Verge of Hunger
(A theory of life)
What is life?
Life really is after all just a game. It is a game of struggle with hunger, a universal hunger that applies to almost everything we consume, both physically and mentally. It is not a negative struggle but rather a positive “just stay a little ahead of the threat that constantly chases us” struggle. It is the tension between hunger and satisfaction and how efficiently any organism maintains that tension between the two states that determines the length and quality of their life – Too much or too little has a negative effect.
It is the struggle itself, when fought correctly, that forces us to be the best rendition of ourselves we can be, both physically and mentally. It is the fight and not the hunger that we need to concentrate on. It is by keeping that conflict ever present in our lives (or as much as we can) that allows us to develop into the very best version of ourselves possible.
Assuming we have evolved from at least a primordial version of ourselves to the present day, how far along the spectrum are we from the last change to the next in our evolution? Safe to say thousands if not hundreds of thousands of years?
While there is no apparent research available that is directly on point to support this concept, the scientific community, for the most part, seems to be in agreement that “Intermittent fasting (IF)” is likely beneficial to our health[1]. We are obviously not designed to eat as we presently do. We are created for and have evolved to operate at our maximum capacity for the longest haul possible.
We need to live on the edge or verge of hunger for both food and knowledge. Our environment, our world despises waste. This dance we do with hunger quite literally touches everything we do and applies to all living entities and all aspects of our lives.
We have evolved to best be served by an almost nomadic existence with its inference of movement or exercise and by eating all natural vegetables, fruits, nuts, eggs, meat, and fish etc. to keep us going and just avoid that inner demon gnawing at our core while allowing us to stave off hunger until we eat or have our group or family meal(s) of the day. We need some processed foods in our lives if we are to maintain sanity after all, but we need to look at them through a lens of self-preservation.
Organized feeding is great for organizations but terrible for the individual animal in the herd, especially where profit is involved and as we all know some animals profit more than others and some might argue that in many cases it is at the expense of others.
As I grappled with this my thoughts turned to infants and how they can never be left in need or even slightly exposed to any chance of hunger, then it occurred to me that from day one we are built to be content right up to the time our needs are not met. The new baby who awakens only because it is hungry soon nurses its way back to sleep. Once their hunger is satiated they are back to dreamland to begin the cycle again. Assuming you are in good health, eating as you go is absolutely the most efficient way to eat, no matter your age.
—
When our minds are always on the verge of needing and wanting more information to complete our individual and/or shared goals or just because we are inquisitive and want to pursue a line of thought, we end up with the same result as with food. We are reaching and striving for our maximum potential while knowing a steady diet of small easily digestible information is good for us.
A diet of information that has limited sit down meals (i.e. classes) which are organized by educators both for profit and not is likely not the most efficient way for an individual to learn. Just like eating we do best when we eat on our own we also learn best when we go at our own speed. While again there is apparently nothing directly on point, the scientific evidence of learning more efficiently in small doses is more directly discussed and has been documented for some time[2]. It is this same struggle with hunger and thirst for knowledge. It is, moreover, not just the hunger per se but the steady pursuit towards obtaining that knowledge that most benefits us in contrast to an overabundance or real dearth of knowledge.
In summary, it is proposed that the pursuit to keep hunger, of whatever type, in perpetual abeyance serves humanities best interests, both physically and mentally and has multiple applications and ramifications to life across the board. If we can begin to accurately measure or more fully understand the play or tension with hunger and its satisfaction, we will be better equipped to facilitate positively the quality and length of life.
Toby Blake
[1] Intermittent fasting (IF; reduced meal frequency) and caloric restriction (CR) extend lifespan and increase resistance to age-related diseases in rodents and monkeys and improve the health of overweight humans. Beneficial effects of intermittent fasting and caloric restriction on the cardiovascular and cerebrovascular systems by Mark Mattson and Ruigian Wan.
Wan, R; Camandola, S; Mattson, MP (2003).“Intermittent food deprivation improves cardiovascular and neuroendocrine responses to stress in rats”. The Journal of nutrition 133 (6): 1921–9.
[2] Richard E. Mayer, Educational Psychologist (Harvard), “The Segmenting Principle”
People learn better when a complex continuous lesson is broken into separate segments. Examples include breaking a complex figure into two or more smaller figures dealing with different parts of the original one; presenting one graphic at a time rather than putting multiple graphics in the same figure or breaking a continuous presentation into short chunks that can be paced by the learner. The learner’s working memory is less likely to be overloaded with essential processing when the essential material is presented in bite-size chunks rather than as a whole continuous lesson.
Please comment:
Authors note:
If this were a diet (it is not) it would be The Never Go Hungry Diet which would have made it so much more appealing and does actually describe the ideal diet under this theory.
All living organisms are hurt by taking in too much or too little. Most of us consume in two constantly fluctuating ways on a daily basis; one as the individual who eats what they want during the day and the other who eats as part of a group with its inherent limited choices. Both are perfectly natural but are competing interests within our lives and should be seen as just that. Organized feeding stands in almost direct opposition to the physical and mental dietary interests of the individual, there are of course exceptions. The ongoing battle of group interest vs individual interest is a necessary part of our life. It is in our best interest to eat, as do most mammals, all natural foods when we are hungry and just until we are satisfied, knowing we can very shortly repeat the process as need be. To the extent we are able to get three meals a day out of our routine, under this theory, will add to our longevity and quality of life.
No one, to my knowledge, is making money off this and it is not something any current commercial enterprise would be interested in, just the opposite. This is an effort to, hopefully, generate research and discussion while moving towards natural foods, as we were originally designed before we became too smart by half – Toby