Acting in your own behalf
Thursday, October 11th, 2007Ever notice that there are a lot of people in society who do not act in their own behalf, even when confronted with evidence that it is imperative they do so?
We all sort of understand the alcoholic or drug addict who has an underlying character or mental defect that makes them need a crutch to get through life. I’ve known alcoholics and addicts who gave up substance abuse only to delve headlong into fervent religious beliefs and the sudden need to convert others to what they have “discovered.” Seems obvious to me they’ve traded in one crutch for another, albeit a less destructive one.
The abused housewife is a tougher one to understand. Why don’t they just get out of their situation? And if they do get away from one abuser, why do some of them seek out another abusing man? Some women seem to have a homing device for abusive men. Low self esteem? Victim of childhood abuse that makes them seek out another abuser? Or just scrambled eggs for brains?
Harder still to understand are those people who are at serious risk of illness or death from the way they eat but won’t change what they eat? I’ve come upon many of these people. Heck, America is full of them, judging from what the news media has labeled America’s obesity epidemic.

A couple of years ago I was enrolled in a supervised exercise program following heart surgery. Many people in the program had undergone bypass surgery like me, but few had bothered to read anything about the eating habits that may have led to their clogged arteries. Many were way overweight but weren’t particularly interested in dieting or exercising. How come?
Most people seem willing to give up smoking once they understand its hazards. Why not unhealthy foods? Is it because there’s a social stigma attached to smoking, namely, smoking implies you must be really stupid to go in the face of such overwhelming evidence that it will some day kill you. Is that it? Smokers quit because there’s a social stigma attached to it, not because it might kill them?

I like to act on newfound knowledge. It makes me feel pretty smart. I used to smoke, but read the evidence it would cause cancer so gave it up. I like to drink but limited my intake based on the evidence that too much led to serious social and health problems. I like to eat, but adapted my intake and tastes to healthy foods once I learned that overeating and certain foods could shorten my life.
Heck, I even moved to the country when I realized the city was hazardous to my life.
Who knows! Maybe I just don’t understand certain types of people.
I made kale soup today, chopped wood, and built the first wood stove fire of the season. Great fun! Maybe next post I’ll talk about chopping wood. Thoreau was correct, as far as he went. But chopping wood has more benefits than warming you twice. Maybe I’ll even post John’s kale soup recipe.





magazine. The forest had just been felled and my friend could not hide his disgust at what he perceived as widespread environmental destruction by a logging company. I tried to explain to him that the logging represented a good use of forest land, and that I was familiar with the practices of the local timber company, Southcoast Lumber, and they did things correctly, namely, they logged, then burned, then replanted according to a very long-term logging schedule. “They have an economic stake in taking care of this land,” I said. “Thousands of homes will be built from the timber, then in another 20 or 30 years, they’ll log again and repeat the process.” I tried to explain to him that even the burning they do after logging is good for the land. “Fire is a natural part of the ecosystem of these forests. What could be more environmentally responsible than that?” He dismissed my explanation, as I knew he would. He was one of those environmentalists who seem to treat their beliefs as a religion. He blocked out explanations that showed timber companies doing any kind of enlightened logging. He simply looked at the denuded land and saw its ugliness. He couldn’t see the productive beauty that was eager to spring up as new trees. For him, logging was simply bad! Now here my wife and I were walking through this beautiful new forest. The logged timber has long ago become new homes. The land sloped away from us to the Pacific Ocean, and we could survey miles of new trees leading to the ocean. But I could see this in my imagination five years ago, amid the heaps of stumps and slash. Why couldn’t my environmental friend see that this was a responsible use of land, not a rape of a forest. Would he acknowledge it even now? I’ve lost track of him so I can’t ask him. I’ve met a lot of people like this. They are committed to a line of thought, and no amount of reasoning will sway them from their beliefs. And their thoughts DO become beliefs, as far as I can tell. Thought and reasoning implies listening to alternative views as you search for knowledge. Beliefs imply that you have reached your decision. There is no more room for talk. Too many environmentalists have become “true believers,” rather than pragmatists looking for sensible solutions to environmental problems. They have become part of the problem, not part of the solution. Companies like Southcoast Lumber are part of the solution. They are making money by caring for their forests. We’ll cut our Christmas tree out of this new growth of forest when there’s snow on the ground. We take care to cut out a crowded tree to help the timber company improve the new forest. Reminds me of a Robert Frost poem: Whose woods these are I think I know, His house is in the village though, He will not see me stopping here To watch his woods fill up with snow. … I’ll skip to the end: The woods are lovely, dark, and deep, But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep.