Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

You say sin, I say disease

antipope.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 57 posts

Re: You say sin, I say disease

#11

Post by ihodes »

lionhearted wrote: post #3

More and more, I'm starting to come to the awful conclusion that most people have very little control over how their lives go. They maybe have a few key decision points in their life - but maybe not all that many. And the rest is autopilot. They watch some subset of the new movies, new TV programs, websites they stumble across. They eat whatever's more or less served near them and eaten by people they associate with.…

Actually, scarier yet is whatever conclusions you seem to arrive at (or, more likely, those which you seem to asymptotically approach) will be baseless and unimportant on an absolute scale: you have to measure the worth of what you create against a scale you do not control.

When you can point to an ought that logically follows from an is, that'll be the most important day in anyone's lives. In the meantime, I'm philosophically opposed to stamping any sort of judgement on the way people lead their lives. There's no reason to condemn anyone for not desiring to learn or to think critically; whatever axiomatic value you try to use as a measuring stick will twist and turn and fail on close inspection: it'll be a subjective measure.

Humans are animals, and going about our business in a frictionless manner is a natural thing to do. Some people detect friction where others see no problem, and from them we see improvement in the sciences and in thought—improvement in the sense that we seem to know more—and those are the people we on HN generally praise.

Lest I come off as a total weirdo, I am for "progress" and "knowledge" and "health" and all that jazz, but I try to keep my pragmatic life as separate from my philosophical life as possible. It's safer that way.

Re: You say sin, I say disease

#12

Post by justsee »

I'm sticking with Occam's razor on this one - "the simplest explanation is more likely the correct one".

A world awash with kilojoules means any life forms around human civilization will be a little more plump.

Charlie Stross does give a hat tip to the overwhelming desire by some sectors to see obesity categorised as a disease / epidemic: "many large corporations would love to see the obesity epidemic pinned on something other than their own sub-standard food products".

However he pulls a quote from Nikhil Dhurandhar at the Pennington Biomedical Research Centre to talk about AD-36 as a potential significant factor in obesity. I just wonder as the largest nutrition research centre in the world, with 600 researchers, whether there is ever any institutionalised bias towards concluding / promoting the idea that obesity is a disease / epidemic?

Obviously baseless speculation on my part, but a quick Google finds such Pennington-run conferences as 'Childhood Obesity and Public Health', which is sponsored by...Coca Cola? http://www.pbrc.edu/childhood_obesity_conference/default.htm

I fail to see how accepting this kind of sponsorship money is healthy for independent research in this area.

Re: You say sin, I say disease

#13

Post by pmr_ »

What is surprising me most is the black-and-white approach: It's either a disease or modern lifestyle and diet.

Organisms tend to be highly complex and there is a myriad of variables that come into play. I feel it is very unlikely that you can identify one sole cause for something as general as obesity.

Re: You say sin, I say disease

#14

Post by ericb »

Evgeny wrote: post #8

I don't find it surprising at all that the rats that feed on the scraps of human food are getting obese - they get the same trans fats, refined carbs and sugars and other stuff that people get. Laboratory animals, again, are fed by humans. Are they fed strictly following the natural diet of fresh food they would eat in the wild? I doubt that - most likely at least some of it is substituted with cheaper option. From m…

I think you may be ignoring the drive to eat. Your reductionist view does little to account for how hard it is for people who want to lose weight to do it long-term. The reductionist view certainly can provide a comfortable feeling of superiority, though.

If you think the drive is inconsequential and easy to ignore then try and hold your breath until you pass out. Just breath less, right? These drives have ways of talking us into doing what they want--they are very persuasive.

Re: You say sin, I say disease

#15

Post by klbarry »

lionhearted wrote: post #3

More and more, I'm starting to come to the awful conclusion that most people have very little control over how their lives go. They maybe have a few key decision points in their life - but maybe not all that many. And the rest is autopilot. They watch some subset of the new movies, new TV programs, websites they stumble across. They eat whatever's more or less served near them and eaten by people they associate with.…

"It's strange being someone who strives to be self reliant, studies and analyzes to make ethics from scratch, constantly examines and re-examines everything... I think there exists less people like this than I originally thought. No, less than that. Okay, divide that number by 10 again."

Most people may not read Emerson, Fromm, Aquinas, Stace, Russel etc but they sure do learn from life experiences on ethics, think about the implications of things and act on those things. Many, many people strive to be self reliant, as well. Once a group like HN starts saying, "God, if only other people were as smart as us", we're reaching a danger zone where we should always take a very close look before self adulating.

Re: You say sin, I say disease

#16

Post by [deleted] »

ihodes wrote: post #11
lionhearted wrote: post #3

More and more, I'm starting to come to the awful conclusion that most people have very little control over how their lives go. They maybe have a few key decision points in their life - but maybe not all that many. And the rest is autopilot. They watch some subset of the new movies, new TV programs, websites they stumble across. They eat whatever's more or less served near them and eaten by people they associate with.…

Actually, scarier yet is whatever conclusions you seem to arrive at (or, more likely, those which you seem to asymptotically approach) will be baseless and unimportant on an absolute scale: you have to measure the worth of what you create against a scale you do not control. When you can point to an ought that logically follows from an is , that'll be the most important day in anyone's lives. In the meantime, I'm phil…

[deleted]

Re: You say sin, I say disease

#17

Post by hugh3 »

samd wrote: post #6

It's a problem in general when we pin the fault of something on a moral failing. It's a cop-out that does nothing to solve the problem. If we want to discourage some behavior in our society we have to look at the causes and try to mitigate them. Unfortunately many people refuse to even consider the reasons for people's behavior.

But what about when it is just a moral failing? What if it is just a matter of developing the modest amount of willpower required to say "Actually on second thoughts I won't have that cheesecake for dessert, an apple will be just fine".

In that case the worst thing you can possibly do is to blame it on anything other than personal failings.

Re: You say sin, I say disease

#18

Post by dejb »

ericb wrote: post #14
Evgeny wrote: post #8

I don't find it surprising at all that the rats that feed on the scraps of human food are getting obese - they get the same trans fats, refined carbs and sugars and other stuff that people get. Laboratory animals, again, are fed by humans. Are they fed strictly following the natural diet of fresh food they would eat in the wild? I doubt that - most likely at least some of it is substituted with cheaper option. From m…

I think you may be ignoring the drive to eat. Your reductionist view does little to account for how hard it is for people who want to lose weight to do it long-term. The reductionist view certainly can provide a comfortable feeling of superiority, though. If you think the drive is inconsequential and easy to ignore then try and hold your breath until you pass out. Just breath less, right? These drives have ways of ta…

I just had the thought. Occam's Razor must surely be reductionist right?

Anyway I wonder if it will ever be possible to separate 'drive to eat' from 'willpower over that drive'. Other possible human drives and addictions must also be similar - drug addiction, avoiding pain, masturbation and breathing. I think it's fair to say the the whole notion 'free' willpower is certainly philosophically suspect. Perhaps the only sensible meaning of the word is "degree of control over one's drives", where the strength of 'drives' are accepted to vary considerably from person to person.

Regardless of whether it is fair that people drives may vary considerably, often that only way to combat them is through equal and opposite levels of willpower.

Re: You say sin, I say disease

#19

Post by Evgeny »

ericb wrote: post #14
Evgeny wrote: post #8

I don't find it surprising at all that the rats that feed on the scraps of human food are getting obese - they get the same trans fats, refined carbs and sugars and other stuff that people get. Laboratory animals, again, are fed by humans. Are they fed strictly following the natural diet of fresh food they would eat in the wild? I doubt that - most likely at least some of it is substituted with cheaper option. From m…

I think you may be ignoring the drive to eat. Your reductionist view does little to account for how hard it is for people who want to lose weight to do it long-term. The reductionist view certainly can provide a comfortable feeling of superiority, though. If you think the drive is inconsequential and easy to ignore then try and hold your breath until you pass out. Just breath less, right? These drives have ways of ta…

Okay, I have to agree - the fact that I can manipulate my weight at will and either stay at the target weight or adjust it if I want to does give me some feeling of superiority in this particular aspect.

And I have learnt a few things on the way - for example, that slight hunger is not a sign that you should rush to the fridge. That a 24 or 36 hours fast will not kill you, but is rather good for you. That if I want to lower my weight, eliminating all refined carbs and added sugars is simple and effective.

Yes, if you want to lose weight you may need to put in some effort. There is little way around it, short of liposuction may be. You may have learn to control the "drive to eat" just like you control many other drives. Ideally, of course, one should make proper eating his way of life.

Talking about breath, by the way - yes, if I concentrate on my breath, I can consciously make it more deep and breathe less often. It is somewhat similar to what I would do to my meals - eat a bit more, but less often, with no snacks in between 3 meals per day, with suprisingly positive results.

Re: You say sin, I say disease

#20

Post by archgoon »

lionhearted wrote: post #3

More and more, I'm starting to come to the awful conclusion that most people have very little control over how their lives go. They maybe have a few key decision points in their life - but maybe not all that many. And the rest is autopilot. They watch some subset of the new movies, new TV programs, websites they stumble across. They eat whatever's more or less served near them and eaten by people they associate with.…

>"well, just ban all the food that's unhealthy, and people will eat better..." - but we know where that road leads.

Modern Europe?

Post reply on HN