Some stuff from my lazy Sunday
“If you attend Oktoberfest in Munich, the only beer you’ll find during the festival is brewed within the city limits of Munich. Only beers that fit this criteria are considered Oktoberfest Beers. According to the Bavarian Purity Requirements there are only 3 ingredients used in the brewing process: water, barley and hops.”
I’d have to find the article somewhere deep in my browser history, but I read a really interesting thing about the 3 ingredients thing a while back. In the more distant past there was lots of experimenting with brews. Many more plants etc. some with very potent effects beyond typical alcohol. some medicinal stuff along with some real trippy stuff. Of course sometimes it went bad, and people got sick or worse, so rulers started to restrict all beers and fermented teas to just those 3 ingredients. Well in fact this basically would restrict all brewing to beer brewing in Europe – no more of that kombucha business.
Also brewing was typically a women’s role. A towns brew wife (like the animal husband) was the one who kept all the recipes and such. And herein lies part of the origin of the mythology of witches. Alas, I could not find the article in my browser history and I don’t feel like looking all this up for references.
We started trying something about a year or two ago with our kids. Like many kids they had something like a piggy bank. But this is a system rife with problems. For example, sometimes they would find money – loose change (probably mine…) , or get a dollar for an odd job , or from a birthday card, or for a lost tooth. And it was hard to keep track of. Maybe if you only have one kid some of theses problems don’t arise, but that is not our scenario. One kid left his money out and another kid just took it, because of course they would. Or someone wanted to spend some of their money while we were at the store, but surprise surprise, they lacked all foresight and didn’t have the money with them.
So we decided to try something different, and it has worked out so well it felt worth sharing.
Use Google Sheets with a different sheet (sheet meaning the tab at the bottom thing, not a whole separate file) for each child as a simple ledger system. An entry for each debit or deposit with a small note. This has an advantage of keeping things in sync, the Sheets app works on my and my wife’s phones and computers without installing anything extra or signing up for a new account. One of us has the document in our drive and we can share it with the other – if / when kids get a phone or google account we could share it in read only mode with them too I suppose, but by that time it might not be something we as parents would really need to manage.
We tend to have our phones with us, so adding some money for a quick chore is easy. Checking if they have enough for some item they spotted while at the store? No problem! Buying online? same. Deduct it right at the point of purchase, no need to have them hand you a bunch of loose change you will subsequently loose into the cushions of the couch for them to recover later. As a kid I never even had the thought of buying stuff online with money from my piggy bank, but my kids know that plush toy they want can be found on eBay or whatever.
This system also has the advantage of leaving a audit trail. “What did you spend this money on?” “Where did it all go?”, “Where did it come from?”, were questions we used to have to ask with no hope for answers. No more! And, ya know, have as much fun as you want with excel reports I suppose, but even just glancing at the list provides some insight.
At a meta level it also works a lot more like how bank accounts and credit cards work in real life. Today my wife and I use cash sometimes, but not most of the time, and the kids seems to understand this ledger system very intuitively because they see us using that all the time. Feels like good prep for how credit and banking systems will work for them down the road. Even if bitcoin takes over or whatever – It’s just a ledger basically.
Here is a link to a template sheet with some examples. Should be easy to copy this and run with it. Google sheet kid bank example
I’ve been walking around a lot more with having a baby and being at home working from home. One observation during this experience is seeing all the houses in the neighborhoods around mine and noticing how little they’re utilized. Large backyards, a screened-in three season room, decks with patio furniture, breakfast nooks, front porches, front yards, All just unused, or unused such a large percentage of the time. it’s as if 75% of these houses are unused 95% of the time. And this is at a time when people are home more than they normally would be. We should be using utilizing our houses more than we ever have, and still it seems most people have way more space than they need.
This seems to correspond to a phenomenon I’ve observed with vehicles. So many people have a large SUV or full size truck, but they don’t use that vehicle at full capacity 95% of the time. Most the time it’s transporting one person around town – ya know, like a bicycle could do except that biking is scary because you have to contend with all the cars and the infrastructure designed specifically for cars…. I digress. I’ve heard it said elsewhere that Americans buy their vehicles for their worst case instead of optimal case. I think there’s a phrase for that, but I can’t think of it. But houses too I suppose. How often do you need a guest room, really. A breakfast nook? Hell, I wonder how many houses could do without a front door. Plenty of people only come and go through the garage.
Inspired by a recent resurgence of the mail-in voting fraud idea
People chiming in to take his conspiracy claim seriously at this point are probably not sincere, and are certainly serving to lend legitimacy to person very much making dictatorial gestures. And they can just fuck right off with that!
Conspiracy thinking in general isn’t bad. A lot of important journalism, for example, is uncovering actual conspiracies. However, there is something fundamentally different about flat earth type conspiracy theorists, and this tends to apply to many ideas this POTUS touts, including this mail-in voting thing.
Concerns with vote by mail follow very typical conspiracy theory paths. Where I have looked into them they are very easily debunked, but the problem isn’t with the theories themselves, it is with the people who hold on to them like a dog with a bone. Like flat earthers they deny the veracity of any facts they can’t somehow see with their own eyes or reproduce themselves with simple reductionist demonstrations. In doing so throw they out whole mountains of evidence along with all the reasoning built on that evidence.
This brand of conspiracy theorist throws out mountains of evidence and reasoning, and then, promptly proceeds to place the burden for rebuilding it all onto those who disagree with them instead of accepting this responsibility themselves. In a sick twist, the unwillingness of people to play into their game is held as proof the conspiracy is correct. Often this logical flail is followed up with a dose of gaslighting. Anyone not gulping up their Kool-Aid of crazy reasoning is not believing the “facts”. We are the ones being duped; who need to “wake up!”
In short, conspiracy thinking generally falls into two camps. The good kind connects new dots by adding to existing evidence and reasoning. The bad kind casts fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) by discarding evidence, asking questions in bad faith, and gaslighting detractors
This post was inspired by a friend who posted a quote “You are not lazy, your goals are not inspiring enough.” He thought it was “absolutely true.” For whatever reason(s) I initially interpreted it as “you wouldn’t be such lazy sack if you actually had any ambition at all.” I suppose I may need to do some introspection as to why I read it like that to start, anyway this is important context for some of my thoughts which followed.
Atomic Habits and The Power of Habit are two books I have read recently that shed some important light on this topic. One of the major claims from Atomic Habits is that habits are far more important than goals. There is so much more to laziness (aka bad habits) than lack of inspiration. Inspiring or ambitious goals are good and all, but they are hardly a solution for laziness. Okay, so, maybe nothing I am going to write here wasn’t stated more eloquently in one of those books. You’ve been warned.
Ambition: (æmˈbɪʃən) n 1. strong desire for success, achievement, or distinction
Inspiration and the way it fuels passion and will power is certainly important. I am not discounting that at all, but even inspiration, powerful as it is, in itself is still insufficient for many people. The missing piece is often strategy and tactics to pair with it. Still, inspiration can be crucial because even excellent strategy and tactics can also fail, or fail to even form, without it.
Inspiration: (ĭn′spə-rā′shən) n 1a. The excitement of the mind or emotions to a high level of feeling or activity
What I find interesting and counter-intuitive is that, when it comes to real fundamental changes inspiration isn’t so often necessary, and specific goals may even be counter productive; good habits alone can usually get you there. And smaller scale habits are stackable. A good sleeping habit, with only a slight nudge, can almost automatically lead to a better study or practice habit.
There are many implications in this thought in regards to parenting, mentoring, or coaching. For example, It is very hard to impart inspiration to my children around brushing their teeth, good hygiene, or other healthy stuff. It is a bit unrealistic to attempt to inspire them on this point and expect good behavior to flow from that inspiration. It is much less stressful and more practical to merely help them form good habits. Setting specific goals along the way feels like a good idea until you watch motivation to continue fall off a cliff once they succeed. or once they fail for that matter.
Habit: (hăb′ĭt) n.1a. A recurrent, often unconscious pattern of behavior that is acquired through frequent repetition:
Again, not that inspiration is irrelevant, it is still a long term aim, and often crucial for the habit to really stick over the long haul, but it can come later after stacking multiple good habits together. In my experience it can sometime arise naturally out of the positive results of good habits. Practicing an instrument turns from merely a habit into fun, all of a sudden making music is inspirational and you feel driven to compose or perform, or do it just for the pure joy of it.
I think one problem with the quote “You are not lazy, your goals are not inspiring enough.” is that it is open to being interpreted in a way that is blaming and shaming, especially here in the US where we have certain attitudes in general towards laziness and ambition. The way it is structured paired with the fact that laziness is so frequently seen as a moral failure, my mind just goes to “your failure isn’t this, it’s really this”, and it can’t help that lack of ambition is another frequent failure category here – could be those puritanical roots mixing with capitalism, who knows. Anyway, blame and shame often aren’t deserved or even if they are it’s not ultimately helpful to point that out if what you’re aiming for is self-improvement.
Many people get into some bad spot with their physical or mental health, and while a lack of inspiration might be a problem, it isn’t so much what got them into the mess. Bad habits are more frequently the culprit.
Plenty of uninspired people stay fit; historically anyway, it’s less likely in modern society. Obesity isn’t an primarily an inspiration issue. Yet in our American culture it often gets portrayed as such.
Assuming most depression is not merely caused by a chemical imbalance, but can be a product of behavior and environment ( a topic for another time ) plenty of people are not depressed sort of by accident. Good sleep, regular exercise, healthy diets, meaningful relationships – all largely maintainable via habits – plausibly contribute to this. At least most people have a sense of the absurdity of inspiring yourself out of depression. Depression can look a lot like laziness in fact, but it would not be compassionate to advise a person suffering in this way to try setting ambitious goals – a main thing they are failing to be able to do is have ambition! May as well ask them if they have tried not being depressed.
Making laziness connect to inspiration puts it at the level of something intrinsic to who a person is. However, if laziness is a mostly a product of habit which emerges from a more unconscious level and is, therefore, less about who we are deep down, but more about how we have been trained to behave, then it becomes less about shame. If lazy is something we do not something we are, well, this is clearly fixable! Behavior modification is something rather well understood. There are concrete steps. Changing things at the level of personality – getting inspired – This is harder. Where does one even start? It will be different for everybody, of course. Plus, how do you know if it ‘worked’?
Now, it makes sense that bad habits have a depressing effect – a tendency to siphon off motivation and inspiration. So I suppose there can be sort of a vicious cycle, a tail spin that induces a sort of hopelessness. If that is where a person is, then building habits may not be the first step. Maybe they need to hear they are not worthless. Maybe they need an emotional boost to get going. In that case a little inspiration may go a long way. My friend, who had been in a place like that in the past, seemed to hear the quote as saying something more like “your root problem isn’t laziness, you have intrinsic value and ought to be inspired instead of demotivated.” And amen to that! But when I encounter quotes like this isolated on a wall in a gym somewhere I think I am still going to have trouble interpreting it that way. Maybe it is just me.
“My friends, nothing important is lost when others gain, when homeostasis occurs among humanity and compassion and opportunity are celebrated for all.”
I have been thinking about this line of thought in different ways over the past few weeks. Clearly, and depressingly, many people are opposed to the cause of achieving greater justice or equality. What is also sad and perplexing is that many many more seem just indifferent. Why? The extreme vast majority would really only stand to gain from the reforms or systemic changes that are being discussed in this wave of protesting.
But it is a similar pattern when I look back at the environmental movement, or pushes to curtail wealth inequality or whatever. I dislike lumping people in simplistic ways but it seems to be especially prominent among “conservatives” – as if what they want to preserve/conserve is the status quo, and in standing on that hill to die, they fail to have the perspective that the status quo is also a boot on their own damned neck.
The status quo so often really only benefits those at the very top. Yet the people at the very bottom protesting their plight find indifference, if not opposition, from so many in the middle. It’s as though they are suffering from some sort of Stockholm syndrome.
Is it something like inertia? If the oppression you experience is fairly bearable day to day, or is far enough removed from ones immediate present experience that it is hard to really imagine, there could be fear that any change may be for the worse. Many lack imagination for the positive but have an overactive one for the negative. Have we spent so much more time in fictional dystopias than fictional utopias that we have atrophied in our ability to even recognize the potential of positive change?
On the one hand Pascal’s Wager was never a very convincing argument to put your faith in something, but on the other hand, it seems rather useful to consider, “what do you stand to lose, really?”
Does a bit of increased cost or reduced convenience as a downside really outweigh all the potential benefits “going green” at a societal level? When we talk about universal health care as a policy, and the absolutely huge potential is dramatically overshadowed by some potential pitfalls of the implementation details, what is really going on there? If we fix some racially oppressive systems, improve the social services available to our communities, and reduce their capacity to harm and do violence, do the theoretical downsides really tip the scales compared to what we stand to gain?
NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio: “An attack on police officer is an attack on all of us.”
My first thought: An unwarranted attack by an armed police officer on an unarmed civilian is an attack on all of us.
Some of my white friends are going to balk at that, I mostly have white friends, it’s just the demographic where I live, but seriously, if we as a society to a very large degree grant a monopoly on the use of violence to the police and they habitually abuse that, and it turns out we have no legit recourse to correct their behavior or hold them accountable… what else is it?
Can we vote this problem away? NYC mayor is a Dem. The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, concedes it would be better to shoot people in the leg instead of the heart, an improvement barely worth mentioning as so much of his platform is. so get real, voting in the short term at least, changes almost none of this. It’s not a party issue, its a system issue.
Okay, that said, I am going to vote in the local primary here today in a little bit anyway. But dammit do I wish it could be a ranked choice ballot. There is no doubt in my mind the voting method we have is part of what leads to nothing really changing.
Some major recurring logical fallacies I have observed in the past weeks in peoples negative reactions to protests and the idea of #DefundThePolice.
1. Whataboutism – pointing out “black on black crime” or other such things that distract from the actual issues . The “what about this white guy who was shot by a cop” line fits here to, but has a unique twist in trying to validate one angle – that of unjust police brutality – while attempting to de-legitimize the other; systemic racist oppression.
2. Red herring – “Don’t forget about the good ones!” Framing around individuals – be they good or bad – misses the point. We shouldn’t dehumanize anyone, “good” police officers included, but neither can we allow the system of policing to go on dehumanizing the rest of us. It’s different than whataboutism because rather than just distracting or discrediting the core argument it tries to re-frame it and make the issue about the “bad ones”
3. Sunk Cost – This manifests as an inability to imagine any means other than police to deal with crime or social problems. ie. “yeah, they have some longstanding problems with corruption and abusing people, but It’d probably be worse if we didn’t have them. Better stick with it!”
There is plenty of victim blaming and false equivalence as well I suppose. Victim blaming is a form of ad hominem of which whataboutism is sort of a variant, depending on how its done. False equivalence has tended to be more of a pre-reaction. They aren’t even getting to the point of considering anything the protesters have to say because they get stuck at the rioting and looting being just as bad (or maybe worse really) than the murder of people. Resisting arrest or being obstinate with police is not on par with shooting a man in the back as he runs away. It’s not close really, and yet, the common retort is “they shouldn’t have resisted.”
Nothing surprising really, these are common logical fallacies people have been committing since forever, but I hope pointing them out in this case this helps people think a little sharper about the issues or maybe improves how to respond to those who you might think are on the wrong side of things this time around.
A friend on Facebook: “This is what living like Jesus looks like!” (Houston cop seen comforting 5-year-old girl at George Floyd protest who asked: ‘Are you gonna shoot us?’)
I went to bed feeling pretty upset about this. Which is really my fault, I know better than to check social media before I head to bed. Anyway, I was upset because it’s a pattern I have seen. White Christians, not necessarily Trumpers, not even conservative politically speaking. (Though it is no surprise this this comes from a Fox source – if any outlet has figured out how to secretly speak to American Christianities under the hood superiority complex it is them) They are consistently praising meaningless displays of solidarity between the police and those protesting the police. Falling over themselves to be the first to commend, what is becoming more and more obviously, mere lip service. But this one felt a little worse, and I couldn’t put my finger on it at first.
I will spare you some of the preceding comments but I got around to responding with something I thought might be worth sharing outside of that discussion.
Me: “I am going to try to slow down and compose my thoughts here. I will aim to explain better my reaction to this clip and your take soon. Please bear with my slowness. I hope it will lead to a more constructive discussion.”
My friend: “I truly appreciate that. I have a feeling that we’re just miss understanding each other.”
Me: “My emotional reaction here is complex, and I don’t want write a whole thesis about it because even then I am sure I wouldn’t nail it all down well. I’ll try to be brief-ish
Admittedly the last week has seen me pushed much farther than I had expected along the spectrum of “the police can do no wrong” towards “the concept of police as we know it is irredeemable”. But even so, keep in mind that that ends up primarily as a judgement on systems not the individuals within. And I shouldn’t expect everyone to be at the same spot on this spectrum as me given how much I have been moving along it myself recently, so I apologize in so much as I attributed a wrong heart in reacting to your take here.
That said, I think what bothers me is not what you see in the clip, but maybe what you don’t see, and again, I am glad I paused, because doing so made me consider how not so long ago I would not have seen it either.
I have an analogy or parable like thing:
Imagine 200 years ago on a plantation. A black man has been lynched. The slaves are angry and afraid, nearing open revolt. Tensions are high. A slave overseer spots a distressed little girl. He’s not a heartless man and he is not in an enviable position. He attempts to comfort the little slave girl saying “I don’t want to hurt ya, not at all, just you follow the rules and you have nothing to fear”.
The overseer isn’t purely the bad guy some would paint him as, but he is hardly a hero. His kindness may have flecks of genuine humanity and compassion in it, maybe it isn’t meaningless, maybe it does offer some temporary comfort for the girl. Yet, in the bigger picture it is a supremely hollow gesture, for his answer ultimately would be that he most definitely would harm her if it came down to it. His loyalty is not to the slaves. The abolitionists are right to see slave overseers as a principal enemy against their cause in spite of a million gestures such as this.
Jesus’ goals have always aligned more with abolitionists than with oppressors, so seeing so many of my Christian friends and family jump at any opportunity to see him more in the actions of the police than in the actions of the peaceful protesters has been profoundly troubling for me.