Ya' know, I've been thinking.
"Deliciousness is deliciousness" Hmmmmmm. On the face of it, I think- sure, I believe this. After all, what pleasure we derive from the taste of what we eat is the bottom line for all of us, and deliciousness creates pleasure, right?
But then, if you think of "D is D" as something like- the ends (deliciousness) justify the means (any edible thing from any source, any environment in which to eat or prepare food, any quality of ingredients, any level of healthfulness, any kind or quality of preparation, any level of sanitariness, any amount of chemical additives, any ANYTHING so long as deliciousness is the result), then I'd have to say I don't agree with it.
For me, the perception of how the ends are realized affects the result. It just doesn't taste as good to me if the road to deliciousness appears to be or is known to be suspect or obviously bad. I understand this is subjective, but so is every experiencce of one's senses.
I'd be more comfortable with my gustatory bottom line being "maximum possible pleasure from food related activity, especially but not limited to eating; encompassing, where applicable, taste, visual appeal of food and environment, olfactory appeal, confidence
in safety and quality of ingredients and in conditions of preparation".
Granted its not as catchy as "D is D", but its much truer to my heart and mind.
So- what do you all think?