This Is™ Humility
Preface and Rationale - by Andrew Wiguna
Beyond philosophy, science and economics, my interest surrounds both the understanding and reflections on Nutrition. Beyond perceiving nutrition as "food"; to merely sustain our means of living. But as a compartmentalised symbiosis; to "Interpretation" itself.
Nutrition also represents how well we filter, digest and most importantly interpret relatively to our needs & concerns within contexts.
My overall voice of concern is to highlight the dubious outcomes from our present hierarchic paternalism. Amidst everything we follow and told as the supposedly “solution”. A supposed solution that is, towards all that of our current sociological and health turbulences. Metabolic syndromes, mental illnesses, social depravity, to name a few. Despite conforming to institutionalised methodology pharmaceutical interventions or societal re-correction services. A crisis of confusions and futile outcomes still somehow persist.
One “clue” however, remains dormant and begs to to be reconciled at an individual level. I documented and propose as such - stems from that of our own biological measures at re-interpreting what "enough” means.
Many personal years of self-accounting of the above turbulences inevitably channelled to the establishment of my conceptual trademark & branding initiative - "This Is™ Humility". First originated as personal observation insights, years accumulatively back since 2012. Within this project I promote inner affirmations out of one’s ability at surviving with less confusions objected. By disciplining and redefining one’s own consumptive habits of Resources.
Such requires self-experimenting the various unorthodox nutritional principles. Away from prevailing seemingly immutable dogma. The empirical "Correctness Hierarchy."
The quality of being empirically correct today, is aided by nothing more than statistical worshipping of facts. Rather than subjective Individual interpretations. Hence, sparking the pursuit that we must capably Question all conventions we often told never to object against.
That is - the very Institution/s we ourselves have blindingly placed all our faith & trust for survival.
What is wrong with our current institutions?
All Institutions believe that condensing every complex subjectivities into as few objective criterias possible - ensures fairer survival and prolonging of the human race.
Governances and/or Institutions are derived out of collectivist opinions of a “Few” at policing linear “correctness”. Upon the however infinitely (& subjectively) growing “Many”.
Binary semantics “Good” or “Bad” remain as their codex against complex individualities. Such a codex is readily abundant as early education or “religion”. An exercise is perpetuated thus in the name of so called “faith” and/or Quantified “willpower”. In face of helplessness, an individual deemed as not “good" enough” is simply told to do "more". Still not enough? Then blame it all on "Willpower". Still not good enough? The victim inevitably will be compared to a lesser circumstance. Then instructed to follow all what "famous" or "successful" survivors do. Hence; further perpetuating paternalist fellowship of correctness. Through Survivorship Biases.
Today we are instilled so convincingly that everything can be “solved” through what is known as practising "Common Sense". If "Common Sense" is the first and last word for cure or "panacea" to quell every human ill or resentment - how well are we doing so far through such paternalism? Sociological "inequality", political gender "inequalities", pathological metabolic syndromes, premature mortality, depression, mental illnesses, suicides, obesity - all continues to persist symptomatically.
When all else “fails” - institutions finally step in by structural force. Condemnation and isolation of such symptoms - through “fixations”.
Institutions prescribe such solutions by attempting to override Nature’s side effects. If one's complex sociological circumstances refuses to “cooperate” harmoniously with every-said "therapies", or that dangerous physiological implications persists from taking "SSRI anti-depressants, "Proton Pump Inhibitors", “Adderals”, Xanax's, Zoloft, Rivastatins, Antibiotics, Antipsychotics, then individual instincts have never been more correct. It is each and every one of these myopic solution/s themselves that causes all such dubious outcomes.
After all, what is there for a patient to do? We have to submit our subserviences (and “patience”) whilst all side effects must be shouldered ourselves. For they, dear Institutions - do not care - if those side effects persist. Such "prescriptions" methodology after all only concerns idealistic outcomes. Against all "odds" of responses at an isolated level.
"Rehabilitation" or "RE-corrections" therefore is not overly different - from imprisonment. After all - "fixing" a problem is much akin - to only FIXATE and IMMOBILISE such symptoms of a problem. Each in perfect - isolation.
It is thus logical I propose, that an Individual filtering of what he/she ingests or consumes - is ultimately needed for biologically interpreting what enough means.
We inevitably have to ask ourselves two daring questions:
Could "simplicity" or “common sense”, as advised through institutional subservience - masks a complex irony in and of itself?
Is it thus not up to us to individually decide whether to become statistical followers or explorers - of our own Authenticity?
I have written a book to proclaim such a need for that individual reconciliation of what “enough” means. Not out of theology. But of biological authenticity. Stemming from how we qualitatively redefine our realm of “consumption”.
HUMILITY THROUGH FRUGALITY™
My book - is an attempt addressing all the above complex concerns within the realm of “Nutrition”. As the last unadmitted confounder towards every parallels of sociological & physiological declines. With all research as best curated today on realms of nutritional science, sociology and economics. An intuitive calling to exercise self-resilience amidst episodical Resource scarcities. To both attest and harness our Authenticities amidst the meeting of our objectivities.
Topics included go beyond Cyclical Ketogenic interventions, Budgeting, and Intermittent Fasting considerations. Or the need for tracking resource consumptions / longevity analysis.
As inhumane the above reductionist measures sounds - such remains as the only precursors to primal re-defining of what enough means. Such sadly lies dormant and unreconciled amidst our present realm of pedestrian modernity.
I implore that any “solution” be it however convincingly expressed as such from reading this Book and its supporting research is never to be taken as a gospel for all. It is neither a totalitarian subscription to “starvation” nor is it myopic adherence to any one (1) nutritional protocol. It implores a redefining of “Science” - as an individual, subjective variable book of interpretations.
This book is also a philosophical resource. Particularly dispelling the misguided notion/s of what “Humility” means. Beyond idealistic moral virtuosity, charity, “Religion” or Societal "modesty". Rather - a biological level of understanding and interpreting of what "enough" means. As feedback loop from outside factors (sociology, scarcity) and into our own physiology (body and mind).
All sections of the book is entirely written in Questions Meet Answers format. As opposed to lengthy thesis-like academic formality. Because all Questions promote gentle curiosities. Upon which such an answer remains flexibly addressed from as however simple, or as elaborative; as desired.
Unlike many concretely-completed book projects, this manuscript remains subjectively open for periodical revisions. Denoted by their revision number (version x.xx) followed by their months of subsequent editing. This model insures impartiality and willingness for progressive reclarifying and continuity.
Any "Facts" is only as "valid" as how it is biologically "interpreted". I implore that "Science", beyond just an academia pursuit - is NEVER about defining objectivity conclusions. All dogmas, beliefs, or paradigms bearing even a single word of "healthy" are insidiously egoistic and subjective. Recall that Institutionalisation impose correctness consensus of the collective few. Against the infinitely growing odds of many.
What is correct for one may seem adverse for another. Hence, a philosophical dilemma, in form of debates inevitably occur between two opinions. I further propose “mechanics” to aid such a mediation is governed through this one dynamic equation.
Nutritive Individualisation = CONTEXTS + INTERPRETATIONS.
Such an assesment is determined by firstly assessing a Resource's (a food, a thought, a belief or outside principle) relevance to the recipient’s CONTEXTS. Then qualitatively mediated by variable physiological INTERPRETATIONS. Such is confounded through genomics, physiology and socio-economics.
I have also designed such - to be visually compartmentalised as a philosophy visual identity. I thus invite you to witness the Behance® extended presentation.
NO “LIKES” OR “SUBSCRIPTIONS” NECESSARY
Arguably, this project is the very first of its kind at honestly proclaiming itself to be the anti thesis of social media “marketing”.
The last if yet most surprising aspect of this entire branding initiative; since its inception in 2015 is its absence of encouraging “likes” or “subscriptions” to its own channel.
“Anti-thesis”- I assert in a way that we must truly question the meaningfulness behind all “numbers”. We live in an overly competitive correctness hierarchy; instrumentalised and quantified by “likes” disguised through numerics. I argue that this equate frivolous and uncooperative rewarding of human civility. Instead, genuine comments of positivity and thanksgiving, in earnest evidence through writing - are preferably as they originated out of authentic, biological response.
Admittedly nevertheless, “recognition” out of one’s efforts and academia endeavours is indeed an important fabric of freedom-of-speech. Yet how ironic is it that Institutions and powers-that-be decide and prioritise what is predictively populist? By mathematical algorithms that automatically decide, through “numbers” alone - to dictate what gets shown, and what gets muted?
Hence, I propose since the very origins of this project intent - is the “Live-It-Forward” model. Beyond “Pay-It-Forward”.
LINKS / WHERE TO FIND THIS PROJECT
I hereby invite all visitors to witness my Blog as well as that of the connected Google+ Page This Is Humility™ I regularly maintain and posts much of my share of thoughts; all as tied under my parent branding initiative website that I have solely produced and designed (thisis-humility.com.au).
Further comprised also of the motion graphic featurette videos I myself created, recorded, edited and produced - all these efforts; which are solely funded with no external help - I'd be sincerely pleased and grateful to hear any feedbacks and comments to all my endeavours within this branding initiative.
Andrew Wiguna / AW™