Kirt:
> One problem with only using your intuition is that, say you need oysters
> but have never eaten them before, your intuition is probably unable to
> direct you to oysters without experience. Perhaps is pays to test as many
> foods as long as possible to widen the scope of raw foods your metabolism
> "knows".

I think you're absolutely correct.  One has no way of knowing the smell
or taste, and the overall appeal of every single food he may come in
contact with in the future.  The message you replied to was a rather old
post of mine; I have changed my ways somewhat now and no longer find mental
images to be a very reliable method.  I need to smell then taste, and
only then will I eat of the food fits my profile so to speak.  In fact,
my very first experience with musseles a day or two ago was a very
horrible one; it was the most salty and digusting thing that found its
way to my taste buds in a long while.

I don't suppose animals visualize foods either.  They likely go by smell
and taste.  Though they must equally likely manage to develop some sort
of mental pictures for foods they might prefer or such (the word "prefer"
isn't very good here; instincts shouldn't have preferences per se).  Now
that I think of it, the whole issue of mental images seems to be too
incompatible with the definition of IE to be considered as a valid method
of food-selection.  Smell should be the key to success IMO.