Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 Hello. I am new to this list. I am a former vegetarian, vegan and raw fooder. It was raw foods that gave me the boot in the butt of deficiencies that provoked me to consume sardines and eggs. I've been eating nutrient dense by way of plant and animal foods without much in the way of grains ever since. I look forward to learning and sharing with you all. For now, I respond to this interesting idea from Chris: Bisexuals could either be considered a separate set, or could be considered a subset of homosexuals. Dear could bisexuals not also be considered the union between the set of hetero and homosexuals, by way of exhibiting characteristics of both sets? In peace, Deanna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 > Hello. I am new to this list. I am a former vegetarian, vegan and raw > fooder. It was raw foods that gave me the boot in the butt of deficiencies > that provoked me to consume sardines and eggs. I've been eating nutrient > dense by way of plant and animal foods without much in the way of grains > ever since. I look forward to learning and sharing with you all. @@@@@@@@@@@@ Veggies, sardines, and eggs---sounds like a recipe for splendid health and epicurean living!! Welcome to the list. Mike SE Pennsylvania Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2004 Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 In a message dated 2/21/04 4:27:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, harmoniousliving@... writes: > Dear could bisexuals not also be considered the union between the > set > of hetero and homosexuals, by way of exhibiting characteristics of both > sets? Yes, but I don't know how to express that in terms of sets. If we analyzed it that way, it would seem to imply that homosexuals and heterosexuals were actual subsets of the bisexual set. That's a pretty interesting way of looking at it. I don't think it helps the discussion we were having though. What would be the implication for the arguments we were using? Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2004 Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 BTW, that would be intersection, not union... Mike SE Pennsylvania > In a message dated 2/21/04 4:27:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, > harmoniousliving@s... writes: > > > Dear could bisexuals not also be considered the union between the > > set > > of hetero and homosexuals, by way of exhibiting characteristics of both > > sets? > > Yes, but I don't know how to express that in terms of sets. If we analyzed > it that way, it would seem to imply that homosexuals and heterosexuals were > actual subsets of the bisexual set. That's a pretty interesting way of looking > at it. > > I don't think it helps the discussion we were having though. What would be > the implication for the arguments we were using? > > Chris > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.