Cornarism and its consequences

Nietzsche, metabolism, longevity

There is this passage in Nietzsche, well known to many of you, under the heading “The Four Great Errors”, in Twilight of the Idols. I quote in full: 

“Error of confusing cause and effect.—There is no error more dangerous than confusing the effect with the cause: I call it the genuine corruption of reason. Nevertheless, this error is one of humanity’s oldest and most contemporary customs: it has even been made sacred among us, it bears the name of “religion” and “morality.” Every statement formulated by religion and morality contains it; priests and moral lawgivers are the ones who originated this corruption of reason.— Let me take an example. Everyone knows the book by the famous Cornaro where he promotes his skimpy diet as a prescription for a long, happy—and virtuous—life. Few books have been read so widely; even today, it’s printed by the thousands of copies every year in England. I have no doubt that hardly any book (with the exception of the Bible, as is only fair) has done as much damage, has shortened as many lives as this curiosity which was so well-meaning. The reason: confusing the effect with the cause. The honorable Italian saw in his diet the cause of his long life, whereas in fact, the prerequisites for his long life—extraordinary metabolic slowness, low expenditure of energy—were the cause of his skimpy diet. He was not at liberty to eat a little or a lot, his frugality was not “freely willed”: he got sick if he ate more. But for anyone who’s not a cold fish, it not only does good but also is necessary to eat properly. Scholars of our day, with their rapid expenditure of nervous energy, would destroy themselves if they followed Cornaro’s regimen. Crede experto [believe the one with experience].”

Nietzsche is referring to Luigi Cornaro’s Discorsi della vita sobria, or the Discourses on the Sober Life (1558). Cornaro was a Venetian nobleman, a sort of entrepeneur who made his money in agriculture and water management. Around the age of 40, Cornaro found himself in poor health and wasting away, living the fast-paced entrepeneurial life with constant eating out and drinking was starting to take its toll. He went to see all sorts of doctors and they recommended him to start restricting his calories, eating no more than 350 grams of food a day, along with some 400 ml of wine. Cornaro healed and lived a long life, dying around 100 years of age, attributing his long life to his diet. Now, Nietzsche’s criticism, simply put, is that Cornaro confused the effect with the cause. That is, his long life was not the result of his diet. No, his diet was the result of “the prerequisities for his long life — extraordinary metabolic slowness, low expenditure of energy.” He didn’t really choose his diet, he had no choice, it was the only diet that his weak constitution could take.

 So, according to Nietzsche, Cornaro’s type of life led to his diet, and not the other way around. Nietzsche seems to say he finds it quite dangerous that these books from these metabollicaly slow types are so popular. Diet books are from all times it seems. It might work for some people, for sure. “But for anyone who’s not a cold fish, it not only does good but also is necessary to eat properly. Scholars of our day, with their rapid expenditure of nervous energy, would destroy themselves if they followed Cornaro’s regimen.” 

In last post, I developed this idea by way of Descartes, that thought can be disastrous, when not engaged in on the basis of a healthy organism, a stressor that digs a hole in one’s energetic reserves, and that even makes the individual incapable of common sense and intuition. 

Views differ on this, but I cannot imagine someone’s brain functioning properly on Cornaro’s diet, provided one is using one’s brain. Perhaps this explains many entrepreneurial types gravitating towards a 10 black espressos on empty stomach + redbull & meat diet. All action, no thought.

In his text, Cornaro mentions on some days he eats a single egg with a piece of bread and maybe a handful of vegetables. His idea is that the organism generally needs less than we think it needs, and he follows the saying that what one leaves on one’s plate is as important for health as what one consumes. Especially as one ages, Cornaro believes one needs less and less food. Throughout his text, we see a general message of self-resignation and denial of one’s instincts. One should not live as one desires, one should live a life fighting one’s natural desires. And in this way, true vitality and health will come to you. Your desire for food and drink? Lies. It lines up perfectly with the ascetic instinct Nietzsche is known to critique. 

But, Nietzsche says, he confuses cause and effect. It is not because he lived in this way, that he lived a long life. The type of life determines the way of life, and not the other way around. We cannot say that Cornaro himself was entirely unaware of this, he writes: 

“Since, therefore, it appears that a regular life is also profitable and virtuous, it ought to be universally followed, and more so, as it does not clash with duties of any kind, but is easy to all. Neither is it necessary that all should eat as little as I do—twelve ounces—or not to eat of many things from which I, because of the natural weakness of my stomach, abstain. Those with whom all kinds of food agree, may eat of such, only they are forbidden to eat a greater quantity, even of that which agrees with them best, than their stomachs can with ease digest. The same is to be understood of drink. The only rule for such to observe in eating and drinking, is the quantity rather than the quality; but for those who, like myself, are weak of constitution, these must not only be careful as to quantity, but also to quality, partaking only of such things as are simple, and easy to digest.”

All are encouraged to eat little, but as to what types of food, this is highly individual. Cornaro himself believes he has a weak constitution, and so he can only digest a small number of foods, the real cause of his diet. But for those who do well on more types of food, enjoy yourselves. Who is to say the same individuality does not also pertain to the amount of food? But in this passage, Cornaro does seem to admit that his way of life was the result of his own constitution. It is not that he chooses to eat little, it is that he can’t tolerate to eat more. The same is true for his entire lifestyle, he only started the extreme diet when his previous hedonistic lifestyle caught up with him. He was forced to eat like a “cold fish.” 

For Cornaro, the secret of a long life consists in keeping the blood pure, and the body of a relatively low temperature. The more one eats, the more the blood gets ‘polluted’, and the more one’s temperature is raised. 

“Strict sobriety, in eating and drinking, renders the senses and understanding clear, the memory tenacious, the body lively and strong, the movements regular and easy; and the soul, feeling so little of her earthly burden, experiences much of her natural liberty. The man thus enjoys a pleasing and agreeable harmony, there being nothing in his system to disturb; for his blood is pure, and runs freely through his veins, and the heat of his body is mild and temperate.”

The idea is basically to live as little as possible, so as to live as long as possible. To expend as little energy as possible, so one needs as little energy as possible. In the end, there is so little activity in the body, that the soul no longer has to suffer the body and can roam freely, detaching itself from this world below. It is a very Socratic-Christian attitude, free the soul from your body by starving the body.

Nietzsche’s principal criticism is that Cornaro’s book, although well-meaning, has shortened many lives, by thinking that what worked for him must work for others too. The Italian is very universalist, he claims he has found the key to health for everyone —eat little and infrequently—, but could one recommend this diet to an athlete or anyone else who expends a respectable amount of energy? Could one recommend this specific diet to anyone who isn’t living a totally stress-free life in Venice, sitting on the riches he made when still a hedonist? It was when long life was secured, when metabolism slowed down, as perhaps it naturally does, that Cornaro started his diet. Most everyone else, it would destroy them. Funnily enough, Cornaro repeatedly mentions that as a man grows older, he needs less and less food. And so, the older he gets, the less he eats. Yet still, he is recommending his restricted diet to everyone, old and young. 

The organism is constituted in a certain way, and as a result it does certain things. Eventually, it deludes itself by saying that how it is, is a result of what it does. And most importantly, that everyone else should do as it does. 

Nietzsche goes on: 

“The most general formula that lies at the basis of every religion and morality is, “Do such and such, don’t do such and such—that will make you happy! Or else . . .” Every morality, every religion is this imperative—I call it the great original sin of reason, the immortal unreason. In my mouth, this formula changes into its opposite—first example of my “revaluation of all values”: well-constituted people, “happy” ones, have to do certain acts and instinctively shrink away from other acts; they import the orderliness which is evident in their physiology into their relations to people and things. In a formula: their virtue is the effect of their happiness . . . Long life and many offspring are not the reward of virtue; instead, virtue itself is that slow metabolism that, among other things, also has a long life, many offspring, and, in short, Cornarism as its consequence.”

The type of life determines the way of life. Afterwards, It calls its way of life virtue, as if it was a choice, and not the natural result of its type. And so, one makes the mistake of believing virtue leads to a happy life, and vice leads to the opposite. But really, a happy life allows one the freedom to be virtuous, and an already ruined life leads one into vice. Luigi Cornaro came from a good family and through all sorts of smart investments in agriculture and water-ways, he was able to amass a great degree of wealth. And when he had reached the age of 40, he no longer had need for the intensely hedonistic lifestyle natural to the entrepreneurial hustler. He had attained what he needed, and could now live a relatively stress-free life, enjoying his daily fasts while sunning in his garden. It is from this position in life, that Cornaro started his diet. Would it have had the same life-giving effects if he had undertaken it in his twenties? Would he have been able to work so hard, would he have been able to recover from the regular hangovers after his business diners? We are left to speculate, but Cornaro does not, he is absolutely certain that he has found the recipe for eternal life, and that it is fit for all. 

When we read Cornaro’s treatise on diet, and Nietzsche’s critique of it, we can’t help but think of current debates. Take project ‘Blueprint’, the longevity project of Bryan Johnson. His idea is to measure all his bodily markers to build a lifestyle on the basis of this data that will lead to optimal longevity. What this looks like is a man spending millions to track everything he consumes and constantly monitoring all of his vital functions through all sorts of technological devices. It is an interesting and quite obsessive project, ridiculed by many for allowing one’s life to be entirely determined by ‘the Science’. Johnson’s idea is to build an ‘autonomous self’ as he calls it. Through all this gathered data, the computers build an optimal lifestyle for you, so you don’t have to think about what to eat and do on a daily basis. In talking about this idea, he likes to quote A.N. Whitehead: 

“Civiliation advances by extending the number of important operations which we can perform without thinking about them.” 

The idea makes sense, the best athlete is not the one that has to consciously think about every move he makes. Rather, he is in flow, and everything happens instinctually, unconsciously. He no longer has to consciously think about every move he makes, it happens automatically. The same is true for all of life. 

So, let the data order your life, and you no longer have to waste time on all of this, and can do more valuable things and so on. 

What Johnson’s lifestyle looks like: lots of fasting, severe caloric restriction, a variety of exercises, a ton of supplements, constant monitoring of all organs in the body, and so on. The usual of these longevity types, but taken to an extreme. He’s also quite pale.

Johnson claims he has been able to reverse his biological age by 21 years in 5 months time, from 42 to 21. 

Now, we can apply Nietzsche’s question. Is it his lifestyle that allows him this type of life, or is it his type of life that chose this lifestyle? 

There are individuals, take an athlete, would the demands of their lifestyle ever resonate with Blueprint, with the pursuit of low bodily temperature and severe caloric restriction? Someone who cares about quality of life more than longevity and has a rich social life, someone like this would never resonate with project blueprint. For, to be sure, Johnson’s routine does not allow any deviation and is incompatible with anything that would disturb his routine.

Whether or not Johnson’s project is actually good for whatever he wants to achieve is irrelevant to me. The question is, what type of life even wants to live like this? What type of life wants technology, eventually AI, to create an autonomous self to replace it’s own decision-making? And why do we see so many of these types? Has Cornaro succeeded in bringing his message to all? 

We see two different ideals of health. One, characterized by a reduction of all that one would characterize as living, a pursuit of a slow metabolism and low temperature —Cornarism and its consequences. You are eating too much, you are doing too much, your problem is too much energy.

The other, characterized by a pursuit for the child-like state of high metabolism, promoted by Nietzsche, and seen in Descartes’ image of a child tending a fire. You lack energy.

The one says true life is death, the other says life is only strengthened by life. With Cornarism, life turns against itself in order to preserve itself. With Nietzsche, such a turning against is read as already being a symptom of decay. 

The question is not whether a regimen such as Cornaro’s or Johnson’s works, it is: what type of life needs to turn against itself in order to live?