Perhaps I can clarify my objections exploding ‘want’ into want/like/approve.
To me it feels like Ellyn Satter takes ‘-want/-like/+approves’ food behaviors then transforms the ‘-like’ and ‘-want’ variables into ‘+like’ and ‘+want’. Comparatively, I feel like TFN takes ‘+want/+like/-approves’ food behaviors then transforms the ‘-approves’ variable into ‘+approves’.
Ellyn Satter’s stuff is all about behavior and desire modification, but everything I’ve read of TFN emphasizes approval more. In both cases you end up with ‘+want/+like/+approves’, which is a better result psychologically. But TFN just gets that, while Satter’s approach gets that and a better result physically as well. I think TFN would disagree of the original quote, while Satter would agree with caveats.
Perhaps I can clarify my objections exploding ‘want’ into want/like/approve.
To me it feels like Ellyn Satter takes ‘-want/-like/+approves’ food behaviors then transforms the ‘-like’ and ‘-want’ variables into ‘+like’ and ‘+want’.
Comparatively, I feel like TFN takes ‘+want/+like/-approves’ food behaviors then transforms the ‘-approves’ variable into ‘+approves’.
Ellyn Satter’s stuff is all about behavior and desire modification, but everything I’ve read of TFN emphasizes approval more. In both cases you end up with ‘+want/+like/+approves’, which is a better result psychologically. But TFN just gets that, while Satter’s approach gets that and a better result physically as well. I think TFN would disagree of the original quote, while Satter would agree with caveats.