On Sun, 4 Aug 2002 05:05:13 -0400, "BabyLemonade ..."
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>>From: Ken Stuart <[log in to unmask]>
>>Reply-To: Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Re: food sensitivities
>>Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2002 13:10:05 -0700
>>
>>On Sat, 3 Aug 2002 13:55:09 -0600, Katrina <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> >>The flaw of this line of argument is that there is no such thing as
>>"objective
>> >>data".  There is no such thing as a "reality" beyond your own mind.
>> >
>> >Nearly all data is objective.
>>
>>What is "data" ?
>>
>>
>>--
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Ken
>>[log in to unmask]
>
>
>This bickering has nothing to do with paleo, please carry on PRIVATELY.

First off, it is not "bickering", it is a philosophical discussion.

Second, it has everything to do with paleo, because the thread is about the
claim by someone on this list, that the Paleo Diet is a "religion", because we
do not know everything about nutrition, and therefore Paleo is a "belief".

Philosophy is about the only area where I claim some expertise, and the use of
the words "belief" and "religion" by this person are entirely incorrect, and
are based on a pop "post-modernism" that uses word games to attack other
people's ideas that seem inconvenient and disturbing.

Certainly, one cannot find any idea that is more inconvenient, than the idea
that eating processed agricultural products is unhealthy.

(Todd's post today "word-meaning and speaker-meaning" talks about some of the
word games used.)


--
Cheers,

Ken
[log in to unmask]