On a physical level, you could say it's the freshness and health of the mineral/plant/animal in question. Meaning, how nutrient dense it is, how ripe, and how recently it has been taken from the source.
Of course, there are fermented foods that can be considered "spoiled in a good way," where the molecules of the food transforms into other substances, some beneficial and some toxic.
From a metaphysical level, you can say that food doesn't really nourish us at all so much as it is a carrier of love. That is the truth behind the saying about home cooking that "the secret ingredient is love." Food tastes better and nourishes better when it is a vehicle for universal love.
Obviously it's a mixture of all of them. If both foods have the same nutrients, look and taste the same, but one tastes like crap and the other like roses, guess which one is better?
I wouldn't eat tasty poison, just as I wouldn't eat very nutritive food that tastes horrible. A balance must exist, and those that have better taste, more nutrients, better appearance and better smell will be the ones that are "better".
It's a combination of all four of them. Food is meant to be attractive in every way, taste wise, appearance wise and don't even get me started on the smell!!!! Nutritionally, it should also be worth its weight, so I don't think that there's any one factor that determines whether or not food is "good food".
The best meals I've ever eaten had me salivating from just the site of it and I was already booked when I got a whiff of it. The taste is of course slightly more important than the others seeing as it's going into your mouth, and if it tastes great and holds back on the calories then thats good food to me!!!
On a physical level, you could say it's the freshness and health of the mineral/plant/animal in question. Meaning, how nutrient dense it is, how ripe, and how recently it has been taken from the source.
Of course, there are fermented foods that can be considered "spoiled in a good way," where the molecules of the food transforms into other substances, some beneficial and some toxic.
From a metaphysical level, you can say that food doesn't really nourish us at all so much as it is a carrier of love. That is the truth behind the saying about home cooking that "the secret ingredient is love." Food tastes better and nourishes better when it is a vehicle for universal love.
Obviously it's a mixture of all of them. If both foods have the same nutrients, look and taste the same, but one tastes like crap and the other like roses, guess which one is better?
I wouldn't eat tasty poison, just as I wouldn't eat very nutritive food that tastes horrible. A balance must exist, and those that have better taste, more nutrients, better appearance and better smell will be the ones that are "better".
Balance is the keyword.
It's a combination of all four of them. Food is meant to be attractive in every way, taste wise, appearance wise and don't even get me started on the smell!!!! Nutritionally, it should also be worth its weight, so I don't think that there's any one factor that determines whether or not food is "good food".
The best meals I've ever eaten had me salivating from just the site of it and I was already booked when I got a whiff of it. The taste is of course slightly more important than the others seeing as it's going into your mouth, and if it tastes great and holds back on the calories then thats good food to me!!!