Quotulatiousness

January 28, 2019

Is there a championship for solipsistic self-absorption?

Filed under: Health — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

If so, then “Alex” here is an Olympic-class competitor:

The routine of a man called Alex starts as follows (he wakes between 5:55 and 6:45):

    I wake up and immediately rehydrate. Your body is most absorbent after you sleep, so the first thing you put in it is the most important. I have a glass of Rebel Kitchen raw coconut water (you should be drinking slightly pink coconut water not white, as that’s more concentrated) and dilute it with water at a ratio of 2:1. I take multi-vitamins and vitamin C boosters.

Where, one might ask, does he sleep? The Sahara desert? More likely Chiswick or Clapham (prosperous districts of the inner part of outer London, where the worried-well who think of illness as an infringement of human rights congregate in droves). I was reminded of the medical students whom I used to examine, who brought bottles of water with them to the exam as if it were being held at an open-air bus station in Nouakchott, the capital of Mauritania.

Having resuscitated himself physically, Alex attends to his soul:

    I do some meditation, where I might recite some mantras. One of them is, “All my relationships are harmonious and full of love,” which is good if you are working with difficult clients.”

Compared with this, Uriah Heep was straight-talking and plain-dealing; but what is most evident in this “mantra” (a word with spiritual connotations) is its complete solipsism. Alex’s relationships, if they can be called that, are either entirely with himself or delusional, because a relationship with another that is full of love requires that the other person should love as well as be loved, for otherwise it is not a relationship.

Having sung some “really relatable mantras,” he “focuses on each inhale and exhale for five minutes” before taking himself off to the gym for a little “yoga, cardio and weight-training,” after which he returns home — it is now 7:45 — to “have a shot of coconut water and glutamine.” By now, he says, his serotonin levels are through the roof, and he showers with organic products and moisturizes with vitamin E oil.

During the rest of the day, he eats nuts, drinks green juice, and swallows activated charcoal and two apple cider vinegar tables “to help with digestion,” as well as digestive enzymes “to help distribute the nutrients all over my body.” And if, when turning in for the night after all this care for himself (and a second spell in the gym), he feels under the weather, he swallows some almond milk with turmeric. Naturally, he believes in the healing, or at least the prophylactic, powers of crystals, and keeps one on his desk, and works by the light of a Himalayan salt lamp, which “helps to absorb the magnetic and radioactive waves that are all around you from wifi and your computer.” All that is missing from his regime to render himself immortal is Hopi ear candles, coffee enemas, and red flannel underwear.

The Cold War – OverSimplified (Part 2)

OverSimplified
Published on 24 Jan 2019

On modern notions of privacy

Filed under: History, Quotations — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 03:00

Terry Teachout does a daily “Almanac” post of a short quotation he’s collected along the way — generally much shorter snippets than my sometimes epic-length QotD postings. A few weeks ago, he posted a short quotation from Charles Stross on the impending loss of privacy, from his SF novel Rule 34:

“Privacy is a peculiarly twentieth-century concept, an artifact of the Western urban middle classes: Before then, only the super rich could afford it, and since the invention of e-mail and the mobile phone, it has largely slipped away.”

Far be it from me to disagree with Charles, but privacy even for the wealthy in the past was an unusual thing: unless you’re of such a refined and haughty sensibility that you literally don’t notice all the servants in your house. Being wealthy meant not having to do a lot of things for yourself, from getting washed and dressed to opening doors and windows to preparing and serving food. Servants were cheap and plentiful, and were everywhere in the worlds of the wealthy and powerful.

Poor people generally had no privacy because the vast majority of them lived in single-room dwellings with their extended families — and outside the towns, even including some of their livestock. All of your activity was in the close company of your family at pretty much all times.

Middle-class people would have at least a servant or two in residence — that was one of the differentiators that helped indicate their social and economic status. Someone would need to do all the necessary work around the house that we no longer need to do thanks to electricity, plumbing, central heating, and all our modern conveniences. At the very least you’d have a cook, a maid, and a footman. If you had a horse-drawn vehicle (much more of a luxury), you’d need staff for the stable and to operate the vehicle (you wouldn’t drive your own carriage most of the time).

Lower middle-class families would also rarely have anything that a modern person would understand as privacy. Aside from a few servants, most tradesmen would have apprentices living in the house, and the house would generally also be the seat of business. Not anywhere near as crowded as houses of the poor, but not particularly conducive to privacy.

I suspect that our modern notion of privacy would have been so rare in historical terms that only certain monastic orders would even come close to it, in the same way that a relatively brief historical period (the 1940s-1960s) defined what “childhood” was supposed to be for most westerners.

A Most Inauthentic Portrayal of Musketry

Filed under: History, Politics, Technology, Weapons — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Brandon F.
Published on 6 Jan 2018

NOTE: At one point in this video I mention lever-action rifles, but I show a Martini-Henry image. The Martini-Henry is not actually a lever-action, but a falling-block rifle. I had incorrectly assumed that the requirements for a rifle to be a ‘lever action’ were more literal- as in, that it used a lever! This is not the case, as lever action rifles are generally repeating, whereas falling block rifles see individual rounds chambered.

This is a video that I’ve wanted to make for some time, but unfortunately, I had to wait until the highly political topic which the source material discusses was less ‘relevant,’ lest my pedantic corrections be considered grossly inappropriate or offensive. That said, this commercial by the organization “States United to End Gun Violence,” features a musket being used in a criminal nature to provide a social commentary on American legislation. However, the manner in which the musket is portrayed and used in this commercial has a few problems, which I thought it would be fun to discuss here.

This is not a political video, and at no point do I express my own views on this highly contentious issue. Please treat it as what it is- historical nitpicking.

The original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LORVf…

For those who are so inclined, we have a Discord chat for the channel! Do stop by!
https://discord.gg/bJzUWxa

If you would like to support the Channel on Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/BrandonF

From the comments:

I was originally planning to upload a ‘me standing in front of the camera,’ lecture style video today, but I’m afraid that I had to alter my schedule rather last minute, so I had to resort to a quicker voiceover video. The next one will (most likely) be in the traditional style!

Also, as you can all see, on advice from some friends I’m trying out a new approach to video thumbnails. This one was actually made by someone else for me, but if we all think it’s a good idea I’ll be trying to edit my thumbnails to include text like this more often in the future.

Also from the comments, and this was almost literally the first thing I thought of when watching the commercial:

lalucre1803
11 months ago
Mistake no. 1 – not fixing bayonet before hand. Could’ve easily finished the job.

QotD: Inequality in academia

Filed under: Bureaucracy, Quotations, USA — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 01:00

We’ve heard a lot about the problem of inequality in America over recent years. But most of that talk has ignored one of the very worst pockets of inequality in American society. I speak, of course, of the American university system and its treatment of adjunct professors and graduate students.

Academics seem to think that the business world is a feudal environment characterized by huge status differentials and abusive treatment of underlings. They think that because, to be honest, that’s a pretty good characterization of … the modern university, where serfs in the form of adjunct professors toil in the vineyards.

Glenn Reynolds, “Trump should pity the poor PhD: New president should target worker exploitation at American universities”, USA Today, 2017-02-16.

Powered by WordPress