IV. Nutrition

C.HAPTER IV. NUTRITION. § 210. Except perhaps in agreeing that gluttony is to be reprobated and that the gO~lr"met, as well as the gour'!Jnand, is a man to be regarded with scant respect, Inost people will think it is absurd to irnply, as the above title does, that ethics has anything to say about the taking of food. Though, by condemning excesses of the kinds just indicated, they im ply that Inen ought not to be guilty of them, and by the use of this word class them as wrong; yet they ignore the ob vious fact that if there is a wrong in respect of the taking of food there must also be a right. The truth appears to be that daily actions perforn1ed in ways "\vhich do not obviously deviate from the normal, cease to be thought of as either right or wrong. As the Inost familiar mathematical truths, such as twice two are four, are not ordinarily thought of as parts of mathematics-as the knowledge which a child gains of surrounding objects is not conlmonly included under education, though it forIns a highly important part of it; so this all-essential ministration to life by fO,od, carried on as a matter of course, is dropped out of the theory of conduct. And yet, as being a part of.

conduct which fundan1entally affects welfare, it cannot properly be thus dropped. How improper is the ignoring of it as a subject-Inatter for ethical judgments, we shall see on observing the ways in which current opinion respecting it goes wrong. § 211. Already, in § 174, the extrelne instances furnished by the EsquiInaux, the Yakuts, and the Australians, have NUTRITION. 501 shown us that enornlOUS quantities of food are proper under certain conditions, and that satisfaction of the seem ,ingly inordinate desires for them is not only warranted but imperative: death being the consequence of inability to take a sufficient quantity to meet the expenditure entailed by severe climate or by long fasts. To ,vhich here let me add the· experiences of Arctic voyagers, who, like the natives of the Arctic regions, acquire great appetites for blubber. Mention of these facts is a fit/preliminary to the question whether, in respect of food, desires ought or ought not to be obeyed. As already said, treatment of· this inquiry as ethical will be demurred to by most, and by many ridi culed. Though, when not food but drink is ,in question, their judgrnents, very strongly expressed, are of the kind they class as moral; yet they do not see that since the question concerns the effect of things swallowed, it is absurd to regard the conduct which causes these effects as nloral or immoral when the things are liquid but not when they are solid.

Adaptation goes on. everywhere and always, in the hunlan race as in inferior races, and, among other results, is the adjustment of the desire for Iood to the need for food. Even were this not shown us by the extreme in stances above given, it 'would be an inevitable corollary from the law of the survival of the fittest. Every mal adjustment of the two must have been injurious, and, other things equal, the tendency nlust ever have been for mal-adjustnlent to cause the dying-out of individuals in which it existed. On the average, then, there must be a fair balance: what there is of deviation from the norlnal, bearing but a small ratio to what there is of normal. Some deviation. doubtless occurs. We still· see inherit ance of traits appropriate to the primitive wild life and inappropriate to settled civilized life; and among such traits is that tendency to take food in excess of iInmediate 502 THE ETHIOS OF· INDIVIDUAL LIFE.

need,which was good in the· irregularly-living savage but which is not good in the regularly-living European. Further, it maybe adrnitted that men who lead nlonot onouslives, as most do, presenting much to bear and little to enjoy, are apt to prolong unduly the few actions which are· pleasurable; and of these eating is one. When the occupation to be entered upon at the end of a meal is pleasurable, there is comparatively little -wish to eke out the meal. But the" more or less of excess apt to result from these causes, is consequent not upon obedience to the sensations naturally arising, but rather from solicitation of the sensa tions: a perverting factor made possible by that hnagilla tion 'which has evil effects as'well as good effects. It is not that an immediate desire prompts the action, but that the action is prompted by the hope of experiencing the agreeable feeling 'which accompanies fulfihnent of adesil'e.

There are kindred evils arising from sitting down to table when appetite does not suggest-partaking of periodically recurring meals whether hungry or otherwise. Very often people eat as a lnatter of course, not in conforlnity with their sensations but notwithstanding the protests of their sensations~ And then, oddly enough, there comes fronl these -transgressors the assertion that sensations are not fit guides! Having suffered from constantly disobey ing· thenl,· they infer that they are not to be obeyed! It· is doubtless ·true that those who are out of health occasionally entail on·· thenlselves mischiefs by eating as much as they desire; and· some who are not in obvious ways unwell, now and then do the like. But a denlurrer dra-\v'n from these experiences is not sustainable. In such cases the adjustments bet\veen all the 'various needs of the organism, and the various sensations which prompt fulfil ment of them,have been chronically deranged by dis obedience. When by persistent indoor life, or by overw'ork, or -by ceaseless· rnental worry, or by· inadequate· clothing, NUTRITION. 503 or by breathing bad air, the, bodily functions have been perverted, guidance by the "sensations ceases' to be reliable.

It then becomes needful either, as in· some cases, to restrain appetite,or,as in other cases, to' take foodwithoutappe tite: 'all abnormal state having-been bronghtaboutby' physiological sins, artificial regulation is called for 'to suppletuent natural regulation. But this proves nothing. After'prolonged: starvation, satisfaction of ravenous ·hunger by a good meal·issaidto be.£atal. The prostration is so great that any considerable quantity of foodbannot be digested, and administration in small quantities is needful. But' it is not· thence inferred' that satisfaction of appetite by a· good meal will ordinarily be fatal. Similarly is it throughout. The evils which occasionally arise:£rom taking asml:lch asappetiteprompt8, lnust be ascribed to the luul titndinous preceding. disobediences to.·sensations,,and not to this particular obedience' to them. While there: is recognition of the evils resulting from excesses"'in "eating, there •is little reoognition of the, evils cOrisequenton eating too little. The~scetie bias'givenby thefrreligion alldby their education, leads most people to think:themselves meritorious if they do with as little food as possible and tempts them to restrict the food of others.

Disastrous', effects .follo'v.· Inadequate nutrition, especially while' gro,vth is:going on, is an unquestionable cause ,of imperfect development, either in "s.ize,or in quality of tissue, orinbotl:r; and pa.rentswho are responsible "for it are respollsiblefor invalid lives. No cattle-breeder: or :horse breeder dreams of obtaining a fine animal-on a stinted diet. No '"possessor,of 'a ..' fine· animal expects him to do good iservice on the rbador in the field unless he is well :fed~ Science· and C0J111Uon.sense unite· in recognizing the truth' that growth. and ;'vigour are alike dependent on a gOod. supply of the materials from which body and brain" areblliltup:when young and rep~iredwhen adult. The taking 'of an adequate quantity of food is insured if appe..

504 THE ETHICS OF INDIVIDUAL LIFE. tite is 0 beyed, while if the supply is restricted spite of the denlands of appetite, there will inevitably be lllore or less of defect in size or in strength. Speaking generally, then, we may say that there is an ethical sanction for yielding in full to the desire for food; both because satisfaction of the desire is itself one element to be counted alnong the nornlal gratifications life offers, and because satisfaction of it indirectly conduces to sub sequent fulness of life and the power of discharging all the obligattons. of life. § 212. One who conlplains of the monotony of his meals and is thereupon reproached for seeking the enjoyments which change of diet gives (I name a fact), is, by the reproach, tacitly condemned from a moral point of view. Whence the implication is that a doctrine of right and wrong has something to say respecting the propriety or impropriety of yielding to the wish for variety. Everyone, therefore, who does not agree in the opinion of the pious Scotchwolnan just referred to) must hold the opposite opinion: the desire for variety of food should be gratified -has a sanction like that of the desire for due quantity of, food.' This is of course not a fit place for entering on the topics-of variety, quality, and preparation of food-topics the mere mention of which will seem out of place to those \vho have not accepted the doctrines hnplied in the first chapter of this work, that every part of conduct which directly or indirectly affects welfare has an ethical aspect.

Here, what has to be said or hinted under the three heads named, may come under the one general head of satisfac tion of the palate, as distinguished from the satisfaction of the appetite-distinguished in a measure but not wholly; since the lone serves as a n orInal stirnulus to the other. Partly as a further sequence of asceticism, and partly as a reaction against the gross sensualism which history OCCOr NUTRITION. 505 sionally records from Roman days down to recent days, it has come to be thought that the ple~sures of the table· are to b~ reprobated; or, if not positively reprobated, yet passed over as not proper to be regarded. Those who take this view are, indeed, like others, discontent ,vith insipid food; and are no less ready than others to dismiss cooks who cannot prepare enjoyable din~ers. But while prac tically they pursue gastronomic satisfactions, they refuse to recognize their theoretical legitimacy.

Here, I cannot imitate this uncandid mode of dealing with the matter; and find nlyself obliged to assert that due regard for the needs of the palate is not only proper but disregard of them is wrong. The contrary view involves the belief that it Inatters not to the body whether it is the seat of pleasurable feelings, or indifferent feelings, or pain ful feelings. But it matters very much. As asserted in an early chapter (§ 36), pleasures raise the tide of life while pains lower it; and alnong the pleasures which do this are gustatory pleasures. There are two reasons why, ,vhen food is liked, digestion of it is furthered, and when disliked is hindered. In common with every agreeable sensation an agreeable taste raises the action of the heart, and, by implication, the vital functions at large; while siInultaneously, it excites in a more direct way the strnct.:. ures which secrete the digestive fluids. It needs but to relnember the common observation that an appetizing odour makes the mouth water, to understand that the alimentary canal asa whole is lnade active by a pleasurable stimulation of the palate, and that digestion is thus aided And since on good digestion depends good nutrition, and on.

good nutrition depends the energy needed for daily ,york, it follows that dne regard to gratification of· the palate is demanded. Those wllo have had any experience of invalid life, know well how slnall a quantity can be eaten of food which is indifferent or distasteful, and hO¥l trying is the digestion of 506 THE ETHICS.' OF INDIVIDUAL LIFE. such food, while the converse holds of food which is grate ful: the resulting adequate meals of such food better di gested, being a condition to recovery and the resulnpti~n of responsibilities. And if the benefit of such ministrations to the palate is made thus manifest \vhere the vitality is .low, it unquestionably exists, though less Inanifestly,where the vitality is high.· Ofoourse, as in respect of quantity. so in respect of quality and variety, there may be, and often is, excess: the last kind of excess being conducive to the first. But no more in this case than in any other case is abuse an argument against use.

§ 213. Before ending this· chapter, \vhich I must now do lest it should become a chapter on dietetics, I Inust say some thing on the altruistic bearings of the conclusions drawn; only making, in further. repudiation of the ordinary ascetic view, the rClnark' that the Hebrew myth \vhich represents the eating of the apple by Eve as prompted by the serpent, seeIns in Inany minds to have been expanded into a general theory of our relations to food: their asceticisrn tacitly implying that gustatory prolnptings are suggestions of the devil. Of the altruistic bearings to be noted, the first concerns the indirect .effects of excess, suffered by those around, from the· occasional illness and more frequent ill-telnper which it produces : injuries to others the prospect of which should serve as a deterrent, no less than prospecti ve injury to self. And then a more remote altruistic bearing is seen in the effect wrought on the· cOlnmunity if excess is general. Remem bering that the stock of food· \vhich a cOlnmunity obtains is a· lilnited quantity, it results that if its members consume more than is needful for complete self-sustentation, they diminish the amount of human life proper to the inhabited area. Olearly, if people at large eat, let us say, one-sixth more than is required for full life NUTRITION. 501 and vigour-if ten millions of people eat as much as would satisfactorily support twelve millions; then, assuming human life to be a desideratum, a wrong is done by thus prevent ing its increase. The share of each individual in the wrong may be inappreciable; but the aggregate wrong-prevent ing the existence of two millions of people'-is appreciable enough.

The remaining alt,fuistic· be~ring is that which concerns offspring. Chronic innutrition of parents injures children. In the case of mothers the inevitableness of this result is clear. Building-up of the fretus has to go on simul taneously with the carrying on of maternal life, and nutri tive' materials are used· upforbothprocesses.>/ Though, in the competition', between the two; thenrsthas ·'a·· certain priority, .and is effected' at great cost to thesecond;y~t, where the· supply of nutritive materials is; inadequate, f~tal growth is checked,as well"Rslnaternalenfeeblelnent caused. A stinted development ··of the infant· .and".a 'sub sequent faUing short of fullHfeare the . consequences. Regard for. posterity-· thus .•... peremptorily· demands. good feeding.