I like to think about what choices I should make in various situations. For example, if I am buying fruit in the winter I know that bananas are a better environmental and monetary choice than nearly any other fruit since they are cheap because they can be shipped here slowly on a boat and that also makes them a good choice in terms of being low emissions.
Sometimes though I struggle to figure out how to compare two totally different scales. For example, this year I have been working out a lot. I like the results. I look better, I feel better, I am healthier. But I am eating a lot more protein, and that has a cost. It seems to me that environmentally speaking bodybuilding is a ridiculous and damaging pursuit. Being big at the cost of a couple thousand eggs seems bad.
But being healthy is good.
So how do I compare these things? What can I do to even put those things on the same scale?
It baffles me.
It is further complicated by odd feelings about the very idea of looking good. People grade each other on a scale based on what else they see around them. Being the richest person in your social group is a huge bump in terms of happiness, no matter which strata of wealth your social group falls into. Same goes for how you look. 10,000 years ago people didn't go about thinking that everyone's hair was awful, they just graded it on the curve.
Which means that if I get bigger (and, by most people's metrics, hotter) then I am making everyone else around me feel less hot. So while that isn't exactly evil, it is definitely an argument against working out being a general good. It is like some kind of bizarre mad scientist's machine - lifting weights transfers a slight amount of hotness from all the people I know to me.
All of which is saying that working out is good for me, but I have these weird feelings like it isn't actually good for the world.
Not that this is going to stop me from lifting, mind, but it is going to make me think about this stuff a lot while I do.