Did we strike a nerve or what? I guess eating 100% raw must also make
you
hyper.

Don

Ingrid Bauer/J-C Catry wrote:

> > Based on the questions that I have asked in the past, this is the last list
> > I would look for "valid comments" on anything
>
> Any comments have some validity ( even when it shows how lost we can be)
>
> > I asked for a comparison between raw verses macrobiotics
>
> What were you expecting to get from comparing a boot with  a running shoes

> you can have all the variations of forms and colors in each categories that
> makes  such a continuum between the 2 that you don't know what is what ?
> Somewhere you might know the diference  if  you can stand in the puddle of
> water for a while and stay confortable with one,  while with the other you
> might realise that you need to run to get out of  that unconforable
> situation.
> Then there is my 4 years old  son who can stay in the middle of a puddle of
> water with his running shoes and still be smiling. ( may be he is one of
> those extremists)
>
> A good shoe  willl be defined by ,1  if it fit your foot, 2 if the symbiotic
> association of the two fulfill the function you want them to have, together.
> In some regard a sad diet is a good diet for some peoples , ...
>
> >and got thing back like Michio Kushi is a chain smoker
> >and eats junk food, therefore macrobiotics is no good (Michio didn't invent
> >macrobiotics).
>
> It din't invent macrobiotic but he  surely is the one who vulgarised it. in the west
> His precepts and the understanding , of the public,  of macrobiotic are
> intimately linked. So if he was not able to walk his talk may be
> macrobiotic( as commonly undrstood)  was too much out of its original context.
>
> >Macro does not have a scientific basics (what is the scientific basis for raw?).
>
> what makes the oriental philosophy behind macrobiotic so interesting and
> relevant to me is precisely that it is not a scientific  analytical approach.
> There is so much arrogance in scientists because they are at the origine of
> so much changes in forms but  they have  so little understanding of the
> content that the scientific applications are getting completly non sensical.
> eating raw makes feel alive and that concept is as unscientific as it can be.
>
> I like the principals of macrobiotic ( the ones that retain my attention)
> and can see a possible integration of the 2 concepts.( raw and macro)
> One anecdote
> I was living in the same vilage than the translator of mishio Kushi in
> French and his children were stealling our strawberries in the garden
>  their purist  father was not smoking but was judging that as a non
> macrobiotic thing to do - i don't  know if it was , the stealing part,  or
> the fruit part,  that didn't agree with him but his children had to hide to
> get to the forbidden fruit).
>
> jean-claude