why wold souls need sustenance anyway?

[donkyhotay]

Also: Could it be called heaven without bacon?

No, no it couldn't.

[derfenrirwolv]

I think celestia is outright non eating. Eating is a material concern that doesn't bother you when you don't have a body

[Barbarianpixie]

Never mind that. Plants are about as far from us as life can get (discounting viruses and non-eukaryot lifeforms). What I really don't get is why vegans don't refuse to eat fungi and fungi-derived foodstuff, including anything alcoholic. Of course, doing that would essentially be suicide since penicillin is derived from fungi, but still. Fungi are relatively speaking pretty close to animals, and they share many similarities with us. An argument could be made that they can't feel pain, but neither can creatures like sea cucumbers and sponges and they are clearly off-limits to vegans.


I think I read Peter Singer once saying he didn't eat oysters or whatever because he'd decided to give them the benefit of the doubt about the whole pain thing, which seems fair enough. Also, those things are slimy and yuck ;)

But yeah I don't think it's cell structure that most vegans care about so the point about fungi doesn't quite hit it on the head (unless youre talking about myconids!); rather they object to treating conscious creatures as food. And I mean nobody would say it's okay to eat chimps or bonobos or whatever even if they weren't endangered cause they're clearly too much like us. Vegans just extend that principle to all animals, and don't try to draw a line at some arbitrary point and say "this animal is sufficiently different from us to eat".

But that's kind of off-topic I guess. Sorry. As for the strip I'd understood it as meaning there just wasn't any need for food at that point in the afterlife, but thinking about it that doesn't make sense. Roy's grandfather said that 'they don't let you eat them around here', which sort of suggests it's a rule that's enforced somehow (magically, whatever), and that you might well have the urge to eat them and be able to in some way, but would be prevented from doing so. So I think it might well be something to do with Celestia being vege/vegan regarding animals that live there at least. I wonder if you could apply the celestial template to tofu? What would a vegan do then I wonder.

[EleventhHour]

No, they eat animals that want to be eaten.

(Resturant at the End of the Universe!)

[Optimystik]

Also: Could it be called heaven without bacon?

That would be my favorite part! All the bacon I can eat, and no adverse health effects!

[Hurkyl]

Vegans just extend that principle to all animals, and don't try to draw a line at some arbitrary point and say "this animal is sufficiently different from us to eat".
However, they did draw a line at "this living being is sufficiently different from us to eat".

[krossbow]

However, they did draw a line at "this living being is sufficiently different from us to eat".

I think someone is volunteering to be dinner... :smalltongue:

[charl]

I think I read Peter Singer once saying he didn't eat oysters or whatever because he'd decided to give them the benefit of the doubt about the whole pain thing, which seems fair enough. Also, those things are slimy and yuck ;)

But yeah I don't think it's cell structure that most vegans care about so the point about fungi doesn't quite hit it on the head (unless youre talking about myconids!); rather they object to treating conscious creatures as food. And I mean nobody would say it's okay to eat chimps or bonobos or whatever even if they weren't endangered cause they're clearly too much like us. Vegans just extend that principle to all animals, and don't try to draw a line at some arbitrary point and say "this animal is sufficiently different from us to eat".

Oysters are animals (and one of the few things I can't stand to eat). I see your point but I still don't get it because not all animals are conscious or capable of feeling pain or suffering. Sponges for example can't feel pain, and if you put a living sponge in a blender for an hour and then pour out the resulting mess and leave it be its cells will reconfigure themselves again (it's still alive) and create one or more new sponges. And it's just one of many animals that doesn't have any nervous system. No nerves, no pain, no conciousness, no suffering. In that regard it is almost like a plant, or for that matter like fungi. But these things aren't ok to eat or otherwise use for a vegan, while a mushroom or yeast are? It doesn't make sense to me.

[Ichneumon]

But these things aren't ok to eat or otherwise use for a vegan, while a mushroom or yeast are? It doesn't make sense to me.

I am a vegan and to be honest I have never been in a postion in which I had to choose to use a sponge or not. I don't think I'd object to it, because of the reasons you've mentioned. Indeed, sponges are technically (and most importantly biologically) animals, but I think that leaving out sponges and unicellar animals doesn't form a logical error or inconsistency as long as you accept that our common day meaning and use of "animals" is different than the biological meaning.

[Serpentine]

What I really don't get is why vegans don't refuse to eat fungi and fungi-derived foodstuff, including anything alcoholic. Of course, doing that would essentially be suicide since penicillin is derived from fungi, but still. Fungi are relatively speaking pretty close to animals, and they share many similarities with us....What? :confused: Fungi are pretty comprehensively closer to plants, except that they're heterotrophs, not autotrophs. And, you know, they're an entirely different Kingdom to both plants and animals
From wikipedia, similarities to other Kingdoms:

With animals: Fungi lack chloroplasts and are heterotrophic organisms, requiring preformed organic compounds as energy sources.[9]
With plants: Fungi possess a cell wall[10] and vacuoles.[11] They reproduce by both sexual and asexual means, and like basal plant groups (such as ferns and mosses) produce spores. Similar to mosses and algae, fungi typically have haploid nuclei.[12]
...sorry, I just... That comment boggles my mind, how you could possibly think that...

[charl]

...What? :confused: Fungi are pretty comprehensively closer to plants, except that they're heterotrophs, not autotrophs. And, you know, they're an entirely different Kingdom to both plants and animals
From wikipedia, similarities to other Kingdoms:

...sorry, I just... That comment boggles my mind, how you could possibly think that...

Yes they are their own type of life-form, but they have more similarities to animals than plants, at least on the cellular level. And really, having cell-walls is not unique to plants (there are animals that have them too). The same with asexual-sexual reproduction, and the haploid chromosome structure (many insects are haploids). And the reproduction by spores thing is a case of divergent evolution if I ever heard one (fungi are relatively speaking closer related to animals than to plants).

[Ichneumon]

To be honest, I don't think the biological issue of classification (which is something entirely different than the basic linguistic question of what we, within this vegan/social/political context, mean with the word "animal") is related to the social issue of how we treat animals and whether veganism makes "sense" or not.

Although I think a biological discussion would be interesting, it wouldn't be on topic or relevant. A discussion about veganism and whether it's okay to cause others, humans or animals, to suffer for your own enjoyment would be interesting, however I doubt this is the right place or even website for such a discussion.

[charl]

To be honest, I don't think the biological issue of classification (which is something entirely different than the basic linguistic question of what we, within this vegan/social/political context, mean with the word "animal") is related to the social issue of how we treat animals and whether veganism makes "sense" or not.

Although I think a biological discussion would be interesting, it wouldn't be on topic or relevant. A discussion about veganism and whether it's okay to cause others, humans or animals, to suffer for your own enjoyment would be interesting, however I doubt this is the right place or even website for such a discussion.

Granted. Let's drop the subject.

[Bogardan_Mage]

FASCISM! PURE AND UTTER FASCISM!
Well it is Lawful Good. Perhaps you'd be more comfortable in Elysium or Arboria.

[hamishspence]

Its kind of odd that catching the fish- sentient fish, no less, is approved of, from an "unnecessary suffering is bad" point of view.

Maybe Grandpa Greenhilt and Roy were using barbless hooks.

There is a parody of the way adventurers treat summoned celestials in OoTS Dragon.

"it be just a dog- no harm, no foul"

[krossbow]

hmm. On that note, would a celestian sponge, despite lacking consciousness still be a holy being?

[hamishspence]

My guess is, that if a sponge was statted out in D&D, it would be a vermin:

which is the usual type, for an animal that is "mindless"

so a celestial sponge, would be a Vermin with the Celestial template- turning it into a magical beast, with an intelligence of at least 3.

Whether or not it would be able to feel pain is a different question.

[Ichneumon]

hmm. On that note, would a celestian sponge, despite lacking consciousness still be a holy being?

I guess anything celestial, even plants, could be considered holy beings,

[hamishspence]

They don't have the Good subtype- they are more

"normal beings infused with a little bit of holiness"

I'm not sure if normal plants can be celestial, but "plant creatures" can- and they, even if mindless, would gain intelligence too.

I wonder- is it immoral to dine on a celestial (or, for that matter, fiendish, anarchic, axiomatic, etc) plant, if your digestion can manage it? Eating an intelligent being is usually frowned on in D&D- BoVD mentions it.

One take on eating celestial animals, is in the Tamora Pierce books- where they are all full deities- that is, "animal gods", and intelligent.

They eat each other, and are reborn every time, in a new body.

as one of them put it:

"Some gods always feel the need to comment, when they've been eaten"

[krossbow]

one would think though that everything on the plane of celestia, being made up of the components of celestia (and therefore infused or containing the very essence of celestia) would be of the good subtype; anything springing up from itself could not help but be of the same substance and subtype as the plane itself.

Unfortunately, this more or less leads to the "all is one, one is all" outlook

[hamishspence]

One might- an certainly all Celestials have it.

But the oddity is, in D&D, the Celestial template does not make you a Celestial.

a Lantern archon is a Celestial (extraplanar outsider with Good subtype)

But a Celestial fish is an extraplanar magical beast- without the Good subtype.

[Moriarty]

Its kind of odd that catching the fish- sentient fish, no less, is approved of, from an "unnecessary suffering is bad" point of view.


i'm pretty sure you can drop the "unnecessary suffering is bad" point of view, considering theres the dungeon crawl full of monsters "who are just strong enough to really challenge you".

[hamishspence]

yes- one theory had it that these monsters are actually magical illusions that don't feel pain- so nothing is made to suffer at all in this dungeon.

[Berserk Monk]

just wondering based upon http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0498.html

"they don't let you eat them around here anyways"; so are they allowed to eat meat at all? is the good afterlife against eating other living beings and forced to eat tofu?

or do they just not eat celestial fish? in that case, why is it good to eat EARTHLY fish?

They're dead. They don't eat period.

And as for them eating meat, fourth to last panel. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0492.html)

[hamishspence]

So, are the steaks at All Steaks Go To Heaven illusory steaks which have flavour, but no real existence?

[Raging Gene Ray]

They're dead. They don't eat period.


So no egg dishes in the afterlife, eh?

[krossbow]

So, are the steaks at All Steaks Go To Heaven illusory steaks which have flavour, but no real existence?


Well being celestia they would presumably have the spirits of the most powerful illusionists in HISTORY around. Perhaps instead of chefs they have high level wizards in the back practicing their craft?

[hamishspence]

Possible. Celestia could be very big on "your mind makes it real"

My guess is that it puts a lot of emphasis on weaning you off the things you like that are unnecessary to your "spiritual progress"

Thus, you get everything you want, until you grow tired of it.

[krossbow]

Possible. Celestia could be very big on "your mind makes it real"

My guess is that it puts a lot of emphasis on weaning you off the things you like that are unnecessary to your "spiritual progress"

Thus, you get everything you want, until you grow tired of it.



olidamarra's mansion of hedonism is starting to sound better and better.

[hamishspence]

maybe. Ironically, the biggest outcry at the time, seemed to be:

"There is physical intimacy in Celestia? this is Wrong! Inconsistant with lawfulness! Nobody Lawful Good should be getting up to this kind of thing in the afterlife!"

So, the notion that it just isn't considered important enough to worry about, that it is permissible but something to "grow out of" is a distinct improvement.

[Porthos]

"There is physical intimacy in Celestia? this is Wrong! Inconsistant with lawfulness! Nobody Lawful Good should be getting up to this kind of thing in the afterlife!"

Ah, fun times (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102983). :smallamused:

Of course the idea that "pleasures of <whatever>" are something that are to be eventually grown out of whilst on Spiritual Enlightnment is hardly an unknown one when it comes to RL religion. Sad to say, not a topic that can be talked about here very much, tho.

So it doesn't seem very contradictory to me that Celestia would set up areas where the "glorified sauages" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0493.html) could work out their urges before heading on to more "spiritually fullfilling stuff".

[hamishspence]

yes. The style is awfully familiar :smallamused:

on the veganism thing- we don't know- but we do have a pretty logical rule that killing intelligent beings to eat them is inappropriate on Celestia.

So All Steaks Go To Heaven ends up needing to be explained as imported food or, more likely (since it says "if you want to enjoy the taste of food"):

it is something along the lines of prestidigitation-flavored tofu, or even entirely illusion created by the plane to satisfy its inhabitants.

[krossbow]

Actually, that statement about the nature of lawful good planes makes alot of sense.


lawful good planes are founded upon the idea that all sensual pleasures are transient and insubstantial; therefore they don't need to worry about such things (such as all steaks go to heaven or the one night stands) corrupting anyone as lawful good individuals would eventually realize how meaningless such things would be, thus there isn't a need to strictly oversee or enforce (avoiding fascism this way).

Chaotic good on the other hand would be filled with individuals who would attempt to find goodness in any and all things, so transient pleasures would be worthy endeavors in their own right by virtue of simply existing as rewards; All rewards, no matter how small are still rewards and therefore it would be pretensious to turn up one's nose at such things.




Basically, the planes would be a heaven SPECIFICALLY for those that go there, and would be a hell for the opposite end of the law/chaose spectrum person.

[Lissou]

What I really don't get is why vegans don't refuse to eat fungi and fungi-derived foodstuff, including anything alcoholic. Of course, doing that would essentially be suicide since penicillin is derived from fungi, but still.

I'm not vegan or anything, but as someone who is deadly allergic to antibiotics, including (but not limited to) penicillin, I can tell you that you can live perfectly fine without penicillin, if you chose (or, like in my case, have to) to abstain from it.
So I definitely wouldn't call it suicide. At most unpractical, and depending on the person potentially dangerous for one's health, but certainly not suicidal.