January 8, 2006

• Lots of business to settle here.  Take a seat and we’ll get started.  There are bagels and coffee on the counter, feel free to help yourself.

  First of all, I have some old news (to me) that was simply too much to put in my last post.  Now, my dad is a very hard-working man and watches TV only about as often as a lunar eclipse.  If he watches TV the only show he will watch is Fear Factor.  He loves the show with an intense interest. 

  So, over winter break my dad takes some international students down to Florida for a trip.  While on the trip he discovers that there is a Fear Factor Live occurring at Universal Studios.  After doing hours of waiting and preliminary work my dad makes the final six people, beating people who he described as “Younger, muscular guys with tattoos.”  My dad is 49 and he estimates he probably had about 20 years on all those guys. 

  Level 1) Hang onto a bar 100 feet in the air as long as you can.                                     

  Level 2) My dad swings on a rope and has to catch balls in a bucket thrown at him by his partner, who acquires the balls by reaching into a tank of eels.

  Level 3) Again swinging on a rope, my dad has 4 octopuses atatched to himself.  He must, while swinging at great heights, throw the octopuses to his partner.

  Level 4) Climb up a ladder that is lateral against a wall while water is pouring straight down on him.  He must find the key at the top, go back down, and start the car.  The car then elevates 100 ft. in the air and slants to one side.  He has to climb to the front of the car and get flags off of the bumber.

  Anyways, all in all, my dad got 2nd place and it was one of the happiest moments of his life.  Funny thing is, my dad is the pastor of a church, and the associate pastor at our church got 1st place.  Nowadays my dad walks around the house with his championed Fear Factor hat on.

  ---

  Now, back to the breakfast/lunch debate (see 3 posts ago).  An alternative viewpoint has been presented and I believe it to be worthy of consideration.  This is a comment by Osmein_Alatar:

  “I think you could be eating both breakfast and lunch. Like you said, breakfast is defined as the first meal of the day, but all the definition for lunch says is that it is a meal eaten at midday. Since lunch doesn’t necessarily have to be the second meal, it is possible for lunch to be one’s breakfast. The real question is: Where does breakfast fall if someone stays up all night, eating occasionally?”

  In terms of meal apologetics there seems to be compatibility between the definitions of lunch and breakfast that I had not noticed before.  Under close review the definitions certainly are not mutually exclusive.  But of the question about when is breakfast after staying up all night?  This question is answered in terms of a slight ambiguity that involves another undesired judgement call.  Breakfast is a “meal” and I do hold that there has to be some sort of minimum portion of food that counts towards a meal’s existence.  If, at 5 o clock, a person eats a granola bar and then does not eat for the rest of the evening I would not call that mastication a “meal”, but rather a “snack.”  Thus, after snacking throughout the night one may “skip” breakfast if they do not have what for them is considered a typical portion of breakfast.  Indeed the meal amount must be correlated to usual meals.  Thus, the following is possible: 

  Timmy:  What did you eat for breakfast, Sarah?

  Sarah:  I didn’t have breakfast, I just snacked on an apple.

  This is a radical idea that I know many meal philosophers will not accept, but it is necessary.  Although, I would accept that one may call Sarah’s apple a “Breakfast Snack”,  for there are increasing stages of meal qualification.  For each meal it follows this pattern, from smallest to largest:  “Breakfast snack.”, “Breakfast”, “Breakfast Feast.” 

  How can you tell which one are you having?  Well, thankfully I am borrowing this thought from an ancient Greek philosopher, mealicles, who outlined the equations for us. 

  Breakfast snack occurs when  A – 3 < (1/3)x - y  where x is the amount of food usually eaten in grams, A is the amount of food eaten in grams, and y is the amount of time measured to the nearest time one eats food again, whether it was before or after the snack.  Thus, if a person is considering whether they had breakfast at 7 A.M., and the next time they eat is 9 A.M., then y = 2.  Or if one last ate at 4 A.M., then y = 3.

  Breakfast feast occurs when A + 5m > (pi)x. where pi = 3.14 (as you probably know), A = the amount of food eaten in grams, x = how much food is usually eaten in grams, and m = either saying “Mmmmm.” (Said as an indication of delicious food) or any other remark made about how sapid the food tastes.  The remarks must be sincere and not generic.   Pi is used in this equation because feasts often include pie. 

  Simply “Breakfast” occurs when it is neither a feast nor a snack. Simple as that, folks!

  I’ll have to search for the brunch equation.  It’s around here somewhere. 

  Also, it seems as a Christian I always pray before a meal/feast, but never before a snack.  It’s an odd trend, that I tend not to thank God for food that comes in small portions, so maybe I will start doing that? Hopefully.

  Have a terrific night and week in school! God Bless.   

  • 10:59 pm
  • 4 Comments