Publication: Why We Eat What We Eat: Explanations for Human Food Preferences and Implications for Government Regulation
Open/View Files
Date
1997
Authors
Published Version
Published Version
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.
Citation
Why We Eat What We Eat: Explanations for Human Food Preferences and Implications for Government Regulation (1997 Third Year Paper)
Research Data
Abstract
As 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.
Description
Other Available Sources
Keywords
Food and Drug Law, cultural idealism, cultural materialism, taboo
Terms of Use
This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service