Quantcast
Connect with us

Rejecting the “self-discipline” framework

Published

on

Sam at Skepchick has an AI up that I think is probably one of the most clear-cut examples I’ve seen in a long time of how framing an issue really suggests the answers. The post is about obesity and nutrition-related diseases like diabetes and heart disease, and he throws out these discussion questions:

Is obesity as big a problem as reported? If so, who should be held responsible for the country’s soaring obesity rates? Food industry? Government officials? Eaters? Which is more of a factor in the obesity trend/epidemic: lacking self-discipline, living in an environment that promotes unhealthy behaviors, video games/Internet? Obesity rates in children have tripled since 1980. How would you reverse this upward trajectory? Would you?

Emphasis mine. It’s not just that it invokes an unfortunate either/or framework that makes this question a problem. It’s that it introduces the concept of “sin” into a discussion about public health. I realize that Sam surely didn’t intend it that way. It’s telling that Christianity is so pervasive that its ideas even penetrate atheist circles. “Self-discipline” can’t really be extracted meaningfully in this debate from the concept of sin and punishment. Under the sin framework, gluttony is a sin, and the only proper response to sin is punishment. Therefore, if you accept the “self-discipline” framework, there is no problem here. The overeaters are sinners, and their health problems are punishment for their sin. The system works, let’s all go home. Indeed, you see this exact argument being trotted out in comments. 

But if you reject this notion and instead view negative health effects of overeating as a public health problem to be solved, then the question of “self-discipline” becomes silly. Let’s just say for the sake of argument that you accept this assumption, that people don’t have self-discipline and that’s why they overeat. If you’re still interested in solving the problem, the response then becomes, “So what?” There’s no real way to fix that problem with traditional finger-wagging, as thousands of years of scolding has so far proven ineffective. Leaving it be is also unacceptable, because real people are suffering and our health care systems are overextended. When you’re engaging in problem-solving, it’s best to start by looking at things you can control, and leave the discourse of sin and redemption to the wayside. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Incidentally, the sexual health debate suffers from the same problem. Even if you accept (which I don’t) the premise that abstinence is inherently good, and that’s what people “should” do, I have the same response: So what? You can say “should” until you’re blue in the face, and people are still going to fuck. If you actually want to fix the problems of STD transmission and unintended pregnancy, you have to deal with people how they are, not how they “should” be. Same with food consumption and exercise. I guess people “should” exert often-extraordinary levels of self-discipline, but they don’t, because they’re human. Meet them where they are, not where they “should” be. 

We can’t fix people’s impulse control, but we can fix their environments through collective action. Interestingly, we can fix their environments so that they are better able to exert self-control. Self-control is neither a fixed quality nor completely under (oh irony) our control. Research has shown that pretty much everyone’s self-control diminishes when they’re mentally exerting themselves or stressed out. Simple fixes that separate mental exertion from eating time could do a lot to reduce over-eating. If that’s not possible, reducing temptation is always an option. Self-control is often only as strong as the environment it presents itself in. (Incidentally, I also reject the way that the sin framework around eating treats eating, which should be a source of pleasure. Demonizing eating is not the best approach here.)

What I would like is for public health discourse to simply get over this fetish for “personal responsibility”. It’s a red herring. First of all, it’s not really a static quality you either have or you don’t. Second of all, it’s not something that’s responsive to scolding, which is the only solution people who love to trot out “personal responsibility” will accept. If we actually give a shit about people and their health, then we have to look at what we can do and what we can fix. And that’s the environment. Plus, there’s piles of evidence that show people are incredibly adaptable to environments. If Americans had an environment that was more conducive to exercise and healthy eating, we’d do more of that. The only other possibility is that we’re uniquely gluttonous as a people, and that’s a little hard to really believe. 

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected]. Send news tips to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Commentary

Ted Cruz’s dangerous resolution suggests that all forms of political dissent could soon be considered terrorism

Published

on

Last week, Republican Sens. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Ted Cruz  of Texas introduced a resolution to designate "antifa," which the Anti-Defamation League defines as "a loose collection of groups, networks, and individuals who believe in active, aggressive opposition to far right-wing movements," as a "domestic terrorist organization."

This article was originally published at Salon

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Florida cop runs down joy-riding black teen on bicycle — then officers shock him with a Taser

Published

on

Florida police chased down a joy-riding black teenager, struck the bicycle he was riding and then violently arrested him after he fled in terror.

Jaydon Stubbs and four friends were riding July 17 on their way to Hollywood Beach when an officer spotted the teens in an area where there had been a string of recent burglaries, reported WPLG-TV.

The officer saw the boys popping wheelies and ignoring traffic laws, so she tried to stop them for questioning -- but they split up and rode away from her.

Continue Reading
 

Facebook

9/11 first responder goes on Fox and destroys Rand Paul’s phony fiscal conservatism: It’s insulting to our intelligence

Published

on

During a Fox News interview on Tuesday, a 9/11 first responder blasted Republican senators who raised concerns about a bill to help compensate those who were injured during the 2001 terrorist attacks and its aftermath.

The Senate is expected to pass legislation that would fund the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund through 2090, despite Republican senators Rand Paul (KY) and Mike Lee (UT) stalling the bill after raising concerns about the cost.

"[Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell has been nothing but gracious. He kept his word. When we had that meeting with, I can tell you he is keeping his word. While we don’t always agree on everything, he has kept his word, and he helped us get here today," said John Feal, a demolition specialist whose foot was crushed during the 9/11 recovery effort.

Continue Reading
 
 
 

Copyright © 2019 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | For corrections or concerns, please email [email protected]

close-image
Join Me. Try Raw Story Investigates for $1. Invest in Journalism. Escape Ads.
close-image