Do we value a diversity of opinions? Will we benefit from varying viewpoints or should we strive for more consistency in thought in our answers and questions on paleohacks?
|
10
1
|
|||||||||
|
|
14
|
Striving for consistency for the paleo community is silly. What we should be striving for is a robust discussion of human health, set in an evolutionary framework. Everyone can interpret information differently, which then leads to different manifestations of "Paleo". Just as everyone is different, everyone's "Paleo" is going to be different. That said, there's going to be things that are the same, like the avoidance of grains, soy and legumes (although some find rice to be non-damaging). From this we'll have consistency in viewpoints, but this shouldn't be forced. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
13
|
Unfortunately there is paleo dogma. What is good for those with an open mind is that we can explore all that paleo has to offer us. There is such a great diversity in this community that the options are never stale. Things only appear to be stale to the closed mind. We are the embodiment of the information we choose to accept and act upon. To change our circumstances we need to change our thinking and subsequent actions. We should not be captured by any dogma. Dogma is accepting others results by adopting someone else's thoughts. Never allow your mind to be usurped. Life contains no failures, it just contains our experiences and responses to its adversity |
|||
|
|
4
|
One of the things that attracted me to paleo (and PaleoHacks) (and what I see as a MAJOR benefit over the fad diets) is the variety of opinions. That and that, despite the "discussions", there is a strong science basis driving the discussions with consistent, reproducible results. The big names (Sisson, Wolf, Jaminet) are constantly keeping track of ongoing research and are willing to update their conclusions as needs be. We have multiple people from multiple fields of discipline arriving at the same conclusions: no grain, no legume, grass-fed meat, real food. They differ on the details (dairy, starches, ratios, etc.), but that is as it should be, it's an indicator of a mentally healthy community. |
|||
|
|
3
|
If you try to include everyone, you can end up helping no-one. I think there ought to be better referencing of (or perhaps we need to establish) what the paleo norm when responding to people who don't live permanently on the PH, while also bringing our individual perspectives as opinions. Trying to gain support for your own position by not acknowledging that many people have valid reasons to disagree is not 'valuing diversity'. |
|||
|
|
3
|
I did notice upon joining PH awhile back, that there was a general back-and-forth between certain practices (1.0 vs. 3.0, safe-starches vs. low carb, etc) but I see that less and less. I may have been more sensitive to it because I thrive on low-carb, no supplement, Paleo 1.0... and the folks that thrive on 3.0/phd/archevore are constantly having to battle the folks that are low-carb dogmatics (of which I was one, admittedly). So now, I will admit my mind has been opened to new concepts in the Paleosphere, and others here seem to have done the same. |
|||
|
