This is a strange article, because its content reads like anecdotal (European/Western) history combined with generic self-help advice. There is no evidence presented that people are "walking without purpose" less now than they used to - it seems to me that 17% of walks being "just to walk" is actually a fairly high percentage, but there's no point of comparison. Although people probably walk less now because we have more convenient modes of transportation, is the argument that a greater percentage of walks were purposeless in the past?
Treating "Great White Men" of the past as exemplars of how life used to be is ridiculous. Advising people to get out and walk for the sake of walking is great, but I don't think we need to pretend that we've lost a great source of creative thinking that used to be more universal.
17% seems like a really high percentage, actually. Also, without reading the linked study, I can't figure out whether it's 17% of all trips, or 17% of all walking trips that are "just to walk." If one out of five trips are for aimless relaxation, that sounds absurdly high.
If you're comparing the average survey respondent to your average independently wealthy 19th century author, there's a few pretty obvious reasons why people with normal jobs don't aimlessly walk all the time - such as a job and the appeal of aimlessly driving, which I'm sure scratches nearly the same itch.
The 17% figure also includes dog walking. For myself, the midnight walks with my dog have been very rewarding. Giving me time to think about things and reflect on the day. Although there are a good number of dog owners who see walking their dog as a chore, which is not the right attitude to have for being mindful.
Walking our dog always felt like a chore growing up. I'd attribute it to being young, but it's now many years later, they have a new dog (both dalmatians) and walking him when visiting is still a chore.
He's either on a leash (by law) pulling relentlessly, or he's free, needing vigilant watch. It's perfectly doable having him walk next to you, but he's still stressing out at everything and it seeps into your bones.
Might be many would benefit from taking walks like you do, I run instead, no patience for walking, but I probably should if only for the benefit of learning to be more patient.
The idea of doing something so unproductive and slow is really hard to get over, though.
> Might be many would benefit from taking walks like you do, I run instead, no patience for walking, but I probably should if only for the benefit of learning to be more patient.
One of the suggestions in the article is the walk mindfully. Unless you're familiar with usages of that term, it's not immediately clear what that means:
It's effectively suggesting meditation through walking. You shouldn't be able to take two steps without finding something marginally interesting to consider. That doesn't mean to write it down for later study, but just let it fill your mind for a moment, and then move on to the next interesting thing.
Walking is about getting to know the world by moving through it. That's a lot harder to do at the speed of a jog.
Additionally, walking around aimlessly in the city where I live, a lot of the time, is simply not a safe thing to be doing. While the article mentions some differences between our world, and the world of the creative thinkers, it leaves out to a certain extent that a lot of people live in densely populated cities with minimal access to green space. If I wanted to go for an aimless walk in the woods, I'd have to drive to the suburbs and find a forest preserve.
I got a lot of strange looks from white people in cars while walking through Capetown, SA. I could not imagine to live in a place where I were afraid to just walk where and whenever I want!
Until now, I never had any negative experiences, anywhere in the world because of walking. I'm male, though, I guess that's quite significant in many places.
Treating "Great White Men" of the past as exemplars of how life used to be is ridiculous. Advising people to get out and walk for the sake of walking is great, but I don't think we need to pretend that we've lost a great source of creative thinking that used to be more universal.