Meaning & Analysis
A food or substance that is nourishing and wholesome for one person can be toxic or harmful to another, reflecting individual physiological differences.
Insights
Subjectivity of Value
What one person finds valuable, enjoyable, or beneficial, another may find disagreeable, harmful, or worthless. This speaks to the radical subjectivity of taste, opinion, and experience.
Relativity of Experience
The proverb illustrates that there are no universal standards for what is 'good' or 'desirable'. An opportunity for one individual could be a disaster for another, depending on their circumstances, goals, and nature.
Caution Against Universalism
It serves as a warning that applying one's own preferences or solutions to others can be ineffective or even damaging. What works as a solution for one person may exacerbate the problem for someone else.
Proto-Scientific Observation
This proverb reflects an early, pre-scientific understanding of individual biochemistry, acknowledging that different bodies react uniquely to various substances. It serves as a piece of folk wisdom that predates the modern concepts of allergies, intolerances, and metabolic differences.
Philosophical Relativism
The proverb resonates with philosophical relativism, particularly the idea that values, tastes, and even truths are not absolute but are contingent on individual perspectives. It echoes the Latin maxim 'De gustibus non est disputandum' ('In matters of taste, there can be no disputes').
Psychology of Individuality
Psychologically, the proverb champions the concept of individual differences. It serves as a caution against ethnocentrism and personal bias, encouraging tolerance and the acceptance of diverse preferences, lifestyles, and opinions without judgment.
Social and Political Complexity
In a social or political context, the proverb is a powerful reminder of unintended consequences. A policy, law, or social change intended as beneficial ('meat') for one segment of the population can be detrimental ('poison') to another, highlighting the complexity of governance.
Rhetorical Devices
Antithesis
The proverb is built on the stark contrast between 'meat' (representing life, sustenance, and pleasure) and 'poison' (representing death, harm, and repulsion), creating a memorable and impactful statement.
Parallelism
The balanced grammatical structure of 'One man's...' followed by 'another man's...' creates a pleasing rhythm and reinforces the idea of a direct, binary opposition between two perspectives.
Metaphor
'Meat' and 'poison' function as powerful metaphors for a wide range of abstract opposites: good and evil, benefit and harm, pleasure and pain, success and failure.
Transcription
Quotations
For that is poison to some, which is medicinable to other.
That which preserues one man poysons another.
What's one man's poison, Signior, Is anothers meat or drink.
What is poyson to one, may bee meat to another.
(That which is one mans meat).
(That that's one mans meat's).
Cross References
- DÜR., I, no. 817
- St., no. 454.
- B51 What baits one banes another
- M482 One man's breath is another man's death
- M810 All meat pleases not all mouths.
Related Proverbs
Original Scan
Used under CC BY-NC 3.0.