Instincto and Psychological Resistance

Changing eating habits is no easy feat. A simple salt-free or sugar-free diet requires a considerable amount of willpower.

It’s even worse when it involves giving up not just one category of usual foods, but all foods to return to the bounty of nature (since “food” here refers to a cooked dish that forms part of a meal). We only truly grasp this by experiencing it firsthand. Cooking is perhaps the most difficult form of addiction.

Several factors keep us captive to culinary pleasures, and each requires a specific process of liberation.

First, the pleasure of taste. Seemingly innocuous at first glance, pleasure is a function directly linked to the survival instinct. A wild animal deprived of gustatory stimulation is in mortal danger, because this lack foreshadows nutritional deficiencies, and therefore a decline in health. In the fierce competition of the natural world and the constant threat of being eaten by a predator, any physical or psychological weakness is punishable by death. It’s no wonder that the most primal, and therefore most uncontrollable, parts of our brain go into overdrive when pleasure is lost for an extended period.

However, switching to a natural diet initially represents a loss of pleasure. Not because natural foods are less tasty or rewarding in themselves, but because food preparation has led us to consume excessive amounts of all kinds of nutrients. Our taste buds are there to protect us from overload. If, for example, we are overloaded with sugars, all natural foods rich in sugars seem unappealing. If we have consumed too much fat, fatty foods are unpalatable in their raw state. Hence the impression that only culinary preparation can save us from death, and an immeasurable level of temptation for traditional dishes.

However, this is only an impression. The excesses mostly disappear within a few days, leading to the discovery, as bodily needs return to normal, of unexpected flavors, many of which far surpass those prepared by cooking. More than the pleasure of the palate, it is a sensation of fullness upon swallowing, and a profound “resonance” of the body with the natural product that crowns the right choice. The choice can only be guided by the sense of smell, but if we obey this rule (as all animals do), the daily influx of pleasure sweeps away culinary memories and allows us to rediscover what our ancestors lost millennia ago: the irreplaceable enjoyment of total communion with nature.

The psychological problem remains. Just like a smoker who quits cigarettes, it’s not just the addiction to the pleasure of nicotine, but also the entire gestural, behavioral, and social aspect attached to the act of smoking. Some homemakers find it difficult to stop preparing food. Those at the table also have to change their behavior. All these customary gestures, linked like reflexes to traditional eating, and suddenly unnecessary, leave a void. The difficulty can be overcome by maintaining some table manners: setting the table, arranging food in attractive baskets, eating together, perhaps even eating fruit with a fork and knife.

Social mimicry also poses a problem. Some people find reassurance in imitating others. No longer eating like everyone else then creates insecurity, a feeling of exclusion that can be destabilizing. The best remedy is a proper understanding of the situation, of the harmful effects of certain eating habits, of the natural laws of nutrition, transforming feelings of exclusion or inferiority into a sense of responsibility.

The number of deaths attributable to traditional diets far exceeds the number of road fatalities, or even the number of victims of heart attacks and cancer. Being aware of this implies a certain responsibility towards others. This doesn’t mean getting carried away and playing the reformer. That would only slow down the necessary awareness. But simply demonstrating the possibility of doing without cooking, the health benefits, and the ecological advantages for the planet can have more impact than the most eloquent speeches from nutritionists and all the government campaigns promoting fruits and vegetables.

The question of the unconscious remains. Decisions made consciously never last long if the unconscious disagrees. Now, dependence on cooking is intimately linked to love for the mother. The child, for whom the mother is the first object of love, receives their first foods from her breast, then from her hand. Everything their mother feeds them remains a symbol of love, and detaching oneself from it unconsciously amounts to losing this primal love.

In other words, separation from cooking causes unconscious suffering of the same order as that experienced by a young child separated from their mother. Undoubtedly one of the worst emotional pains imaginable. The conscious mind, for its part, cannot accept this dependence. Therefore, when one gives up cooking, an internal conflict arises that remains unresolved until its underlying mechanisms are understood.

The solution lies in anticipating this dynamic in order to analyze unconscious frustrations in real time and restore them to their true meaning. Eating cooked food won’t win back your mother’s love or resolve your Oedipus complex. On the contrary: taking a step back from cooking can provide an irreplaceable key to understanding and dismantling mechanisms of dependence on parental images, getting rid of Oedipal hatreds, rebuilding a balanced relationship with your real parents, and ultimately finding yourself more fully.