Tags
ada palmer, discworld, ozy blog post, parenting, PRECIOUS sexual energy, rationality, this is a prussian education system hateblog, world's worst vegan
[Thanks to Linch and Nick for buying me books. If you like my blog, you too can buy me a book by clicking on the link in the upper left-hand corner of the blog.]
Raising Steam: After I discovered Terry Pratchett had Alzheimer’s, I stopped reading Discworld, because I didn’t want to read the last Discworld book. After it was pointed out to me several times that my options are reading the last Discworld book or dying with a Discworld book unread, I picked up Raising Steam.
Raising Steam is interesting because like a lot of Pratchett’s later work it’s quite serious– this is a book about the process of a fantasy world undergoing the Industrial Revolution– but there’s a bunch of little worldbuilding details left over from earlier books that were far more silly. So the dwarves’ political intrigue is about who gets to sit on the Stone of Scone, and it’s pointed out that one dwarf really just wants control of the treacle mines, and so on. I actually like this: actually existing worlds are sometimes quite silly.
Pratchett’s dwarves are a really obvious Islam metaphor, but actually remarkably sensitively handled (especially given his racist jokes in earlier books): he emphasizes that there’s nothing undwarvish about progress or about feminism, that what ‘dwarvish’ means must and has to change, and that the opinions of extremist clerics do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the dwarf on the ground.
The Animal Activist’s Handbook: I love this book! The Animal Activist’s Handbook provides tips for vegetarians and vegans looking to create more vegetarians and vegans, including specific scripts for dealing with common questions, like “where do you get your protein?”, “don’t plants suffer too?” and “didn’t God make animals for us to dominate?”
Example advice: Share vegan food with meat-eaters, but make sure it’s food they don’t find repulsive– leave the tofu-and-carrot burgers with nutritional yeast sauce at home. Don’t try to convince people of your favorite raw-food diet. Don’t freak out about vegan purity: the effect of an occasional egg in a hamburger bun or bit of whey in a candy bar is far outweighed by omnivores thinking vegetarianism is difficult, time-consuming, and isolating. Don’t talk about health: people don’t stick to fad diets. Dress like the people you’re trying to reach out to; if you’re talking at churches, get a haircut and wear nice slacks. If someone asks about vegetarianism at the dinner table, say “I’m glad you’re interested, but I don’t want to monopolize the conversation and I’ve found that it can put people off their food. Can I have your email to talk to you about it later?”– it creates positive feelings from those who were expecting a vegetarian lecture. Always look to find common ground: get people to agree that animal cruelty is bad. Encourage people to do whatever they can: in particular, try to get them to stop eating birds and fish, which result in most of the animal suffering an omnivore causes. Practice the Socratic method: ask questions and let people draw their own conclusions. Befriend omnivores instead of isolating yourself out of vegan purity. Never get angry. Never get snarky. Never insult anyone. If someone insults you, smile and say something like “hey, you started the conversation!” Never get derailed onto another topic, like abortion or the death penalty. Know where people can get more information about vegetarianism, or ideally carry pamphlets with you.
The core of the book is that the influence you have on others is just as important as the animals you don’t eat yourself. Through nonjudgmentally encouraging others to recognize the contradiction between their opposition of animal cruelty and their support of factory farming, you can get people to reduce or even eliminate their animal consumption. Therefore, it is really important that we as vegetarians be kind, don’t lecture people, and model vegetarianism being an easy and pleasant way to live.
I appreciated the first chapter’s emphasis on altruism as something you do to make you happy and to find meaning in your life, instead of a grim duty.
In spite of coming out in 2009, this book feels extremely effective altruist to me: it talks about cause selection, emphasizes the importance of evidence when selecting tactics, and uses numbers when talking about how much good you can do. Is that just the Singer influence?
Mating in Captivity: A book about how to have a hot sex life while monogamously committed, which I purchased on the grounds that monogamous people are doing satisfactory sex lives on hard mode and can therefore be expected to have advice for easy-mode people like myself. Mating in Captivity avoids the “Ten Tips For A Hot Sex Life Tonight”-style advice, instead talking about improving one’s sex life through improving one’s relationship. A lot of the book is about how increased intimacy can destroy passion. Through developing stability and the confidence that your partner will stay there, you become bored. That’s how you get the famous “our relationship is great! they’re the love of my life! …except that we never have sex” couples. The solution is for both partners to maintain boundaries and autonomy, and be open to the existence of ‘the third’ in relationships. (Which doesn’t necessarily mean nonmonogamy– it can simply mean flirting or acknowledging your partner’s crushe son other people.) A lot of Perel’s other ideas are frankly not very insightful: did you know that BDSM can be very erotic, but some people think it’s degrading or anti-feminist? Did you know that American society is simultaneously prudish and licentious in a way that screws people up about sexuality?
Not nearly as good as Come As You Are, which I still want to give out on street corners as a sort of sex-positive missionary.
How To Win Friends and Influence People: In lieu of evidence, this book has a bunch of stories in which some person goes through Insert Absurd Levels Of Hardship Here and then comes to Absurd Levels of Success through application of Principle Discussed In This Chapter, and then it turns out that man… was Albert Einstein. (Well, actually, mostly Abraham Lincoln.) I assume this is because it was written in the 1930s and they had weird self-help book writing styles back then.
I completely approve of the advice provided in this book, which is mostly about not complaining, giving honest compliments, and looking at things from other people’s point of view. And I like the reminder that being nice is not just ethical but also more effective. But fundamentally I object to a self-help book in which half the content is anecdotes about early twentieth century celebrities. I don’t care! Get to the good part! Someone needs to write a different version of this book catering to me.
Expecting Better: A much-needed dose of sanity in the hysterical, overprotective world of pregnancy advice. Emily Oster, an economist, sensibly deals with many unreasonable and non-evidence-based beliefs with regards to pregnancy. Is coffee consumption bad? (Not if you consume less than three or four cups a day.) Is sushi really going to hurt my baby? (No.) Do I have to worry if I’m gaining five or ten pounds more than the doctor says I should? (No, and it’s much better than gaining five or ten pounds less.) Do I really have to eat that much fish? (Unfortunately, this one is a yes.) Perhaps Oster’s most controversial advice is her advice that there is nothing wrong with consuming a glass of wine with dinner while pregnant. As long as you take care not to consume more than one unit of alcohol a day– the amount the liver can easily and quickly metabolize– she argues, not only is there no evidence it harms your fetus, there’s not even any plausible mechanism for it to do so.
My favorite fact from this book is that there was a remarkably effective medication for pre-pregnancy nausea which is no longer sold for fear of lawsuits, since some women who took it and got birth defects threatened to sue. A meta-analysis found that this nausea medication led to a non-statistically-significant decrease in birth defects, and it is a combination of a B vitamin and Unisom, a Class B drug (that is, a drug which has an above-average safety profile in pregnancy). Oster recommends rolling your own.
The best thing about Expecting Better, I think, is that it allows the reader to choose their own risk tolerance, based on their own assessment of the risks and benefits. Oster is clear that the decisions individual pregnant people make are just that– individual. A professional wine taster will have a different cost-benefit analysis on consuming alcohol than a person who has no interest in drinking; someone who would welcome a child with Down Syndrome has a different cost-benefit analysis than someone who is already struggling with two intellectually disabled children. There is no right or wrong answer; it depends on your goals, your comfort with risk, and your preferences. This sort of clear-headed compassion is desperately needed in the parenting advice field.
Gender Dysphoric Person Rating: 10/10, contains absolutely nothing about your innate womanly nature. Are there PEER-REVIEWED STUDIES of your innate womanly nature? No? Then Emily Oster doesn’t care.
Taking Charge of Your Fertility: I do not recommend this book unless you happen to be in the category “people who have a uterus, like gross things, and are also complete nerds.” Like, if you are the sort of person who really deeply in your heart of hearts wants to make a chart of the functioning of your cervical mucus and also cherishes fantasies about showing up gynecologists with your expert knowledge of your own reproductive system, then this book is for you. If your thought on that is more “cervical mucus is gross” or “I don’t like graphs”, then I must say I don’t really understand your psychology, but this is probably not the book for you.
Gender Dysphoric Person Rating: 8/10. There’s a little bit of woo-woo feminist stuff about how every woman should be in tune with her body, but it’s relatively brief and then we get back into Cervical Positioning And You and How To Self-Diagnose Your Infertility Problems.
Mayo Clinic Guide to a Healthy Pregnancy: First of all, that cover.
I told Topher that he had to get the heterosexuals to stop. He said that he had no control over what other heterosexuals decided to do, because they are “97% of the population” and “not a hivemind.” I am pretty sure this is just an excuse.
Anyway, it’s a pregnancy book, with pretty much the same pros and cons as any other pregnancy book. The descriptions of what is happening week by week are interesting. The descriptions of what can go wrong are horrifying. The advice has vaguely heard of the concept of “acceptable risk” but is extremely suspicious of it.
Gender Dysphoric Person Rating: 8/10. Actually does a remarkably good job of avoiding gendered stereotypes in discussions of self-care or getting back into sex. I docked a point for all the natural pain relief being incredibly frou-frou and girly, but that might not be the Mayo Clinic Guide’s fault, and another point for the fucking cover.
The Sinner’s Guide To Natural Family Planning: Susie Bright is my favorite person. A lesbian sex-positive feminist, she was browsing the Internet one day when she stumbled across the blog of a Catholic woman who believes birth control, homosexuality, and nonmarital sex are all sinful. Naturally, Susie Bright’s reaction is to say “wow! This woman is a great writer!” and send her an email saying that she should definitely publish a book and if she ever does Susie Bright will be her editor.
Anyway, I’m not Catholic and don’t use NFP, so I am not in Fisher’s target audience twice over. However, Fisher is a genuinely witty and likeable woman with a good heart; the book explains in vivid detail what it’s like to use NFP and what people get out of it. Without shying away from the negative effects of Catholic teaching on the body, she manages to make this atheist understand why some people would adhere to it. It’s a really good book. If you’re interested in theology of the body or want to humanize a group of people you might not know very much about, I recommend it.
What To Expect Before You’re Expecting: From this book, I learned that having sex with the intent to conceive is called “baby dancing.” This is the most ridiculous and cutesy euphemism I have ever heard.
I would suggest not reading the chapters on infertility before you try to conceive, as then you will start being anxious about whether your period cramps mean you have endometriosis, at least if you are me and have an anxiety disorder. The rest of the book is pretty good, but not necessarily groundbreaking. It turns out that in order to optimally conceive, one must treat their illnesses, refrain from taking mind-altering substances, eat a balanced diet, exercise regularly, get enough sleep, and refrain from stressing. The observant reader may note that this is also the advice doctors give about how to be healthy the rest of the time too.
Gender Dysphoric Parent Rating: 3/10. Way too many cutesy jokes about what men are like and what women are like, and the section on how to keep baby-making sex exciting is just unbearable. also, WHY would you feel the need to describe sperm competition as the result of innate male competitiveness? WHY? WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
Too Like the Lightning: Dense, complex, fascinating worldbuilding. I was very confused until halfway through the book, and I think I’m going to reread it now that I fully understand the difference between Utopians and Humanists, whom I kind of thought were the same people for the first fifty pages. Too Like The Lightning very much trusts its reader: it fully believes that if it drops you in an alien world full of incomprehensible slang, you will be able to find your footing and follow the plot. A lot of books feel the need to hand-hold you through exactly what their far future society is like; Too Like The Lightning trusts that you are smart enough to figure it out on your own.
Too Like The Lightning also managed to pull off the “all the characters know something but the reader doesn’t” reveal and have it actually work instead of feeling like a cheap gag. (Partially because the narrator assumes his readers, being from the future, know the thing too. Did I mention it’s written in eighteenth-century pastiche? It’s written in eighteenth-century pastiche.)
There’s a system in this book that divides different people into categories. My understanding is that one of the single most important factors in the success of a science fiction or fantasy series is whether there are categories in it that people can put themselves in, so in case you are concerned: you can definitely argue about whether or not you are a Cousin or a Brillist.
(Utopians represent!)
One World Schoolhouse: The book by the founder of Khan Academy. About half the book is a somewhat dreary memoir about the founding of Khan Academy, which I suppose might be interesting for some people, but I personally don’t care a lot about how he decided to quit his job to make videos. The really interesting part of One World Schoolhouse is Khan’s explanation of what went wrong in education and how it should be fixed. He holds with the theory that modern education is a product of the Prussian system in the 19th century, designed to produce obedient and reasonably well-informed soldiers and factory workers, and that while that’s all very well in its place the modern world has rather more need of innovators than factory workers.
Khan’s vision of an ideal school was interesting. He wants classes of perhaps a hundred students, with four or five teachers. All classrooms would be age-mixed, to allow older students to mentor younger students and younger students to look up to older students. The homework would be watching filmed versions of classroom lectures and reading textbooks; there would be no lectures in class, since those are trivially easy to film. At school, students would spend about a fifth of their time using computer programs like a much more advanced version of Khan Academy’s math problems; when they got stuck, they could call over one of the circulating teachers. These programs would follow mastery learning principles: you don’t move on to the next lesson until you get 100% of the answers right. (Khan is a big fan of mastery learning. As he points out, if you get an 80% on an algebra test– sloppy arithmetic errors aside– it’s because you understand 80% of algebra. A person who understands 80% of algebra is not going to do a good job of understanding calculus. While this might make students move on slower, he argues complete grasp of algebra is better than a poor grasp of calculus.) Since the class is age-mixed, there is no reason for children to stay with their own age group; the very bright may speed through the studying, while the very slow get to stay working on some problems until they understand them. The rest of the time, students would engage in project-based learning, small-group discussions, and explorations of their own mathematical, scientific, literary, and artistic interests, guided by the teachers.
Mise Feargach said:
So – going back to the 19th century educational system but with filmstrips? Because that’s how it used to be back in the old days (one big classroom with no separate rooms for different ages, although all those of one age were clumped together). Even the “older students… mentor younger students” was part of it, with pupil teachers.
As for his filmed lectures, I don’t and can’t learn from listening to those types of things, and I doubt I’m the only person in the world who does better from a written source than sitting watching a presentation. I’ll agree he’s right about having a good grasp of the basics before going on to the next level or topic.
People are always coming up with bright new ideas to revolutionise education, but I don’t know how good they are in practice. Mr Khan may decry the system meant to produce factory workers, but is that because he thinks education should not be tailored to suit the demands of business (who are always going on about what subjects should be taught in school to produce the kinds of workers they want) or is it more ‘we don’t have any more use for factory workers, instead we want value-producers to drive the economy forward’?
I think we do need to come to some definition of what do we want from an education system, and it’s all too much nowadays “turn out people fit to slot right in to the workforce, whether that’s straight from high school or after college”. I don’t know if Mr Khan’s revolution would change that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
christianhendriks said:
It is possible that I studied the Khan Academy as a grad school Research Assistant. Although pedagogical theory was really only a background to the work, I got the clear sense that Khan has no educational psychology principles to underpin his ideas about the flipped classroom (or about good educational video design). His are just Great Ideas from the Tech & Business Sector. I think this audience is familiar with that phenomenon.
(Also, he very clearly wants school to prepare engineers, programmers, and more of that sort, and has little or no interest in maintenance or other forms of infrastructural, non-innovative labour, or even non-technological academic fields.)
LikeLike
jossedley said:
I worked through precalc with my daughter, and I never got much from Khan’s lecture – his “show the equations and repeat the important thing 3 times” style doesn’t work for me.
What I liked, and where I would like to see some innovation, is something like this.
1) Some things, like precalc, have a pretty well systemizable knowledge tree – to be fluent in the subject, you need to learn to do these 200 things, and some of them lead to others.
1.1) Consistent with this, I like Khan’s model of a knowledge tree where you test your ability on various subjects. I’d like it even better if they kept building out their online test capacity, so you could test yourself on array formulae or whatever every time you felt rusty.
2) In place of Khan’s instruction, or in potential addition to it, the other thing I like about the internet is there is so much instruction available. If I don’t like Khan’s explanation of array formulae, I can try PurpleMath’s, and if I don’t like PurpleMath’s the lecture notes of a random high school instructor and so on are available.
I’d love to see a search engine that returned all the popular instruction pages on a particular note in the knowledge tree, or even recommended them for me based on the style of instruction I’d found productive at other nodes.
3) The comments at Khan Academy are also really good. A good StackExchange style forum is really valuable for instruction and assistance.
LikeLike
Maxim Kovalev said:
I’ve definitely heard accounts by people with cuckold fetish that the thought of their partner having sex with other people does make them feel very jealous, and that’s the point, since it makes them perceive their partner’s attention and affection as something scarce and to be fought for rather than granted, and thus fuels passion. So this is probably up to something.
But at the same time, I feel like it’s still different from a dynamic in a poly relationship. Allowing open flirting in an otherwise monogamous relationships seems like a way to exploit one’s own insecurities for good. Engaging in cuckold fetish seems like believing that extramarital sex is a transgression for one partner and humiliation for the other, and embracing it as such, for the sake of being transgressive and humiliating, and deriving value from that.
If, on the other hand, one is poly, and doesn’t perceive it as something bad at all, extramarital sex and relationships don’t seem mutually exclusive with developing stability and the confidence that your partner will stay there. So I’m not sure if the same approach would work here – in the same way as it would probably be tricky for most women to derive pleasure from bottoming in a forced feminization scene. But then the question is whether it’s actually needed. In a monogamous relationship, there might be a trade-off of intimacy, stability, and confidence in future vs interesting sex life. But in a polyamorous relationship, wouldn’t it be an OK trade-off to have intimacy, stability, and confidence in a primary relationship, even at the cost of good sex life within it, and then just have good sex life elsewhere?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Murphy said:
As discussed on stackexchange, I don’t agree that the dwarves are supposed to be an Islam metaphor.
http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/92283/are-terry-pratchetts-dwarves-an-explicit-allegory-for-muslims
other than the structure of grags sort of kinda looking a little like the structure of Imam’s seen through a distorted lense they’ve pretty much got nothing in common.
If anything they’re a generic set of fundamentalists.
Their dress has more in common with Capirote’s and their views on propriety have more in common with extreme nationalism focusing on what is and is not “true” dwarfishness.
Their views on language have more in common with ultra-orthodox rabbis.
They’re a sendup of religious conservatives in general, hell, i get a distinct flavor of what american conservatism looks like from the outside.
They’re a generic immigrant group. In the earliest books there were explicit comparisons made between dwarves and the Irish far from home and ankh morpork doesn’t even pretend to be anything other than victorian london.
Pratchett didn’t typically just dress a real minority up in drag for his world.
He did dress locations up in drag but not the discworld races.
But even that doesn’t match, the dwarves seat of power is uberwald which is basically discworld transylvania which again isn’t islam-associated.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Murphy said:
I meant to include: I found raising steam to be… kind of sad. I could see the holes, I could see the sections that felt like another author. The plot was rushed, the jokes few and flat, the characters lacked their unusual life.
It wasn’t to the same extent as The Shepherd’s Crown, only about 25% of that books pages and the broad plot felt very pratchetty at all and we know that big chunks of it were written by Rihanna
I Shall Wear Midnight is probably the last discworld book which felt like proper Pratchett. The ones after that involved a significant fading as his health declined.
LikeLike
rash92 said:
I found small gods to be very very islam based because of my background, but i imagine it’s also something that applies to fundamentalist religion in geneal. there’s enough similarities between fundamentalist religions that there’s not that much need to be super specific. the drawves in thud gave me more of an othodox judaism vibe.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No one said:
I was going to post a really confused comment about how it seemed like the Pratchett dwarves were way more strongly based on insulting jewish stereotypes (Insularity, reverence of words and writing, big noses, love of gold, questionably edible breadlike products, Carrot being considered ‘culturally’ dwarfish, Koom Valley and the associated holy wars over a stretch of desert with atrocities on both sides, and the not terribly subtle, literal undermining of Discworld society) than islamic ones.
It all makes a little more sense being that I haven’t read small gods yet and consider Thud to be a series favourite. I always figured he was pushing for a troll – arab connection to tie the conflict together, but it’s good to hear that was relatively contained to a few books.
Thanks for shedding some light!
LikeLike
rash92 said:
I don’t remember anything about big noses, love of gold and rock-like bread are just dwarf things, but the ‘cultural dwarfism’ and insularity are what gave me orthodox judaism vibes yeah. the dwarf-troll war is similar to israel-palestine, but it doesn’t need to be one-to-one such that trolls are the arab side. it’s a huge mix of different allegories that aren’t all directly lifted from real life in that way IMO.
LikeLike
Murphy said:
ok I find that idea weird since I found it to be a very very straight take off of the catholic church.
The structure of the church, Om basically going from being the old testament god to new testament god.
Late omnian faith is very very much modeled on christianity even down to the schisms.
The omnians have much in common with the Judeo-Christian religions, in terms of smiting, manifestations, monotheism, churches, sermons, inquisitions, commandments etc
“Catholic” originally meant “universal” or “Omnipresent”.
LikeLike
rash92 said:
when i read it i found a lot of parallels to islam because of my background as a fundamentalist muslim. That may or may not have been intentional. You say ‘judeo-christian’ but you can just as easily say ‘abrahamic’ to include islam, since all three have a lot of similarities.
LikeLike
Murphy said:
Fair enough. It may be a sign that Pratchett successfully crafted a generic monotheist church for the story if lots of people read it and see their own religion mirrored.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Walter said:
Too like the Lightning was really good. I enjoyed the heck out of it.
LikeLike
Henry Gorman said:
Agreed! It’s like a smarter, better version of what Neal Stephenson (who blew my mind when I was younger) tries to do in his novels, in the same way that NK Jemisin’s Broken Earth books are like a better, smarter version of what Brandon Sanderson does (and again, I totally love Sanderson).
LikeLike
Walter said:
I liked Too Like The Lightning because it was:
A: An interesting idea about the future
B: A STORY that takes place in that future
If those are the reasons that you liked it, you might also enjoy The Unincorporated Man. Warning, it is about as libertarian as TLTL is progressive, but the same vibe of “the author has thought deeply about their notion of what the future will be like AND has given thought to putting together characters you care about in a situation that brings them drama” is present.
LikeLike
embrodski said:
> (Utopians represent!)
Whoop whoop!!
I think you’re going to have a hard time finding people in Rationalist circles who don’t identify as primarily Utopians. 🙂 Maybe some Masons or Europeans among the NRX.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Henry Gorman said:
I aspire to be a Utopian or Humanist, but my ridiculous obsession with classifying people with personality taxonomies might mean that I’m actually a Brillist.
Also, I think that EA can be pretty Cousinish.
LikeLiked by 1 person
PDV said:
My problem with a lot of education reform suggestions is that they observe the ‘yeah, factory workers are not that important now’ piece, suggest that we need innovators, and then don’t actually grapple with the implications.
Most people will never be innovators. You can design a system that will work for those who will be, and I expect it would be great for anyone with high need for cognition, even the ones who will never be innovators. But it would be terrible for the other 80-95% of the population. And, as we are reminded of by the smol with a trolley problem, children are basically amoral, and tweens and teens are mostly a slightly different flavor of amoral with more vicious status contests. So as long as you’re putting kids in environments of repeated interaction with other kids, it’s going to be terrible.
Because of these bad qualities of children, I think that honestly, for the majority of people, we’re not going to do much better than the Prussian system as the default. It would be better to focus on improving detection of outliers to funnel them out into something better for them.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Eric L said:
Well, the education reform book I’ve been reading lately is “Free to Learn” by Peter Gray, and he has a number of interesting counterpoints to this. You can get a lot of the content of the book from his articles in Psychology Today. I’d start with these if you’re interested:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/freedom-learn/201002/children-teach-themselves-read
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/freedom-learn/201006/freedom-bullying-how-school-can-be-moral-community
TL;DR:
– The US was highly literate before there was a public school system
– The problem is not kids in an environment where they interact with other kids, it’s an environment where they are exclusively with kids their own age. They have nothing to learn from each other, everyone is in competition for their spot in the social pecking order, there is no one to protect and no one to look up to. Very different in a mixed age environment.
– Schools teach kids that learning is no fun by making kids sit through lessons on whatever the school has decided to teach today rather than providing an environment where kids can pursue what they are interested in today. We see self-motivated learners as a rare sort now, but if kids have little opportunity to pursue their interests then it shouldn’t surprise us that motivation is rare.
I’ve long suspected the truth of your view. As a kid I always felt like the one self motivated kid, annoyed by a school designed to make everyone else learn through mindless repetition stuff they never would have learned otherwise. I’m reconsidering this view now. But it has occurred to me that, if this view is correct, how poorly suited the society we’ve created is to human nature. There is nowhere in the animal kingdom any species that must coerce its young into learning the skills it needs to survive against its will. If this is vital for humans then that is either telling us something truly tragic about the downsides of modernity and progress or perhaps a story of how we’ve devolved due to civilization into losing the ability to function without the hierarchy and control it brings.
LikeLike
Patrick said:
The Shepherds Crown is the last Discworld novel.
LikeLike
Anaxagoras said:
How useful would the advice in The Animal Activist’s Handbook be for other sorts of proselytizing? Would evangelical Christians or tupperware sellers be able to get much out of it?
LikeLike
Fossegrimen said:
It’s probably just a typo but to nitpick, it’s the Scone of Stone (An incredibly hard and dense piece of baked goods)
The Stone of Scone is the ancestral coronation seat of the Scottish king that was kept in Westminster for several centuries in order to ensure the Scots would not rebel with a new king because he would have nowhere to sit. (I kid you not.) It was returned to Scotland in 1996(?) and is currently situated in Edinburgh castle.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Machine Interface said:
“try to get them to stop eating birds and fish, which result in most of the animal suffering an omnivore causes”
I still find this one very questionable*; it takes 6 to 8 weeks to raise a farm chicken, but 18 months to raise a beef; even if the chicken suffers more, it suffers for a much shorter time, but further, it takes significant more ressources to raise the same quantity of beef meat as chicken meat, thus having a bigger ecological impact, which of course affect humans, but also animals (since farm animals need crops, so forest are burned to make way for fields, and small animals are killed during the harvest).
Some actual calculations would be needed, but on first approach, it does seem killing a lot of small short lived animals is actually better than killing a few big long lived ones.
(*: although fish do seem bad, as most of them seem to take months to raise, often as long as beef)
LikeLike
Oldman said:
What are the racist jokes in Pratchett’s early works? I read them as a child and they likely passed me by.
LikeLike
jossedley said:
I don’t remember my early Pratchett enough to give examples – my guess would be that since Pratchett writes his species and nations to have “Planet of Hats” defining characteristics, especially early on, then it’s going to have a racist impact if you think they analogize to real life groups.
So if you think the Agatean Empire is made up of a bundle of Asian stereotypes, for example, then encountering them is going to seem gross.
LikeLike
rehana said:
How to Win Friends: have you read The Charisma Myth? Lots of specific suggestions and exercises; some anecdotes but they’re short and less extreme. It even has advice on how to like people more. It’s written with the assumption that you want to improve your charisma for the sake of your career, but seems applicable regardless.
LikeLike
danohu said:
I’m glad you say what you do about How to Win Friends…. That was entirely my experience. It leaves me a bit confused at how widely-praised the book is (including among people who are generally anti-fluff). The advice is good, but by now has more-or-less entirely filtered down into self-help orthodoxy.
LikeLike
Kathleen said:
Love the suggestions on less sexist/gendered, more empirical books on human reproduction. Any chance anyone has suggestions for equivalently not-useless books on how to deal with babies? I would really like to find a guide that can explain basic infant care without assuming that every reader is 1) personally gestating and lactating or 2) a sports-obsessed baby-phobe whose childcare responsibilities are limited to after-work babysitting.
LikeLike
Pingback: Interview – Ada Palmer (Too Like The Lightning) – The Methods of Rationality Podcast