Cool Parallel

Seriously, Gabilondo is a freaking genius. Who else would think of drawing a parallel between divorcing marriage and biology (gay marriage is an example he gives) and divorcing food consumption from hunger (as in foodie culture)?

11 thoughts on “Cool Parallel”

  1. Biophobia is a hallmark of progressivism.

    So is boredom.

    All my physical needs are easily taken care of. Everything new and shiny is better than the old thing. Our old, primitive animal needs are so boring. And icky.

    I think this is what underlies the transhumanist stuff. These people should go camping more.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. \ I think this is what underlies the transhumanist stuff. These people should go camping more.

      Don’t know much about transhumanism, but if Google is correct in defining it as “a philosophical movement that advocates for the transformation of the human condition by … technologies to greatly enhance human intellect and physiology,” then the idea is quite old. Eugenics pursued the same goal via different means.

      Isn’t desiring to reach some ideal a part of human condition? Physical needs have to be respected, but we are not (primitive) animals to be satisfied by them…

      Now thought transhumanism is about “primitive animal needs” after all – transforming oneself and one’s descendants in the attempt to win the intraspecific competition. It is not limited to humans either since in nature “Intraspecific competition is often more intense than its interspecific (when different species compete with each other ) form.”

      Like

      1. It’s an academic fad that sees everything human as evil and cheers on the eventual destruction of humanity by robots. It sounds nuts but it actually is a thing.

        Like

      2. I am talking about the people who think they are going to upload their consciousness into a server and live forever. It’s not just that they think food and sex are overrated. I think they really are disgusted by their own biology. I think you’d have to be, to find such an existence appealing, rather than appalling.

        Also, sidewise, talking about neo-yuppie people I know, who were chuffed to get a “molecular gastronomy” kit for Christmas. Because making edible purple foam that tastes like whatever you want was apparently the next hot thing in food, a couple years ago. How bored do you have to be with eating, to get excited about that?

        Like

  2. The analogy feels forced. Food has been a status symbol for millennia – think about elaborate feasts of European kings and Roman emperors. The same goes for fashion, which takes clothing beyond its initial purpose of satisfying the biological need to stay warm.

    Like

    1. Actually, the food of the Romans, and then medieval and Renaissance kings was abundant but not elaborate. Medieval aristocracy ate meals that were 6-12 courses of roast meat. This is, in part, what motivated Columbus’s journey: to get the spices that would relieve the boredom and the blandness.

      If we think about a later era, Victorian England created very elaborate rituals of domestic service, politeness, complicated social behaviors. But curiously, they didn’t leave a cuisine. The British food existed in the state of bland boredom until 1980s when fashionable chefs started trying to make something out of it.

      The famous Russian cuisine of the 19th century was good because it was very fish and veg based but it was hardly elaborate. The most complex thing they had was the famous Olivier salad that was multi-ingredient yet not like anything today’s foodie would find appealing.

      Like

      1. You’re right. I was wrong to use the word “elaborate”. I also focused only on Europe, how racist of me. My point was that food has been about more than just hunger for quite a while. For as long as there have been social classes, humans have been using almost all aspects of their lives to highlight belonging to a particular group and/or being better than others.

        It is true that the modern foodie culture surpasses the past in its complexity.

        Like

      2. “Romans, and then medieval and Renaissance kings was abundant but not elaborate”

        I seem to recall reading that the Roman elite had a thing for… camouflaged? food, that is dishes that were made by combining lots of ingredients in such a way that they could not be identified… which sounds like a kind of proto-foodie culture…

        *I think I remember the book (antrhopology about cross cultural food influences especially related to latin america) but can’t remember the author or title….

        Like

  3. “Who else would think of drawing a parallel between divorcing marriage and biology (gay marriage is an example he gives) and divorcing food consumption from hunger (as in foodie culture)?”

    St. Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle. That’s about nine-tenths of the perverted faculty argument you have there!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.