Wednesday, June 17, 2020

Round Up #28

Aphorisms/Shorts
===

"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire."  Gustav Mahler

Tribe-D signals its concern for working conditions at Amazon, but actively tries to facilitate migrant workers on mega farms. . .   In both cases, it refuses to starve either system of capital by practicing the noble art of doing without.

Saying, "TV shows like the Good Place, Bojack Horseman, and Rick and Morty demonstrate that studying moral philosophy leads to good stories" is not that far from proving that moral philosophy is only good for telling stories.

Telling me I have to vote in a psuedo-democracy like ours is akin to encouraging an arranged marriage with a prostitute, who will not stop being a prostitute in the marriage, and at no point will show me a moment of real affection.

I wonder how many neo-reactionaries cannot see that Trump was elected by vulgar, mob-ocractic forces?  I wonder how many small-d democrats cannot realize that Biden is an attempted restoration?

 Most of the developed world has worked to make the lives of families better.  In the U.S. we marketed "family values" and then called it a day.

"Do unto others 20% better than you would expect them to do unto you, to correct for subjective error." - Linus Pauling

===
Research and Links
===

I am glad to have seen this cartoon.

Gorgeous use of color to make water shimmer. So much so that the nudity is forgivable.  It just captures the golden hour.  I would never go out to New Zealand to see it, but it must be something person.

I recently saw some blowhard here in the Age of Disinformation going on about how since cities are terrible and cause stress, people live longer in rural areas.  Rural versus urban life expectancy is in fact something that is measurable and measured [and more recent].  Never occurs to these people to look, does it?

I finally got around to reading the Gospel of Thomas.

My, such a world of literary blogs exist, starting with me finding this one.  I knew they had to exist, but figured it would be quite difficult to find what I was looking for using mere internet search -- too many blogs spammed out reviewing new and bad books.

Doctors are less likely to undergo intense end-of-life treatments.  They know better.

Grew interested in just how many people live in failed states and what life was like -- you know, just asking . . . for a friend.  Here's a start. And some more.

I had high hopes for the search term "maya versus bullshit."  I am interested in a thoughtful discussion comparing and contrasting the two terms, especially putting bullshit through Frankfurt's take on the matter. It might be out there, but not in the first few pages of a search.  The term "buddhism maya versus bullshit" didn't help.  Might be something I write one day.  Not today.

Piece by Ian Welsh on reading to acquire knowledge contains this money quote:
 You cannot think with knowledge you do not know, and you cannot even look up most Knowledge, because you have to know what you don’t know. The more you know, the more you know what you don’t know.
If I'm the last one to be exposed to the band Baby Metal, my apology for bringing it up. -- Oh my god, the lyrics translated makes it even better.

I'm proud enough of this response on Reddit to this.

Also, continuing the theme of being a guy on the internet saying the internet is not going to last.

Prime Curious! -- this sort of thing is my bag, baby.

Mmm.  That's some good writing on societal transition.

A reflection on the how what the world needs now is a negative capacity -- the capacity to do nothing.

Stuff About Wheat Production

Started as an answer to a question on Reddit.

===

I did some investigating, and it looks like I should update some of my thoughts on world grain production. I'll share that below, but first wanted to honestly answer your question about where I got the idea.
Well, to be honest, my understand went back quite a while to a book I no longer remember the title of, but what it pointed out was that the US won the Cold War and faded the threat of Japan (if you'll remember they were once considered our greatest threat, before their stock bubble burst and their demographic pressures caught with them). It made it seem like US grain exports were a key factor. Though the situation has changed in Russia to a shocking degree, as I will show below, I did some more digging and it turns out that claim was not lacking in merit.
Beginning with the 1972-73 crop season, the Soviet Union imported more wheat than any nation had ever taken. In 1984-85, takings were 55.5 million tonnes of both wheat and corn, a record for a single country to take in one year.
But, it looks like some updating needs to be done. According to this source, wheat production goes
  1. China 2. India. 3. Russia 4. US 5. France
I am shocked by Russia's turn-around. It really goes to show that famines are often political in nature and that collectivized farming was not a great idea. (Side note: France is also amazing. The country is around the size of Texas -- smaller, in point of fact).
But if you are a "bread basket" you can't just eat up all the grain you produce; you need to export it to get leverage. Go to this source for exports, and behold!
  1. Russian Federation: $8.4 billion, 20.51% of world exports
  2. Canada: $5.7 billion, 13.87% of world exports
  3. United States of America: $5.5 billion, 13.27% of world exports
  4. France: $4.1 billion, 10.04% of world exports
So, yes, Canada can consider itself a great exporter. I think I might have to amend down how important US grain is to it's continued ability to screw everyone else by holding the world reserve currency. Man. . . it really might be military or bust at this point.

Wednesday, June 10, 2020

Stategic Idleness

In this wonderful meditation on the subject of idleness Neal Burton writes
In a few cases, ‘laziness’ is the very opposite of what it appears.
He then gives some examples of leaders using idleness through history to demonstrate that
 Adepts of this kind of strategic idleness use their ‘idle’ moments, among others, to observe life, gather inspiration, maintain perspective, sidestep nonsense and pettiness, reduce inefficiency and half-living, and conserve health and stamina for truly important tasks and problems. Idleness can amount to laziness, but it can also be the most intelligent way of working. Time is a very strange thing, and not at all linear: sometimes, the best way of using it is to waste it.
What a beautiful write up about what is so often missing in our dominate cultural narrative about work [1]. There is a very important negative capacity to living well.  It is also how most us do our best work, not just our only sustainable work (same thing over a long enough time frame).

Compare with the discussion in Locate the Minimum Effective Dose.

This is not to say the art of strategic idleness is easy to do well; it is not, as Burton's essay also acknowledges.  But it is worth it, if you are playing life for real and on your terms [2].


==

[1] Incidentally, the piece goes on with many other great points.  I highly recommend the whole thing, but I have enough for my essential point.

[2] Too many people don't see through their own eyes, even with what you would think is the most important matters of all -- what to do and how to think in the only life they will ever have.

Copy of To make laziness work for you, put some effort into it

To make laziness work for you, put some effort into it
by Neel Burton

==

We are being lazy if there’s something that we ought to do but are reluctant to do because of the effort involved. We do it badly, or do something less strenuous or less boring, or just remain idle. In other words, we are being lazy if our motivation to spare ourselves effort trumps our motivation to do the right or best or expected thing – assuming, of course, we know what that is.
In the Christian tradition, laziness, or sloth, is one of the seven deadly sins because it undermines society and God’s plan, and invites the other sins. The Bible inveighs against slothfulness, for example, in Ecclesiastes:
By much slothfulness the building decayeth; and through idleness of the hands the house droppeth through. A feast is made for laughter, and wine maketh merry: but money answereth all things.
Today, laziness is so closely connected with poverty and failure that a poor person is often presumed lazy, no matter how hard he or she actually works.

But it could be that laziness is written into our genes. Our nomadic ancestors had to conserve energy to compete for scarce resources, flee predators and fight enemies. Expending effort on anything other than short-term advantage could jeopardise their very survival. In any case, in the absence of conveniences such as antibiotics, banks, roads or refrigeration, it made little sense to think long-term. Today, mere survival has fallen off the agenda, and it is long-term vision and commitment that lead to the best outcomes. Yet our instinct remains to conserve energy, making us averse to abstract projects with distant and uncertain payoffs.

Even so, few people would choose to be lazy. Many so-called ‘lazy’ people haven’t yet found what they want to do, or, for one reason or another, are not able to do it. To make matters worse, the job that pays their bills and fills their best hours might have become so abstract and specialised that they can no longer fully grasp its purpose or product, and, by extension, their part in improving other peoples’ lives. Unlike a doctor or builder, an assistant deputy financial controller in a large multinational corporation cannot be at all certain of the effect or end-product of his or her labour – so why bother?
Other psychological factors that can lead to ‘laziness’ are fear and hopelessness. Some people fear success, or don’t have enough self-esteem to feel comfortable with success, and laziness is their way of sabotaging themselves. William Shakespeare conveyed this idea much more eloquently and succinctly in Antony and Cleopatra: ‘Fortune knows we scorn her most when most she offers blows.’ Other people fear not success but failure, and laziness is preferable to failure because it is at one remove. ‘It’s not that I failed,’ they can tell themselves, ‘it’s that I never tried.’

Some people are ‘lazy’ because they understand their situation as being so hopeless that they cannot even begin to think it through, let alone do something about it. As these people are unable to address their circumstances, it could be argued that they are not truly lazy – which, at least to some extent, can be said of all ‘lazy’ people. The very concept of laziness presupposes the ability to choose not to be lazy, that is, presupposes the existence of free will.

In a few cases, ‘laziness’ is the very opposite of what it appears. We often confuse laziness with idleness, but idleness – which is to be doing nothing – need not amount to laziness. In particular, we might choose to remain idle because we value idleness and its products above whatever else we might be doing. Lord Melbourne, Queen Victoria’s favourite prime minister, extolled the virtues of ‘masterful inactivity’. More recently, Jack Welch, as chairman and CEO of General Electric, spent an hour each day in what he called ‘looking out of the window time’. And the German chemist August KekulĂ© in 1865 claimed to have discovered the ring structure of the benzene molecule while daydreaming about a snake biting its own tail. Adepts of this kind of strategic idleness use their ‘idle’ moments, among others, to observe life, gather inspiration, maintain perspective, sidestep nonsense and pettiness, reduce inefficiency and half-living, and conserve health and stamina for truly important tasks and problems. Idleness can amount to laziness, but it can also be the most intelligent way of working. Time is a very strange thing, and not at all linear: sometimes, the best way of using it is to waste it.
Idleness is often romanticised, as epitomised by the Italian expression dolce far niente (‘the sweetness of doing nothing’). We tell ourselves that we work hard from a desire for idleness. But in fact, we find even short periods of idleness hard to bear. Research suggests that we make up justifications for keeping busy and feel happier for it, even when busyness is imposed upon us. Faced with a traffic jam, we prefer to make a detour even if the alternative route is likely to take longer than sitting through the traffic.

There’s a contradiction here. We are predisposed to laziness and dream of being idle; at the same time, we always want to be doing something, always need to be distracted. How are we to resolve this paradox? Perhaps what we really want is the right kind of work, and the right balance. In an ideal world, we would do our own work on our own terms, not somebody else’s work on somebody else’s terms. We would work not because we needed to, but because we wanted to, not for money or status, but (at the risk of sounding trite) for peace, justice and love.

On the other side of the equation, it’s all too easy to take idleness for granted. Society prepares us for years and years for being useful as it sees it, but gives us absolutely no training in, and little opportunity for, idleness. But strategic idleness is a high art and hard to pull off – not least because we are programmed to panic the moment we step out of the rat race. There is a very fine divide between idleness and boredom. In the 19th century, Arthur Schopenhauer argued that, if life were intrinsically meaningful or fulfilling, there could be no such thing as boredom. Boredom, then, is evidence of the meaninglessness of life, opening the shutters on some very uncomfortable thoughts and feelings that we normally block out with a flurry of activity or with the opposite thoughts and feelings – or indeed, any feelings at all.
In Albert Camus’s novel The Fall (1956), Clamence reflects to a stranger:
I knew a man who gave 20 years of his life to a scatterbrained woman, sacrificing everything to her, his friendships, his work, the very respectability of his life, and who one evening recognised that he had never loved her. He had been bored, that’s all, bored like most people. Hence he had made himself out of whole cloth a life full of complications and drama. Something must happen – and that explains most human commitments. Something must happen, even loveless slavery, even war or death.
In the essay ‘The Critic as Artist’ (1891), Oscar Wilde wrote that ‘to do nothing at all is the most difficult thing in the world, the most difficult and the most intellectual.’
The world would be a much better place if we could all spend a year looking out of our window.Aeon counter – do not remove

Neel Burton
This article was originally published at Aeon and has been republished under Creative Commons.

Wednesday, June 3, 2020

Palindromes, MEDs, and Duchamp's Fountain

This started as one of my Round Up posts, but then I realized it was converging to a theme, so I popped out the content to make a separate post.  I'm too lazy to change the prose style, but I will add a picture:



===
Photo Attribution By Coldcreation and Marcel Duchamp - Own work and Marcel Duchamp, File:Marcel Duchamp, 1917, Fountain, photograph by Alfred Stieglitz.jpg, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=74694278

===

I) From Palindrome's to Taste

Extensions of the palindrome "A man, a plan, a canal -- Panama!"
  • "A man, a plan, a cat, a canal – Panama!"  
  • "A man, a plan, a cat, a ham, a yak, a yam, a hat, a canal – Panama!"
  • "A dog, a plan, a canal: pagoda!"
  • "A dog, a-panic in a pagoda!"
  • "A car, a man, a maraca!"
If you ever want to try your hand at making palindromes, there is an online checker program because, well, of course there is.

This brings up an aesthetic point: super-long palindromes aren't good.   I don't know that we can ever improve on "A man, a plan, a canal -- Panama!" because 1) it has meaning, 2) it tells a story, and 3) it has great rhythm.

"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." -- Antoine de Saint-ExupĂ©ry,  #minimumEffectiveDose

II) Math to Marcel

As I start working more and more on math, and become drawn to a beauty that is very hard to communicate to others, I think about how after Marcel Duchamp released a few masterpieces, he focused on chess most of his life, somewhat abandoning art.
The man who saw a urinal and called it a work of art -- and so it was! -- said “I am still a victim of chess. It has all the beauty of art – and much more. It cannot be commercialized. Chess is much purer than art in its social position.”

Perhaps we should see Duchamp's path as another example of a minimum effective doses: he made a definitive piece of Cubism/ Cubo-Futurism, definitive pieces of Readymades -- Bicycle Wheel and Fountain, a definitive piece of Dada and then . . .

. . .

At the very least, very much empty space.

. . .

III) Marcel's Metaphorical Fountain

During his chess years, Duchamp hung out with a lot of artists that were coming up, and that leads to debates about influence, but for this paragraph I am thinking more about life-style.  Duchamp hung out with artists, got to be part of their stunts, such as playing chess with a naked woman in an art gallery (see "glossy-style" piece above) but virtually everyday he pursued his own craft which he found more beautiful, and more pure than what we call art.  And sometimes he got to do so with naked women.

This brings us to John Cage, the composer who wrote (?) a 4 minute 33 second piece of silence -- really an invitation to notice ambient sound.  He saw himself importing in Zen Buddhism into art.  He hung out with much the same scene as Duchamp.  Furthermore, Cage
is considered a co-inventor of “happenings” and performance art; the Fluxus movement essentially arose from classes that Cage taught at the New School, in the late nineteen-fifties. (One exercise consisted of listening to a pin drop.) Cage emulated visual artists in turn, his chief idol being the master conceptualist Marcel Duchamp. [emphasis added]
Who deserves more credit?  Probably Cage, but I cannot really say.  I only called this section Marcel's Fountain because I like the pun.  Yes, I could almost certainly have come up with a Cage pun, but I had already put in a picture of "fountain" and everything.

I am interested in how both artists explored negative space.  I am also interested in the dynamics of creative groups.  And the creative group of the time, this John-Marcel Cage-Fountain, however it may have flowed, was important to the development of many artists.

From the already cited Big Think piece:
In the end, Larson’s Where the Heart Beats: John Cage, Zen Buddhism, and the Inner Life of Artists provides a fascinating new lens through which to see the whole course of modern American art. Where many see Pop Art as devoid of philosophy and purely as the use of the detritus of commercialism, Larson suggests seeing Andy Warhol, for example,  as modern Zen master. The sometimes maddening lack of answers from the enigmatic Warhol thus becomes the strategic silence of the teacher of Zen desiring the student to discover the answer for him or herself. Warhol’s 8-hour film Empire (1964) capturing subtle changes in the Empire State Building in real time becomes an extended moment of Zen.  (emphasis mine). 
My critique of an 8-hour film of the Empire State building is similar to that of Palindome's that go too long -- you out-run the human observer and make something gaudy, meaningless, just in bad taste.  It can only be glossed over, or ignored.

I don't know if this then leads to a critique of Zen or of Americans messing Zen up inside of the context of art as profession -- I hope the latter, but it shows the importance of having concepts of sufficiency, dosage . . . dao.

I imagine Zen has a relationship between master and student, where the master at least attempts to build up a sequence of practices to move the student along.  Warhol's "Empire," on the other hand drops you into 8 hours with no regard for your prior experiences or preparation.  Caveat emptor.  There is the extra layer that an artist like Warhol down the flow of the fountain (or trapped in the cage) exposes the absurdity of unequal financial results -- but that wears pretty thin after the most minimal of repetitions [1].

But 4 minutes and 33 seconds of silence seems like a better amount of time to get people to step out.  After all, they might actually do it, not just talk about the implications of some one else doing it, and then laughing at people who don't get the thing the professional has done.

Another way to step out is to examine other beauties, outside of certain social warpings. Perhaps a game of chess, a math problem set, or recreational linguistics -- Panama! Ricercar!


===

[1] At least for those not at the top.  Much of the joy in Modern Art is of course the gas-lighting.  I'm not endorsing it, but it is evident. 

===
Dude, check this palindrome out.
(See also a maker's commentary).

Quotes from Preparing for Instituonal Collapse [2008]

There's always a better Doomer.  All of this holds up

Letting go of one’s illusions is a difficult process that takes a long, long time, but I am just about there.  From a young age I have been a believer in public services and benefits as a way of providing some measure of assurance for other people, people I rely on every time I purchase a good or service, of a decent life regardless of one’s personal income or standing.  After all, I initially chose public service as a career.  And I have been a defender of the public institutions when compared with those who were only concerned with their own situation and preference put in less, or get out more, as if the community was a greedy adversary to be beaten in life rather than something one is a part of.  Now, however, I see that it is probably hopeless.  

. . .

It isn’t just that those who have skillfully obtained “good deals” for themselves in the past are “grandfathered” and get to keep them.  Worse, those who already have such deals take more and more every year.  Like a bad parasite, the political class and its supporters feel so needy, so entitled, that they cannot help but kill their host.  They will just keep grabbing and grabbing until government institutions collapse.

. . .

In fact for those without connections we may, as a nation, be heading back to the pre-progressive era in public services and benefits.  But not in taxation.  The money older generations have promised themselves, and promised to the wealthy and those in other countries in exchange for more benefits for less taxes for themselves, mean the federal, state and local governments will be coming after us for more and more money even as public services disappear and the poor are left to fend for themselves.  Indeed, they will be coming after the poor for taxes.  So it’s no use becoming a conservative or Republican, because they will be in favor of collecting those taxes too someday -- after the fiscal collapse, when they can’t borrow anymore to hand out favors those who matter to them.

Mind, you should give this more weight because it was predictive.  The money quote:
Here is the dilemma. Our social institutions, in government and business, are in the hands of a self-perpetuating group of self-interested people. The more ordinary people put in to government and business institutions -- in taxes, hard work, savings and investment -- the more those people take out for themselves and their supporters. I’ve argued for years that the institutions need to be revitalized, taken back, because we need them. I now suspect that we may have to do without them, whether we need them or not.
How do you accept that without getting pissed off or depressed, let alone move to a place of compassion?  It is a challenge.  But I do have a lot of time on my hands.

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

"The Coronation" and The Importance of Being Non-Dualistic

This was my first exposure to Charles Eisenstein.  I am impressed. In an article about the pandemic he talks about our War on Death:
The ultimate fulfillment of civilization’s program of control would be to triumph over death itself. Failing that, modern society settles for a facsimile of that triumph: denial rather than conquest. Ours is a society of death denial, from its hiding away of corpses, to its fetish for youthfulness, to its warehousing of old people in nursing homes. Even its obsession with money and property – extensions of the self, as the word “mine” indicates – expresses the delusion that the impermanent self can be made permanent through its attachments. All this is inevitable given the story-of-self that modernity offers: the separate individual in a world of Other. Surrounded by genetic, social, and economic competitors, that self must protect and dominate in order to thrive. It must do everything it can to forestall death, which (in the story of separation) is total annihilation. Biological science has even taught us that our very nature is to maximize our chances of surviving and reproducing.
If you can get out of the mental habits of separation, it alters your ethical stance:
When the self is understood as relational, interdependent, even inter-existent, then it bleeds over into the other, and the other bleeds over into the self. Understanding the self as a locus of consciousness in a matrix of relationship, one no longer searches for an enemy as the key to understanding every problem, but looks instead for imbalances in relationships. 
Instead of seeking your scapegoat, you search for hard-to-express (actually impossible to express in words) harmonies.

This ties a few ideas together I have been thinking about for a while.  First, enemies are legible to the centralized systems of modernity.  Second, if you don't tamp down your desires, real compassion is impossible -- because you will always fall for the trick of a scapegoat narrative [1 -- READ THIS NOTE].  And how do you tamp down desires?  Words don't do the process justice ("Dao called dao is not the eternal dao"), but it involves breaking down separation and living in a world of wonder.

Another way to look at it is the question of dosage.  Once you go past a minimum effective dose you risk other parts of system, including the most important ones: Gaia and Soul.  Everything in too much extreme can become its opposite.  This is also something Eisenstein realizes:
. . . we see that fear of death is actually fear of life. How much of life will we forego to stay safe?

BE SURE TO READ THE FOOTNOTE!  IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR YOUR SOUL.

===

[1] This point is embedded several places in the Daodejing.  For me, however, the full flower of understanding came later, when I read the following passage from the Mundaka Upanishad, translated by Eknath Easwaran:
Beyond the reach of words and works is he [the deepest, best Self], but not beyond the reach of a pure heart freed from the sway of the senses.  (pg 193).
The era of social media provides ample demonstration that one of these strongest senses is that of social proof.  Only in spaces where your heart is freed of that, and other greeds and lusts, can you get to real compassion.  Study deeply the careers of your fellow humans and you will see that words and works alone cannot get you there.  It is a process inside of you, working on the spiritual equivalent of muscle memory.  And when you don't work on it, you will fall back to lines of separation.  And when you fall back to separation, your compassion will leave and you will find scapegoats.  You will demand sacrifices.

The real test of a person's compassion is if they can want good things for those whom they see as living an unattractive life.

State of Play: U.S. and Globe

Another Reddit thread, lightly edited.

===

My heart grieves to think how many more people are likely going to be thrown into the situation [tent cities].

I now don't think basic income is going to happen in the US. Rather, some kind of food delivery is about as far as I see it going -- soylent here we come. If I ever do some writing about it, I think I'll call it manna.

All these tent cities in such near proximity to tech workers shows me that is a quality of life they are willing to see other people live in. I was such a hardcore doomer even just a few years ago that I thought starvation for others was A-OK to these people as well, but the more I think about it, that's pretty rare. Trump has kids in cages, but the story isn't that they are starved to death, or executed.

It seems like a consortium of a few billionaires could fund a delivery mechanism for the manna. Giving someone a house, however, brings down property values, so will never do it.

===

A reply:

I think I read somewhere we have like more vacant houses than homeless people (and elsewhere, that if you put people into a home, they might actually take care of it and keep it from falling apart). There's this link https://sf.curbed.com/2019/12/3/20993251/san-francisco-bay-area-vacant-homes-per-homeless-count about the Bay area, for example. In other words the problem of shelter, at least, is artificial. I imagine the food supply stateside at least is another artificial problem. And so on.

I really wonder how much is actually fixable via redistribution and how much isn't. Both stateside and globally. Like if there's actually enough to go around, in a way that it can be spread around, or not, and what stands in the way of that. Not that such is an easy undertaking or endeavor but...


===

My response:

I use the distinction of wandism/probablism in my thinking a lot.

I'm pretty sure that in the US we have built enough. If we radically changed zoning laws over the top of people engaging in NIMBY activism to protect property values, we could make this work -- 1/4 of the energy use, everyone with at least a flophouse, healthcare in line with, say, Costa Rica. But that requires a magic wand. In all probability, we are a people too trapped in stories of separate individuals and our only community orientation being the delusional, cultist expectation of ever-appreciating assets. We will distort all realities -- violently, if we have to -- to make assets that don't obey the gravity that is regression to the mean.

Globally, I think most other cultures can move more gracefully through a future of energy descent. We are starting to give the rest of the world a demonstration of what not to do. The UK has become our stupid lapdog, but other than that policy makers in other nations are starting to take notice. China moved 300 million people into a experiment to copy and paste our brand of capitalism, down to a monstrous housing bubble and more college graduates than jobs that you need college graduates for, but that still leaves one billion peasants. I believe they'll be able to re-tool much better than US, not even counting the bonus inflows they will get if and when they become the last great power standing. India might start looking a lot better to the global community. It is said that India is very good at moving people out of absolute poverty, but very bad at moving people up the next few dollars-a-day. Well, that might be all the planet has to give. . . the Kerala model is probably a best case scenario.

Wednesday, May 20, 2020

Round Up #27

Aphorisms/Shorts
===

It would seem most successful entrepreneurs are people who don't think the rules apply to them and then in fact that turned out to be right long enough to build enough capital to either eventually comply with or change the rules.

We just accept at the level of truism that the internet contains "the sum total of all information," but if this is true why do most of the best blogs consistently import knowledge from books into the internet?

A while back my wife and I saw the most recent version of Emma.  It brought back to mind the terrible character of Frank Churchill.  But Frank Churchill shows the default, normalized behavior found on any remotely popular section of the internet, so much so that I don't know if it is even possible to explain to them what is wrong with how Churchill acts.  The classics bring my grief to the surface.

In these debauched times, the ability to read an unassigned book is potent signal of the tenderness, openness, and meta-cognition that is necessary (but not sufficient) to understand anything important.

To put a positive spin on the last quote, the test wouldn't work so well if our times weren't so debauched, decadent.

Also related.  I know somehow I'm the one who would seem rude by saying "I want to gauge if this conversation is worth continuing, so please tell me about some of the books you've read in the last six months."  Better to avoid situations where I even need to ask.

Many of those with an avid interest in collapse don't seem to understand that there is more to life than whatever ends up killing you.

===
Links and Research
===

So France has the highest per capita consumption of whisky in the world.  This really doesn't fit to stereotype, but that's why we keep learning.

. . .  Further interesting things down this line: India consumes the most total whisky.  BUT 85% of the population doesn't drink, and so the U.S. has a larger population of drinkers.  THEREFORE the Indian drinking population out-drinks the U.S. drinking population in whisky, but the billion people in India who don't drink drag the per capita numbers way down.

Speaking of alcohol, I wondered if was used as a drug in vision quests.  It would appear this was true at least for the Iroquois.

"Granola Shotgun" has a beautiful piece that performs the near-impossible and combines deep-felt empathy for an individual elder while at the same time exposing how her story shows the cracks in the systems Boomers are going to try to rely on.

I'm going to also guess the women in this piece is the one who expressed in another piece that a van-dwelling nomad who worked as a tech professional was cheating the system. Her position was treated with grace there as well.  Johnny S. sure does have a lot of tact.

I'm calling it quits on adding to my list of art from Reddit that deals with our Covid-19 shelter-in-place world. It is an interesting snap-shot of a moment and a gestalt.

===
YouTube and Podcasts
===

Data visualization to make primes and approximations of pi . . . stunning.  The video finishes with a brief, inspiring statement about the importance of mathematical play.

I got interested in stretching and used the search term "science of stretching."
  • First video mentions some of the basics of what happens in a stretch, however  . . . 
  • Second video shows how the benefits claimed are incorrect.
  • This podcast has an interview with a researcher who agrees. 
  • Apparently acupuncture isn't total bullshit. It has to do with moving connective tissue to get muscle stretches. 

Wednesday, May 13, 2020

Van Gogh Flow

Beth and I once visited my friend Nat in Brooklyn for a week.  While there, Beth and I took a trip to the Metropolitan Museum of Art.  Images completely flattened to 2D -- whether images on a screen or a print -- cannot do justice to the large pieces they have of Monet and Van Gogh.  With paintings of a sufficient size, the tiny involuntary moments of your eyes (called saccades) can give the work a dynamic quality, which can be used by a master artist to great effect (even affect).  Beth's favorite was a Monet that featured water.  In the painting-as-experience the water moved around but with the harmony and shimmer of a perfect day.  Golly, just imagine . . . a perfect day, captured forever [1].

I, however, was moved most by Van Gogh.  Afterward, I told Nat that perceiving a Van Gogh in real life felt like a walk in Nature (mind, I don't mean to say that every time I go outside I feel this way, just when I am really grooving).  Putting this into words is difficult -- and that's why we need visual arts...  But to put in a good word for language, visual pieces of the scale I am writing about, like all complex experiences, would have to picked up and physically moved to each perceiver, which is unwieldy in best case scenarios, but in practice usually impossible.   Thus we need writing.  Though writers are often left saying "it's more complex than I'm making it sound" or "I can't put this into words" at least we writers can make those gestures.  A bad picture, or even a print of a great picture, leaves the impression that it contains all there is.  Language can connect concepts and can warn us of the unseen (or of the existence of the unseeable, or even the unwriteable, unthinkable, unfeelable (perhaps), etc).

Again, a Van Gogh perceived live is an experience beyond my ability to reduce.  There are lots of those kinds of experience, but not all of them remind me of a great walk, so to try to explain further I want to invoke a concept, an imperfect tool [2].  The concept is flow.  Van Gogh  -- Live! -- gives flow.  You can get an outline of the flow from a print, but the experience live is the kind that breaks the lines of separation, through non-linear movement.  Most people who describe breaking separations talk about moving past "dualism," but I don't like that phrase because I don't just see Two; I see many, many parts liable to break down and flow into each other.

So how is that like time spent in Nature?  Please imagine --  or better yet, try -- the following experiment: just look at any segment of nature and see how long it can stay unchanged, without any movement.  (Or, if you have practice with imagination and empathy, you can just ask the nature-segment-which-I-don't-want-to-call-an-object).  Many things will move right before you, even at human time-frames.  The bird will fly, the blade of grass will bend to the wind.  Develop your patience a bit and you can watch a cloud formation unfold.  And with each level of greater patience, memory, and ability to see connections, more and more will change.  For me, Van Gogh invokes that flow.  Find it in Van Gogh, find it in Nature, find it with the aid of substances, if you must.  I just want you to find it and then we can talk some important truths.

Ego-death?  I don't know much about that.  I know that I can take the totally sober (though perhaps deeply neuro-atypical) ability to trace flows and their ability to break separations and apply it to myself.  That breath I just took -- borrowed oxygen and carbon, only borrowed, and then given back.  It seems preferable, at least more gentle, to give them back as breaths later on, but one way or another, I will be giving them back.  Perhaps the understanding that people return breath requires a culture with scientific knowledge, but even there I am not so sure.  But I am sure all humans have had at least the opportunity to see "liquid in/ liquid out."  Substance in, and substance out. . . Then plants can grow in that substance.  However you want to look at it, you'd be hard-pressed to find anything you can keep. . . but only if you are open to seeing that truth.  You can learn to see what is bigger than you, but instead of feeling small because of it, you can, and should, feel intertwined.

I close with the Van Gogh painting First Steps, after Millet 1890. [backup]  The interplay of painting and my soul brought tears.  It's still all about flow, but now it includes a little human and the harmony with caregivers.  I have seen no more beautiful image of human life.  I bought a print in the gift shop.  It is a reminder of a deep aesthetic experience.  And if I ever have children, that print will go in the nursery. Update: and it did.



===

[1] I wonder if virtual reality will ever render a copy with high enough resolution to give the effect.  I  imagine the technology could be there one day, but will it ever fit the design philosophy of those with the means of mass distribution?  In our weird times, the important thing is to not pretend it's there until it is.  Many people have deprived themselves of real Quality and driven themselves crazy by the lack.  Eco-therapy is real.

[2] Aren't all tools imperfect?  If they weren't, someone would own a God-stick, or a Marvel-style cube or gauntlet, or what-have-you.

Wednesday, May 6, 2020

Infestations, Interesting and Boring

"All art is infested by other art."  He had this as a sign on the wall.  It was hand-written in marker on cut poster-board.  I am not sure whether or not he had the attribution, but just I looked it up today and found it was by Leo Steinberg [1]

We are social beings and we exist in a historical context, even down to being carried away in contemporary movements of memes [2] and shifting emphasis.  To achieve excellence, we must gather much.  On the other hand, if you spend all your time with other art, even if it's just art better than what you can do, you don't have time to create your own.  And the benefit to feeling alive through experiencing the edge of creation is of profound importance.  If I can be happy and still create (or vice versa) then I have won . . . existence.

Back to the handwritten sign: These types of decorations as non-decoration are common enough for male teachers, especially at the high school level.  His entire instructional method was lecture.  You may think that is my criticism of him; it is not.  Rather, it is that he lectured poorly. Not only that, but that he lectured poorly on purpose.

My proof is that he had two stories from his life that he shared with the class,  but the only way he'd tell them was if someone said "tell us the ____ story" by name.  This meant that someone who had heard the story before had told someone in the class to ask him about it.  See, it was an ego-trip, you dig?

In the telling of these two stories, he showed the fundamentals of a good communicator:  facial expressions, set ups, punchlines, expressing the doings and states of mind of interesting people.  The stories were excellent.  But none of these abilities were used in teaching literature.  For that, his job, he read in a monotone off notes that were turning yellow with age, showing no desire to breath life into any text, or make any of it human. I mean he had great things to work with -- Hamlet, Hesse's Damien, Kafka's Metamorphosis, Gardener's Grendel, the Death of a Salesman, and Waiting for Godot.

So why did he do this?  In part it was to keep his class sizes small, which I got on good information from another teacher who I worked with later on.  Also, it enabled his two stories to stand out so much that they achieved legendary status.  But really, I think the biggest factor is that he got off on the notion that he was smarter than everyone else.  If eyes were glazed over or students fell asleep, it just went to show how much greater his ability to take on the higher realm of abstractions was.  Holy shit, I just remember I took his philosophy course as well, and that in that course he stated that was a Platonist [3].  Now that I remember I took more than one course with him, I think that I might have heard at least one of his two good stories more than once.

. . . I'm now going to undermine my own humor a bit.  I've taught, and I would hate to read an essay like this from a former student of mine.  So I want to give the man his due.  He had once expressed the idea that he thought people learned best from their own reading, and that what was particularly beneficial about going to college was access to a good library.  The pacing of his reading assignments stacks up favorably in light of the watered-down education students are now receiving.  He taught in a way that was emotionally sustainable for him and was professional in all his interactions with students.  In conclusion, I received no harm from taking his classes and would gladly have a conversation with him if we ever happened to cross paths again.

===
[1] This lead to me reading up about Mr. Steinberg.  Doing so lead to this gem:
Steinberg took an informal approach to criticism, sometimes using a first-person narrative in his essays, which personalized the experience of art for readers. This was in juxtaposition to many formalist critics at the time, such as Clement Greenberg, who were known to be resolute in their writing.
This goes to show that the "objectivity" pose in criticism was something constructed out of a historical moment, and one that was not really all that long ago.  As a quick summary, the arts developed physics envy as modernity was ramping up.  Then the sentiment was hardened into rules and procedures during academia's metastatic growth, which in turn was a subset of the Great Cultural Suicide after the Great Oil War, aka World War II. No "I" meant no ethos, which fit in just fine with the systems that were growing in power and seeking to defend themselves.  Mistakes were made, indeed.


[2] Be aware that meme was well-defined when it was coined in Richard Dawkin's The Selfish Gene.
This article summarizes it as "an idea, behaviour or style that spreads from person to person within a culture" and furthermore includes this explanation:
Dawkins explains how an "internet meme" is a hijacking of the original idea and that instead of mutating by random change and spreading by a form of Darwinian selection, they are altered deliberately by human creativity. Unlike with genes (and Dawkins' original meaning of "meme"), there is no attempt at accuracy of copying; internet memes are deliberately altered.
This brings up an interesting question.  Do we make efforts to defend that meaning or do we let the word semantically drift along it's merry way as over-repetition of images, mostly from -- but sometimes creating -- pop-culture?  I am left fascinated with these kinds of fights. And if you never fight for anything, you cede all of natural language to fools.  (Note to self: keep working at math. Even if you remain laughably inadequate, at least you can operate inside of truth).

[3] I think that "holy shit" actually works  on a pretty significant level here.  We defecate because we are embodied.  Human bodies experiencing the world are what took the time to pen literature and even philosophy.  I don't think there's supposed to be pooping in the Platonic realm, at least not in the reading presented in that survey class. 

In/Out and Western Civilization

Built off a response to this post.
===
I)
Has anyone here dropped out without any regrets? Did anyone drop out, then later drop back in?
I went out, in, out, in, and am back out again. I was trying to get back in, even had done one interview (not the job I wanted, but I thought I'd get practice) and then the world shut down. It might be better to call what I do "mini retirement" with occasional goldbricking. I think that doing "out" well is a skill. I'm a lot better at it here on the third try than I was the first one.
Being "in" and happy AND true to my ethics is the harder skill for me. I haven't gotten the balances right since my times of grief which started my first sabbatical. It's not just that the creature comforts are better out than in -- god, I love a nap in the middle of the day or having a large uninterrupted time to read, write, or just think, and I love these things much, much more than paying for entertainment or traveling -- the real problem is one of meaning. I think better when I'm out.  More pages added to the journal, more reading gets done.
II)
Western civilization is not just some kind of toxic prison that destroys the world to make rich people even richer. It's my home.
I guess it just depends on what you mean by "Western civilization." To quote some anonymous writer
I live on the margins of society, but that is a voluntary choice, because that is where the interesting things happen.
The things I like after the post world war II cultural suicide are those things on the margins, always while they stay on the cutting-edge of creation rather than the moment they become co-opted within branding and consumption (also see). I would characterize the dominate thrust of Western civilization here in 2020 precisely as a toxic prison to make rich people even richer. I can't emphasis enough that people should check out Gerbner's work on cultivation theory. Very little of this was first-order malice from 1945-2008; instead we saw the emergent properties of a culture focused on growth, over-optimization, and debt -- frankly a culture of greed. Only when the myths that made system go were exposed around 2008 did open malice begin to gain traction. Enter the alt-right.
My home is harvesting the good out of the shards of culture and community:
  • I love old, beautiful things from a time when it was possible to make for a community, before the times of distrust (no really, look into cultivation theory and mean world syndrome).
  • I love my weirdos, but at some distance. They often lack social skills.
  • Bougie people with social skills have their place. I like a face-to-face interaction with someone who is pleasant. Heck, I married one.
Is that really western civilization at this point? In terms of time spent, western civilization is mostly netflix and social media feeds. In terms of politics and economics, it is whatever 0.1% of the wealthiest people want it to be. In terms of research, it is bogged down in a replication crisis (my opinion being that this has something to do with the distortions of needing to serve the 0.1%).