Reply to comment

Pollan points not only to the deceptive marketing of organic produce, but the long-term environmental disaster and possible eventual collapse of our society that we can expect if we continue to rape our land with industrial (including industrial organic) farming. He claims that our current system produces ethically and nutritionally unhealthy food now and catastrophe in the long run. I'm still wary of his claims that we should all become more knowledgable about and engaged with the source of our food (which in turn will lead to greater pleasure in our consumption of same), while becoming less inquisitive about the process by which nature creates our food (as scientific investigation encourages dangerous tinkering with nature).

Pollan's claims lead me to questions. We are a naturally curious and organized species - is it possible to refrain from investigating the wonders of our world? If possible, would that decision be morally correct or an abuse of our intellect? If not possible or correct, how can we prevent enterprising organizations from abusing scientific discovery to turn a profit at the expense of the consumer, the natural world and ultimately our entire civilization? Is this doable in a capitalist society?

I also am curious to see Pollan's ideal food situation. The vast majority of Americans are so reliant on industrial food that we would be incapable of feeding ourselves without it. Even experienced farmers are vulnerable to the quirks of nature.  If we restored immediacy to the individual/food connection, I believe that we would also experience a rapid decline in population.  It seems that this would be great for the environment and ultimately great for our species.  But how could we as connected individuals psychologically and emotionally navigate this sort of regression? How do we choose between the survival of ourselves and our loved ones v. the survival of our kind, and is that a choice we may face in the foreseeable future (in the next 1-200 years)?