Essays On Education And Kindred Subjects (Fiscle Part- 11), Herbert Spencer [historical books to read .txt] 📗

Pg 54

Horse--An Animal Of    Nearly Allied Structure, But Habituated To A More

Concentrated Diet. Here The   Body, And More Especially Its Abdominal

Region, Bears A Smaller Ratio To The   Limbs; The   Powers Are Not Taxed By

The Support Of    Such Massive Viscera, Nor The   Digestion Of    So Bulky A

Food; And, As A Consequence, There Is Greater Locomotive Energy And

Considerable Vivacity. If, Again, We Contrast The   Stolid Inactivity Of

The Graminivorous Sheep With The   Liveliness Of    The   Dog, Subsisting On

Flesh Or Farinaceous Matters, Or A Mixture Of    The   Two, We See A

Difference Similar In Kind, But Still Greater In Degree. And After

Walking Through The   Zoological Gardens, And Noting The   Restlessness With

Which The   Carnivorous Animals Pace Up And Down Their Cages, It Needs But

To Remember That None Of    The   Herbivorous Animals Habitually Display This

Superfluous Energy, To See How Clear Is The   Relation Between

Concentration Of    Food And Degree Of    Activity.

 

 

 

That These Differences Are Not Directly Consequent On Differences Of

Constitution, As Some May Argue; But Are Directly Consequent On

Differences In The   Food Which The   Creatures Are Constituted To Subsist

On; Is Proved By The   Fact, That They Are Observable Between Different

Divisions Of    The   Same Species. The   Varieties Of    The   Horse Furnish An

Illustration. Compare The   Big-Bellied, Inactive, Spiritless Cart-Horse

With A Racer Or Hunter, Small In The   Flanks And Full Of    Energy; And Then

Call To Mind How Much Less Nutritive Is The   Diet Of    The   One Than That Of

The Other. Or Take The   Case Of    Mankind. Australians, Bushmen, And Others

Of The   Lowest Savages Who Live On Roots And Berries, Varied By Larvae Of

Insects And The   Like Meagre Fare, Are Comparatively Puny In Stature,

Have Large Abdomens, Soft And Undeveloped Muscles, And Are Quite Unable

To Cope With Europeans, Either In A Struggle Or In Prolonged Exertion.

Count Up The   Wild Races Who Are Well Grown, Strong And Active, As The

Kaffirs, North-American Indians, And Patagonians, And You Find Them

Large Consumers Of    Flesh. The   Ill-Fed Hindoo Goes Down Before The

Englishman Fed On More Nutritive Food; To Whom He Is As Inferior In

Mental As In Physical Energy. And Generally, We Think, The   History Of

The World Shows That The   Well-Fed Races Have Been The   Energetic And

Dominant Races.

 

 

 

Still Stronger, However, Becomes The   Argument, When We Find That The

Same Individual Animal Is Capable Of    More Or Less Exertion According As

Its Food Is More Or Less Nutritious. This Has Been Demonstrated In The

Case Of    The   Horse. Though Flesh May Be Gained By A Grazing Horse,

Strength Is Lost; As Putting Him To Hard Work Proves. "The Consequence

Of Turning Horses Out To Grass Is Relaxation Of    The   Muscular System."

"Grass Is A Very Good Preparation For A Bullock For Smithfield Market,

But A Very Bad One For A Hunter." It Was Well Known Of    Old That, After

Passing The   Summer In The   Fields, Hunters Required Some Months Of

Stable-Feeding Before Becoming Able To Follow The   Hounds; And That They

Did Not Get Into Good Condition Till The   Beginning Of    The   Next Spring.

And The   Modern Practice Is That Insisted On By Mr. Apperley--"Never To

Give A Hunter What Is Called 'A Summer's Run At Grass,' And, Except

Under Particular And Very Favourable Circumstances, Never To Turn Him

Out At All." That Is To Say, Never Give Him Poor Food: Great Energy And

Endurance Are To Be Obtained Only By The   Continued Use Of    Nutritive

Food. So True Is This That, As Proved By Mr. Apperley, Prolonged

High-Feeding Enables A Middling Horse To Equal, In His Performances, A

First-Rate Horse Fed In The   Ordinary Way. To Which Various Evidences Add

The Familiar Fact That, When A Horse Is Required To Do Double Duty, It

Is The   Practice To Give Him Beans--A Food Containing A Larger Proportion

Of Nitrogenous, Or Flesh-Making Material, Than His Habitual Oats.

 

 

 

Once More, In The   Case Of    Individual Men The   Truth Has Been Illustrated

With Equal, Or Still Greater, Clearness. We Do Not Refer To Men In

Training For Feats Of    Strength, Whose Regimen, However, Thoroughly

Conforms To The   Doctrine. We Refer To The   Experience Of

Railway-Contractors And Their Labourers. It Has Been For Years A

Well-Established Fact That An English Navvy, Eating Largely Of    Flesh, Is

Far More Efficient Than A Continental Navvy Living On Farinaceous Food:

So Much More Efficient, That English Contractors For Continental

Railways Found It Pay To Take Their Labourers With Them. That Difference

Of Diet And Not Difference Of    Race Caused This Superiority, Has Been Of

Late Distinctly Shown. For It Has Turned Out, That When The   Continental

Navvies Live In The   Same Style As Their English Competitors, They

Presently Rise, More Or Less Nearly, To A Par With Them In Efficiency.

And To This Fact Let Us Here Add The   Converse One, To Which We Can Give

Personal Testimony Based Upon Six Months' Experience Of    Vegetarianism,

That Abstinence From Meat Entails Diminished Energy Of    Both Body And

Mind.

 

 

 

Do Not These Various Evidences Endorse Our Argument Respecting The

Feeding Of    Children? Do They Not Imply That, Even Supposing The   Same

Stature And Bulk To Be Attained On An Innutritive As On A Nutritive

Diet, The   Quality Of    Tissue Is Greatly Inferior? Do They Not Establish

The Position That, Where Energy As Well As Growth Has To Be Maintained,

It Can Only Be Done By High Feeding? Do They Not Confirm The   _À Priori_

Conclusion That, Though A Child Of    Whom Little Is Expected In The   Way Of

Bodily Or Mental Activity, May Thrive Tolerably Well On Farinaceous

Substances, A Child Who Is Daily Required, Not Only To Form The   Due

Amount Of    New Tissue, But To Supply The   Waste Consequent On Great

Muscular Action, And The   Further Waste Consequent On Hard Exercise Of

Brain, Must Live On Substances Containing A Larger Ratio Of    Nutritive

Matter? And Is It Not An Obvious Corollary, That Denial Of    This Better

Food Will Be At The   Expense Either Of    Growth, Or Of    Bodily Activity, Or

Of Mental Activity; As Constitution And Circumstances Determine? We

Believe No Logical Intellect Will Question It. To Think Otherwise Is To

Entertain In A Disguised Form The   Old Fallacy Of    The   Perpetual-Motion

Schemers--That It Is Possible To Get Power Out Of    Nothing.

 

 

 

Before Leaving The   Question Of    Food, A Few Words Must Be Said On Another

Requisite--_Variety_. In This Respect The   Dietary Of    The   Young Is Very

Faulty. If Not, Like Our Soldiers, Condemned To "Twenty Years Of    Boiled

Beef," Our Children Have Mostly To Bear A Monotony Which, Though Less

Extreme And Less Lasting, Is Quite As Clearly At Variance With The   Laws

Of Health. At Dinner, It Is True, They Usually Have Food That Is More Or

Less Mixed, And That Is Changed Day By Day. But Week After Week, Month

After Month, Year After Year, Comes The   Same Breakfast Of

Bread-And-Milk, Or, It May Be, Oatmeal-Porridge. And With Like

Persistence The   Day Is Closed, Perhaps With A Second Edition Of    The

Bread-And-Milk, Perhaps With Tea And Bread-And-Butter.

 

 

 

This Practice Is Opposed To The   Dictates Of    Physiology. The   Satiety

Produced By An Often-Repeated Dish, And The   Gratification Caused By One

Long A Stranger To The   Palate, Are _Not_ Meaningless, As People

Part 1 Chapter 4 (Physical Education) Pg 55

Carelessly Assume; But They Are The   Incentives To A Wholesome Diversity

Of Diet. It Is A Fact, Established By Numerous Experiments, That There

Is Scarcely Any One Food, However Good, Which Supplies In Due

Proportions Or Right Forms All The   Elements Required For Carrying On The

Vital Processes In A Normal Manner: Whence It Follows That Frequent

Change Of    Food Is Desirable To Balance The   Supplies Of    All The   Elements.

It Is A Further Fact, Known To Physiologists, That The   Enjoyment Given

By A Much-Liked Food Is A Nervous Stimulus, Which, By Increasing The

Action Of    The   Heart And So Propelling The   Blood With Increased Vigour,

Aids In The   Subsequent Digestion. And These Truths Are In Harmony With

The Maxims Of    Modern Cattle-Feeding, Which Dictate A Rotation Of    Diet.

 

 

 

Not Only, However, Is Periodic Change Of    Food Very Desirable; But, For

The Same Reasons, It Is Very Desirable That A Mixture Of    Food Should Be

Taken At Each Meal. The   Better Balance Of    Ingredients, And The   Greater

Nervous Stimulation, Are Advantages Which Hold Here As Before. If Facts

Are Asked For, We May Name As One, The   Comparative Ease With Which The

Stomach Disposes Of    A French Dinner, Enormous In Quantity But Extremely

Varied In Materials. Few Will Contend That An Equal Weight Of    One Kind

Of Food, However Well Cooked, Could Be Digested With As Much Facility.

If Any Desire Further Facts, They May Find Them In Every Modern Book On

The Management Of    Animals. Animals Thrive Best When Each Meal Is Made Up

Of Several Things. The   Experiments Of    Goss And Stark "Afford The   Most

Decisive Proof Of    The   Advantage, Or Rather The   Necessity, Of    A Mixture

Of Substances, In Order To Produce The   Compound Which Is The   Best

Adapted For The   Action Of    The   Stomach."[3]

 

 

 

Should Any Object, As Probably Many Will, That A Rotating Dietary For

Children, And One Which Also Requires A Mixture Of    Food At Each Meal,

Would Entail Too Much Trouble; We Reply, That No Trouble Is Thought Too

Great Which Conduces To The   Mental Development Of    Children, And That For

Their Future Welfare, Good Bodily Development Is Of    Still Higher

Importance. Moreover, It Seems Alike Sad And Strange That A Trouble

Which Is Cheerfully Taken In The   Fattening Of    Pigs, Should Be Thought

Too Great In The   Rearing Of    Children.

 

 

 

One More Paragraph, With The   View Of    Warning Those Who May Propose To

Adopt The   Regimen Indicated. The   Change Must Not Be Made Suddenly; For

Continued Low-Feeding So Enfeebles The   System, As To Disable It From At

Once Dealing With A High Diet. Deficient Nutrition Is Itself A Cause Of

Dyspepsia. This Is True Even Of    Animals. "When Calves Are Fed With

Skimmed Milk, Or Whey, Or Other Poor Food, They Are Liable To

Indigestion."[4] Hence, Therefore, Where The   Energies Are Low, The

Transition To A Generous Diet Must Be Gradual: Each Increment Of

Strength Gained, Justifying A Fresh Addition Of    Nutriment. Further, It

Should Be Borne In Mind That The   Concentration Of    Nutriment May Be

Carried Too Far. A Bulk Sufficient To Fill The   Stomach Is One Requisite

Of A Proper Meal; And This Requisite Negatives A Diet Deficient In Those

Matters Which Give Adequate Mass. Though The   Size Of    The   Digestive

Organs Is Less In The   Well-Fed Civilised Races Than In The   Ill-Fed

Savage Ones, And Though Their Size May Eventually Diminish Still

Further, Yet, For The   Time Being, The   Bulk Of    The   Ingesta Must Be

Determined By The   Existing Capacity. But, Paying Due Regard To These Two

Qualifications, Our Conclusions Are--That The   Food Of    Children Should Be

Highly Nutritive; That It Should Be Varied At Each Meal And At

Successive Meals; And That It Should Be Abundant.

 

 

With Clothing As With Food, The   Usual Tendency Is Towards An Improper

Scantiness. Here, Too, Asceticism Peeps Out. There Is A Current Theory,

Vaguely Entertained If Not Put Into A Definite Formula, That The

Sensations Are To Be Disregarded. They Do Not Exist For Our Guidance,

But To Mislead Us, Seems To Be The   Prevalent Belief Reduced To Its Naked

Form. It Is A Grave Error: We Are Much More Beneficently Constituted. It

Is Not Obedience To The   Sensations, But Disobedience To Them, Which Is

The Habitual Cause Of    Bodily Evils. It Is Not The   Eating When Hungry,

But The   Eating In The   Absence Of    Hunger, Which Is Bad. It Is Not

Drinking When Thirsty, But Continuing To Drink When Thirst Has Ceased,

That Is The   Vice. Harm Does Not Result From Breathing That Fresh Air

Which Every Healthy Person Enjoys; But From Breathing Foul Air, Spite Of

The Protest Of    The   Lungs. Harm Does Not Result From Taking That Active

Exercise Which, As Every Child Shows Us, Nature Strongly Prompts; But

From A Persistent Disregard Of    Nature's Promptings.