What about dogs?
“Aw, Jesus - if you’d at least driven them into the Dead Sea, I could fish them out as salt pork…”
“I wouldn’t go so far as to call a dog filthy but they’re definitely dirty. But, a dog’s got personality. Personality goes a long way.”
Nah - don’t you know that if the demon cannot leave the host before it dies, it gets stuck in limbo. Those pigs took one (well, 2000) for the team.
Si
Dogs eat cat shit.
So does a pig.
Well we’d have to be talkin’ about one charming motherfuckin’ pig. I mean he’d have to be ten times more charmin’ than that Arnold on Green Acres, you know what I’m sayin’?
As charming as Cujo?
That is recorded, and as you might imagine they weren’t pleased.
panache45:
Well, only if it’s TERRIFIC, RADIANT and HUMBLE. Then that would be SOME PIG.
I’d like to see a lost scroll by the people of that region telling their side of events.
You’re right that “Judea” would have been more correct, but it’s customary in colloquial speech to refer to ancient regions by their current names - “12th-Century Turkey” or “Prehistoric France”, for instance.
That is a connection I did not need to have made in my mind.
I’m skeptical of the disease claim and the Marvin Harris-type claim as well. Cultural notions of what is “unclean” don’t have to make any sort of logical sense. It is easy to create post facto explainations for things like “why pork isn’t kosher”, but it is impossible to tell which, if any, are the true explaination.
For example, in the West we generally don’t eat dog or horse (the French aside on the latter), and not because dogs or horses carry disease or cost too much to raise. The reason is purely cultural - in our case, because we perceive dogs and horses to be companion animals. The ancient Hebrews perceived pigs to be unclean, and so did not eat them - it is no use attempting to go behind that judgment and finding out why the ancient hebrews thought they were unclean. It could be as simple as “we see they eat any sort of garbage”, or it could be that “they don’t have the characteristics we want in a food animal”.
Why, for example, don’t people in our culture generally eat rats? They probably won’t make you sick, if prepared properly. It’s mostly cultural. In most people’s minds, rats = unclean (even though people keep them as pets and they are no worse than any other animal in the cleanliness department).
Harris has explanations for all these. Check out “Good to Eat?”
Sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I’d never know 'cause I wouldn’t eat the filthy motherfucker.
17: Then the people began to plead with Jesus to leave their region.
(Lost version)
18: And Judas spoke to the people and said, “That’s a nice of herd of goats you have there. It would be a shame if anything was to happen to it”.
19: Hearing this the people gave Judas pouch filled with pieces of silver.
20: And Jesus rebuked his disciple saying, “Judas, I’ve told you before not to do that”.
The short answer is that economic and environmental conditions push pre-industrial and low-technology societies evolve to prefer foods that are compatible with the environment and the most efficient in terms of calories acquired for energy spent.
Thus, in societies where large domestic meat-producing animals are available, it is more likely that small or less efficient sources of protein, such as small animals (rodents), insects, or carnivores (dogs) will become shunned as not good to eat. Even in societies were insects are eaten, it is because, relative to other protein sources, insects are not as inefficient as they are in insect-shunning societies. Even then, it is usually the largest common insects that tend to be preferred.
In the case of the horse, European society found that eating them created a disadvantage in a society where horses were much more valuable for other purposes and as prestige items. In France, the societal rebellion against the aristocracy and the horse as a symbol of oppression of the people led to an overturning of the view of the value of the horse. Indeed, the right to eat horse meat became enshrined as a value under the revolution.
Again, it is easy to construct post-facto explainations, but impossible to prove which, if any, are true.
For example - horses have no aristocratic value in Canada, they were never a symbol of artistocratic status here, and yet are not eaten nontheless.
Moreover, horses have little practical utility in an era of internal combustion. Certainly some can be used for racing and others by technological holdouts like the Mennonites, generally horses are not used for practical purposes other than recreational riding. So why don’t Canadians by and large eat horses?
The answer, surely, is cultural. Horses are cute. Horses figure in childhood books like Black Beauty. Horses are considered companion animals.
One could easily create a cultural explaination as to why horses were associated symbolically and religiously with power and prestige (and not food) that goes back to (say) Bronze Age chariot warfare, and this would be equally compelling as some sort of material determinism. It is impossible to prove reither way.
Similarly with the kosher status of pigs. All sorts of explainations, all equally compelling, no way to determine which is true.
The treatment of horses in Canada is simply inherited from its socio-cultural history and there have been no environmental or economic pressures that would change it. That’s really the same as the deal in the United States. Horses no longer have any socio-economic value, but people aren’t going to change their minds about eating horse meat until there is some environmental or economic pressure that makes it important to do so.
Harris has come up with a logical, consistent, scientific explanation. Given that your “shit just happens” explanation is equally unconfirmable, I don’t see any reason to discard Harris in favor of that.
Scientific knowledge is often unconfirmable and provisional. We can’t absolutely determine the truth of every step in the origin and development of the universe, but we provisionally accept the explanations that accord with scientific principles. That’s the way it works.
Sometimes the setup for the joke is just way, way too easy.