How to Eat with Instincts

It’s 1973, British couple Maurice and Maralyn Bailey survive 117 days on a rubber life raft in the Pacific.  They survived by eating all sorts of sea creatures raw, including turtles. What they craved most during the ordeal were fish eyes and they couldn’t figure out why because, like typical Brits, they’re grossed out by what Chinese people eat. After their rescue, they learned that fish eyes contain water and vitamin C, both of which they were in dire need of to survive.

If you were lost at sea, you’d eat those eyes.

Point of the story is that we’re able to eat with our instincts and intuition — our bodies *can* tell us when and what to eat instead of eating when and what we’re told to eat.   And when you’re in survival mode, these instincts override all cultural habits, including aversion to really nasty Chinese food.  You’ll eat what you need to eat to survive.

How to Eat With Instincts and Intuition

Instincts we’re born with, while intuition is developed based on experiences. Not saying intuition is always correct — it’s often wrong — but it can be honed and enhanced with enough introspection.

Keep in mind that we’re taught, especially in school, to not trust our instincts and to not develop our intuition. We’re told, for instance, to not trust our own eyes because our experiences are anecdotal and therefore mean jack shit.  And that only so-called experts can interpret the world for us.

Below are steps to reverse what we’ve been taught.

Step 1: Activate your instincts.  Do sports — yoga and dance count — to activate instincts. The stress and sense of immediacy from playing sports with high intensity takes you closer to survival mode so that you become more aware of your body signals.  Listen for the dialogue between what your body wants and what your mind craves. The body in survival mode wants nutrition and instinctively knows where to find it, while the disturbed mind seeks immediate comfort (eg pint of ice cream). You get sick when your mind isn’t aligned with what your body wants.

Step 2: Question every habit and idea you think is normal and natural.  Do one a week.  Examples:

  • Is sitting in chair healthier than squatting?
  • Is Western democracy the best form of government for all nations?
  • Should I drink orange juice when I have the flu?
  • Does school make people smarter or dumber?
  • Are polite people good people?
  • How often and when should I eat?

Give yourself a week to investigate the debates, it’ll be a mind opening experience.  The more you question your assumptions — cultural biases taught in school and by mainstream media — the more your instincts and intuition will kick in and tell you who is full of shit. Insanity is when those who are lactose intolerant (70 percent of world population) keep drinking cow milk just because the government says you need to to be healthy. Listen to your body, listen to the sound of diarrhea, not to so-called experts with bullshit degrees.

Are government nutritionists paid off by dairy lobby, or are they just Anglo-centric nitwits?

Step 3: Watch stand-up comedy.  Stand-up comedians are the most intuitive social critics around.  They say what we feel and think intuitively but are afraid to express for fear of offending.  In Anglo-centric cultures, where politeness is lauded as a virtue, stand-up comedians are one of the few with the courage to tell the truth. Hearing the truth about who you and other people are will help you develop your intuition, which is your ability to recognize patterns to make sense of experiences.  For instance, I’ve learned from experience to never trust overly polite people — they are vile, incompetent, and socially inept — even though I was taught that politeness is a sign of good breeding. A recent by study by the Association for Computational Linguistics supports my intuition. Sure, you’ll be called a racist and sexist and whatever else they come up with for challenging what you’ve been taught, but you’ll be a lot closer to and better prepared for the truth.

Stand-up comedian Russell Peters tells racist jokes.  Pay attention to his observations, and not to what dumbfuck Ethnic Studies professors have to say.

Put simply, stand up comedians remind you of what the world is, which protects you from falling in love with your version of how the world ought to be. Stand up comedy trains you to trust your guts — which tells you the truth — and never your heart, which only tells you what you want to hear.

That’s why you should watch Ronny Chieng. He reminds you of how insignificant you are, which is a lot closer to the truth than the snowflake bullshit you learn in school.

Step 4: Do as kids do, they’re cuter versions of stand-up comedians.  We’re taught it’s uncivilized to live instinctively and rude to develop our intuition.  Watch pre-kindergarten kids in Anglo nations, they instinctively squat to sit, as do most adults in the non-Western world.  They also eat instinctively: instead of using a spoon, they’ll bring a bowl of soup to their mouths, as do most adults in the non-Western world. They communicate instinctively, they’re blunt and ask lots of questions, are never euphemistic and don’t care if they offend. They don’t practice bizarre manners and habits until their instincts are beaten out of them, often at school.

According to anthropologists, this is the healthy and instinctive way to sit and eat, and this is how it’s done through most of the world. Yet most American adults can’t do this because they’ve been programmed to sit in chairs that ruin their backs and hamstrings instead.

I single out Anglo-nations for promoting this kind of civility that’s neither natural nor found in most cultures. The point of doing so is to emphasize that cultures are as malleable as they are enduring and how we live *isn’t* necessarily normal or natural, even if it feels that way to us. My aim here, at best, is to suggest that we don’t have to live this way. We can instead strive to live as God intended us to live before the Fall.

 

What if They Spend the Money on Heroin?

So what if people spend their $1000/month guaranteed income — Andrew Yang’s “Freedom Dividend” — on heroin? We already spend money on stupid shit like schools. Teacher John Taylor Gatto:

School is a twelve-year jail sentence where bad habits are the only curriculum truly learned. I teach school and win awards doing it. I should know. (from Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling)

Which use of money nets a better return on investment, funding schools or giving a heroin addict $1000/month? It’s not clear to me.

To begin with, how many heroin addicts steal to pay for their habit? How many car windows do they break? How many FEWER car windows will they break if we give them $1000/month? Let’s say ten fewer per month per junkie. That’s ~$3000 worth of damage avoided. Add the cost of police work, the cost of inconvenience, the value of items stolen, and the $1000 given to the heroin addict is an awesome deal for society.

Meanwhile, there’s considerable evidence that most of school is at best a waste of time and resources, and at worst a breeding ground of drug addicts (how many kids take Ritalin — legal meth — for school induced ADHD because they won’t pay attention to lousy lectures and complete lame assignments?) and incompetent, incomplete narcissists who learn to never ask questions except for perfunctory ones like “how are you,” to which they only want to hear perfunctory responses such as “I’m fine, thank you.” With conversations so scripted and unimaginative, it’s no wonder so many people are lonely and turn to drug abuse. Watch 3-5 year olds, they’re constantly asking questions and exploring. After even a few years of schooling, most of them will be addicted to affirmation and only know how to beg, brag, complain, and compliment when conversing.

This guy is a behavioral economist. Meaning, he’s a lot less biased than educators when evaluating the merits of education.

What if They Won’t Work?
That’s fine too, why should everyone work? The “dignity of work” is bullshit. There’s no dignity in working a job you hate and don’t see the point to other than to make money. Seventy percent of Americans say they hate their jobs. As they should: most people hate selling things they don’t believe in; following procedures that don’t require creativity; doing tasks that don’t accomplish anything; working for bosses who don’t care about them. Why force people to endure abuse? Would we force someone to play in the NFL because we think doing so builds character? Do retirees lack dignity? Or do most people find meaning outside of work — as stay at home parents, as volunteers, gardeners, grandparents, and so forth?

Universal Basic Income versus Welfare
Welfare requires a bureaucracy of administrators and social workers and god knows who else to enforce rules and regulations. Bureaucracies aren’t cheap, and their primary goal is to keep themselves alive — a lot of jobs at stake here — rather than fix the problems they’re supposed to fix. That may be why the rapid expansion of welfare programs — LBJ’s War on Poverty — starting in 1965 haven’t reduced poverty.

Note that poverty rate was declining rapidly until…the War on Poverty began. Coincidence?

The above chart claims that poverty rate would be LOWER today without the War on Poverty programs, just as some think that the literacy rate — which was increasing before the popularization of public schools — would be higher today without compulsory education. Let’s look at the cost of failed programs:

Yikes, what if we’d spent that on updating our infrastructure? How many fewer manufacturing and heavy industry jobs would we have outsourced if we’d had a modern transportation infrastructure?

Universal basic income, on the other hand, is *universal*, meaning, it’s given to all citizens above the age of 18 regardless of individual financial circumstance. It treats citizens as shareholders of a company (ie USA) who deserve a dividend, a small share of the company’s profits. Put differently, it gives taxes to the people instead of government bureaucrats who’ve proven over and over again that they mostly waste the resources they’re given and will subconsciously sabotage poor people’s lives to keep their jobs. Programs that tell the poor that they have poor diets and shitty lives because they’re poor is an example of sabotage — how can one have hope when life is so simply and easily determined and salvation is possible not from that struggle within but only from government aid?

What if They Spend the Money on Heroin?
Who knows, and at this point, why care? We don’t have enough data about the consequences of each spending habit and I showed above how spending on heroin might be better — against popular opinion — than spending on school. But we do have lots of data that suggests American government bureaucrats are, as a whole, incompetent narcissists who create stupid lobby influenced guidelines like the Food Pyramid that some think contributed to the obesity crises. Let’s suspend judgment for now and see what happens when the government stops telling people how to live their lives and we let people figure out how to live the life they want to live.

How many more like Steve Jobs would we have if we didn’t have compulsory schooling?