Marvin wrote:
> Ah, the struggle for enlightenment against the shackles of ignorance and
> error is ever marked by such defensive poses, by the intransigant
> insistance on being or doing in just this way or just that way, by the
> creation of hierarchies and titles, by the narrow division of teachings
> into right and wrong, as if there were not infinite layers of truth and
> transcendence to be explored.
>
> For nobody said that you SHAN'T have your pork, or said it was anything
> less than savory and good. And it would be naught but cruel to deny
> base pleasures to those not yet capable of appreciating meals more
> glorious and rewarding by far.
>
> For while it is true that, as meats go, pork tends towards more fat and
> therefore more immediate gratification of the less developed palate and
> mind (hence the periodic reappearance of such abominations as the
> "McRib"), it is also true that slow-cooked beef takes on richer and
> subtler flavors, just as fresh, fresh sushi is altogether more rewarding
> than, say, deep-fried catfish. Which is not to say that catfish or pork
> are bad, per se, just that a mind more in touch with the cosmic essense of
> yumminess will tend towards sushi and BBQ beef because they reward a more
> elevated and developed level of perception.
>
> Thus, a soul seeking enlightenment will choose a BBQ capable of leading
> one on towards ever greater degrees of insight and understanding, not the
> BBQ of conventional dogma. Such a soul will not raise up a given meat
> like an icon, but instead will use the meat to propel himself into greater
> oneness with the BBQ. Such a soul will opt for the incense of the palate,
> not the candy.
*Note to self*
Never get into a pseudo-philosophical argument with Marvin.
Adam
