Journal 4: The Omnivore’s Dilemma Part 3

I personal probably won’t be able to make food that I foraged myself. Pollan describes in the third part of the book the challenge of making a meal entirely from things that you’ve made yourself. That means that you use ingredients that you’ve foraged or hunted yourself. As natural human beings, we do not see the need and we have no motive to hunting down animals for food. We grow plants, we genetically engineer food, but we see no reason in hunting down an animal just to eat it. Most of our meat has been genetically modified in some way or another, and that it is probably fake meat that tastes and looks like the real thing. Unlike animals, humans don’t need to hunt to survive. We did not learn how to fish or claw down an animal when we were young. Animals naturally learn from their parents how to survive out in the wild. Some people, like Bear Grylls, were properly trained to survive out in the wild. These people aren’t doing it because they have to; they’re doing it because they want to do it for the fame and the riches. No one, in their right mind, would strand themselves out on a dessert island just because they want to.

However, what if human beings did in fact hunt animals as a natural instinct. What if humans are just like any other animal, having its own place on the food chain and killing whatever is its prey. Knowing what I know today, it would be pretty dangerous for humans to go around eating whatever looks eatable. There could be poisonous mushrooms, insects, plants, and other substances that can cause severe damage to our bodies. “As the case of mushrooms suggest the omnivore’s dilemma often comes down to a question of identification – to knowing exactly what it is you are preparing to eat.” We would also be behind in technology, basically imagine a world without iPhones and iPads and instead of sitting at home playing on the computer or going to school, we are outside in the wild trying to survive every single day. Sometimes, what the food industry is doing doesn’t seem so bad.

If the food industry is not doing what it’s doing today, then we would be in a completely different position in terms of our food growth. However, whether that difference is good or bad, ultimately depends on how you view the situation. If you see the food growth as a negative impact on the world, then you would view the world as a peaceful place instead. However, if you see the food growth as a positive impact, then you would view the world as a place with no technological future. It all depends on how you view the situation and what you plan on doing. “For we would no longer need any reminding that however we choose to feed ourselves, we eat by the grace of nature, not industry, and what we’re eating is never anything more or less than the body of the world.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s