For crying out loud, why eat fruits and vegetables?

Post Reply New Topic

No, you seemed to identify epidemiology as a post hoc fallacy -- that is a danger with sloppy or premature epidemiology, but generally not the case ... not all post hoc analysis fall into the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Last edited by monty on 22 Apr 2009, 8:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

But you haven't. All you've done is disagree with someone and said it's x fallacy. That's not debate, and it's not right. That's just being stubborn. You asked a question and you aren't listening to the answer. Deal with it.

Vitamins, minerals and fiber.

And they generally taste good.

ruveyn

Michael Pollan has described this as "the ideology of Nutritionism": "The widely shared but unexamined assumption is that the key to understanding food is indeed the nutrient. Put another way: Foods are essentially the sum of their nutrient parts." That simplistic, reductionist view of food does not fit the evidence.

There are a multitude of nutrients not accounted for by any simple summary like "vitamins, minerals and fiber" - we don't have a list of all compounds that are truly essential, or those which are conditionally essential, and those which are not essential but which are quite beneficial.

VEGGIE HOMAGE

The roots and shoots and fruits I gobble
Keep me from that old age hobble.
I do not mumble like a dumb bell,
My physique makes me not humble,
For, with rigor and with vigor
I maintain a decent figure.
It’s broccoli, carrots, tomatoes
Let me stretch, touch my toes.
Beans, of course, teach me the art
Of the loud creative fart.
(attentive of the circumstance
Careful not to s**t my pants)
So hey for veggies, shout “Hurray!
Good for work, great for play.”

Also, you can actually cook fruits and veggies much easier than capsules of vitamins and the like....It actually looks AND tastes better too! Transforming food before consumption is one of the things we excel at as humans (though other primates have shown capacity for such a thing...like putting potatoes in hot water and washing it to remove dirt).

Me: The moon is made of swiss cheese. That's why you see craters in it.

You: No, it could be from astronomical collisions.

Me: You're just being stubborn! I explained why the moon is made of cheese, and you're not even listening! Deal with it!

Why eat 'em? Because they're Tasty AND Nutritious!

Thank you for your polite answer. I'm getting the usual wave of insults and ridicule after winning the argument.

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
Albert Einstein

It's good that both you and Einstein seem smugly confused. It's the best company.

You would be on steadier ground to argue that the minimum caloric intake is bunk.

I dont see any definitive win on your part I am afraid.

What? Look, I might not be the most eloquent guy on the board, but I'm not going round in stupid circles with silly mind games. You're asking a question about why we should eat any veg at all, and you aren't happy with the negative responses you're getting, so you're claiming everything as a fallacy or just something incorrect. You can't arrogantly claim to be an expert at debate or rhetoric if you aren't willing to consider any new information given to you.
Do you drink protein shakes for all your daily protein? Or do you like to eat meat and nuts and bread for your daily intake of carbs and protein and fibre? Why eat any fresh food at all aside from the fact that it just tastes nicer than swallowing 20 pills every day? What's the big deal about eating fruit and vegetables if people like them? If you don't, fine. Just have the stinking pills, but don't take it out on other people.
Can you explain more about your conpsiracy theory? I get that you think that the governement (the secret lizard, thought-stealing government, perhaps?) are trying to keep the 'proles' down by making veg expensive, but surely paying £5 a time for a bottle of vitamin pills is just as bad? You see what you're getting when you buy an apple, and if the government was secretly repressing people, don't you think they'd have an easier way of doing it than making veg expensive? Like... I don't know, censorship of sensitive material, prohibition of particular substances, that kind of thing?
Perhaps I am being stubborn, but I'm only working with what you're giving me, so don't expect anything special.

Me: Oh yeah, and people have been to the moon and brought back moon dust and rocks and stuff, none of it tastes like cheese.

You: But it's gone off! It's dried out in the harsh environment of space!

Me: Is that so?

just_ben: First of all, observe the differences in the styles of our posts.

Me: "This is why I don't believe such-and-such. Your argument is flawed. You committed the fallacy of such-and-such. I'm a philosophy student, I know these things, and I'll even show you a list of fallacies."

You: "You're an idiot. You're going around in circles. You're not doing things right. What I'm telling you is just plain true, so deal with it."

The difference? I'm arguing like a logician, and you're arguing like a Street Fighter.

I have kept insults down to a minimum and remained relatively polite throughout the discussion, while you and Monty cast one stone after another.

In debate, I try to do well to inform, educate, and enlighten people, to present my ideas clearly and concisely, and to avoid insulting my opponent's intelligence. For me, debate is cooperative, not competitive. I'm not just looking to bite the other guy's head off.

The purpose of debate is to teach (if you win) and learn (if you lose). For that reason, I don't even think it should be called losing. Everyone wins in debate.

I hoped that both of you would be more receptive to the idea of a fallacy and use your newfound knowledge to your advantage. It's really unfortunate that you had to stoop to insults.

The idea that eating fruits and vegetables is a class based plot against poor people is obvious paranoia.
The idea that eating pills and greasy carbohydrates is either cheap or healthy or appealing to anybody with an experienced palate is very strange.
The idea that fruits and vegetables are out of the reach of the average person by price is simply not true.

Aside from that debate may be educational. But I get the definite feeling you were forced to eat badly prepared vegetables by a martinet of a mother.

Alright, fair enough professor. Tell me more about this conspiracy theory. Does it involve the illuminati and tin foil hats?
I still hold the opinion that you aren't debating though. I read your posts and I see someone who is desperately trying to stay in control and has only said 'I'm a student' so that you can proclaim fallacy this and fallacy that. I think you may have a reasonable question to answer, but you've been so arrogant about how you ask it that you've recieved nothing but negativity back, and you aren't happy with that. I don't think I'll have any more say in this because we're both going round in circles. You the more eloquent of the two of us, simply saying I'm discrediting you for never really saying anything. You discrediting me for being a big meany. Evidently you don't like vegetables and don't want anyone else to like them either. Sorry you feel that way. Perhaps you should a vegetable curry or something. There's plenty of recipes on the internet. Or the pharmacy probably has a mail order if you are that serious about not eating veg.

I'm surprised to find noone has done this yet, but here goes.

Fallacies of four terms, coupled with fallacies of many questions.


Converse accident, then a slippery slope.


Appeal to emotion.


Anecdotal evidence.


Red herring.




Ignoring for the time being that you present this as your theory then claim to be in the skeptic camp, all of the questions you ask are really fallacies of many questions.


Pretty much baseless enthymeme, since you've provided nothing to show that fruits and vegetables are not, in fact, a necessary part of our diets, and this is really not a widely assumed stance.