So if I think they’re nasty, I’m wrong because I’m not starving enough? Not a great counterpoint. They’re still nasty in that scenario, just a helpful nasty.
Aaaaaand that’s how you know someone who has never starved before. Truly starved. The stomach has it’s own opinion when left empty long enough.
It’s good though, that you never had. I’ve been through a lot, but the trauma of starvation is a permanent one. It’s best you don’t ever see the perspective of why people made food from blood.
My point is that if you have to be starving to enjoy eating something, then its default descriptor is probably much closer to “nasty” than “delicious”
I absolutely concede the point that everything nutritious will taste good if you’re starved, and I’m glad to have never needed to rely on nasty tasting food to stay alive. I’m very lucky, no need to be adversarial about it
So if I think they’re nasty, I’m wrong because I’m not starving enough? Not a great counterpoint. They’re still nasty in that scenario, just a helpful nasty.
Aaaaaand that’s how you know someone who has never starved before. Truly starved. The stomach has it’s own opinion when left empty long enough.
It’s good though, that you never had. I’ve been through a lot, but the trauma of starvation is a permanent one. It’s best you don’t ever see the perspective of why people made food from blood.
My point is that if you have to be starving to enjoy eating something, then its default descriptor is probably much closer to “nasty” than “delicious”
I absolutely concede the point that everything nutritious will taste good if you’re starved, and I’m glad to have never needed to rely on nasty tasting food to stay alive. I’m very lucky, no need to be adversarial about it
Not every disagreement is worth arguing about
Pretty much no comment in this entire thread is “worth” posting, including yours. What did you add to the discussion by saying that?