Software developer interested in history, computing, science and anything nerdy. Tongue in cheek, my views are normally lightly held and fluid except when they are not.
followed tags: 50
followed domains: 0
badges given: 7 of 8
member for: 1788 days
Sometimes it takes a little time to unpack an assertion (or a number of assertions) and show why it may be inaccurate. It seems like a snap judgement to call him a "archetypal alt-right spoilboy that lacks empathy" without at least examining what he is saying first to see if it is correct in anyway. What did he say that led you to the conclusion that he is wrong?
Clinical psychologists in general may not be an authority on this topic except perhaps ones who carried out funded research on this very topic. Do we just dismiss that? Also I didn't get the sense that he is alt-right but it is VERY easy to label him as such based on the content and just dismiss it.
It seems like most people looked at this, thought "well that doesn't match my ideology" and promptly started screaming and hand wringing.
Not sure its that straight forward. There seems to be a strong desire to paint it black, describe him as a villain and then move on.
Take a look at this video:
Peterson is a Clinical psychologist lecturing at University of Toronto and has researched the points raised in the Manifesto prior to it being written. There is supporting research for Petersons claims but they are not politically correct message, hence the reaction. It would be my guess that the author took a lot of ideas from Peterson when writing the document but may have strayed in places.
There is a huge amount of anger over all of this and that is not helping the dialogue at all.
I hope its not him and the true identity is never uncovered. If it was me I'd be working overtime to plant clues that lead directly away from me.
Something is lost when the identity is revealed, the art is now linked to the artist and it becomes a reflection of him/her rather than a reflection of us...
Take a read of that.
Nice to be back, hoping to spend a bit more time here now that things are settling down at work. Just after getting home to Ireland after a 6 week spell in Maine which was a blast.
- - Otto Von Bismarck, the asshole that effectively made WWI possible
Whoa whoa whoa, before we go kicking Bizmarck around for setting up an intricate set of political alliances that eventually led to WW1, we should also acknowledge that Kaiser Wilhelm was a fuckwit who couldn't keep shit together. Its hardly Bismarcks fault that the royal family lost the genetic lottery and ended up with a ruler not fit to clean his boots...
Which is 8% of your gross salary if you earn 100K before they take the other 21/42% PAYE tax. Essentially half your salary goes to tax...
It makes for interesting conversations when my US based co-workers make the occasional gripe about salary or cost of living, my heart bleeds for them.
- The top federal income tax rate in the United States is 39.6%, with a threshold of about $415,000 in income for a single filer.
/Stares at paycheck
40% tax for everything over 42K... Damn!
EDIT: some quick maths shows that someone earning 100K would take home 12K more per year if they lived in the US.
Not sure I follow that, care to explain?
Oh no I even said it myself that I probably did miss the point so you're not being rude :) I knew coming in that it wasn't going to be a straight action/adventure story and I wasn't looking for one. I have read some philosophy but it sounds like perhaps not the right books...
Can you tell me what you took from it?
Hmm, so I'm just finished and I have to say my overwhelming feeling toward Anathem is that it was just really dull, too long with too many made up words.
There is a pattern throughout the book that goes something like this:
"Erasmus goes to a new location, he meets new people, he learns something new, that may or may not be tangentially related to the larger quest, but which also involves long side arcs where not much interesting happens". That is repeated at least 8 times if not more (interviews, apert, punishment, travel, city attack, archaeological site, new Math, space, ship, finale and probably a few more i missed).
The characters seem quite one-dimensional I thought, Arcibald and Jezry are almost interchangable. We are told multiple times that Jezry is the most gifted in the group yet never see him do anything to justify the acclaim. The love story could be removed and felt like an annoying add-on with no depth. None of the characters felt like actual people, merely plot devices that deliver some new information which sweeps our hero on to the next plot point.
It just seemed to me that it took an extraordinary long time to say nothing at all really, I would guess if someone had studied philosophy and was interested in a discussion about Nominalism and Platonism then it will tick some boxes but for me it didn't really work. It all just seemed a bit preachy, I'm sure there is a trope for characters who use a form of didactic conversation to withhold secrets until the student is ready but its probably used too much here. I may have drifted off a little towards the end, after the 3 way end story stuff, and missed some glorious reveal...
I don't feel it come close to the scale of Cryptonomicon which had multiple timelines and multiple perspectives wrapped up in an admittedly more firework laden storyline. Anathem is a single perspective wrapped around one topic which starts to really drag when we hit long wordy chapters filled with philosophical navel gazing.
Twas OK, maybe 2-3 stars out of 5. I'm coming to Anathem after reading the fantastic Wolf Hall/Bring Up the Bodies books from Hilary Mantell, who really knows how to build a character, so perhaps I'm treating Anathem too harshly as the comparison highlights its failings more acutely.