Consider, for a moment, a world in which magic actually worked, where the things that we most deeply wish for in life could be achieved with a spell or a charm. Forget for a moment that such things don’t happen. Would there be anything problematic with such a world?
Two spring immediately to mind. First, and most obviously, we should fear the power that this sort of thing would place in human hands. We couldn’t be certain whether it would be used for good or ill – or rather, knowing what human beings are like, we would rightly fear its destructive potential.
But also, and less obviously, I think it would threaten to undermine the way in which human beings make sense of their lives and come to find meaning within it. If I can make myself immediately slimmer, say, with a quick bit of hocus pocus, then it would make no sense to think of my getting slimmer as the story of overcoming my inner demons, of struggle and achievement. There would be no inner drama in front of the fridge or the toaster. In such a world, diets would lead to two different types of weight loss: physical and existential, as in what Kundera calls “the unbearable lightness of being”. That is the deeper problem with magic. It robs life of its meaning, of its weight.
I was thinking of magic when I pondered my reaction to Tom Chivers’s piece for UnHerd about diet pills. He was writing about technology not magic, of course. His concern was to defend “fixes” to various social ills and specifically to defend technology against the charge of “solutionism” defined as the “foolhardy belief that technology can sidestep thorny social or political problems”.
Those, like me, who have a problem with “solutions”, think there is something wrong about – for example – a quick pharmacological fix to obesity. Pop a pill and you will be thin. That simple. What’s wrong with getting what you want like this, Chivers asks? Nothing at all, he concludes. But I don’t think he gave the solutionist argument a proper run for its money. So here goes.
The one area where there is widespread anxiety about the use of technological – especially pharmaceutical – fixes is within the field of elite sport. Here we call it doping. And why do we worry about doping? Because, ultimately, it drains sport of its meaning. If we allow any and every chemical fix to enter sport, then the difference between success and failure would be achieved in the lab and not on the pitch or piste. And that would rob sport of the very reason we find it compelling – that it is a battle of wills, of skill and of human courage. To replace all this with chemistry, where the winners are the ones with better lab teams, would fatally undermine the very existence of sport.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThank you Giles for articulating this so well.
I think there is another problem with any easy fix in life, there is always a price to pay further down the line.
To imagine that a human problem can be made to disappear with a pill is not to have faced reality yet. Valium, downers, uppers, fat pills, HRT, ADHD drugs, opioids, all only help superficially and temporarily. The pain and distress, if left unaddressed fundamentally, will pop up and manifest again, quite possibly even worse than before, never mind the chemically induced side effects.
Wittgenstein’s advice is good, wish I’d had it as a student.
I suppose that for previous generations a country where almost everyone lives in homes with gas, electricity , and even more importantly, clean running water would have been fairly magical.
My back of the envelope assumption is that a lot of people are miserable unless they have got something to be unhappy about .
Whole aisles in vast warehouse-like supermarkets full of edible products that have no discernable nutrional value, peopled by the wobbling obese who ‘live’ on them. Don’t worry, there’s a pill for that.
It would appear that Giles’s memory of “The Life of Brian” is somewhat at odds with the film, but heh ho, why let the facts get in the way of a good story.
Not just me who remembers Brian being picked up by the spaceship after falling from an unfinished stairwell whilst being chased by legionaries then? Thank God for that.
I had to go back and watch the clip to remember when it occurred in the story of Brian. No marks against Mr. Fraser from me for this one small issue, as I think his article is wonderful.
Yeah, I dont remember the aliens – just the ‘I can see your place from here” quip
Thanks to Mr. Fraser who articulates so clearly the problem I have with Chivers – not only with his view on diet pills, but lockdown, etc etc. Almost everything Chivers writes – even when I agree with his premise – seems to miss something about our humanity. I would prescribe Chivers a strong dose of “The Master and His Emissary” as I think it would do his soul good and help him to see the holes in his worldview.
he s a utilitarian ‘rationalist’ sort of person. There’s something a bit superficial & happy clappy about people like that
No, it’s darker than that. Vulcan, almost.
Someone who thinks we should act on evidence and not emotion, when for example, considering medical treatments etc. Can’t see what there is (or ought to be) to object over that. So we should prefer a surgeon operating on us who tried very hard, refused to use the best and most modern easiest to use modern instruments, and killed twice as many patients as his colleagues.
Excellent article.
Another reason that what you are saying is true is that the magical fix ignores the root cause of the problem.
OK – so you could take a pill and get thin – but why were you overweight? Perhaps it was due to some genetic disorder but more likely an underlying anxiety or pain. Or just boredom with life and lack of self-discipline?
Taking the pill just removes, probably temporarily, the symptom, and can extend the hidden damage from the original problem. Damage that is likely to be harming many other areas of your life.
I suppose that as Tom Chivers believes ardently in evolutionary naturalism, there is little need for meaning in life when the parameter of value is utilitarian survival of the fittest.
This is a muddled, confused, and ultimately disappointing argument by Giles whose articles I generally look forward to. I certainly admire the man and would lunch with him at any opportunity. The nail in the proverbial coffin, however, is that it is crystal clear that Giles has never taken the time to watch ‘Life of Brian’, one of the greatest stories ever told. That itself is a sin.
I agree. For example, equating life with sport, and popping a pill with doping, is muddled and confused. Is falling back on a pill to avoid suffering actually cheating?
It was satire then.
To err is human…
I know where Giles is coming from. There is an absurdity to modern life at the moment. We have it so good that much of what gave life meaning in the past is now rendered obsolete, think family, monogamy, religion, etc. Education is now reaching this stage where it has devolved from the pursuit of knowledge to the formation of little and easily controlled minds.
Going off on an angle here, but I used to be a huge fan of the game World of Warcraft because of the path you needed to take to develop your character. For instance, players had to work really hard to grind enough gold to buy a mount which made travel across the world much faster. Epic weapons and armor required teams of players enter dungeons and slay god-like beings. As the game progressed, however, the developers, in seeking to include and garner more players, made the game easier. Mounts were practically given away. Monsters became so feeble that a single player could slay five of them under 30 seconds. Much of the game could be done solo, thus the community aspect withered away. Everyone now had an epic mount and walked around in gleaming armor armed with the best sword in the world. It was around that point I stopped playing. The game had become so ‘casualized’ that it had rendered itself meaningless.
I’m more inclined to support Giles’s argument, but I don’t think happiness automatically follows weight loss – rather better health follows. A measure of happiness should also follow, but it is not a given. I also agree that meaning and purpose is the ideal goal, but happiness is also linked to meaning and purpose.
I do think that happiness is the ultimate state even though it can be elusive – is is a kind of affirmation that you are balancing all the good with a bad, the challenge and the successes and managing to be closer to satisfaction.
I also leave space in life for miracles and magic, both of which I have experienced and if combined with wisdom, both contribute to happiness.
If you read carefully, you will see that the whole point of his article is that happiness does not follow weight loss. Your use of the word “but” in your comment seems to indicate you’ve missed his point.
THERE is no such human state as “happiness’ per se – only contentedness (not wanting) s atisfaction (jobs and meaningfulness) and love (kindness and connectedness)
Giles’ argument could be equally applied to other technological fixes. The contraceptive pill and viagra seek to bypass or remove the human realities of unwanted conception and unwanted flaccidness. Are we to disapprove of these too? Perhaps we should (although easier to do if you’re not a beneficiary of either).
Am I the only one who finds this a somewhat bizarre and weak argument? Not to mention curmudgeonly.
For what it’s worth I also didn’t agree with Tom’s nonchalant acceptance of a quick fix – but mainly because in that specific case I don’t think it would address the underlying cause of the issue (obesity); either lifestyle and/or genetic propensity among other factors.
However I really don’t buy the wishy washy logic behind Giles’ argument – that a quick fix is a bad thing purely because it doesn’t chime well as a narrative in line with the human condition, its “story” or suffering.
Obesity might not be quite as bad as a direct fatal illness (although arguably not far off given its strain on the health services and now known exacerbating effects on Covid amongst countless other maladies), but it would be a bit like arguing that the smallpox vaccine removed a vital part of the human condition and suffering and so therefore a bad thing.
Weak and actually a bit sadistic
We might have difficulty accepting quick fixes as part of our human condition, and it’s clearly a healthy thing to be sceptical of these as so often things that are too good to be true are just that. But let’s not confuse that scepticism as being the reason not to try and fix things. That’s plain stupid.
Should we also forgo the benefits of modern medicine? This argument would seem to apply also to that. I would probably already have died a grim and embarrassing death without it – I doubt that I would have found it more meaningful.
Rector disparages modern miracle story… perhaps turning the water into wine was a magical fix that reduced meaning?
Or perhaps the diet pills (an injection actually) free the individual from worry and health issues arising from their weight so that they may seek true meaning in activities once beyond them?
The irony of “Having to eat to survive” and “having to diet to survive for longer”.
Why don’t we also make a pill for all those in the 3rd world who are without food. End of world hunger.
If the problem of world hunger can only be solved by bringing food to those who don’t have enough then why can’t the problem of obesity be also solved by not eating, exercising control and exercising? After all , it’s affecting one’s health . Stop eating.
I know , I know …. Complex’s mental health problems etc etc . I am mindful of mental health and aware it exists but as for a pill for obesity….!!!! I’m certainly missing something.
Perhaps Mr. Fraser is best comforted wearing horse hair underpants when lining up for his next Pfizer, Moderna, AZ MAGICAL vaccination.
I’m not sure that there isn’t some sort of belief here that if we try hard enough we can achieve anything. For those who do manage (through willpower, therapy, personal nutritionists/trainers) I agree, the narrative can be wonderful and life-affirming. But what about those who fail? And there are far more of them than there are successes. What’s their narrative?
A pill may not address the underlying cause of the problem; it may not give its user the kind of satisfaction we assume comes through having to endure and finally overcome terrible hardships (which is the narrative of virtually every fairy story: if you suffer long enough you will be happy in the end). But if you’ve been fat and unhappy and you’ve tried and failed and tried and failed and tried again to lose the weight, wouldn’t that magic pill take some of the pain away from living with self-disgust and loathing?
I think it might.
I’m with Mr Chivers on this one
The fact that some people have found meaning in struggle and suffering doesn’t imply that we would all be better off if only we suffered more. The people who have struggled with their weight don’t need another lecture about how the struggle is good for them. If they are finding the struggle a source of meaning then they already know that, and don’t need the advice. If, on the other hand, they find struggling with their weight a form of meaningless suffering, acerbated by all the blaming they get for their condition, why not let them out of that personal hell?
I’d vote for extended life expectancy producing years you can spend with your grandchildren over a narcissistic personal struggle with weight issues as a source of increased meaning in life, any day. And shouldn’t your family, whom I assume wants to extend your life because they love you and don’t want you dead get a vote here too?
Not sure that further extension of lifespan will lead to greater proportion of life spent with grandchildren, as opposed to eg institutional life in a nursing home, as an empirical reality across the general population
Great piece Giles, thank you.
Brilliant article- thanks
Hmm. I was planning on flying to Hawaii in a few days, but after reading this article I’ve decided to swim. Swimming would be a REAL triumph of the human spirit.
But seriously, I know it’s better to control one’s weight with diet and exercise. I suspect diet pills have their downsides. Exercise makes me feel good. It’s also time-consuming and HARD. I wouldn’t disparage folks who felt like they needed diet pills because their choice was insufficiently, uh, magical.
Thought provoking, which is why I read Unherd.
But if we extend Giles argument ad absurdum we are left asking our neighboring caveman if using a fire to stay warm and cook our meat is somehow a cheat in life’s great struggle. The first human controlled fire was really magic!
It’s not the fat pill that is diverting the “life streams” but the totality of our technological advance, which has exposed the meaning-giving deities and reduced the need for life affirming work.
I’m pretty sure Brian is not rescued at the end by the little green aliens. He’s rescued by them by accident as he falls from the top of a tower about halfway through the film. I always thought the point of it was to introduce a deus-ex-machina as pointless in the context of the fact that it made no difference in the end because Brian died anyway.
Anyway, the rest of this piece is quite interesting, but I can’t help but observe that the draining of meaning caused by the progressively easier existence that technology-driven modernism brings is what most of us would call a good problem to have.
And if you disagree, go back 100 years to before penicillin when our health services mostly catered for thousands of people at any one time dying slowly of tuberculosis. This was fixed with a simple course of pills. Are we really saying that there was a cost to this in the form of the loss of some existential mission statement?
Formula 1 racing is fixed by the technical superiority of the car and yet people still watch it and think it is about the drivers. People can be stupid