Frances Lee and Stephen Macedo on the pandemic response; Lorenzo Warby on farmers vs. pastoralists; Stephen Eide on marijuana and mental illness; Martin Gurri on the moral domain
“Covey taught that proactive people focus their energy on their Circle of Influence, working on things they can change rather than worrying about things they can't.“ It can be difficult to measure one’s circle of influence, especially for bloggers and podcasters. Arnold is probably more influential than he realizes, but still not as influential as he wants to be. Just a guess.
Unquestionably your writing leaves me better, every day. You are a model of epistemic humility coupled with curiosity, while maintaining a self confident moral compass. You are a a first team all American proactive person. Thank you for sharing your thoughts with the world.
Covey's 7 Habits of Highly Successful People remains relevant -- and Arnold's blog posts are a form of his daily diary. And of my own, far more limited notes.
Working toward personal, individual success is bit more boring than trying to Change The World (for the Better!), and cleaning up your own damn room doesn't make one a legend, not even in their own mind.
In theory I'd like to be more effective, but as I think about the steps to take to maximize, or at least increase, my chances of being more locally successful, it seems so "not worth it" that I don't even try. Rather play another computer game.
What is the meaning of life? Personal health is one of them -- Biden has prostrate cancer, so does Scott Adams (of Dilbert). But if I'm doing regular exercise & takin' my many pills, I fee like I'm pretty high on an S curve of health (on the left) and actions taken (x). More exercise or diet isn't going to help me much. And similarly, how much effort to make my wife or kids happy; they're pretty happy with me and what I can realistically/ comfortably do. So my local Circle of Influence is pretty good, and I have time for Concerns. Wasting time? But it's intellectually stimulating, and I like it. So I plan to keep doing it.
"My essays make me one of the reactive people, especially when I write about the Current Thing." Yes, and isn't that the summation of all the bloggers and commenters who continuously offer their opinions about the current events? I enjoy your Current Thing writing; I believe you're seriously trying to avoid a Pavlovian reaction, and it shows. However, the rest of your writing is a more measured contemplation of a topic, which I do enjoy more.
> In Eastern Europe, for example, all the farming polities became Christian, all the pastoralist polities became Muslim.
A couple of counterexamples: Vlachs (Romanians) pastoralists, Albanians (no correlation between Tosk/Geg division and Muslim/Christian division).
And more counterexamples outside of Eastern Europe: Egypt (farming), Muslim Sicily (farming), Muslim Andalusia (farming), Spanish Mesta and related Christian institutions (pastoralist).
To pile on with specifics on scale. First, I have recently seen a couple of examples of many fewer degrees of separation than the mythical six. Second, a friend lights people (e.g., stadium servers) up with her genuine smile and concern for their well-being, setting an example for all around her. Third, Jordan Peterson points to our individual responsibility for the level of goodness in the world.
"My essays make me one of the reactive people, especially when I write about the Current Thing."
I have a liberal friends who participates in lots of protests. I tried to broach the subject but his responses nse was a little like people who think their vote is important. "If enough people in enough cities join the protests .."
I'm not sure I agree what you do is solely reactive. Maybe. Surely my participation here is more so. That raises the question of what we should be doing. Career, family, helping others in our community, and hobbies? Do we need a diversion from careers? How much time can we spend on family if we don't have young kids? Is what we do here not a hobby? What else who of we be doing instead?
"My essays make me one of the reactive people, especially when I write about the Current Thing."
I have a liberal friends who participated in lots of protests. I tried to broach the subject but his responses nse was a little like people who think their vote is important. "If enough people in enough cities join the protests .."
Maybe your writing and my participation aren't any better. If not then I have to ask what we should focus on. Careers, family, hobbies? Do we need diversions from careers? How much time can we spend on family if we don't have young children? Are hobbies different than what we are doing here?
Also, you are being a little too hard on yourself. I am not here for the mood affiliation, unless being a former Midwesterner is a type of mood affiliation, and I like when you give your reactive opinions, especially when I might disagree somewhat.
Your essays influence me regularly, leaving me better off than before I read them.
“Covey taught that proactive people focus their energy on their Circle of Influence, working on things they can change rather than worrying about things they can't.“ It can be difficult to measure one’s circle of influence, especially for bloggers and podcasters. Arnold is probably more influential than he realizes, but still not as influential as he wants to be. Just a guess.
Unquestionably your writing leaves me better, every day. You are a model of epistemic humility coupled with curiosity, while maintaining a self confident moral compass. You are a a first team all American proactive person. Thank you for sharing your thoughts with the world.
Yeah.
Covey's 7 Habits of Highly Successful People remains relevant -- and Arnold's blog posts are a form of his daily diary. And of my own, far more limited notes.
Working toward personal, individual success is bit more boring than trying to Change The World (for the Better!), and cleaning up your own damn room doesn't make one a legend, not even in their own mind.
In theory I'd like to be more effective, but as I think about the steps to take to maximize, or at least increase, my chances of being more locally successful, it seems so "not worth it" that I don't even try. Rather play another computer game.
What is the meaning of life? Personal health is one of them -- Biden has prostrate cancer, so does Scott Adams (of Dilbert). But if I'm doing regular exercise & takin' my many pills, I fee like I'm pretty high on an S curve of health (on the left) and actions taken (x). More exercise or diet isn't going to help me much. And similarly, how much effort to make my wife or kids happy; they're pretty happy with me and what I can realistically/ comfortably do. So my local Circle of Influence is pretty good, and I have time for Concerns. Wasting time? But it's intellectually stimulating, and I like it. So I plan to keep doing it.
"My essays make me one of the reactive people, especially when I write about the Current Thing."
I would say your circle of influence has grown.
"My essays make me one of the reactive people, especially when I write about the Current Thing." Yes, and isn't that the summation of all the bloggers and commenters who continuously offer their opinions about the current events? I enjoy your Current Thing writing; I believe you're seriously trying to avoid a Pavlovian reaction, and it shows. However, the rest of your writing is a more measured contemplation of a topic, which I do enjoy more.
Re farming vs pastoralists: that has been raised for attitudes of Scots vs English.
> In Eastern Europe, for example, all the farming polities became Christian, all the pastoralist polities became Muslim.
A couple of counterexamples: Vlachs (Romanians) pastoralists, Albanians (no correlation between Tosk/Geg division and Muslim/Christian division).
And more counterexamples outside of Eastern Europe: Egypt (farming), Muslim Sicily (farming), Muslim Andalusia (farming), Spanish Mesta and related Christian institutions (pastoralist).
To pile on with specifics on scale. First, I have recently seen a couple of examples of many fewer degrees of separation than the mythical six. Second, a friend lights people (e.g., stadium servers) up with her genuine smile and concern for their well-being, setting an example for all around her. Third, Jordan Peterson points to our individual responsibility for the level of goodness in the world.
"My essays make me one of the reactive people, especially when I write about the Current Thing."
I have a liberal friends who participates in lots of protests. I tried to broach the subject but his responses nse was a little like people who think their vote is important. "If enough people in enough cities join the protests .."
I'm not sure I agree what you do is solely reactive. Maybe. Surely my participation here is more so. That raises the question of what we should be doing. Career, family, helping others in our community, and hobbies? Do we need a diversion from careers? How much time can we spend on family if we don't have young kids? Is what we do here not a hobby? What else who of we be doing instead?
"My essays make me one of the reactive people, especially when I write about the Current Thing."
I have a liberal friends who participated in lots of protests. I tried to broach the subject but his responses nse was a little like people who think their vote is important. "If enough people in enough cities join the protests .."
Maybe your writing and my participation aren't any better. If not then I have to ask what we should focus on. Careers, family, hobbies? Do we need diversions from careers? How much time can we spend on family if we don't have young children? Are hobbies different than what we are doing here?
Martin Gurri's book was so good I read it twice, but that is the best thing by him I have ever read.
Also, you are being a little too hard on yourself. I am not here for the mood affiliation, unless being a former Midwesterner is a type of mood affiliation, and I like when you give your reactive opinions, especially when I might disagree somewhat.