Soil and Health Library
This document is a reproduction of the book or other copyrighted material you
requested. It was prepared on for the exclusive use of Oriana , whose email address
is orianaoriana@gmail.com. This reproduction was made by the Soil and Health Library only for the purpose of
research and study. Any further reproduction or distribution of this copy in any form
whatsoever constitutes a violation of copyrights.FRANK AVRAY WILSON 
 
FOOD FIT FOR 
HUMANS 
 
 
 
 
 
LONDON 
THE C. W. DANIEL COMPANY  
First published in Great Britain  
by The C. W. Daniel Company Limited  
60 Muswell Road, London N10 2BE 
 
© Frank Avray Wilson 1975 
 
ISBN 085207 132 9 
 
 
 
 
 
Set  in  eleven  on  twelve  point  Baskerville. Printed  by  the  Northumberl and  Press  Ltd,  Gateshead,  
and  bound  by  Staples  Printers  Ltd,  
Rochester,  Kent, using  Da lmore  artwork  supplied  by  
Frank  Grunfeld  Ltd,  London. CONTENTS 
 
 1 The Object Defined 
 2 In Praise of Beauty 
 3 Beauty Pursued 
 4 Beauty and the Beast 
 5 Flowers, Fruits and Brain Cells 
 6 The Life-Giving Seeds 
 7 The Sources of Evil 
 8 Love, Lust and Aggression 
 9 Need or Greed 
 10 The Impoverishments of Prosperity 
 11 The Unloving Crowd 
 12 The Deceits of Lucullus 
 13 The Costs of Confusion 
 14 Food Fit for Humans 
 15 Beautiful People, Beautiful Things 
 16  Hints for the Millennium 
 17  Notes and Readings  
 
1. The Object Defined 
 
 
Appearance can be deceptive. Who is happy? Who is healthy? Assurances can also be false, like the dictum, 'a little of what you 
like is good for you'. Even rats, gi ven the chance to eat what they 
like, eat the wrong things. Sight, smell and taste have been so 
falsified that the native senses are now powerless to distinguish 
nature from artifice. Can it be that  some of the things people take 
for granted to be harmless, right  and good, are in reality bad? Not long ago, such a question would have been met with scorn. But doubt has shattered ancient assumptions. Fat babies, once 
believed to be the healthiest of babies, are now known to be more 
likely to die than thin ones. If one chooses the largest, showiest 
vegetables on a stall, one is all th e more likely to be buying the 
products of overfertilized soils, now known to be the source of the 
cancer-inducing nitrosamides, as well as a lashing of some insidious 
pesticide. For all its sensational discoveries, science has turned out to be 
an unreliable guide. Indeed, it is largely responsible for a planetary 
outrage of nature, now threatening human survival. This crisis of 
malpractice and of misunderstanding the meaning of nature has 
been so well advertised, that no one should be able to delude 
himself today that things are not really as bad as they seem, that 
they will turn out to be all right in the end. The sense of betrayal, of hopelessness, felt by many, especially 
the young, is understandable, for if the human being is without 
reliable guidance, in the artif icial conditions of industrial 
civilization, disaster is certain. Having abandoned the gods, and 
now discovered the unreliability of reason and science, what hope 
remains? This is an attempt to s how that the strongest hope of all, 
neglected by a matter-of-fact culture , is to be found in the human 
sensitivities—to beauty and purity in particular. It will be seen to be 
applicable to life's most important biological activity—eating. In order to substantiate this cl aim, it will be necessary to begin 
by defining what is meant by the human sensitivities. To understand 
the meaning of beauty, so out of tune in a world dominated by 
materialistic values, will be to provide a basis for an approach to 
living radically different from the one taken by most people. The value of science is not denied. The orderliness of nature 
discovered by science is one of the greatest achievements of the 
human spirit. But the way this ev idence is used depends on some 
sustaining background of thought and belief. The mechanistic, 
materialistic ideal of present day science is by no means the only 
one possible. That it is inadequate, is indicated by the considerable 
amount of evidence which refuses to fit into the official picture of 
nature, and which is accordingly neglected. The vision of nature which sustains this book is one of a 
Creation seeking wholeness, harmony, and beauty, and culminating 
in a creature able to appreciate these qualities, and to express them, and in so doing, to experience a sense of joyful participation in the 
Creation. There is ample eviden ce for such a vision, in the 
harmonies of atomic order as in the progressive achievement of 
beauty in the course of evolution. In attempting to account for the human needs in food in calories 
and proteins, in minerals and vitamins alone, these other essential 
contributions which food can make to the human estate have been 
neglected. It is hoped that the subject will confirm that a reliance on 
the human sensitivities provides a valid and invigorating guidance 
to the way of life able to ensure harmony with nature, wholeness 
and health. 2. In Praise of Beauty 
 
 
The way in which human beings appreciate beauty, and express it in 
their lives, and in their arts, depends on the prevailing social 
conditions. In harsh, cruel and heartless times, beauty goes out of 
living. The appeal of a Negro mask, of a medieval gargoyle, as of 
many modern pieces of sculpture, has more to do with excitement, 
sexiness, awe, with magic and other strange enticements than with 
beauty. In extreme conditions, the human mind becomes so 
anguished that it acquires a taste for the hideous and macabre, as in 
the cherished skull museums of head-hunters. Beauty in fact 
requires sufficiently humanizing, benevolent conditions. With the Industrial Revolution, the beauty-loving Renaissance 
was superseded by a desecration of nature, and the rising of a man-
made environment too often hideous and disorderly. The word 
beauty has gone out of fashion even among the lovers of art. It is 
sadly true that the periods of history benevolent enough for beauty 
to reign have been few. Many have seen in this apparen tly natural lack of beauty the 
evidence that the appreciation of beauty, order and harmony is a 
cultural acquisition and not a gene tic endowment. Those who have 
favoured a hard, aggressive view of man have seen in the 
preoccupation with beauty the evid ence of decadence. Yet there is 
sufficient anthropological evidence that the more benign primitives, 
living in the more benevolent environments, have a natural 
appreciation of beauty, and express it in everything they touch, in 
every gesture, movement and ritual. In these conditions such a 
sensitivity to beauty goes hand in hand with an over-all 
compassionate disposition absent among the more harassed 
primitives, and among the civilized. But the strongest indication that the beautiful is as 
indispensable a human feature as brain or upright posture, is the 
extraordinarily intense emotiona lism associated with it, and the 
abundance of pleasure it can afford. That the appreciation of beauty 
is part of the humanizing process is shown by the humanizing effect 
such an appreciation has on human behaviour and predisposition in 
general. As the evolutionists would say, it has survival value. The opposite of beauty is ugliness, synonymous with the 
bestial, with the mean, selfish and sordid, the disgusting and the 
sickly, all hostile to the human condition. Had the earliest humans 
not sensed the difference between ugliness and beauty, 
humanization would have come to an end. The distinction between 
beauty and ugliness runs close to the distinction between good and 
evil, between order and disorder. An evolving, learning brain 
requires a prolonged familial and social nature, which in turn was 
only possible in an orderly and harmonious social setting. The capacity for love is leagued with a sensitivity to beauty. Many psychologists have observed that love is the guarantee of the 
mind's stability and wholeness, and that love-failure, in hatred, violence and viciousness, is the agent of the mind's disintegration. The appreciation of beauty, like love, can be defined as a condition 
of wholeness, and a sensitivity to that quality in others and in 
nature, providing the utmost degree of mental balance, of joy and a 
sense of meaningful-ness in living. Whole food, fit for humans can 
but be beautiful food. 3. Beauty Pursued 
 
 
So important has beauty been in human evolution, that one can 
expect the human being to be designed to find beauty in every 
possible thing, in every possible way. Nothing would be undertaken 
unless it had an aesthetic element to it. Such' a beatific condition 
can still be observed among the few simple peoples left. In the 
islands of the Pacific, among the native tribes of Central America, 
people are bedecked with flowers, eating and love-making take 
place in flowered boweries, every object is made attractive and 
colourful, and the naked body variously adorned. The human body 
is felt rightly to be the object of supreme beauty, which accounts for 
the common nakedness. One can learn much from the body's beauty, as the great 
masters of European painting reali zed. All beauty is there incarnate. The limbs are felt to be ideally proportioned, the smoothness of the 
skin inviting touch and caress, the eyes particularly enticing. The 
disappearance of body hair in the course of humanization has not 
only been due to the presumably temperate conditions in which 
human evolution occurred, but, of much greater importance, 
represents the removal of animal associations. What is left of the 
hair, around the head and, in the man, around the face, is evidently a 
haloing and an adornment, with an emotional effect the very 
opposite of animal. The only part of the body where the hair has not 
been aesthetized, and remains animal in its appeal, is around the 
genitalia. In a creature depending on social and familial harmony 
for survival, a primary interest in the genitalia would have been self-
defeating. Consequently, the genitalia, and the hair associated with 
them, were left uncouth and unattractive, with the obvious intention 
of detracting attention from these parts. In a creature sensitized to 
beauty, this would be as good a way as one could find of ensuring 
that human relationships were not primarily sexual. All those 
primitives who live in an essentially naked condition, help nature by 
covering over the genitalia. A complete nudism, as much as 
clothing, is an expression of the aesthetic impoverishment of 
civilization; both are unnatural. The female breast is a part of the body made particularly 
beautiful, intended to serve as the focus of a love, erotic, 
compassionate and social, echoing the ancient mammalian lineage 
of mankind. Many of the great painters of the Renaissance were 
alive to this appeal, picturing th e infant Jesus suckled with exposed 
breast by Mary. There is something profound in this, for the 
mammalian female was emotionalized  long before the male in the 
selfless devotions of mother love. In an important sense, the woman 
is more profoundly human than the man. But the echo of the breast 
in the man is a reminder also of his mammalian kind. Threatened 
male gorillas will beat their breasts like the angered elders of the 
Bible. When men confronted one another in battle in a naked 
condition, slaughter was minimal, compassion the rule. The human infant has been made beautiful in a particularly 
tender, appealing way. It is interesting to note that the young of all 
mammals share in this appeal. Ho wever ugly the adult may appear, 
their young are invariably felt to be appealing, beautiful. In this 
tender appeal, an important attri bute of beauty is apparent—its 
denial of an opportunist, bestial sexuality. This is absolute in the 
case of the infant; only the sick and the depraved feel sexually 
drawn to the children. But it is also  evident, on another scale, in the 
erotic appeals of the adult body, wherein caress, adoration and 
tenderness can transfigure what can otherwise be an animal 
encounter. It is in this sense that human sexuality becomes 
transformed from the essentially reflex activities of animals into a 
sexual love felt to be pure, noble and beautiful. Beauty is 
incompatible with impurity, so much so that the demand for purity 
is threaded in all the human sens itivities, in the very structure and 
function of the brain and mind. In the visual arts, there is an 
awareness of the purity of line, of form, of colour essential to the 
expression of beauty. So potent is this transfiguring quality, that 
even lewd and revolting subjects can become transformed, raised to 
a higher level of appeal, through the materials and techniques of art. Mere sexuality acquires an elysian quality, an eroticism steeped in 
ecstasy. Hence the clash of pornography, . which is never art, and 
the erotic, which can be high art. The current habit of labelling 
attractive, beautiful things as 'sexy' betrays a sad corruption of 
perception and feeling. Unless beau ty was inherent and abundant in 
nature, it is unlikely that it could ever have played a role in 
humanization. Although the industrially jaded eye can become blind 
to the beauty of nature, once the veil is lifted, it is everywhere 
apparent still. Minerals can be ve ry beautiful, and as minerals must 
have appeared at the dawn of Creation, as the first matter cooled 
sufficiently, one can conclude that matter is inherently endowed 
with beauty. Today, one knows that the beautiful symmetry of 
crystals, their amazing geometric pur ity, is the echo of atomic order. Since all things large or small are dependent on this order, one can 
be confident that nature is basically aesthetically compatible, a 
reassuring conclusion. This confidence is confirmed by the fact that 
beauty is increasingly expressed as evolution progresses. The 
ugliness of the early insects gave way to the beauty of the butterfly, 
the gawky pterodactyl emancipated into the bird of paradise, and the 
monotonous swamps of the Carbonife rous were succeeded by the 
spectral orgies of flowers in the Cretaceous. Without such a long preparation, persistently bringing out the 
latent beauty in things and creatures, the eventual emergence of a 
creature sensitive to beauty would have been impossible. Beauty in 
human existence remains closel y dependent on beauty in the 
environment, in all things featuring in human life, which explains 
why an ugly age loses the meaning of beauty. Let us ponder well 
upon this, for it touches upon our subject intimately. Bearing in 
mind that the Creation is a whole, the evolution of beauty in 
landscape, in flowers, in human beings, in art, and, as we shall see, 
in such an important activity as eating, makes for a vast and 
intricate ecology of the beautiful. Unless harmonious forms were in 
existence before the earliest hum an appeared, in the wonderful 
shapes of hills, of trees, of pebbles, of shells, it would not have been 
possible for the earliest men to make the beautiful tools which accompany their remains. Unless flowers and fruits were already 
there, to provide the external stimuli of colour, human eyes would 
have been incapable of evolvi ng the exceptional human sensitivity 
to colour. Creative evolution must have something to work on. One can go further in affirming, in contradiction to the 
depressing and bestial origins now popular, that the human genesis 
must have occurred in an environment in which beauty and 
harmony prevailed, conditions which are recalled in the world-wide 
myths of an earthly paradise. If the essential human mark, the distinction from the other 
hominids and higher primates, is not so much anatomy, but the 
sensitivity to love and beauty, care and compassion, virtues required 
for a most exacting breeding co-operation needed by an evolving 
brain, then truly human creatures may go back several million years. They are then likely to have had smaller brains, but a large brain is 
not necessarily a mark of humanization. The perfection of the 
organs connected with the humanizing sensitivities—the eye's 
sensitivity to colour, the olfactory sense to the perfume of flowers, 
the musical propensities of the human voice, must have taken a 
long, long time to perfect. This is an important inference, for it 
suggests that the most distinctive and characteristic human features 
were laid down before the advent of the Ice Ages, when near 
paradisiacal conditions prevailed in many parts of the world. The 
fossil hominid evidence so far gathered may have nothing to do 
with this ancient human line, referri ng rather to the deviant, ruthless 
and murderous experiments, doomed to failure, spurred into being 
by the dehumanizing conditions of the Ice Ages. If the human genesis occurred in  conditions of beauty, then it 
must follow that what is naturally beautiful is likely to be humanly 
compatible, what is ugly, incomp atible. This provides an intuitive 
guidance, quite different from common sense and reason, which has 
the backing of the whole of nature, and indeed has the backing of 
science, although most scientists are clueless as to the relevance of 
beauty. Nonetheless, some leading mathematicians and physicists 
have found that their theories are all the more likely to be true and 
valid, the more beautiful and harmonious they happen to be. This intuitive guidance should be applicable to all human 
problems. Human beings can exist in the most horrid and terrible 
conditions, but they are bound to be all the less effectively human 
for it. The great civilizations of the past endeavoured to respect 
nature's inspiring beauty when ever  possible, and to bring beauty to 
all man-made things. Whatever the tensions and frustrations 
inevitable in the complexities of civilization, there was thus a 
corrective humanizing force. With the industrial age, and with the 
dominance of the mechanical and materialistic viewing of science, 
this wisdom has been smothered, in a world grown mean and ugly. Granting the importance of beauty, it is impossible to believe 
that food felt to be ugly and revoltin g, no matter how widely eaten, 
can be natural human food. Indeed, one would expect that such an 
important function would be ma de especially beautiful and 
humanizing. Pleasantly tasting natural foods are attractive, beautiful 
foods. Alas, in no other field have human beings shown such 
subterfuge in making what is naturally repulsive pass as attractive. The tragedy of human feeding lies here. 4. Beauty and the Beast 
 
 
An Arcadian vision of mankind clashes with reality. Although most 
people have their better moments, it is violence, cruelty and horror 
that have dominated human history, and, from all the available 
evidence, ruled the lives of the Ho minids in the Palaeolithic. This 
fact has encouraged the belief th at man originated in horror and 
depravity, and that it is only thanks to culture and eventual 
civilization that he has managed to rise above a despicable natural 
condition. It is difficult to look at this apparent contradiction calmly, 
for there can be no doubt that the realities of hard existence harden 
the heart and blunt the sensitiviti es. The Arcadian appears absurd 
and unacceptable. Often enough, the response is one of anger, of 
hatred for the mild and the beau tiful, to be seen in the common 
wanton killing of birds and butterflies, the trampling of flowers and 
the desecration of nature. Yet even if the moments of blessedness are few and far 
between, they indicate a formidable intensity of feeling when they 
do occur, so strong as to completely alter the course of life in many 
cases. Such power cannot have come into being without some 
biological advantage. To the extent  that they reveal a quality to life 
which is different from the usual and ordinary, they should be seen 
to imply that there are aspects of the human being which differ from 
the common experience, and contradict what one usually assumes to 
be the human standard. In the past, this dilemma was r esolved by religious beliefs of 
one kind or another, fortified by myths and played upon by magic 
and superstition. Today, in the name of a liberation from this 
ancient condition, science has promoted the view of a meaningless 
universe, in which the human presence is a merely accidental one, a 
situation to which the human be ing appears quite unadaptable, no 
matter what the material rewards. The increase in the anger and 
violence of the age springs from deep archaic responses rebelling 
against this inhuman crisis. In such a situation, one must expect that 
people are not likely to be able to think clearly and impartially, that 
bias and prejudice, even on the part of science, are bound to be rife, 
that any attempt to frame a different picture of the meaning of being 
human will be arbitrarily ruled out. The evidence of the breakdown of the thin rational crust of the 
human mind is everywhere, to the extent that it has become very 
difficult to define what one is to mean by a normal state of mind. The Arcadian view of man provides such a definition concisely—
the mind being normal only when the humanizing predispositions 
predominate, ensuring a wholeness of function in which 
benevolence and beauty prime, ruli ng out all that is mean, selfish 
and inhuman and providing a sense of joy and meaningfulness in 
living. In such a happy state, the sub-human stages which the mind of 
every individual must carry, are silent. But they are easily aroused by any condition which wars against the forces of humanization. Lovelessness, a violent, mean, drab existence in an ugly hostile 
world, become the historical and well-nigh universal causes of an 
incipient mental pathology, the clash between beauty and the 
aroused beast, expressed in world-wide myths. As the sub-human 
minds are aroused, so the sub-human and anti-human passions that 
go with them come to take over human lives. The mind is not without resources of defence against this 
disturbing onslaught. The humanizing predispositions are 
intensified, and given a social boosting, a process Freud described 
as the influence of the super-ego. But because the pressures can 
never be completely deviated by an imposed morality and social 
censure, by religious and other s ublimating agencies, all societies 
have provided for periodical venting of accumulated pressures, 
indispensable for their survival with some degree of integration and 
order, from competitive gambits and games, to warfare. It is not 
difficult to find numerous examples in the competitive structures of 
daily existence. The sadism, lust, and violence in entertainment are 
such outlets. These existentially aroused subhuman aspects of the mind, 
purulently affecting human behaviour, refer to a time anteceding the 
human genesis. They know nothing of beauty, of order, of harmony, 
of selflessness and love. Like all animal passions, they are 
instinctual, immediately demanding, callous and blind. Beauty, 
goodness and purity become obstacles to their venting. Although a preoccupation with the mystical and the occult is a 
normal human interest, an expression of man's defiance of matter 
and time, the magical is clearly antihuman, in its relish of the 
macabre, the sordid, and the ugly. While mystical experience is 
invariably associated with b eauty, the magical purposefully 
excludes beauty and obliges a relish in the obscene and the 
excremental. Today, there is a discernible arousal of the magical 
mind. Indeed magic has never been fully quenched by the rise of 
reason; many aspects of so called civilized life reveal it. Eating 
habits are not without their magical asides. If the mark of the human is a n eed for the beautiful, and if the 
magical shows itself by a relish for the hideous, it is simple enough 
to pick out the features of the diet which are magical—the bloody 
joint, the dripping steak, organs like the kidney concerned with filth 
elimination, foul smelling foods, the desecration of living things 
which the killing and cooking of any animal entails. This magical 
relish can go to extremes, which then acquire a gruesome twist, as 
in the chewing of eyeballs and the gobbling of brains, the sucking of 
marrow and the savouring of testicles. The point is that once the magical mind is aroused, such 
practices are felt to be exciting, strength giving, in dispensable, and 
in fact become supported by a corrupted reason, by science itself. Just as the politician uses his reason to justify an atomic overkill, 
entailing the murder of millions, so the nutritionist assures one that 
fried brains are a good source of protein. This is the frailty of 
reason—its easy misuse for inhuman ends by minds no longer 
sufficiently irradiated by the humanizing resources. There is a sinister ally to such humanly debasing habits. Protein 
products foreign to the normal physiology of the body provoke 
chaotic reactions when eaten. In a wild attempt to allay the intruding substances, the body produces too mu ch of the allaying chemicals, 
an excess which has the malicious result of demanding more, and 
ever more, of the foreign substances. The essential abnormality of 
all animal foods is shown by the habituation and craving they 
provoke, a demand which can come to defy all sense and economy. In this manner, eating habits which comply with the secret 
desires of a disturbed mind are fortified by an insidious 
biochemistry. Food habits also reflect the life-hatred which goes with a 
hardening of the heart to a harden ed existence, as in the barely 
believable hideousness of the d eath-dealing industries supporting 
every civilized table. This life-hatred, and the hatred of nature 
which accompanies it, goes back to the onset of the Ice Ages, which 
chased the earliest humans from thei r earthly paradise. No longer 
guided by instinct, but by cortical conditioning, human beings are 
able to adopt virtually any ruse in order to survive, no matter how 
unbiological. But the fact that humanization occurred in idyllic 
conditions, left humans badly equippe d for the periodical geological 
and climatic cataclysms of earth hist ory. While in all other animals, 
instinct would insist that the normal habits were reverted to as soon 
as conditions returned to normal , in the case of man, cortical 
conditionings, revived in each succeeding generation by social 
customs, tend to persist. Animal foods, and the vast machinery of 
suffering their eating entails, have become one of the most 
entrenched of social customs, defended by science as natural and 
beneficial, and ardently insisted upon by the public. Admittedly, attempts are made to give such horrible habits a 
veneer of aesthetic appeal. Cooking of animal foods removes the 
reek of raw flesh, and sauces help to smother the sheer animality of 
the ingredients. Here and there, vegetables, fruits and even flowers 
come into the decoration of some recipe as if to humanize the 
offence, sometimes ludicrously, as the ears of roast pork stuffed 
with flowers. But the underlying ugliness is scarcely covered, as 
most children show in their initial protests. One is entitled to enquire how it is  that science, which claims to 
operate on impartial reasoning, has failed to point out the 
unbiological and irrational features in such patently inhuman habits. The environmental crisis is proof enough that science is no impartial 
observer to the follies of an age, of a culture, and indeed serves 
them faithfully. Most scientists, and science as a whole, show the 
same spirit of aggressiveness and in consideration regarding nature 
which dominated Palaeolithic existence. The science of nutrition shows this insensitivity more than 
most. While physics and astronomy tend to attract the philosophers, 
nutrition seems to entice the extroverts, with an aversion to more 
profound thinking, in league with the disinclination to food 
fussiness shared by the common man. The fact is that nutritional 
science arose in a time when the industrial revolution had so 
disorganized an ancient way of life as to make poverty and 
undernutrition the rule among the masses, and the European 
influence in many parts of the world had sabotaged long-tried food 
habits and let loose widespread starvation. Nutrition has accordingly 
been haunted by insufficiency, and has been preoccupied with 
ensuring quantity. It is only quite recently that excess has been seen 
as a danger as much as deficiency. But the philosophy of biology has also been guilty of failing to 
provide such a subsidiary science as nutrition with proper guidance. Vicing to comply with the mechanical ideals, most biologists have 
been singularly blind to the most explicit characteristic of life, its 
functional integration and wholeness, in terms of which alone a 
living organism can be normal. As a result, biological thinking has 
largely missed the meaning of normality, and commonly mistaken 
the average for the normal. Accordi ng to this crude way of thinking, 
since most people are in some way sick, sickness must be the 
normal human condition, and since most people like eating meat, 
meat eating is normal. Nutrition, in line with the thinking and 
feeling of the age, has been crude and permissive, backing the 
common greeds and perversions of taste with the hollow voice of 
authority. As a result, bad, inhuman food habits, inherited from the Ice 
Ages, have been made more wid espread and acceptable than they 
might otherwise have been, for in the past, the peasantries, 
whenever circumstances permitted, adopted dietary habits much 
closer to the human norm than usually prevails among the 
scientifically guided civilized. Under the banner of emancipation, 
nutritional science has in fact help ed to make available to the 
masses the greeds and perversions once the preserve of the 
privileged classes. Nature is not mocked. The price paid for this conspiracy is 
colossal. Given sufficient time, science may well become wiser and 
a better guide. In the past decades, its crudities have given way to a 
greater degree of sensitivity, of humility when faced with the 
complexities of living phenomena. But there is in all probability not 
enough time. In hatred and ugliness, man will have exterminated his 
own kind long before. It has beco me a desperate survival necessity 
to find an alternative meaning to being human, a change which is 
likely to demand a revolution in all human aspects and activities, 
most of all, in that most important of functions, eating. 5. Flowers, Fruits and Brain Cells 
 
 
Until the Cretaceous period, the Age of Chalk, which began 136 
million years ago and lasted 71 million years, there was little colour 
in the world, apart from the mostly hidden colour of minerals, the 
greens of chlorophyll, and the bl ues of sky and water. Then a 
remarkable event occurred. The l eaves of certain plants became 
modified, in the incredibly rapid time of a few million years, into 
sepals and petals, which became filled with the brightest of 
pigments, providing thousands of different hues. At the same time, 
insects, which had been fearsome, ugly if not revolting creatures 
until then, also became resplendent in colour. As if not to be left 
out, the ungainly reptiles managed to sire some of the most 
exquisite of coloured creatures, the tropical tree lizards, and tropical 
fish became iridescent living jewels. Clearly, nature at that time had 
moved into an orgy of artistic expression. As already suggested, the lavish  presence of flowers in the 
environment of human genesis was indispensable for the evolution 
of the human colour sense. Botanists believe the origin of flowers occurred somewhere in Southern Asia, judging from the diversity of floral species still surviving there, as well as of some of the more primitive kinds. It is from there that flowers have spread all over the world, some regions and continents being more favoured than 
others. Another momentous event occurred in the Cretaceous which 
greatly influenced this distribution, and may have played a hand in the creation of the mammals, for th is manmaking line also arose in 
the Cretaceous. Prior to the Cretaceous, the c ontinents had been amassed 
together around Africa; they then began drifting apart. Asia and the 
Americas moved the furthest away. The flowers spread easily all 
over EuroAsia, except in those re gions then covered by ocean—
regions now occupied by immense deserts and high mountains, the 
Himalayas. The flowers also occupied the Americas, by a 
landbridge with Asia which persis ted into human times. Africa, 
however, possessed a considerable obstacle to the spread of 
flowers—an ocean, which is now th e Sahara, and the impenetrable 
tropical forest-belt stretching right across the continent. As a result, 
Africa is a continent poor in fl oral species, except for the north, 
where flowers have crept in from the near East, and in the extreme 
south, where flowers may have trav elled by a landbridge with Asia 
over what is now only a scattering of islands across the Indian 
Ocean. The fact that EuroAsia is rich er in flower species than Africa 
would indicate that humanization is more likely to have occurred 
somewhere in Asia, as was once believed, rather than in Africa, now 
the most favoured site, in view of the large number of hominid 
remains found there. But as anthropologists agree, this may be 
fortuitous; abundant remains may yet be found in Asia, or possibly 
once abundant remains have been subsequently effaced by geological events, which have been particularly intense in Asia, 
with the rising of the Himalayas, still rising when the earliest men 
were on the scene. This inference is further supported by the fact 
that the low lying fruits, like the apple family, which presumably 
formed the essential part of the food of the ground living pre-human 
apes, are virtually uniquely the product of Asia. In other words, the 
numerous fossil hominids of Africa may be no more than hominid 
experiments, with little or nothing to do with the true human line. This would be just as well, for the African hominids were a blood-
thirsty, cannibalistic lot. That fruits are the favourite foods of the higher Primates is 
explained by the fact that fruits o ffer one of the most concentrated 
supplies of energy in nature, owing to their high content of sugar. For animals with relatively large brains and complex social patterns, 
such a concentrated food enabl es much time to be spent in 
developing these characteristics, in  the continual games and other 
social frolics so typical of these animals. Long browsing and 
searching would have barred social evolution. As a prelude to the 
evolution of man, fruits had an exceptional advantage—they are 
among the most beautiful and harmonious objects in nature. A consequence of a largely fruitarian diet resulted in digestive 
changes, in the chimpanzee and in man, which had unexpected 
subsequent results. The concentrated  energy of fruit sugars enabled 
a considerable reduction in the si ze and length of the alimentary 
tract in these two primates, comp ared with the bulky digestive 
organs of the gorilla, for instance, a primate living largely on tough 
leaves. It is this reduction which enabled man, and to a lesser extent, 
the chimpanzee, to take to eating animal foods when their natural 
diet fails. The lengthy alimentary tract of the bulky plant eaters is quite 
incongenial to such a mixed diet, for the very opposite conditions 
are needed for the digestion of proteins or of plant fibres. The one 
has to be absorbed rapidly, and eliminated rapidly, before 
putrefactive poisons have time to  accumulate, while the latter needs 
time for the nutrients to be digest ed out of the fibrous matrix. But 
this does not imply that man or chimpanzee is well adapted to have 
such a mixed diet, for a preponderance of proteins, which a mixed 
diet involves, required a revolution in metabolism as well. The 
metabolic end products of protei n, like the putrefactive products 
formed in the gut by bacteria, ca ll for very special devices so as to 
enable their excretion in a harmless form. All carnivores possess 
such deamination devices. The primates are entirely deprived of 
them, so that any intake of nitr ogenous substances over a relatively 
low level of a vegetarian dietary, puts a strain on the system. Uric 
acid and other end products of  purine metabolism accumulate, 
causing increasing havoc over the years in rheumatic joints and 
kidney strain. That the level of protein intake at which deamination is 
optimally efficient is identical in man and chimpanzee to that of the 
other primates, should make it clear that the rare sallies of 
chimpanzees into flesh eating, and the common mixed diet of 
humans, are emergency measures. Since protein metabolism is the 
most difficult aspect of digestion, one must expect that a 
physiological tax has to be paid for defying its natural limits. This is 
an important question, for if the human being required the relatively large amounts of protein recommended by nutritionists—1 gram per 
kilo body weight—then man would have had to be a 'mixed eater' 
from the start, and could not be the preponderantly fruitarian 
creature suggested in this book. Since protein balance studies 
confirm that humans, like the other primates, need no more than 
about a third of this amount, one can only conclude that the 
standards recommended are wrong. Because proteins are unquestionably important, nutritionists 
have thought it wise to set their standards according to the so called 
'best fed nations', those peoples in fact who in all probability 
consume far more food altogether than they need. Nutritionists, 
doing field surveys in the tropics, have been surprised to find people 
living on amounts of protein much lower than they had been led to 
believe were indispensable, and liv ing well and healthily. Although 
the writer found many other signs of malnutrition in the course of 
such a survey, he found no pr otein deficiency, except in places 
where malaria was rife. In fact, the lurid picture of protein 
deficiency in textbooks on the subject only occur in exceptional 
conditions of general famine follo wing wars and other catastrophes. The beauty of fruits, their sweetness and exquisite flavours,—
how different those different varieties of apple, of pear, of peaches 
can taste!—are the ideal food fo r a beauty-loving animal. The 
conditions in the Cretaceous which brought colour to the world in 
flowers, so preparing the way for the evolution of the human colour 
sense, also brought into being the fruits on which the highest of 
creatures, the most noble, beautiful and pure, would in time come to 
feast. The human being is best designed as a picker of fruits, not a 
climber of tall trees, so that only low growing fruit trees would meet 
his needs. It is just these fruits that abound, and abound still, in the 
EuroAsian landmass—particularly the apple family, so close to the 
rose, and also peaches, cherries,  plums, apricots, grapes and a 
multitude of berries. The high growing fruit of tropical jungles 
could have fed only a few acrobats. The apple features as the 
miraculously healing fruit in the folklores of many of the peoples of 
EuroAsia. In many of their langua ges, apple is synonymous with 
fruit. The myth of Adam and Eve recounts the drama of the Fall, the 
chasing from the earthly paradise, no doubt by the Ice Ages, and the 
human corruption which ensued. In offering the apple, Eve was 
symbolically reminding the man that lust could only be pursued at 
the loss of a natural purity, of wholeness. In eating the apple, Adam 
destroyed the symbol of human purity, and the human race began its 
long stumble into pain and misery. In an engraving by Dürer, it is 
the snake, phallic symbol of lust, which eats the apple. The human need for very large amounts of daily fruit is borne 
out by the relative enormous amounts of vitamin C needed for 
optimal health and general well-being. The primates are exceptional 
in their needs for this vitamin,  for almost all other animals, 
including pure vegetarians like the rabbit make their own 
requirements of it. Although the human being, like the other 
primates, can make do with smalle r amounts of vitamin C in their 
foods, they are less fit for it, more prone to infections, listless and 
unhappy. The common cold is common because commonly people 
do not eat enough fruits. The official recommendations, in all other 
respects probably excessive, appear to have underestimated the 
needs of vitamin C, judging from the ever increasing list of diseases in which an inadequacy of this vitamin is involved. The reason for 
this underestimating is simple. No t believing man to be basically 
fruitarian, they have ignored the hi nts that have come up over the 
past years for much larger needs of vitamin C, for such amounts 
could only be met by living largely on fruits. The primates are lured to fruits by their colour, by their 
pleasant smell and feel, and particularly, by their sweet taste. Many 
animals have something of a sweet tooth, but nowhere as marked as 
that of human beings. In a natural world, to eat sweet things is to eat 
vitamin C. The child's craving for sweets is in reality a craving for 
fruits, which shows up the iniquity of confectionery, the biggest 
nutritional deception ever devised and responsible for much pain 
and misery. Besides sweetness, the acidity of fruits is also an 
enticement to eating them. Not only do such acids clean the mouth 
without dissolving the enamel of the teeth, squeezing the salivary 
glands and providing the right milieu in the digestive tract, but there 
is evidence that in their metabolism, they have a tonic effect on the 
body as a whole. This insistence on fruits on the part of nature must have some 
special significance to humanization. The cortex of the brain alone 
has some six thousand million cells, each cell intertwined in a 
profusion of interconnections. This inconceivably complicated 
structure can only function if a perf ect co-ordination prevails. A few 
molecules of some undesirable substance sends the whole 
mechanism out of gear. Anything l ess than a perfect co-ordination is 
insanity. It stands to reason that in  evolving such a fantastic organ, 
natural selection would have picked on a way of life, including a 
way of feeding especially, which could have best ensured this 
cerebral equilibrium. The brain's need of vitamin C is higher than any other tissues. The brain functions on sugar, which fruits ideally supply. But it is 
the fact that a preponderantly fruita rian diet necessarily means a low 
protein diet which is probably the fruits' particular advantage in 
brain evolution, for even in those animals long adapted to a high 
protein diet, the carnivores, the tissue wear-and-tear, and the 
cumulative damage by the products of protein metabolism, are not 
completely overcome. The carnivores are short-lived, and quick-
growing, the opposite conditions for evolving a large, long-learning 
brain. Sharing the mechanistic bias of biology, nutritionists have 
popularized the subject of protein by stressing the simplicity 
whereby the body picks its own requirements of amino acids from 
the welter of proteins eaten, implying that it does not matter what 
the source of protein happens to be as long as all the amino acids are 
provided in abundance; that eating other animals is the best way of 
meeting this seems evident to su ch a mentality. But in the last 
decade, the barely believable complexity of protein chemistry has 
become apparent. There are a host of nitrogenous substances 
accompanying proteins which tag on to amino acid digestion and 
reassembly, thereby becoming a part  of the body's chemistry. Only 
very minute amounts of such substances are involved, but their 
effects can be out of all proportion to their amounts. They can in 
fact act as drugs and hormones, and impinge upon those all-
controlling submicroscopi c wonders, the genes. Because of the far greater complexity of the proteins in animals 
than in plants, such accessory n itrogenous substances are much 
more abundant in animal foods than in plant foods. In fact, they 
barely occur at all in fruits, while  present to some extent in a few 
foods of vegetable origin, such as yeast and chocolate. It has 
recently been discovered that vitamin C helps in the metabolism and 
removal of these substances from the tissues, so that the importance 
of vitamin C in brain function is understood. The pieces begin to fit in a most interesting way, for not only 
would fruits offer a minimum of potentially disturbing products of 
protein metabolism, but they would ensure that the brain is 
protected from the minor amounts that must arise on the most 
perfect diet. Since vitamin C cannot be stored in the tissues, nothing 
less than a daily abundance of fruits  will meet the needs of a brain-
evolving creature such as man. In  fact, nature made no attempt to 
store the vitamin, as it made none to manufacture the vitamin in the 
human body, in order to make quite  sure that human beings would 
gorge on fruits daily. Combined with the already mentioned 
advantage of providing a concentrated source of energy, with a 
minimum bulk, this makes fruits the essential condition of 
humanization. Had the earth not evolved flowers and fruits in that 
breath-taking splendour of the Cret aceous, humanization could not 
have taken place some one hundred  and fifty million years later. Because science has done nothing to encourage one to sense the 
unity of nature, such a feat of prevision seems incredible. But if 
nature is a whole, then it must fo llow that earlier stages prepare for 
the later ones, as in a living organism. One can conclude, with hope 
revived, that these many thousands of millions of years of evolution 
from Stardust to mammals, had a de finite developmental end in 
view—us. No doubt the cosmologists are right in assuming that life 
evolves into being in endless planets. But one can be reasonably 
assured that unless such planets bring forth flowers and fruits, 
among many other requirements,  humanization would not be 
possible, and so a mind, able to sense the beauty and harmony of 
Creation, would be ruled out. 6. The Life-Giving Seeds 
 
 
So important have fruits been to body and mind, that the quality and 
quantity of other nutritio nal essentials in an optional human diet are 
likely to be determined by the manner in which they fit into this 
fruitarian scheme. This has been hi nted to be the case with protein. It is a well-known principle that deficiencies in one part of a 
plant are made up in another. In the case of fruits, the deficiencies 
of the soft, sugar-soaked part are compensated for in the seeds. While the pulp of fruits contains  very little protein, the seeds 
contain between 8 and 22 per cent. The nut is of course a fruit seed, 
the almond being the seed of a beautiful member of the apple 
family. Seeds and nuts also compensate for mineral and vitamin 
deficiencies of fruits. For instance, the pulp and the juice have very 
little of the B vitamins, and calcium, while seeds and nuts are rich in 
these essentials. In the fruit as a whol e therefore, nature has offered 
a well balanced food. Another example of such complementation is that between 
seeds and nuts, on the one hand, and leaves and shoots on the other. While many seeds and nuts have not much lysine, and methionine, 
amino acids indispensable for th e manufacture of protein in the 
body, green glowing leaves are full of them. Thus cereals by 
themselves, or with fruits, may be inadequate, but with green shoots 
they provide all the amino acids required, an example which insists 
that requirements be considered as a whole, as one should all things. Separate analyses are useful and interesting, but one should always 
sense their part in a thoroughly integrated scheme of nature; nothing 
properly exists in isolation. Most fruits have diminutive seeds, and nuts are not 
overabundant. The primates are communal animals, and a more 
plentiful supplement was indispen sable. While some primates, like 
the gorilla, specialized in leaves, the human line took to the grasses, 
which produce seeds in abundance. Together with tender shoots, 
their ideal complement, the grasses, ancestors of the cereals, were 
most probably the inducement to living on the ground. As grasses 
are not to be found in the tropical forests, the home of the other 
higher primates, one must suppose that the human line, like the 
chimpanzee, had become ground- living under quite different 
conditions. In the Miocene, some sixty million years ago, the Himalayas 
had barely begun their stupendous rise from the bed of a gigantic 
ocean once stretching from the Atlan tic to the Pacific. The rising 
land must have produced many lakes—the Black Sea, the Caspian 
and the Mediterranean are such survivors—and gently sloping, 
well-watered valleys in which flowers prospered. Conditions 
possibly not very different persist to this day in the flower- and 
fruit-filled valleys south of the Central Asian Plateau. Conditions 
were also ideal for the grasses. In the more temperate regions, these 
were relatively short growing, enabling especially adapted trees—the typical temperate tree flora a nd especially the fruit trees, which 
are well suited to a grassy environment—to grow interspersed with 
grass, producing orchard- and park-like conditions. The Miocene saw the rise of that great family of grass eaters, 
the herbivora. Their virtual defencelessness indicates that these 
were also benevolent times, when beasts of prey were few. These 
are better adapted to the jungles of the tropics, and the tall grasses of 
the tropical savannas. The carnivora cannot persist long in a 
chase—the nature of their diet hinders long sustained effort—so that 
they must surprise their prey and kill quickly and surely, conditions 
not met in the short grass lands of the semi-tropical and temperate 
regions. In all probability, it is these c onditions which persisted ,into the 
Pliocene, which lured the hominid ancestors to become ground-
living, thus isolating themselves from the other primates which 
followed the retreating tropical vegetation as the world climate 
became colder as the Miocene passed into th e Pliocene. The popular 
notion that our ancestors took to the ground in order to prey on 
game is nonsensical. Man is not equipped as a natural hunter; in 
every hunting community, he has to learn the skills of hunting the 
hard way. That human beings have lived as intermittent hunters 
since the onset of the Ice Ages do es not alter the fact that their 
bodies remain totally unadapted to this way of life. Man's gait and 
posture, the remarkable co-ordination of hand and eye, the entire 
digestive and metabolic equipment, point to a native plant food-
gatherer, an activity calling for communal co-operation and 
participation which is at the heart of socializing drives. From the first therefore, the abundant seeds of the grasses 
probably formed an intrinsic part of man's diet. In many parts of the 
world to this day, handfuls of grass seeds can be easily collected by 
sieving the spathes through the fi ngers. Such seeds have the further 
advantage that they will keep; they can be eaten raw, or ground into 
flour and made into porridge, pancakes, biscuits, chappatis and the 
endless varieties of flour usage found all over the world. With the 
ending of the Ice Ages some ten thousand years ago, it was 
inevitable that mankind should set about selecting the most 
congenial of the grasses, so bringing into being the cereals, closer to 
the nuts in size, and virtually identical in composition. It is this ideal human diet of fruits, shoots and seeds which 
enabled the evolution of society, for its concentration made much 
time available for social activities. In bringing about a reduction in 
the length and size of the alimentary tract, it enabled man also to eat 
other foods, far from his ideal, in order to survive during the Ice 
Ages. In a mind-bearing creature, such a departure from the ideal is 
likely to have had the most disturbing effects on the mind. In the 
next chapter, the way in which th is transgression of natural law has 
affected the human mind will be traced. 7. The Sources of Evil 
 
 
It was earlier mentioned that human needs for protein are lower 
than is usually stated, and that animal foods not only provide an 
excess of protein, but introduce into the body economy unnatural 
nitrogenous substances. It is a biological law that an animal can only deal efficiently with substan ces to which it has become adapted 
in the course of its long evolution. Changes in size and shape can be 
brought about in a few generations, but functional changes require much more time. Recent estimates of the time necessary for evolving quite different metabo lic and enzymatic lines, such as 
would be incurred in a radical change of diet, runs into many millions of years. In every function studied, man remains identical 
to the higher primates, to the chimpanzee, the gorilla and the gibbon 
in particular, which means that the nearly universal 'mixed' type of 
human feeding is an abnormality and is bound to cause some sort of functional trouble. The possible consequences to the body have been pointed out from time to time by medical men and other 
scientists, but most people have cons idered the risks worth taking, if 
indeed they have been willing to accept the evidence of bodily 
damage at all. It is only recently that the effect on the mind has become more apparent. The price that has to be paid for such widescale dietary transgression seems truly enormous. As far back as 1931, Quastel and Wheatley had indicated that certain products 
of protein digestion, especially  those resulting from bacterial 
decomposition, possessed properties analogous to the most potent mind-affecting drugs such as mescalin, which might play a role in mental disturbances. At the time, this information was felt to be awkward, if not preposterous, possibly because it was felt unlikely 
that such an important item of food could be incriminated in mental 
disorder. Whatever the reason, it is only some forty years later that 
the problem was reopened, when the role of the monoamines in brain functioning was discovered. Ketz distinguishes between the biogenic amines, manufactured by the brain tissues, responsible for 
normal mental states, and a wide range of slightly altered 
monoamines which could be responsible for more unusual states, like mystical ecstasy, hallucinati ons and 'high' dreams. Between 
normality and psychosis, one might find a graduation of subtle alteration of the monoamine molecules. Since mescalin was isolated in 1943, the biochemical 
connection of the more elusive aspects of human experience, in 
love, in the arts, in mystical a nd other states, has been apparent. Evidently, nature has made use of  drug-like substances produced by 
the brain itself, such as reserpine. This does not imply that the mind 'is nothing but a chemical brew', but it does indicate that even the 
most elusive mental functions, such as the humanizing sensitivities, 
have a biological basis, an indication which should be obvious enough if the universe is a consistent enterprise. Although engendered by brain cells, there is every indication that mental experience in itself is not a part of the physical and chemical order. But whatever the nature of the mind, it is undoubtedly very much 
affected by biochemical events. There is a definite pharmacology of the soul. The monoamines are products of protein metabolism, a fact 
which makes the proteins as important to the mind as to the body. The finer aspects of protein metabolism are only now beginning to be unravelled. For too long it has been crudely assumed that brain and body can manufacture their protein needs from any kind of food protein, so long as the chemical building blocks are supplied. Very 
slight changes in molecular structure, barely detectable by the 
chemist, can have profound effect s on living functions, particularly 
in such a precariously balanced one as the brain, with its billions upon billions of cells and interconnections. Ketz has suggested the 
possibility 'that the different amines give some characteristics to the 
newly synthetized proteins, impar ting a "colour code" of affective 
qualities as it is being formed'. Very slight shifts from the normal might have enormous affectiv e, emotional, behavioural 
consequences. For every so called 'normal' protein that features in nutrition, 
there may be millions of such mi nor abnormal molecular variations. Although the body does possess an outstanding ability to select the protein ingredients it requires, this ability is only likely to refer to the ingredients which form part of the normal nutritional pattern, a pattern minutely and exactingly set by evolution. The possibility already referred to, of a wide conf usion regarding the 'normal' in 
human nutrition, makes it possible that the human mind is exposed 
to protein products which are in  various ways abnormal, with 
possibly momentous effects on brain function. The abnormal amines could be both manufactured in the body 
during the metabolism of abnormal proteins, as well as by bacterial 
action on protein wastes in the alimentary tract, especially in the 
colon, on the nitrogenous products which have resisted absorption, usual in a 'mixed' diet. It is here that one can make a clear distinction between foods of animal  origin, and of plant derivation. Besides the large amounts of proteins in animal foods, there are a host of substances related to the amines, the purines and the 
pyramidines, and those released by putrefactive changes. These 
form what analysts term the extractives, consisting of the more easily hydrolyzable and soluble protein products, and therefore all the more easily absorbed. These are completely absent in fruits and 
many vegetables, and only present in minor amounts in seeds and 
nuts. However, some plant foods do contain significant amounts 
also, as does cocoa, yeast extract, and many pulses. On a diet of fruit and vegetables, low in protein, a fermentative 
bacterial flora prevails, which is  biochemically the opposite of 
putrefication, a living process in which yeasts are active, producing B vitamins and other substances usef ul to the body. Putrefaction is 
rightly associated with death. On a 'mixed' diet, not only is protein 
usually in excess, but the vegetable fibres present hinder the digestion of protein, providing more wastes for the putrefactive bacteria in the colon. One must conclude that the diet of most humans, the world over, is particularly favourable for the 
production and absorption of abnormal amines. The normal monoamines would be presumably concerned in 
initiating the humanizing predispositions, the aspirations to goodness and harmonious social relationships, to love, compassion 
and co-operation, and the joys and ecstasies that go with their fulfilment. The more elusive, yet important pursuits of purity, of the 
mystical and spiritual, are connected. The abnormal amines, on the 
other hand, are disruptive rather than integrating, more likely to excite the lower, prehuman aspect of mind, normally quiescent but easily aroused, accounting for the mi schief and the insensitivity in 
the human midst, and, when more severe, for the violence and hatred, the horrors and bestialities of existence. To find such a biochemical basis to evil, in world-wide 
aberrations of diet, must appear as the over simplification of an immensely complex problem. Certainly no two individuals are likely to react in the same way to the same abnormalizing conditions, and some people will be better equipped than others to 
resist the inhuman tendencies, as some societies have been more 
active than others in encouraging an acceptable level of human behaviour. But statistically, over sufficient time, abnormal effects on the mind will push behaviour toward s the inhuman and bestial. It 
is not the rarer outburst of loving, the sudden craving for beauty and 
purity, that count so much as the steady loading of thought, desire 
and action in directions which are subtly not properly human, for ever waiting for the periodical occasions for more terrible venting, in the tragedies of individual exis tence as in the recurring crises of 
human history. 8. Love, Lust and Aggression 
 
 
The destructive anger and hatred of human beings serves no 
biological purpose; on the contrary, they are a threat to human 
survival. Although primates, and humans, are not territorial animals, 
in the sense that the carnivores ar e territorial, they do resent 
encroachment into their habitats. Gorillas can get very angry and 
ferocious. It is evident therefore th at the capacity for anger has been 
purposefully retained in the evoluti on of the primates, to meet threat 
and challenge, even if their usua l and normal patterns of existence 
are peaceful. As humans became hunt ers with the Ice Ages, they did 
in fact acquire some of the territorial predispositions of carnivores 
and hunting animals. This is unders tandable, for game is scarce at 
the best of times, a given area only being able to provide a tenth or 
less of game compared to vegetable foods. With this cortically 
involved territorialism, there has arisen a capacity for exercising 
anger, violence and ruthless-ness. Bu t this is not natural; it is purely 
existential. If the usual is confused for the normal, it is impossible to make 
sense of the historical, and prehistorical, facts of man's extreme and unbiological aggressiveness. Attempts to find reasons and advantages for it, are fanciful. While aggressiveness as a normal pattern of life in many animals is clearly biologically advantageous, 
attempts to transpose such advant ages to the human genesis entails 
an ignorance of the most pertinent human features, those which have been absolutely essential for th e very special type of social 
organization characteristic of humans as opposed to the groupings found among other animals. The fact is that most people ha ve at one time or another known 
the meaning of love, if not fully in the reality of their lives, then at least in longing and in dreaming. Love is then seen to be a condition of joy nearing ecstasy, a desire to give oneself for others, a longing for the pure and the beautiful, the righteous and noble, so powerful 
as to completely transfigure the meaning of existence. In such 
moments, there is no possibility of meanness and selfishness, of 
brutality and cruelty. Clearly, such a humanizing predisposition, innate and biologically implante d, affecting all thought and 
behaviour, has been absolutely indispensable for the familial and social structure required by an evolving and a developing brain. In 
the fact of such requirements, any contrary suppositions can but 
amount to faulty and injurious myth-making. Since most people like to find support for what they happen to be, rather than for what they 
should be, such spurious myth-making, from which scientists themselves are not entirely absolved, are very popular. The intensity of love's ecstasy, proving its biological 
implantation, is evidently designed to be kindled in an atmosphere of sexual love, the longing for another, calling for tenderness and 
solicitation, care and adoration. In such a scheme, the human body and the human face have necessarily been decreed by natural selection as the most beautiful things in the Creation, the ultimate 
objects of veneration. As sexual love is fulfilled, so comes a sense of profound meaningfulness in all things. Lovers have no doubt that 
life has meaning, that nature is sacred. In such a state, mere carnality is transcended into a near divine 
rapture. Each touch becomes an act of adoration, each word and movement holy. There can be no blind demand for an animal stampede into the self-centred relief of immediate coitus. On the contrary, the love game overcomes time, and when coitus occurs, it 
is a sublime unitive rapture wh ich thoroughly transcends flesh, 
place and time, in a 'high' whose promise was whispered in the first encounters of loving. This near divine transfiguration of the body, and thereby of the universe, in the 'high' of sexual love, is the complete opposite of the lewd and lustful, of the pornographic, 
purient interest in the body, in the sexual organs. The purity which it 
demands makes it the prerogative of youth, of young lovers. Although it carries an obvious ability to be shared with others, and with all things, it is the most naturally achieved in an enduring relationship with another. By definition, careless change and 
promiscuity are contrary to it. The impulse to a wider sharing of love, originally awakened in 
sexual loving, takes also a sexless form of immense importance to a creature communally bonded by compassion rather than by instinct or advantage, in the love of family, of friends, of community, of nature.
Food_Fit_For_Humans_by_Frank_Wilson.txt
Summarize the following text section accurately and concisely. Maintain specific details and numerical information, and use anti-repetition mechanisms:

        Soil and Health Library
This document is a reproduction of the book or other copyrighted material you
requested. It was prepared on for the exclusive use of Oriana, whose email address
is orianaoriana@gmail. com. This reproduction was made by the Soil and Health Library only for the purpose of
research and study. Any further reproduction or distribution of this copy in any form
whatsoever constitutes a violation of copyrights. FRANK AVRAY WILSON 
 
FOOD FIT FOR 
HUMANS 
 
 
 
 
 
LONDON 
THE C. W. DANIEL COMPANY  
First published in Great Britain  
by The C.
Frank Avray Wilson
Who is the author of the book "Food Fit for Humans"?
The author argues that the human being is designed to appreciate and seek out beautiful and harmonious things, and that this sensitivity to beauty is essential for humanization.
What is the author's main argument in the book?
The author criticizes science for being complicit in the destruction of nature and the promotion of unhealthy and unnatural food habits, and suggests that science has failed to provide a moral compass for human society.
What is the author's view on the role of science in human society?
The author argues that fruits are essential for human health and well-being, and that a diet based on fruits and vegetables is the key to humanization.
What is the author's stance on the importance of fruits in the human diet?
The author suggests that aggression and violence are not natural or biological, but rather a result of human deviation from a natural and harmonious environment, and that they are a threat to human survival.
What is the author's view on the role of aggression and violence in human society?