prudence   83

« earlier    

Lynn Margulis | West Hunter
Margulis went on to theorize that symbiotic relationships between organisms are the dominant driving force of evolution. There certainly are important examples of this: as far as I know, every complex organism that digests cellulose manages it thru a symbiosis with various prokaryotes. Many organisms with a restricted diet have symbiotic bacteria that provide essential nutrients – aphids, for example. Tall fescue, a popular turf grass on golf courses, carries an endosymbiotic fungus. And so on, and on on.

She went on to oppose neodarwinism, particularly rejecting inter-organismal competition (and population genetics itself). From Wiki: [ She also believed that proponents of the standard theory “wallow in their zoological, capitalistic, competitive, cost-benefit interpretation of Darwin – having mistaken him… Neo-Darwinism, which insists on [the slow accrual of mutations by gene-level natural selection], is in a complete funk.”[8] ‘


You might think that Lynn Margulis is an example of someone that could think outside the box because she’d never even been able to find it in the first place – but that’s more true of autistic types [like Dirac or Turing], which I doubt she was in any way. I’d say that some traditional prejudices [dislike of capitalism and individual competition], combined with the sort of general looniness that leaves one open to unconventional ideas, drove her in a direction that bore fruit, more or less by coincidence. A successful creative scientist does not have to be right about everything, or indeed about much of anything: they need to contribute at least one new, true, and interesting thing.
“A successful creative scientist does not have to be right about everything, or indeed about much of anything: they need to contribute at least one new, true, and interesting thing.” Yes – it’s like old bands. As long as they have just one song in heavy rotation on the classic rock stations, they can tour endlessly – it doesn’t matter that they have only one or even no original members performing. A scientific example of this phenomena is Kary Mullins. He’ll always have PCR, even if a glowing raccoon did greet him with the words, “Good evening, Doctor.”

Nobel Savage:
Dancing Naked in the Mind Field by Kary Mullis

jet fuel can't melt steel beams:
You have to understand a subject extremely well to make arguments why something couldn’t have happened. The easiest cases involve some purported explanation violating a conservation law of physics: that wasn’t the case here.

Do I think you’re a hotshot, deeply knowledgeable about structural engineering, properties of materials, using computer models, etc? A priori, pretty unlikely. What are the odds that you know as much simple mechanics as I do? a priori, still pretty unlikely. Most likely, you’re talking through your hat.

Next, the conspiracy itself is unlikely: quite a few people would be involved – unlikely that none of them would talk. It’s not that easy to find people that would go along with such a thing, believe it or not. The Communists were pretty good at conspiracy, but people defected, people talked: not just Whittaker Chambers, not just Igor Gouzenko.
west-hunter  scitariat  discussion  people  profile  science  the-trenches  innovation  discovery  ideas  turing  giants  autism  👽  bio  evolution  eden  roots  darwinian  capitalism  competition  cooperate-defect  being-right  info-dynamics  frontier  curiosity  creative  multi  poast  prudence  org:mag  org:anglo  letters  books  review  critique  summary  lol  genomics  social-science  sociology  psychology  psychiatry  ability-competence  rationality  epistemic  reason  events  terrorism  usa  islam  communism  coordination  organizing  russia  dirty-hands  degrees-of-freedom 
november 2017 by nhaliday
Why ancient Rome kept choosing bizarre and perverted emperors - Vox
Why so many bizarre emperors were able to run a vast empire
Many of these emperors had extremely small circles of advisers who often did the grunt work of running the vast empire. "The number of people who had direct access to the emperor ... was actually rather small," says Ando. The emperors ruled through networks of officials, and those officials were often more competent. They propped up the insanity at the top.

What's more, most people scattered across the vast Roman Empire didn't pay much attention. "It didn't matter how nutty Caligula was," Ando says, "unless he did something crazy with tax policy." While those living in military provinces could have been affected by an emperor's decree, those in far-flung civilian provinces might have barely noticed the change from one emperor to another.

All that underlines the real truth about imperial power in Rome: yes, there were some crazy emperors, and some of the rumors were probably true. But the most bizarre thing about the Roman Empire wasn't the emperors — it was the political structure that made them so powerful in the first place.
news  org:data  org:lite  history  iron-age  mediterranean  the-classics  trivia  conquest-empire  government  polisci  power  leadership  prudence  list  top-n  people  statesmen  institutions  organizing  antidemos  regression-to-mean  big-peeps  benevolence  alignment 
november 2017 by nhaliday
Ethiopian altitude adaptations | West Hunter
I said a while ago that the altitude adaptations in Tibet were too damn good, more effective than those seen in Andean Amerindians, and so must have originated in a population that lived at high altitude for a long time.  This seems to be the case.

The same must be true of Ethiopia. Their altitude adaptations also work well. There is a genetic component in Ethiopia that seems to correspond to the original hunter-gatherers, and the altitude alleles must have originated in that population, not the later components that look like East Africans or Levantines.

In both cases, there’s a fair chance that the ultimate origin could be some archaic group.
You know, I don’t think that is the problem.

I’ve paid attention to the Falasha story for a long time. I think it’s funny as hell.


The Falasha are (best guess based on recent genetic studies) locals who converted to an old-fashioned, non-rabbinic Judaism. Genetically pretty much like other highland Ethiopians, definitely so in mtDNA.
On the other hand, the non-African component is probably similar to what we see in the Levant today, as with other Ethiopian highlanders speaking Semitic languages.
west-hunter  scitariat  discussion  ideas  speculation  asia  developing-world  africa  sapiens  pop-diff  archaics  gene-flow  embodied  atmosphere  sky  comparison  archaeology  multi  poast  judaism  prudence  israel 
august 2017 by nhaliday
Born that way | West Hunter
In the Atlantic Monthly , which no longer has any reason for existence, since there’s really no point in placing a computer screen on the bottom of a birdcage, Jason Silverstein  – a doctoral candidate in anthropology at Harvard –  has a piece explaining that genes don’t cause racial health disparities – society does! Moreover,  it’s immoral to even look for such genetic explanations.

I guess he should have gotten this published earlier, since we’ve already found some of those naughty genes – pretty important ones. So it’s too late.


Which means that Silverstein is a jackass. Nothing stopped him from digging into biomedical research to see if his thesis was substantially true: he didn’t bother. But why is he a jackass? Born that way, probably.
west-hunter  scitariat  discussion  ideas  rant  critique  race  medicine  pop-diff  health  genetics  embodied  attaq  prudence  straussian 
august 2017 by nhaliday
mental gluttony – Snakes and Ladders
Again, while it is a great blessing that a man no longer has to be rich in order to enjoy the masterpieces of the past, for paperbacks, first-rate color reproductions, and stereo-phonograph records have made them available to all but the very poor, this ease of access, if misused — and we do misuse it — can become a curse. We are all of us tempted to read more books, look at more pictures, listen to more music than we can possibly absorb, and the result of such gluttony is not a cultured mind but a consuming one; what it reads, looks at, listens to is immediately forgotten, leaving no more traces behind than yesterday’s newspaper.
Clearing up browser bookmarks of saved reading. Realizing that having way too much to read for a lifetime isn't something to be proud of.
letters  pinboard  info-dynamics  info-foraging  attention  the-monster  temperance  prudence  culture  big-peeps  aristos  old-anglo  aphorism  quotes  rhetoric  advice  regularizer  prioritizing  workflow  twitter  social  discussion  techtariat  internet  notetaking  exocortex  multi  unaffiliated  gnon  right-wing  explore-exploit 
july 2017 by nhaliday
Edward Feser: Conservatism, populism, and snobbery
feser is good on this: chief task of conservative intellectuals is to defend epistemic credentials of mere prejudice

The Right vindicates common sense distinctions:
In some ways, we’re already there. One of the core intellectual tasks of the Right has been, and will continue to be, the analysis and rehabilitation of categories found useful by pre-modern humanity but rejected by moderns in their fits of ideologically-driven oversimplification.
Consider these three:
1. Friend vs. Enemy. Carl Schmitt famously put this distinction at the core of his political theory in explicit defiance of the liberal humanitarianism of his day that wanted to reduce all questions to abstract morality and economic efficiency. The friend vs. enemy distinction, Schmitt insisted, is independent of these. To identify a threatening nation as the enemy does not necessarily make any statement about its moral, aesthetic, or economic qualities. Schmitt observed that the liberal nations (for him, the victors of WWI) in fact do mobilize against threats and competitors; forbidding themselves the vocabulary of “friend” and “enemy” means they recast their hostilities in terms of moral absolutes. The nation they attack cannot be called their own enemy, so it must be demonized as the enemy of all humanity. This will be a reoccurring conservative argument. Eliminating a needed category doesn’t eliminate hostility between peoples; it only forces them to be incorrectly conceptualized along moral lines, which actually diminishes our ability to empathize with our opponent.
2. Native vs. Foreigner. Much of what Schmitt said about the distinction between friend and enemy applies to the more basic categorization of people as belonging to “us” or as being alien. I argued recently in the Orthosphere, concerning the topic of Muslim immigration, that we can actually be more sympathetic to Muslims among us if we acknowledge that our concern is not that their ways are objectionable in some absolute (moral/philosophical) sense, but that they are alien to the culture we wish to preserve as dominant in our nation. Reflections about the “universal person” are also quite relevant to this.
3. Masculine vs. feminine. Conservatives have found little to recommend the liberals’ distinction between biological “sex” and socially constructed “gender”. However, pre-modern peoples had intriguing intuitions of masculinity and femininity as essences or principles that can be considered beyond the strict context of sexual reproduction. Largely defined by relation to each other (so that, for example, a woman relates in a feminine way to other people more than to wild animals or inanimate objects), even things other than sexually reproducing animals can participate in these principles to some extent. For example, the sun is masculine while Luna is feminine, at least in how they present themselves to us. Masculinity and femininity seem to represent poles in the structure of relationality itself, and so even the more mythical attributions of these essences were not necessarily intended metaphorically.

The liberal critique of these categories, and others not accommodated by their ideology, comes down to the following
1. Imperialism of the moral. The category in question is recognized as nonmoral, and the critic asserts that it is morally superior to use only moral categories. (“Wouldn’t it be better to judge someone based on whether he’s a good person than on where he was born?”) Alternatively, the critic presumes that other categories actually are reducible to moral categories, and other categories are condemned for being inaccurate in their presumed implicit moral evaluations. (“He’s a good person. How can you call him an ‘alien’ as if he were some kind of monster?!”)
2. Appeal to boundary cases. Sometimes the boundaries of the criticized category are fuzzy. Perhaps a particular person is like “us” in some ways but unlike “us” in others. From this, conclude that the category is arbitrary and meaningless.
3. Emotivism. Claim that the criticized category is actually a sub-rational emotional response. It must be because it has no place in liberal ideology, which the liberal presumes to be coextensive with reason itself. And in fact, when certain ways of thinking are made socially unacceptable, they will likely only pop out in emergencies and moments of distress. It would be no different with moral categories–if the concepts “evil” and “unfair” were socially disfavored, people would only resort to them when intolerably provoked and undoubtedly emotional.
4. Imputation of sinister social motives. The critic points out that the categorization promotes some established social structure; therefore, it must be an illusion.

Why the Republican Party Is Falling Apart:
Moore and a great many of his voters subscribe to a simplistic and exaggerated view of the world and the conflicts it contains. Moore has voiced the belief that Christian communities in Illinois or Indiana, or somewhere “up north,” are under Sharia law. That’s absurd. But why does he believe it, and why do voters trust him despite such beliefs? Because on the other side is another falsehood, more sophisticated but patently false: the notion that unlimited Islamic immigration to Europe, for example, is utterly harmless, or the notion that Iran is an implacable fundamentalist threat while good Sunni extremists in Saudi Arabia are our true and faithful friends. Each of the apocalyptic beliefs held by a Roy Moore or his supporters contains a fragment of truth—or at least amounts to a rejection of some falsehood that has become an article of faith among America’s elite. The liberal view of the world to which Democrats and elite Republicans alike subscribe is false, but the resources for showing its falsehood in a nuanced way are lacking. Even the more intellectual sort of right-winger who makes it through the cultural indoctrination of his college and peer class tends to be mutilated by the experience. He—most often a he—comes out of it embittered and reactionary or else addicted to opium dreams of neo-medievalism or platonic republics. Since there are few nonliberal institutions of political thought, the right that recognizes the falsehood of liberalism and rejects it tends to be a force of feeling rather than reflection. Moore, of course, has a legal education, and he assuredly reads the Bible. He’s not unintelligent, but he cannot lean upon a well-balanced and subtle right because such a thing hardly exists in our environment. Yet there is a need for a right nonetheless, and so a Roy Moore or a Donald Trump fills the gap. There is only one thing the Republican establishment can do if it doesn’t like that: reform itself from stem to stern.

Who Are ‘The People’ Anyway?:
Beware of those who claim to speak for today's populist audience.
- Paul Gottfried

Gottfried's got a real chip on his shoulder about the Straussians
journos-pundits  essay  right-wing  politics  ideology  government  civil-liberty  culture  egalitarianism-hierarchy  class  hypocrisy  populism  tradition  society  rhetoric  aristos  prudence  meta:rhetoric  debate  multi  gnon  us-them  gender  coalitions  twitter  social  commentary  unaffiliated  self-interest  prejudice  paleocon  current-events  news  org:mag  org:foreign  instinct  counter-revolution  axioms  straussian  subculture  trump  reason  orwellian  universalism-particularism  pragmatic  systematic-ad-hoc  analytical-holistic  philosophy  info-dynamics  insight  slippery-slope  values  heuristic  alt-inst  humility  emotion  metabuch  thinking  list  top-n  persuasion  duty  impetus  left-wing  wisdom  love-hate 
july 2017 by nhaliday
King Canute and the waves - Wikipedia
The story of King Canute and the waves is an apocryphal anecdote illustrating the piety or humility of King Canute the Great, recorded in the 12th century by Henry of Huntingdon.

In the story, Canute demonstrates to his flattering courtiers that he has no control over the elements (the incoming tide), explaining that secular power is vain compared to the supreme power of God. The episode is frequently alluded to in contexts where the futility of "trying to stop the tide" of an inexorable event is pointed out, but usually misrepresenting Canute as believing he had supernatural powers, when Huntingdon's story in fact relates the opposite.


Proverbial reference to the legend in contemporary journalism or politics usually casts the story in terms of "Canute's arrogance" of "attempting to stop the tide". It was cited, for example, by Stacy Head as typifying the New Orleans city council's response to Hurricane Katrina (2005), or by Mark Stephens in reference to Ryan Giggs as "the King Canute of football" for his attempts of stopping "the unstoppable tide of information " on the internet in the 2011 British privacy injunctions controversy. This is a misrepresentation of Huntingdon's account, whose Canute uses the tide to demonstrate his inability to control the elements and his deference to the greater authority of God.[4]
history  medieval  stories  parable  aphorism  europe  nordic  leadership  humility  prudence  wiki  reference  jargon  volo-avolo 
july 2017 by nhaliday
history and progressive virtue: moral technology, moral fashion, and ancestor-memorial retro-trauma chic – ideologjammin'
A terrific point. The rapidity with which good liberals suddenly internalize and enforce novel norms is striking in itself, content apart.

The rapid shift in moral norms in our society should worry us. We are being conditioned to adapt rather than to hold to our principles.
A thread on the psychology of liberalism, which replaces historical memory by a stereotyped darkness of the past, to be eternally overcome

losing a battle to push something new forward is understandable. having something repealed? going BACK? this is quite incomprehensible to us
i think it's instinctual, not conscious.
Almost everybody today is a Whig: ie think in terms of 'moral progress', 'forwards' vs 'backwards' thinking, 'stuck in the past', and so on
the slope is "progress". we slide down every single one eventually. just read some history; recent history will do; it will become obvious.
The real problem is that America has already ceased to be a tolerant society. It has, instead, become a celebratory one.
In a truly surreal display, NFL great Brett Favre is being denounced by the left’s new cultural commissars for not clapping long and hard enough at ESPN’s ESPY awards, as Bruce/“Caitlyn” Jenner received a “Courage” award for his efforts to become a woman. Oddly, Favre did applaud – not doing so would have been a grave heresy to America’s new church of progressive inquisitors. His sin was not applauding enthusiastically enough.


In fact, it all smacks of the gulag – literally. On my shelf at my office is Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s classic, The Gulag Archipelago. There, on page 69 of volume 1, is a chilling account of a Stalinist Soviet Union where men were actually penalized for not clapping ardently enough.

Transgenderism Is Propaganda Designed To Humiliate And Compel Submission:
unaffiliated  left-wing  essay  insight  politics  ideology  morality  ethics  social-norms  flux-stasis  prudence  multi  twitter  social  discussion  journos-pundits  right-wing  history  mostly-modern  rot  zeitgeist  retention  tradition  prejudice  anarcho-tyranny  universalism-particularism  absolute-relative  slippery-slope  instinct  whiggish-hegelian  westminster  info-dynamics  nostalgia  meta:rhetoric  identity-politics  academia  epigenetics  social-science  race  gnon  isteveish  diversity  egalitarianism-hierarchy  discrimination  obama  civil-liberty  exit-voice  prediction  homo-hetero  justice  counter-revolution  myth  ritual  nascent-state  news  org:mag  letters  current-events  drama  communism  track-record  big-peeps  russia  authoritarianism  gender  signaling  backup  reason  orwellian  solzhenitsyn  love-hate  org:popup  propaganda  impetus  telos-atelos  tribalism  us-them  sex  sexuality  tactics  organizing 
june 2017 by nhaliday
Logic | West Hunter
All the time I hear some public figure saying that if we ban or allow X, then logically we have to ban or allow Y, even though there are obvious practical reasons for X and obvious practical reasons against Y.

No, we don’t.


Small Change Good, Big Change Bad?:
And on reflection it occurs to me that this is actually THE standard debate about change: some see small changes and either like them or aren’t bothered enough to advocate what it would take to reverse them, while others imagine such trends continuing long enough to result in very large and disturbing changes, and then suggest stronger responses.

For example, on increased immigration some point to the many concrete benefits immigrants now provide. Others imagine that large cumulative immigration eventually results in big changes in culture and political equilibria. On fertility, some wonder if civilization can survive in the long run with declining population, while others point out that population should rise for many decades, and few endorse the policies needed to greatly increase fertility. On genetic modification of humans, some ask why not let doctors correct obvious defects, while others imagine parents eventually editing kid genes mainly to max kid career potential. On oil some say that we should start preparing for the fact that we will eventually run out, while others say that we keep finding new reserves to replace the ones we use.


If we consider any parameter, such as typical degree of mind wandering, we are unlikely to see the current value as exactly optimal. So if we give people the benefit of the doubt to make local changes in their interest, we may accept that this may result in a recent net total change we don’t like. We may figure this is the price we pay to get other things we value more, and we we know that it can be very expensive to limit choices severely.

But even though we don’t see the current value as optimal, we also usually see the optimal value as not terribly far from the current value. So if we can imagine current changes as part of a long term trend that eventually produces very large changes, we can become more alarmed and willing to restrict current changes. The key question is: when is that a reasonable response?

First, big concerns about big long term changes only make sense if one actually cares a lot about the long run. Given the usual high rates of return on investment, it is cheap to buy influence on the long term, compared to influence on the short term. Yet few actually devote much of their income to long term investments. This raises doubts about the sincerity of expressed long term concerns.

Second, in our simplest models of the world good local choices also produce good long term choices. So if we presume good local choices, bad long term outcomes require non-simple elements, such as coordination, commitment, or myopia problems. Of course many such problems do exist. Even so, someone who claims to see a long term problem should be expected to identify specifically which such complexities they see at play. It shouldn’t be sufficient to just point to the possibility of such problems.


Fourth, many more processes and factors limit big changes, compared to small changes. For example, in software small changes are often trivial, while larger changes are nearly impossible, at least without starting again from scratch. Similarly, modest changes in mind wandering can be accomplished with minor attitude and habit changes, while extreme changes may require big brain restructuring, which is much harder because brains are complex and opaque. Recent changes in market structure may reduce the number of firms in each industry, but that doesn’t make it remotely plausible that one firm will eventually take over the entire economy. Projections of small changes into large changes need to consider the possibility of many such factors limiting large changes.

Fifth, while it can be reasonably safe to identify short term changes empirically, the longer term a forecast the more one needs to rely on theory, and the more different areas of expertise one must consider when constructing a relevant model of the situation. Beware a mere empirical projection into the long run, or a theory-based projection that relies on theories in only one area.

We should very much be open to the possibility of big bad long term changes, even in areas where we are okay with short term changes, or at least reluctant to sufficiently resist them. But we should also try to hold those who argue for the existence of such problems to relatively high standards. Their analysis should be about future times that we actually care about, and can at least roughly foresee. It should be based on our best theories of relevant subjects, and it should consider the possibility of factors that limit larger changes.

And instead of suggesting big ways to counter short term changes that might lead to long term problems, it is often better to identify markers to warn of larger problems. Then instead of acting in big ways now, we can make sure to track these warning markers, and ready ourselves to act more strongly if they appear.

Growth Is Change. So Is Death.:
I see the same pattern when people consider long term futures. People can be quite philosophical about the extinction of humanity, as long as this is due to natural causes. Every species dies; why should humans be different? And few get bothered by humans making modest small-scale short-term modifications to their own lives or environment. We are mostly okay with people using umbrellas when it rains, moving to new towns to take new jobs, etc., digging a flood ditch after our yard floods, and so on. And the net social effect of many small changes is technological progress, economic growth, new fashions, and new social attitudes, all of which we tend to endorse in the short run.

Even regarding big human-caused changes, most don’t worry if changes happen far enough in the future. Few actually care much about the future past the lives of people they’ll meet in their own life. But for changes that happen within someone’s time horizon of caring, the bigger that changes get, and the longer they are expected to last, the more that people worry. And when we get to huge changes, such as taking apart the sun, a population of trillions, lifetimes of millennia, massive genetic modification of humans, robots replacing people, a complete loss of privacy, or revolutions in social attitudes, few are blasé, and most are quite wary.

This differing attitude regarding small local changes versus large global changes makes sense for parameters that tend to revert back to a mean. Extreme values then do justify extra caution, while changes within the usual range don’t merit much notice, and can be safely left to local choice. But many parameters of our world do not mostly revert back to a mean. They drift long distances over long times, in hard to predict ways that can be reasonably modeled as a basic trend plus a random walk.

This different attitude can also make sense for parameters that have two or more very different causes of change, one which creates frequent small changes, and another which creates rare huge changes. (Or perhaps a continuum between such extremes.) If larger sudden changes tend to cause more problems, it can make sense to be more wary of them. However, for most parameters most change results from many small changes, and even then many are quite wary of this accumulating into big change.

For people with a sharp time horizon of caring, they should be more wary of long-drifting parameters the larger the changes that would happen within their horizon time. This perspective predicts that the people who are most wary of big future changes are those with the longest time horizons, and who more expect lumpier change processes. This prediction doesn’t seem to fit well with my experience, however.

Those who most worry about big long term changes usually seem okay with small short term changes. Even when they accept that most change is small and that it accumulates into big change. This seems incoherent to me. It seems like many other near versus far incoherences, like expecting things to be simpler when you are far away from them, and more complex when you are closer. You should either become more wary of short term changes, knowing that this is how big longer term change happens, or you should be more okay with big long term change, seeing that as the legitimate result of the small short term changes you accept.
The point here is the gradual shifts of in-group beliefs are both natural and no big deal. Humans are built to readily do this, and forget they do this. But ultimately it is not a worry or concern.

But radical shifts that are big, whether near or far, portend strife and conflict. Either between groups or within them. If the shift is big enough, our intuition tells us our in-group will be in a fight. Alarms go off.
west-hunter  scitariat  discussion  rant  thinking  rationality  metabuch  critique  systematic-ad-hoc  analytical-holistic  metameta  ideology  philosophy  info-dynamics  aphorism  darwinian  prudence  pragmatic  insight  tradition  s:*  2016  multi  gnon  right-wing  formal-values  values  slippery-slope  axioms  alt-inst  heuristic  anglosphere  optimate  flux-stasis  flexibility  paleocon  polisci  universalism-particularism  ratty  hanson  list  examples  migration  fertility  intervention  demographics  population  biotech  enhancement  energy-resources  biophysical-econ  nature  military  inequality  age-generation  time  ideas  debate  meta:rhetoric  local-global  long-short-run  gnosis-logos  gavisti  stochastic-processes  eden-heaven  politics  equilibrium  hive-mind  genetics  defense  competition  arms  peace-violence  walter-scheidel  speed  marginal  optimization  search  time-preference  patience  futurism  meta:prediction  accuracy  institutions  tetlock  theory-practice  wire-guided  priors-posteriors  distribution  moments  biases  epistemic  nea 
may 2017 by nhaliday
UPDATE: After a very difficult journey has finally reached the port of with 1446 .
people  Napoli  Prudence  from twitter_favs
may 2017 by gyaresu
This is how +1400 people slept on . We're overwhelmed, can't go to and no other boat can help. Whe…
Sicily  Prudence  from twitter_favs
may 2017 by gyaresu
The Advent of Cholera | West Hunter
Two main factors interfered with an effective policy response to cholera (not counting ever-present human stupidity and obstinacy): bad science and 19th century liberalism.

Scientists at the time had convinced themselves that the germ theory of disease was just wrong. Yellow fever’s decimation of the French force in Haiti made it important, and when yellow fever hit Barcelona in 1822, French scientists were all over it. They concluded that there was no possibility of contact between yellow fever victims in Barcelona, and ruled out contagion. Mosquito transmission didn’t occur to them.

Worse yet, they generalized their error: they concluded that contagion was never the answer, and accepted miasmas as the cause, a theory which is too stupid to be interesting. Sheesh, they taught the kids in medical school that measles wasn’t catching – while ordinary people knew perfectly well that it was. You know, esoteric, non-intuitive truths have a certain appeal – once initiated, you’re no longer one of the rubes. Of course, the simplest and most common way of producing an esoteric truth is to just make it up.

On the other hand, 19th century liberals (somewhat like modern libertarians, but way less crazy) knew that trade and individual freedom were always good things, by definition, so they also opposed quarantines – worse than wrong, old-fashioned ! And more common in southern, Catholic, Europe: enough said! So, between wrong science and classical liberalism, medical reformers spent many years trying to eliminate the reactionary quarantine rules that still existed in Mediterranean ports.

some history:
In some countries, the suspension of personal liberty provided the opportunity—using special laws—to stop political opposition. However, the cultural and social context differed from that in previous centuries. For example, the increasing use of quarantine and isolation conflicted with the affirmation of citizens’ rights and growing sentiments of personal freedom fostered by the French Revolution of 1789. In England, liberal reformers contested both quarantine and compulsory vaccination against smallpox. Social and political tensions created an explosive mixture, culminating in popular rebellions and uprisings, a phenomenon that affected numerous European countries (29). In the Italian states, in which revolutionary groups had taken the cause of unification and republicanism (27), cholera epidemics provided a justification (i.e., the enforcement of sanitary measures) for increasing police power.


Anticontagionists, who disbelieved the communicability of cholera, contested quarantine and alleged that the practice was a relic of the past, useless, and damaging to commerce. They complained that the free movement of travelers was hindered by sanitary cordons and by controls at border crossings, which included fumigation and disinfection of clothes (Figures 1,​,22,​,3).3). In addition, quarantine inspired a false sense of security, which was dangerous to public health because it diverted persons from taking the correct precautions. International cooperation and coordination was stymied by the lack of agreement regarding the use of quarantine. The discussion among scientists, health administrators, diplomatic bureaucracies, and governments dragged on for decades, as demonstrated in the debates in the International Sanitary Conferences (31), particularly after the opening, in 1869, of the Suez Canal, which was perceived as a gate for the diseases of the Orient (32). Despite pervasive doubts regarding the effectiveness of quarantine, local authorities were reluctant to abandon the protection of the traditional strategies that provided an antidote to population panic, which, during a serious epidemic, could produce chaos and disrupt public order (33).
west-hunter  scitariat  history  early-modern  disease  parasites-microbiome  medicine  britain  europe  mediterranean  politics  ideology  civil-liberty  realness  being-right  right-wing  spreading  trade  migration  antidemos  stories  error  randy-ayndy  lol  unintended-consequences  authoritarianism  prudence  epidemiology  public-health  multi  study  the-trenches  alt-inst  track-record  tradition  fashun 
may 2017 by nhaliday
Readings: The Gods of the Copybook Headings
When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you know."

On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."

In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."

Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four —
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man —
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: —
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!
gnon  isteveish  commentary  big-peeps  literature  poetry  values  virtu  britain  anglosphere  optimate  aristos  org:junk  prudence  paleocon  old-anglo  albion  hate  darwinian  tradition  pre-ww2  prejudice  morality  gender  sex  sexuality  fertility  demographic-transition  rot  aphorism  communism  labor  egalitarianism-hierarchy  no-go  volo-avolo  war  peace-violence  tribalism  universalism-particularism  us-them  life-history  capitalism  redistribution  flux-stasis  reason  pessimism  markets  unintended-consequences  religion  christianity  theos  nascent-state  envy  civil-liberty  sanctity-degradation  yarvin  degrees-of-freedom  civilization  paying-rent  realness  truth  westminster  duty  responsibility  cynicism-idealism  tradeoffs  s:**  new-religion  deep-materialism  2018  the-basilisk  order-disorder  eden-heaven  janus  utopia-dystopia  love-hate  afterlife 
april 2017 by nhaliday

« earlier    

related tags

!forskning  1950s  1956  2009  201308  2016  2018  ability-competence  absolute-relative  academia  accounting  accuracy  actoninstitute  additive  advice  africa  afterlife  age-generation  agri-mindset  albion  alibi  alien-character  alignment  alt-inst  altruism  analogy  analytical-holistic  anarcho-tyranny  ancient_greece  ancient_philosophy  andrésvelasco  anglo  anglosphere  anthropology  anticipating  antidemos  aphorism  aquinas  archaeology  archaics  archbishop  aristos  aristotle  arms  art  arthur_brooks  article  ascetic  asia  assimilation  atmosphere  attaq  attention  audio  authoritarianism  autism  autoindustry  axioms  backup  banking  behavioral-gen  behaviours  being-right  ben_stein  benevolence  bernanos  biases  bibliography  big-peeps  bio  biodet  biophysical-econ  biotech  bishop  blogs  blowhards  books  bounded-cognition  brain-development  brain  britain  broad-econ  bryan  business  bust  campaign_2016  cancer  candidate-gene  canon  capitalism  caplan  carefulness  character  charity  checklists  children  chile  china  choices  christianity  civic  civil-liberty  civil  civilization  class  classic  clojure  coalitions  cog-psych  cognition  cold-war  collapse  commentary  communism  comparison  competition  conceptual-vocab  conquest-empire  consumption  contradiction  contrarianism  cooperate-defect  coordination  copper  correction  correlation  corruption  cost-benefit  counter-revolution  counterfactual  courage  cowardly  creative  crisis  crispr  critique  crooked  crossborder  cuation  cultural-dynamics  culture  curiosity  current-events  cv  cynicism-idealism  cynicism  darwinian  data  dear  debate  debt  decentralized  decision-making  deep-materialism  defense  definition  degrees-of-freedom  democracy  demographic-transition  demographics  derek_burney  deterrence  developing-world  development  dirty-hands  discovery  discrimination  discussion  disease  distribution  diversity  diy  domestication  donald_trump  downloaded  drama  duty  dysgenics  dystopianism  early-modern  economics  economist  eden-heaven  eden  eea  ef-add  egalitarianism-hierarchy  egt  elite  embodied  emotion  empirical  employment  energy-resources  energy  enhancement  envy  epidemiology  epigenetics  epistemic  equilibrium  error  essay  estate  ethancohen  ethics  eu  eudaimonia  europe  events  evolution  evopsych  examples  existence  exit-voice  exocortex  expansionism  explanans  exploration  explore-exploit  family  fandom:across_the_universe  fashun  fertility  fic  fiction  finance  finances  financial  financial_literacy  flexibility  flourishing  flux-stasis  focus  foreign-policy  forethought  formal-values  framework  frc  free-riding  front  frontier  frugality  fund  futurism  gallic  galton  gavisti  gbooks  gedanken  gender  gene-flow  generative  genetic-load  genetics  genomics  geopolitics  giants  globalization  gnon  gnosis-logos  good  goodbye  government  great-powers  green  group-level  guilt  guitar  habit  hanson  hari-seldon  hate  health  hedonism  hetero-advantage  heuristic  hidden-motives  history  hive-mind  holiday  homo-hetero  honor  hsu  humility  humor  hyperopia  hypocrisy  iasb  ideas  identity-politics  ideology  ignatius  immune  impetus  individualism-collectivism  industrial-revolution  inequality  info-dynamics  info-foraging  innovation  insight  instinct  institutions  intel  intellectual_history  interests  internet  intervention  interview  investments  iq  iraq-syria  iron-age  islam  israel  isteveish  janus  jargon  javascript  journos-pundits  jr  jstor  judaism  jude  justice  jvm  kant  king  korea  kumbaya-kult  labor  language  latinamerica  law  leadership  lee-kuan-yew  left-wing  letters  leviathan  life-history  life  list  literature  lived-experience  local-global  lol  long-short-run  love-hate  lucy/prudence  lucy  luther  madisonian  magnitude  make  making  management  marginal  market-failure  marketing  markets  markov  martial  martin  max/jude  meaningness  medicine  medieval  mediterranean  mensensmokkel  meta:medicine  meta:prediction  meta:rhetoric  meta:war  metabolic  metabuch  metameta  microfoundations  migrant-crisis  migration  military  mind  mitchell  moderation  moments  money  mongodb  moral  moral_philosophy  morality  mostly-modern  mr  multi  music  mutation  myopia  myth  n-factor  napoli  nascent-state  nationalism-globalism  natural_law  nature  near-far  neocons  neuro-nitgrit  neuro  neuroscience  new-religion  news  nibble  nietzschean  no-go  noble-lie  noblesse-oblige  nordic  nostalgia  notetaking  novelty  nuclear  obama  objektbuch  occident  oceans  offense-defense  old-anglo  only  optimate  optimization  order-disorder  org:anglo  org:biz  org:data  org:foreign  org:junk  org:lite  org:mag  org:ngo  org:popup  org:rec  organizing  orient  orwellian  outcome-risk  paleocon  parable  parasites-microbiome  paternal-age  patho-altruism  patience  patience_&_prudence  paul  paying-rent  pdf  peace-violence  people  perry_como  personal_economy  personal_finance  persuasion  perturbation  pessimism  pharse  philosophy  photos  phronesis  pic  pinboard  piracy  planning  plasticity  poast  poetry  polarization  policy  polisci  politics  pop-diff  pop  population-genetics  population  populism  porch  potterygirl  power  practical_reason  pragmatic  pre-ww2  prediction  prejudice  preparation  prioritizing  priors-posteriors  privacy  probe  profile  propaganda  proposal  psychiatry  psychology  public-health  putnam-like  qtl  quixotic  quote  quotes  race  rainydayfund  randy-ayndy  rant  rationality  ratty  readiness  realness  realpolitik  reason  recent-selection  recklessness  redistribution  reference  reflection  regional-scatter-plots  regression-to-mean  regret  regularizer  religion  republic  responsibility  rest  retention  review  revolution  rhetoric  right-wing  rights  rigor  risk  ritual  roots  rot  russia  s:**  s:*  sanctity-degradation  sapiens  savings  savory  saying  sayings  science  scifi-fantasy  scitariat  search  selection  self-development  self-interest  self-regulation  self-sufficiency  selfcontrol  sex  sexuality  sicily  signal-noise  signaling  simplicity  simulation  sinosphere  sky  slate  slippery-slope  slow  social-capital  social-norms  social-psych  social-science  social  society  sociology  solzhenitsyn  song  space  spearhead  speculation  speed  speedometer  spreading  st.  statesmen  stochastic-processes  stoicism  stories  strategy  straussian  street-fighting  study  stylized-facts  subculture  summary  supply-demand  systematic-ad-hoc  tactics  technicaldebt  technology  techtariat  telos-atelos  temperance  terrorism  tetlock  the-basilisk  the-bones  the-classics  the-founding  the-great-west-whale  the-monster  the-trenches  the-watchers  theology  theory-practice  theos  thinking  thomism-21stc  thrift  thucydides  time-preference  time  tocqueville  top-n  track-record  trade  tradeoffs  tradition  trends  tribalism  trivia  trump  trust  truth  turing  twitter  umlaut  unaffiliated  uncertainty  unintended-consequences  universalism-particularism  us-them  us  usa  utopia-dystopia  utopianism  value  values  vice  virtu  virtue  virtue_ethics  vitality  volo-avolo  walter-scheidel  war  wealth-of-nations  web  webdev  west-hunter  westminster  whatsoldisnew  whiggish-hegelian  whitelaw  wiki  wire-guided  wisdom  wonkish  work  workflow  world-war  world  writing  yarvin  youtube  zeitgeist  🌞  🎩  🐸  👽 

Copy this bookmark: