Hansenista comments on Mapping Fun Theory onto the challenges of ethical foie gras - Less Wrong

34 Post author: HonoreDB 07 December 2011 08:47PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (62)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Hansenista 08 December 2011 01:07:15AM 2 points [-]

So far as I know it's not an acquired taste (e.g., generally unpleasant), so people would probably want it even if nobody were "bending their preferences".

Comment author: SilasBarta 08 December 2011 01:35:07AM 5 points [-]

They have to do some bending to get people to notice its existence in the first place, let alone deem it worthy of trying a first time. The fact that people insist on calling it by its French name, rather than "fat liver", is a testament to the marketing that has to be done to support interest in it.

I don't pretend this is a cure-all, or that we can always end livestock torture by not promoting its tasty products -- that would be endorsing a "just world fallacy". But sometimes we really do make our hard choices a lot harder than they need to be.

Comment author: Hansenista 08 December 2011 03:14:24AM 6 points [-]

The fact that people insist on calling it by its French name, rather than "fat liver", is a testament to the marketing that has to be done to support interest in it.

The study of variable quantities is called "al-jabr" not because mathematicians want to make it sound exotic, but because of historical accident. Unless you have particularly good reason to think otherwise, I would guess foie gras is the same way.

Comment author: SilasBarta 08 December 2011 04:19:07AM *  0 points [-]

People are automatically repulsed by "fat liver". They're not repulsed by "the restoration". Foie gras needs to hide its original-language meaning to avoid turning away some people; algebra doesn't. Not a particularly relevant comparison, I think.

Comment author: Antisuji 08 December 2011 07:36:33AM 9 points [-]

People who speak English are (possibly) automatically repulsed by "fat liver". French speakers are not similarly repulsed by "fois gras". The difference has little if anything to do with the practice of force feeding.

Comment author: Kevin 08 December 2011 11:53:21AM *  4 points [-]

Americans are repulsed by just "liver", for the most part. It's unfortunate, organ meat is really good for you, and for the most part much cheaper than muscle.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 08 December 2011 04:32:44PM 1 point [-]

Would the latter remain true in America if Americans were to lose their beliefs that organ meat is repulsive?

Comment author: Hansenista 08 December 2011 09:19:16PM 0 points [-]

Probably the price of organ meat would go up, while the price of "normal" meat would go down. That's basically a winner for everyone.

Comment author: dlthomas 08 December 2011 09:36:08PM 3 points [-]

Except those of us who already like organ meat...

Comment author: Hansenista 08 December 2011 11:53:20PM 1 point [-]

Well, you people are disgusting anyway :)

Comment author: Prismattic 09 December 2011 12:19:35AM 0 points [-]

Though the related expression* might lead one to believe otherwise, Jewish Americans consume chopped liver that is labelled "chopped liver" pretty regularly. Though I've got to say that chopped beef liver is much better than chopped chicken liver, so I have my doubts about goose liver pate (which I've never tried). Also, a little minced onion and salt makes it a lot more appetizing than it might be alone.

On a different note, make sure you don't eat liver from a carnivore.

*"What am I, chopped liver?"

Comment author: dlthomas 09 December 2011 12:36:50AM 0 points [-]

Also, a little minced onion and salt makes it a lot more appetizing than it might be alone.

Also, some hard boiled eggs.

Mmm... chopped liver...

Comment author: [deleted] 24 February 2012 12:12:22PM 1 point [-]

I think most of the discussion of “bending preferences” and “acquired taste” underestimate the variance of tastes across the population. I've seen someone on LW saying that they didn't enjoy wine, and therefore suspecting that whoever claims to enjoy wine must be doing it for signalling. The idea that maybe some people actually enjoy wine and some don't doesn't seem to have occurred to them (where by some I mean ‘a sizeable fraction of the population’). Likewise, I'd be shocked to find that the fraction of people who actually like foie grass the first time they try it is <10% or >90%.