This thesis is a metaphilosophical investigation into how food can be handled philosophically. The first chapter considers the question of whether food can be the subject matter of philosophy, and concludes that there are three possible ways: Foodist Philosophy, Philosophy of Food, and Philosophy and Food. This thesis focuses on the category Foodist Philosophy. The second chapter develops an account of foodist philosophy: it is a style of philosophy that assumes that our food and eating practices are fundamental aspects of the human condition. The third chapter analyses Plato's concept of love in the Symposium and these conclusions are objected to in a foodist critique in the fourth chapter. / KMBT_363 / Adobe Acrobat 9.54 Paper Capture Plug-in

In this dissertation, I apply Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutics to examine interpretations of the food-drug relationship within the contexts of health and medicine. Assumptions regarding the relationship between these categories undergird a substantial academic discourse and function as key components in worldviews beyond the academy. Despite this, little work has been done in foregrounding them to allow for critique and consideration of alternative perspectives. Unearthing philosophical assumptions within various fields, epistemic systems, and regulatory bodies, I classify food-drug interpretations into two main categories: dichotomous interpretations of the categories of "food" and "drugs" as ontologically distinct, and continuum-based interpretations where these categories overlap. Rather than arguing for a single appropriate way of understanding the food-drug relationship, my project aims to disclose the complexities of both sets of interpretations, illustrating their virtues and vices, and underscoring the need for people to call their own interpretations into question while taking seriously those of others. The dialogical structure of philosophical hermeneutics provides a useful foundation for dialogue within and between dichotomous and continuum-based interpretations. We do not have unmediated access to a mind-independent reality, the terms "food" and "drugs" do not necessarily refer to natural kinds, and all interpretations likely have different degrees of strengths and blind spots. Food-drug interpretations are bound up with larger worldviews, holistic systems that generate meaning for their adherents. Granting this, conversation partners can seek to gain a clearer picture of differing interpretations, what they can learn from these interpretations, and how they can interrogate their own interpretive modes.