Are there any "natural urges" humanity has overcome through willpower?

This is going to be a little rambly. I apologize in advance.

My question is pretty simple: Are we looking at overeating in entirely the wrong way?

In many weight/diet/weightloss/overeating/nutrition threads, the idea is put out that people could control their weight through willpower–that it’s just a lack of it that leads people to indulge themselves with too much food, or inappropriate food.

I agree.

But I also believe that the sort of willpower we’re talking about is not readily available to most people, and I believe that in the majority of other times where a person’s natural inclination butts up against unwanted repercussions have been solved through science or law, not willpower.

Examples (all of them arguable, perhaps):

Sex–We don’t expect people to use their willpower and remain celibate in order to avoid pregnancy. No, we view sex as normal and have devised ways for people to “indulge” in it without (as many) pregnancies.

Debt–We don’t expect people to spend only the cash money they have on hand. No, we have devised ways for them to spend more and pay back later (if at all).

Violence–Rechanneled into acceptable outlets like wars, sports, video games, etc. Penalized, often severely, when outside of those outlets.

Drinking/Drugs–Often illegal, with severe penalties, though it’s obvious that the penalties don’t do much to discourage the use.
I guess what I’m going after is that there are certain urges that we don’t generally master through willpower. We find ways to get what we want because relying on willpower doesn’t work, and when what we want is unacceptable, we place big penalties on indulging in it.

So, is overeating/obesity in the same “class” of desires? I think it is. Just as some people are asexual, or uninterested in alcohol, or peaceful, some people are quite uninterested in food. But for others, expecting them to control their impulses is like expecting people to stop being horny. And just as we had to devise ways to have sex without pregnancy and/or disease, we need to devicse ways to eat “bad” foods without obesity and/or disease–because willpower isn’t going to work.

I agree. Willpower is good for short term problems, but tends to be worn down or subverted over the long term. In other words, if you’re trying to quit smoking, don’t leave any packs lying around. If you’re an alcoholic, don’t have a six pack of beer in the fridge. Too much constant temptation will get to you.

I think the problem with overeating is worse because it is naturally impossible to go cold turkey. It’s as if an alcoholic was forced to drink a glass on wine each day; it makes it impossible to not be tempted.

I’ll also say this; everybody has willpower, so if willpower was the solution, the problem would be long gone. Problems that can be solved by simple effort tend to not stay problems.

Ha! Obviously you’ve never seen me in the ice cream aisle.

My opinion is that it is almost impossible to achieve something just by willpower. Most people achieve by making something a habit. Take for example - brushing your teeth. I bet you do this every morning. Why? Is it because of willpower or your need to be liked? No. It is a habit that your parents probably trained you into starting when you were two.
The thing that really hit me was The part in Adams "God’s debris’ when he talked about willpower.He said that ‘willpower’ is a delusion.
http://www.andrewsmcmeel.com/godsdebris/
and read pages 92-96.

You can’t speak of “humanity” as overcoming any natural urges by willpower, only of individuals.

Why, just yesterday I tore out the throat of a rival for Alpha, but stopped myself from eating his offspring.
Don’t tell me I lack willpower.

Hey, that’s actually a really profound thought on weight loss. I’ve honestly never thought about it that way before.

The problem, I think, is that those two statements are not equivalent. People don’t overeat because they lack willpower. They overeat because they like food (enjoy the taste, enjoy the ritual, etc.). Where willpower comes in is in overcoming those (natural) urges. Without it, we gain weight.

As for your question, sure, lots of people exercise willpower all the time. There are LOTS of things we’d like to do, but don’t because of the consequences, whether legal, social or personal. Food is tough for a couple reasons. Der Tris’s insight is a good one. Another is that the downside of overeating accumulates slowly over a period of years, whereas the advantages are immediate. A third is that it’s basically a victemless “crime,” i.e., the victem is one’s self, so it’s harder to muster a sense of moral obligation to refrain.

My $0.02.

Ahem, “victimless” and “victim.” D’oh.

You don’t need willpower, you need won’tpower!

Hey, this afternoon, I strapped myself into a metal box sceeching around the countryside at fifty miles per hour. You show me one natural instinct in my species that tells me that that’s a normal and desirable thing to do. :smiley:

Jean Nidetch, founder of Weight Watchers, stated in her book that she thinks willpower is a myth. She uses the word “desire”: I have the desire to weigh less, so I eat cantaloupe instead of cake. She also states that hardest thing in the world is to teach fat people how to eat correctly.

“I think the problem with overeating is worse because it is naturally impossible to go cold turkey. It’s as if an alcoholic was forced to drink a glass on wine each day; it makes it impossible to not be tempted.”

Not really.

The problem is more the opposite - that going ‘cold turkey’ and eating nothing but totally ‘healthy’ food rarely works for most people. Which is pretty much the case for alcohol abuse as well really - total abstinence rarely works full stop, although it does work very well for a minority of people.

Which is where we get back to willpower. Not doing something is a way of thinking that we’re generally terrible at, we’re much better at thinking about what we do want to do, ie focus on eating the cantaloupe rather than ‘not eating’ the icecream.

Otara

Ummm, no. “Cold turkey” would be not eating, at all. That’s why I called it impossible. Well, suicidal, at least.

Obviously you’ve never heard of the Breatharians! :wink:

Oh, I’ve heard of then. I simply regard them as either suicidal or dishonest.

And add to that what food is readily available and fast and cheap is usually the worst offenders to the waistline. I read one time (sorry no cite) that more than 70% of food products in the grocery store are primarily white flour or processed corn, corn syrup, oils, sugars and/or salt. We have isles dedicated to cookies, crackers, corn syrup soda, breads, cakes, ect. all made with these cheap commodities. Fast food is much the same. Its much more difficult to find lean meat and assorted fresh fruits and vegetables than it is cheap, starchy, fatty ones. You become conditioned at a young age to this crap and it’s everywhere.

If you go down that track yes.

The assumption within that argument though is that its the ‘inability to go cold turkey’ thats generally the problem with losing weight - because the temptation is always there.

My point is that its more the opposite - going ‘cold turkey’ often doesnt work full stop, and when people try to apply similar strategies with food (‘only eat the good food for ever and ever’) you tend to get similar results to other areas such as totally abstaining from alcohol and the like, rather than a particularly anomalous result as you’d expect if it really was the substantially different situation that its being argued to be.

Otara

Absolutely. If there was a way to stop eating completely and forcing yourself to find other ways to cope, that would be great. I even thought, hey, I’ll throw out all my food and just buy nutrisystem. They will be my only supplier. But no, you still have to buy food to supplement what they send you, and that puts me back in the grocery store.

Both excellent points. Other than the “sight pollution” referred to in another thread, I like to think no one is hurt but me.