Extract from Plant Paradigm by James Wilson
If you have a review, good or bad, please email it to [email protected]. I will publish all.
Given your stated objectives it’s hard to miss the point. If I had a similar “road to Damascus” event and wanted to let others know I don’t know how I could do better than the approach you’ve taken in this book.
You are open about what you’re trying to do, you back it up with evidence to the extent possible, and lace it with human interest to keep the reader reading.
As I sought to find flaws in your arguments it emphasised how resistant humans are to changing their strongly-held views. Of course your “science” might be bogus - but who has the time or energy to chase those references down, so we treat them with caution. Of course you’re bound to be “cherry picking”, finding confirming evidence for what you want to believe - it’s the well known human “confirmation bias”. And as to your anecdotal description of your personal circumstances, a sample of “1” is hardly convincing. So, being endowed with most of the main biases in human thinking, I have no trouble in dismissing your pamphlet as the unwelcome preaching of a sincere, well-intentioned, educated person.
But what else can you do. You book is clear, open, honest, evidence-based yet most of us will either not read it or not be persuaded because it is not welcome news. I cheer you James Wilson for having the guts, energy, and time to try.
However, do not think that I am happy after reading Plant Paradigm. I have significant sympathy with the three concepts underpinning your exhortation: Eating meat is:
But, in order to fully embrace your example I would have to totally overturn my dietary preferences established during rationing after the second world war, reinforced by a childhood in the New Zealand countryside, slightly broadened by 30 years intermittent globetrotting for IBM, with some significant prohibitions when, after retirement, I was diagnosed with coeliac and diabetes type II.
That is a bridge too far.
What I will be doing is evaluating my food preferences against those three concepts to see if, without turning my world upside-down, I can choose the lesser damaging options.
Thank you for writing the book.
Ian Brackenbury
I respect and admire your work and the work all animal advocates are doing to make people aware of how bad conditions are in the world. Please keep up the great work!
Marcus Serrao
Given your stated objectives it’s hard to miss the point. If I had a similar “road to Damascus” event and wanted to let others know I don’t know how I could do better than the approach you’ve taken in this book.
You are open about what you’re trying to do, you back it up with evidence to the extent possible, and lace it with human interest to keep the reader reading.
As I sought to find flaws in your arguments it emphasised how resistant humans are to changing their strongly-held views. Of course your “science” might be bogus - but who has the time or energy to chase those references down, so we treat them with caution. Of course you’re bound to be “cherry picking”, finding confirming evidence for what you want to believe - it’s the well known human “confirmation bias”. And as to your anecdotal description of your personal circumstances, a sample of “1” is hardly convincing. So, being endowed with most of the main biases in human thinking, I have no trouble in dismissing your pamphlet as the unwelcome preaching of a sincere, well-intentioned, educated person.
But what else can you do. You book is clear, open, honest, evidence-based yet most of us will either not read it or not be persuaded because it is not welcome news. I cheer you James Wilson for having the guts, energy, and time to try.
However, do not think that I am happy after reading Plant Paradigm. I have significant sympathy with the three concepts underpinning your exhortation: Eating meat is:
- Bad for human’s health
- Bad for the environment
- Bad for the creatures in our food chain
But, in order to fully embrace your example I would have to totally overturn my dietary preferences established during rationing after the second world war, reinforced by a childhood in the New Zealand countryside, slightly broadened by 30 years intermittent globetrotting for IBM, with some significant prohibitions when, after retirement, I was diagnosed with coeliac and diabetes type II.
That is a bridge too far.
What I will be doing is evaluating my food preferences against those three concepts to see if, without turning my world upside-down, I can choose the lesser damaging options.
Thank you for writing the book.
Ian Brackenbury
I respect and admire your work and the work all animal advocates are doing to make people aware of how bad conditions are in the world. Please keep up the great work!
Marcus Serrao