Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorHutt, Peter Bartonen_US
dc.contributor.authorTorpoco, Edward A.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-06-07T03:11:29Z
dc.date.issued1997en_US
dc.identifier.citationWhy We Eat What We Eat: Explanations for Human Food Preferences and Implications for Government Regulation (1997 Third Year Paper)en
dc.identifier.urihttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:8846767
dc.description.abstractAs this paper will demonstrate, however, understanding the reasons behind human food preferences can make a tremendous difference in the well-being of the world's people. To this end, Part II examines two competing theories for the origins of human food preferences: cultural idealism and cultural materialism. The first approach starts from the premise that human food preferences are fundamentally arbitrary--i.e., that food preferences are the results of irrational cultural prejudices--whereas the second theory posits that human food habits are rational adaptations to material conditions. Part III illustrates these two theory's explanations for two well-known food taboos: the American taboo on dog meat and the Indian taboo on cow slaughter.en
dc.language.isoen_USen
dash.licenseLAAen_US
dc.subjectFood and Drug Lawen
dc.subjectcultural idealismen
dc.subjectcultural materialismen
dc.subjecttabooen
dc.titleWhy We Eat What We Eat: Explanations for Human Food Preferences and Implications for Government Regulationen
dc.typePaper (for course/seminar/workshop)en_US
dc.date.available2012-06-07T03:11:29Z
dash.authorsorderedfalse


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record