Philosophy Now Forum

.




You Are What You Eat



Does anyone here associate their diet with their practice of philosophy?



Do you have a specific diet that you follow? - and why?


Do you consider yourself overweight, normal or on the thin side?




Where are you on the BMI?




.........................................






Do you normally eat based upon ethics, need, or emotional compensation?






.

I normally eat based on what I like to eat, and whether I feel hungry?

Bill Wiltrack wrote:You Are What You Eat

Easy on the prairie oysters, Bill.

If what you say is true Bill, then a lot of people around here must eat shite!

Bill Wiltrack wrote:You Are What You Eat

No, you are who you eat.

bobevenson wrote:

Bill Wiltrack wrote:You Are What You Eat

No, you are who you eat.

Yes, and I'm sure it will get worse in your next post.

We can only hence theorise that bob eats shit, because he certainly is most adroit in talking it.

Suffice to say I am not fat bob, nor am I thin nor am I an ectomorph or a mesomorph or an endomorph, if you are what you eat bob I suspect you are turgid, bombastic and feculent.

I don't think the laconic style really lends well to the prose, I think it shows a lack of elan in the language personally, I think if he could talk in English appositely or at least in a manner that was at least practised if not verbose, or at the very minimum, demonstrably, well founded in the words of a language, at least it may be appropriate in his prose. I think he talks like that in riddles because his writing skills are injurious to adept demeanour as it pertains to good language.

If you can talk well do it if not don't but don't talk like a vagina. And yes I just posted the most loquacious perhaps mendacious piece of inculcant prose in the history of language, but you would hope the poinard of my sword was marking the target that was most close to a sentiment. I of course await any repost with aplomb. the mark has been made, and the return if it is skilful may yet fall upon my corpulent form hence, as of course it pertains to the voluble over the more lean of extant language.

Blaggard wrote:We can only hence theorise that bob eats shit, because he certainly is most adroit in talking it.

Suffice to say I am not fat bob, nor am I thin nor am I an ectomorph or a mesomorph or an endomorph, if you are what you eat bob I suspect you are turgid, bombastic and feculent.

I don't think the laconic style really lends well to the prose, I think it shows a lack of elan in the language personally, I think if he could talk in English appositely or at least in a manner that was at least practised if not verbose, or at the very minimum, demonstrably, well founded in the words of a language, at least it may be appropriate in his prose. I think he talks like that in riddles because his writing skills are injurious to adept demeanour as it pertains to good language.

If you can talk well do it if not don't but don't talk like a vagina. And yes I just posted the most loquacious perhaps mendacious piece of inculcant prose in the history of language, but you would hope the poinard of my sword was marking the target that was most close to a sentiment.

Well that was about $8.50 worth, but then i don't pay as much as others do.

Blaggard wrote: I of course await any repost with aplomb. the mark has been made, and the return if it is skilful may yet fall upon my corpulent form hence.

Your edit is worth another $.75

thedoc wrote:

Blaggard wrote:We can only hence theorise that bob eats shit, because he certainly is most adroit in talking it.

Suffice to say I am not fat bob, nor am I thin nor am I an ectomorph or a mesomorph or an endomorph, if you are what you eat bob I suspect you are turgid, bombastic and feculent.

I don't think the laconic style really lends well to the prose, I think it shows a lack of elan in the language personally, I think if he could talk in English appositely or at least in a manner that was at least practised if not verbose, or at the very minimum, demonstrably, well founded in the words of a language, at least it may be appropriate in his prose. I think he talks like that in riddles because his writing skills are injurious to adept demeanour as it pertains to good language.

If you can talk well do it if not don't but don't talk like a vagina. And yes I just posted the most loquacious perhaps mendacious piece of inculcant prose in the history of language, but you would hope the poinard of my sword was marking the target that was most close to a sentiment.

Well that was about $8.50 worth, but then i don't pay as much as others do.

Pfft you are kidding it wasn't worth a dime and you know it. Don't patronise me.

Ok then as you edited, it's worth at best 85c. An internet post isn't worth shit but if you are going to pay for it, well 85c seems to be way overvalued. But meh it's your money.

Blaggard wrote:
Pfft you are kidding it wasn't worth a dime and you know it. Don't patronise me.

Ok then as you edited, it's worth at best 85c. An internet post isn't worth shit but if you are going to pay for it, well 85c seems to be way overvalued. But meh it's your money.

I'll owe it to you, rather owe you that cheat you out of it.

Blaggard wrote: Don't patronise me.

Why not? I usually patronize everyone.

Your peccadillos are of no interest to me mate. I'm just waiting on a cheque for 85c. You can knock 75c off for the overseas postage if you like.

thedoc wrote:

I'll owe it to you, rather owe you that cheat you out of it.

Typical Merkin.

.






...................................................







.

thedoc wrote:

bobevenson wrote:

Bill Wiltrack wrote:You Are What You Eat

No, you are who you eat.

Yes, and I'm sure it will get worse in your next post.

I forgot to add, "and how many times."