Why does life have to be beautiful and wonderful and a precious gift? Why can't it just be a biological fluke that we happen to be experiencing?
Why does Canada have to be world-renouned with a sterling reputation abroad? Why can't we just be a quiet, decent place to live?
Why do food and drink and sex and movies and art and books and theatre and yoga have to be amazing? Why can't they just be nice, pleasurable, enjoyable?
Why does Toronto have to be a world-class city? Why can't we just be a nice city with decent amenities for its residents?
Why do we have to work hard and play hard? Why can't we just work when necessary and play when it strikes our fancy to do so?
Why do we have to be passionate about our favourite hobbies? Why can't we just like them, enjoy them, find them relaxing?
Why do we have to be passionate about our charitable causes? Why can't we just think they're worthy?
Why do we have to live life to its fullest, making the most of each moment? Why can't we just live life?
Saturday, June 25, 2005
Strength vs. weakness, courage vs. cowardice
I've blogged before about how recently the word "cowardly" tends to be overused and extended to mean "something I disapprove of" or "generic negative adjective". I've noticed this extension is happening more and more often with the words courageous and cowardly, and the words strong and weak, and all the adjectives thereof. These words are growing connotations of "moral and immoral" respectively, or "morally superior and morally inferior" respectively.
This is terribly inaccurate. Being courageous or cowardly, being brave or scared, being strong or weak, is morally neutral. This notion of giving moral value to degrees of strength or bravery probably, the fact that our culture tends to celebrate situations in which the moral or morally superior choice requires exceptional courage/bravery/strength, but the fact remains that it isn't the courage/bravery/strength that makes that particular choice moral or morally superior.
If, god forbid, there is a you-know-what, and I muster up every ounce of my courage (plus some that I don't have) and go charging into the room to dispose of it myself, that is courageous. If instead I run screaming from the room and make someone else dispose of it, that is cowardly. But the actions are morally equal - just like taking out the garbage myself vs. asking someone else to do it.
If, in the midst of a great personal crisis, I manage to go through my day-to-day life with a stiff upper lip and total sangfroid, not letting the crisis affect me at all, that is being strong. If, instead, I only just manage to fulfil my duties and spend every spare minute crying into my pillow, that is being weak. But there is no moral difference between these two situations, just a difference in emotional reaction.
I think this all arises from the fact that courage, strength and bravery are quite convenient, whereas cowardice and weakness are quite inconvenient. If I am the epitome of courage and strength at all times, that is useful for those around me. They can count on me to do anything, and know that I will always be low-maintenance. But if I am weak and frightened, that requires a lot of work and attention from others - and not simple problem-solving and throwing money at things, but slow, painstaking, handholding emotional support. Combine that with the fact that situations in which courage and moral superiority co-occur tend to be loudly celebrated, and we have this whole over-celebration of courage and strength and over-demonization of cowardice and weakness.
The fact of the matter is that courage, strength, cowardice and weakness cannot have moral value because they are not choices. They are states of being, or personality traits. They can no more have moral value than can our eye colour or our phobias or our like or dislike of bitter foods. I cannot make a conscious choice to be more courageous or less cowardly. I can, in some situations, make a conscious choice to take the course of action that happens to be more courageous, but, like everyone, I do possess a finite amount of courage, and I cannot just make a decision to use more courage than I possess.
This is terribly inaccurate. Being courageous or cowardly, being brave or scared, being strong or weak, is morally neutral. This notion of giving moral value to degrees of strength or bravery probably, the fact that our culture tends to celebrate situations in which the moral or morally superior choice requires exceptional courage/bravery/strength, but the fact remains that it isn't the courage/bravery/strength that makes that particular choice moral or morally superior.
If, god forbid, there is a you-know-what, and I muster up every ounce of my courage (plus some that I don't have) and go charging into the room to dispose of it myself, that is courageous. If instead I run screaming from the room and make someone else dispose of it, that is cowardly. But the actions are morally equal - just like taking out the garbage myself vs. asking someone else to do it.
If, in the midst of a great personal crisis, I manage to go through my day-to-day life with a stiff upper lip and total sangfroid, not letting the crisis affect me at all, that is being strong. If, instead, I only just manage to fulfil my duties and spend every spare minute crying into my pillow, that is being weak. But there is no moral difference between these two situations, just a difference in emotional reaction.
I think this all arises from the fact that courage, strength and bravery are quite convenient, whereas cowardice and weakness are quite inconvenient. If I am the epitome of courage and strength at all times, that is useful for those around me. They can count on me to do anything, and know that I will always be low-maintenance. But if I am weak and frightened, that requires a lot of work and attention from others - and not simple problem-solving and throwing money at things, but slow, painstaking, handholding emotional support. Combine that with the fact that situations in which courage and moral superiority co-occur tend to be loudly celebrated, and we have this whole over-celebration of courage and strength and over-demonization of cowardice and weakness.
The fact of the matter is that courage, strength, cowardice and weakness cannot have moral value because they are not choices. They are states of being, or personality traits. They can no more have moral value than can our eye colour or our phobias or our like or dislike of bitter foods. I cannot make a conscious choice to be more courageous or less cowardly. I can, in some situations, make a conscious choice to take the course of action that happens to be more courageous, but, like everyone, I do possess a finite amount of courage, and I cannot just make a decision to use more courage than I possess.
Thursday, June 23, 2005
Sims 2 question
One of my characters has the main ambition of marrying a rich sim. How do you tell if a sim is rich? I picked a character I thought was rich, but it turns out she only had $200 to her name!
Giving Up the Ghost by Hilary Mantel
This book didn't do anything for me, but I don't think it's the fault of the book. I think it's just because I don't like memoirs. Perhaps a memoir would be an enjoyable read for me if it were about someone I knew or a vaguely famous person whose career I'd been following, but memoirs in general, even when they are well-reviewed, don't do it for me. I simply am not emotionally attached to the same things to which the author is emotionally attached, and I don't necessarily see the same significance in events that she does. She is doubtless sparing us certain details to preserve some modicum of her own privacy, but those are the very details that would have made the story interesting to me. Similarly, the things that she appears to feel are bold, dramatic exposures of her innermost self are rather ho-hum to me, because in most cases I know someone or another who has been through a similar experience.
I think authors write memoirs more for themselves and perhaps those who know them, and so far in my life (not just with this book but with others) it has been a waste of my time to read them.
This is why I'm not going to bother to blog about the book itself at all. My dislike for memoirs should not in any way be construed as any sort of review of the literary merit of this book. If you want more well-thought-out reviews, feel free to do some googling or go to amazon.
I think authors write memoirs more for themselves and perhaps those who know them, and so far in my life (not just with this book but with others) it has been a waste of my time to read them.
This is why I'm not going to bother to blog about the book itself at all. My dislike for memoirs should not in any way be construed as any sort of review of the literary merit of this book. If you want more well-thought-out reviews, feel free to do some googling or go to amazon.
Quick thoughts on being childfree
Some quick thoughts arising from this article.
1. I find it rather odd that "I don't want to have children" is not generally considered "enough" of a reason for not having children. Why would you want children being raised by parents who are anything less than completely thrilled with the idea of children?
2. A slightly flawed metaphor: For me, having children is like swallowing a live goldfish. People have done it, and I'm sure I could do it, but I really don't see the point. The flaw, of course, is that having children will affect every single day of the rest of your life, while any residual effects from swallowing a live golfish will likely be over in a week.
Actually, the live goldfish is a good metaphor for any number of things that I am not at all interested in doing.
1. I find it rather odd that "I don't want to have children" is not generally considered "enough" of a reason for not having children. Why would you want children being raised by parents who are anything less than completely thrilled with the idea of children?
2. A slightly flawed metaphor: For me, having children is like swallowing a live goldfish. People have done it, and I'm sure I could do it, but I really don't see the point. The flaw, of course, is that having children will affect every single day of the rest of your life, while any residual effects from swallowing a live golfish will likely be over in a week.
Actually, the live goldfish is a good metaphor for any number of things that I am not at all interested in doing.
Wednesday, June 22, 2005
Things that annoy me
On the CBC radio new this morning, an politician made a remark that seemed generally innoccuos, but I found it particularly ill-advised for reasons that required about 100-200 words of linguistic analysis. But since this was the morning and I was in the process of getting ready for work, I didn't have time to type it all out. So I left myself a little note to look up the story when I got home, and write out my reaction, complete with links.
However, when I got home this evening and started looking for the story in question, it turned out the particular remark never made it to any of the online print versions of the story. It was just played on the radio. And in the mess of my day, I forgot who made that remark and what the exact wording was, so I can't exactly comment on it any more. Bleah.
However, when I got home this evening and started looking for the story in question, it turned out the particular remark never made it to any of the online print versions of the story. It was just played on the radio. And in the mess of my day, I forgot who made that remark and what the exact wording was, so I can't exactly comment on it any more. Bleah.
Trapiche Chardonnay
This is a rather interesting wine. It contains all the elements usually found in chardonnay, but in different proportions. I can't really explain it beyond that, but it's quite refreshing.
Monday, June 20, 2005
Sunday, June 19, 2005
Brain development and sense of consequences
This article (well worth the trip to bugmenot if you don't have a Toronto Star login) is really interesting. It postulates that adolescents have less of a sense of consequences because their brains are not yet fully physically developed. It gives some fascinating examples of trains of thought arising from not-yet-fully-developed children's brains, such as:
I wonder if this means my brain developed early, or if it means I'm still walking around with a child's brain. That would be interesting, if I were using a child's brain to do my (rather intellectual and cerebral) job.
Ask a 4-year-old if he has a brother, and he'll tell you yes. Ask what his name is, and the child may answer "Jim." Then ask, "Does Jim have a brother?" The answer might be no.The only problem about this theory of sense of consequences is that it does not correlate at all to my personal experience. The last time I remember my sense of consequences being different from what it is now was around the age of 3, when I honestly did not understand that if I made a big complicated mess my parents would have to clean it up. But, with the exception of things that require factual or experiential knowledge (for example, turning off a Linux computer without shutting down properly could fuck up the kernel, or mixing bleach and ammonia makes poisonous fumes), my sense of consequences has been about the same since age 9.
I wonder if this means my brain developed early, or if it means I'm still walking around with a child's brain. That would be interesting, if I were using a child's brain to do my (rather intellectual and cerebral) job.
The magical stalking sanding ghost
Someone either upstairs or next door or in the hall is sanding or doing something that makes a lot of scrapey and frictiony noises. The weird thing is that no matter where I am in my apartment, this noise sounds like it's coming from the nearest wall or ceiling. As I lay in bed, it sounded like it was coming from the ceiling directly above me. Then as I sat in the toilet, it sounded like it was coming from the wall of the apartment next door. Then as I wandered into the kitchen it sounded like it was coming from the hall. Now I'm in the living room, and it sounds like it's coming from a different part of the ceiling.
Saturday, June 18, 2005
People who live on less than a dollar a day
The number of people who live on less than a dollar a day is often bandied about when describing global poverty.
But what does this number actually mean?
Does it mean the amount of necessities of life that I could purchase if I walked down to the corner store with a (presumably US) dollar?
Or does it mean the amount of necessities of life that I could purchase if I wandered into the marketplace of a poor village in a Third World country with a (presumably US) dollar?
I realize it's probably the GDP of the country divided by the number of people, but which of these two scenarios is it probably closer to?
But what does this number actually mean?
Does it mean the amount of necessities of life that I could purchase if I walked down to the corner store with a (presumably US) dollar?
Or does it mean the amount of necessities of life that I could purchase if I wandered into the marketplace of a poor village in a Third World country with a (presumably US) dollar?
I realize it's probably the GDP of the country divided by the number of people, but which of these two scenarios is it probably closer to?
U Really Got a Hold on Me
Yes! I knew this Sesame Street sketch existed! No one else remembered it, but I distinctly remember the first time I heard the Beatles song "You Really Got a Hold on Me" I was highly impressed that they did Sesame Street covers.
But I don't want Harry Potter to grow up!
One of the things that makes the Harry Potter characters most endearing to me is that they have the full awkwardness, ignorance and confusion of their ages. Even though they're brave and magically powerful, they aren't emotionally precocious. Being safely out of that awkward stage myself, I can sit back at arms-length and fully appreciate where they are. I even like CAPS-LOCK!Harry, because I find that emotionally realistic.
One of the things that really annoys me in fanfic is when people suddenly make Harry become calm and rational and reasonable about everything. Yes, it might be easier to write and more pleasant to read and it might enable certain plot directions that the author might want to explore, but that isn't where he is right now - and he certainly isn't going to achieve that over one summer!
But this interview worries me. They seem to be hinting that Harry is going to grow up emotionally, and that doesn't seem a realistic thing to happen at this point. It is quite necessary for the plot - and the fact that 17 is the age of majority for wizards suggests that he needs to be an adult in book 7. But I don't want Sweet Valley High-style adult teenagers in my Harry Potter, I like them being children!
Hopefully J.K. Rowling will, à la limite, have Harry at the end of his sixth year reach the place where those fanfic authors have him at the end of the summer. I'm in no hurry to have my Harry grow up.
One of the things that really annoys me in fanfic is when people suddenly make Harry become calm and rational and reasonable about everything. Yes, it might be easier to write and more pleasant to read and it might enable certain plot directions that the author might want to explore, but that isn't where he is right now - and he certainly isn't going to achieve that over one summer!
But this interview worries me. They seem to be hinting that Harry is going to grow up emotionally, and that doesn't seem a realistic thing to happen at this point. It is quite necessary for the plot - and the fact that 17 is the age of majority for wizards suggests that he needs to be an adult in book 7. But I don't want Sweet Valley High-style adult teenagers in my Harry Potter, I like them being children!
Hopefully J.K. Rowling will, à la limite, have Harry at the end of his sixth year reach the place where those fanfic authors have him at the end of the summer. I'm in no hurry to have my Harry grow up.
Friday, June 17, 2005
Knowledge base
Things I have learned recently:
- LCD monitors work best at the optimum refresh rate. They do not work best at a higher refresh rate. Yes, it is counterintuitive to take the refresh rate down to 60, but it helps.
- If you are using InterActual DVD player and you can't access the DVD-ROM specific material on the Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban DVD, click on the Extra Credit link on the bottom.
- In Sims 2, if you want to do the move_objects on and then delete a character thing, don't panic when the character's icon disappears. Simply exit to the neighbourhood (saving your game on the way) and re-enter the house. The character will reappear with their mood levels all up.
- If you have WebWasher, ZoneAlarm, Norton Internet Security and Windows XP firewall and pop-up blocker, the easiest thing to do is disable the pop-up blocking/ad blocking/privacy capacities of all the software except WebWasher, then edit the WebWasher filterlist as needed to allow access to sites you want to access and block things you want to be blocked. It's also easier to disable the Windows XP firewall and let ZoneAlarm take care of that with Norton as a backup. Anything more (or different combinations) gets far too overprotective.
- You can't stash .exe files in your gmail account. Zipping them doesn't trick the gmail filter.
- If your OS is Windows XP and your ISP is Sympatico, there may be two little network connection icons in your tray. Do not try to close one of these network connections, bad things will happen! (When I did this it inadvertently deleted my network card). You can convince the non-sympatico icon to not show itself, but don't try actually closing it.
- In Windows XP, if you set your taskbar to auto-hide and then maximize a Trillian window, the Trillian window will cover up the taskbar and you have to annoyingly switch to another window or resize Trillian before you can access the taskbar. Instead of maximizing Trillian with the icon in the top right of the window, just drag the window edges until you reach the required size.
- Furniture on casters that is frequently rolled around can damage the finish of hardwood floors.
- Hiking up your pants by casually sticking your hands in your pockets and then casually shrugging your shoulders is not a good idea, because it puts pressure on seams that the designers never intended.
- If your bra straps have metal buckles and adjusty-things, and you have a zit right under where one of the metal pieces needs to be, wear a different bra. Even if it ruins your line. The resulting skin irritation is extremely aggravating.
- If your vegetarian meal comes with an item that wasn't part of the meal description on the menu, find out what that item is before eating it.
- LCD monitors work best at the optimum refresh rate. They do not work best at a higher refresh rate. Yes, it is counterintuitive to take the refresh rate down to 60, but it helps.
- If you are using InterActual DVD player and you can't access the DVD-ROM specific material on the Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban DVD, click on the Extra Credit link on the bottom.
- In Sims 2, if you want to do the move_objects on and then delete a character thing, don't panic when the character's icon disappears. Simply exit to the neighbourhood (saving your game on the way) and re-enter the house. The character will reappear with their mood levels all up.
- If you have WebWasher, ZoneAlarm, Norton Internet Security and Windows XP firewall and pop-up blocker, the easiest thing to do is disable the pop-up blocking/ad blocking/privacy capacities of all the software except WebWasher, then edit the WebWasher filterlist as needed to allow access to sites you want to access and block things you want to be blocked. It's also easier to disable the Windows XP firewall and let ZoneAlarm take care of that with Norton as a backup. Anything more (or different combinations) gets far too overprotective.
- You can't stash .exe files in your gmail account. Zipping them doesn't trick the gmail filter.
- If your OS is Windows XP and your ISP is Sympatico, there may be two little network connection icons in your tray. Do not try to close one of these network connections, bad things will happen! (When I did this it inadvertently deleted my network card). You can convince the non-sympatico icon to not show itself, but don't try actually closing it.
- In Windows XP, if you set your taskbar to auto-hide and then maximize a Trillian window, the Trillian window will cover up the taskbar and you have to annoyingly switch to another window or resize Trillian before you can access the taskbar. Instead of maximizing Trillian with the icon in the top right of the window, just drag the window edges until you reach the required size.
- Furniture on casters that is frequently rolled around can damage the finish of hardwood floors.
- Hiking up your pants by casually sticking your hands in your pockets and then casually shrugging your shoulders is not a good idea, because it puts pressure on seams that the designers never intended.
- If your bra straps have metal buckles and adjusty-things, and you have a zit right under where one of the metal pieces needs to be, wear a different bra. Even if it ruins your line. The resulting skin irritation is extremely aggravating.
- If your vegetarian meal comes with an item that wasn't part of the meal description on the menu, find out what that item is before eating it.
Thursday, June 16, 2005
Masi Tupungato Passo Doble
This is a blend of two grapes with which I'm not too familiar: Malbec and Corvina. I couldn't tell you which grape is doing what, but the end result is far too tannic for me. It might work with some really hardcore meat, but this simply is not a good wine for me. It doesn't even give me the vague healthful feeling I generally get when sipping on a red wine.
Manipulative commercials
There's this commercial that shows this adorable little baby crying inconsolably. She's just crying and crying and crying for long enough to make anyone who is capable of doing so lactate, and anyone else look around to make sure the baby is okay.
Then the caption comes on saying that X people die of drunk driving. The more crying. Then they say "Emily's mother was one of them."
I don't like this commercial because it is far too manipulative. First of all, it upsets me, as is intended. But I don't like my television set upsetting me unexpectedly - especially in the morning, if I have my TV on while getting ready. Selfish as it sounds, the last thing I need is to tear up when I'm running late and have just put on my mascara.
Then I get indignant about being upset as a warning against something I would never do and never allow others to do. I do own a breathalyzer and carry taxi money for a reason!
Then I realize that it's upsetting me for no reason. The baby is crying and inconsolable, but that's not because her mother died because of drunk driving. She's crying because no one has come to get her! Even when a baby's mother dies, of whatever reason, someone is still put in charge of the baby. The problem in this scenario is that whoever is in charge of the baby either hasn't reached her yet, or is of the "let her cry it out" school of parenting. Which is a problem, but has nothing to do with drunk driving. So then I get embarrassed about allowing myself to be manipulated like this.
And the overall problem with this commercial is that the kind of people who are selfish and/or stupid enough to drive drunk probably wouldn't care that the poor widdle baby is crying, they'd probably be more the type to say "Someone shut that damn kid up!" So the target audience completely disregards the commecial, while innocent bystanders have to redo their mascara and are late for work. Not a good plan.
I don't know if the aim of this commercial is to get me to not drive drunk and not allow others to do so, or to get me to give money to MADD (or whatever organization). But I'm already not going to drive drunk - it's not like I have the opportunity anyway - and it's making me less like to give money to the organization because I don't like being manipulated this way.
Then the caption comes on saying that X people die of drunk driving. The more crying. Then they say "Emily's mother was one of them."
I don't like this commercial because it is far too manipulative. First of all, it upsets me, as is intended. But I don't like my television set upsetting me unexpectedly - especially in the morning, if I have my TV on while getting ready. Selfish as it sounds, the last thing I need is to tear up when I'm running late and have just put on my mascara.
Then I get indignant about being upset as a warning against something I would never do and never allow others to do. I do own a breathalyzer and carry taxi money for a reason!
Then I realize that it's upsetting me for no reason. The baby is crying and inconsolable, but that's not because her mother died because of drunk driving. She's crying because no one has come to get her! Even when a baby's mother dies, of whatever reason, someone is still put in charge of the baby. The problem in this scenario is that whoever is in charge of the baby either hasn't reached her yet, or is of the "let her cry it out" school of parenting. Which is a problem, but has nothing to do with drunk driving. So then I get embarrassed about allowing myself to be manipulated like this.
And the overall problem with this commercial is that the kind of people who are selfish and/or stupid enough to drive drunk probably wouldn't care that the poor widdle baby is crying, they'd probably be more the type to say "Someone shut that damn kid up!" So the target audience completely disregards the commecial, while innocent bystanders have to redo their mascara and are late for work. Not a good plan.
I don't know if the aim of this commercial is to get me to not drive drunk and not allow others to do so, or to get me to give money to MADD (or whatever organization). But I'm already not going to drive drunk - it's not like I have the opportunity anyway - and it's making me less like to give money to the organization because I don't like being manipulated this way.
Wednesday, June 15, 2005
Another reason why parents aren't like the rest of us
In the elevator of my building, there was a woman and her toddler daughter. The little girl says to her mother: "Mamamama bayayayaya!"
The mother understood her! She looked down at the little girl as though she had said something perfectly rational, and reassured her that they could pick it up tomorrow, it would still be there.
I was so tempted to ask the mother what the little girl had just said, but that would be a bit of an intrusion.
The mother understood her! She looked down at the little girl as though she had said something perfectly rational, and reassured her that they could pick it up tomorrow, it would still be there.
I was so tempted to ask the mother what the little girl had just said, but that would be a bit of an intrusion.
Parliamentary procedures
MP Steven Fletcher, as we all know, is quadriplegic. And in today's Globe and Mail, there's a photo of MP Andy Scott in a wheelchair for some reason.
So how do these gentlemen rise to be counted when voting?
So how do these gentlemen rise to be counted when voting?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)