the fisherman of halicarnassus

steelmanning is a critical thinking technique that involves trying to understand and present the strongest possible version of an argument or position, even if it is one that you disagree with or find flawed. the goal of steelmanning is not to defend or advocate for the argument, but rather to understand it more deeply and to better understand why someone might hold that position. this can be useful in a variety of contexts, such as when you are trying to have a productive conversation or debate with someone who holds a different perspective, when you are trying to anticipate objections to your own argument, or when you are trying to identify the underlying assumptions or values that inform someone's argument.

here are a few examples of how steelmanning might be applied in different contexts:

imagine that you are trying to have a conversation with a friend about the value of wearing masks to prevent the spread of covid-19. your friend argues that masks are unnecessary because they don't provide complete protection and can make it harder to breathe. to steelman their argument, you might try to understand why they might hold this view, even if you disagree with it. you might ask questions like: "what do you think are the main reasons that people might believe masks are unnecessary?" "what kinds of experiences or evidence might lead someone to conclude that masks don't provide enough protection?" by asking these questions, you are trying to understand the strongest version of your friend's argument, rather than simply dismissing it as misguided or wrong.
suppose that you are writing an essay in which you argue that the government should invest more in renewable energy sources. one of the objections to your argument might be that renewable energy is too expensive and that it is not feasible to rely on it as our primary source of energy. to steelman this objection, you might try to understand the underlying assumptions and values that inform it. for example, you might ask yourself: "what do people who believe that renewable energy is too expensive think are the main costs associated with it?" "what do they see as the main benefits of non-renewable energy sources, and how do they weigh those benefits against the costs?" by answering these questions, you can better understand the perspective of those who disagree with you and anticipate their objections more effectively.

imagine that you are trying to have a productive conversation with someone who holds a very different political perspective from your own. one way to approach this conversation might be to try to steelman the other person's arguments. for example, if they argue that the government should not provide social services because it is not the government's role to take care of people, you might try to understand why they might hold this view, even if you disagree with it. you might ask questions like: "what do you think are the main reasons that people might believe that the government should not provide social services?" "what kinds of experiences or evidence might lead someone to conclude that it is not the government's role to take care of people?" by asking these questions, you are trying to understand the strongest version of the other person's argument and to identify any common ground you might have, rather than simply dismissing their perspective as misguided or wrong.

this is an argument that introduces a new topic in order to distract from the original issue being discussed. for example, "yes, i know i'm late for work again, but have you seen how bad the traffic is this morning?"

the slippery slope is a logical fallacy that occurs when an argument suggests that a small initial action or event will inevitably lead to a chain of other events, culminating in a significant, negative consequence. this type of argument suggests that if the initial action is allowed to happen, it will set off a chain reaction that cannot be stopped, ultimately leading to an undesirable outcome.

for example, consider the following argument:

"if we allow students to use their phones in class, it will lead to students being constantly distracted and unable to pay attention. this will result in lower grades and a decrease in overall academic performance. therefore, we should not allow students to use their phones in class."

in this argument, the initial action of allowing students to use their phones in class is presented as the first step in a chain of events that will ultimately lead to negative consequences. however, this argument does not take into account the possibility that students might be able to use their phones responsibly or that other measures could be put in place to prevent distractions.

one key problem with the slippery slope fallacy is that it often relies on exaggerated or unrealistic assumptions about the consequences of an action. it is important to carefully evaluate the evidence and consider alternative explanations when confronted with this type of argument.

in critical thinking, it is important to be aware of the slippery slope fallacy and to carefully consider the evidence and logic behind an argument, rather than simply accepting it because it seems to follow a logical sequence of events. it is also important to consider alternative explanations and to be open to the possibility that the initial action or event may not necessarily lead to the negative consequences that are being predicted.

the concept of zero as a number has a long and interesting history. it is thought to have originated in ancient civilizations in mesopotamia, india, and the maya civilization in central america.

in ancient mesopotamia, the sumerians used a symbol for a placeholder in their system of base 60, which is still used in time measurement today (e.g. 60 seconds in a minute). this placeholder symbol was later adopted by the ancient babylonians and is thought to be the earliest recorded use of a placeholder symbol in a positional number system.

in ancient india, the concept of zero as a number was developed independently by the ancient indian mathematicians. they used the sanskrit word "shunya," which means "void," to represent the concept of nothingness. the ancient indian mathematician brahmagupta was the first to write about the rules for arithmetic with zero, including the concept of negative numbers.

the maya civilization in central america also had a concept of zero, which they represented with a shell-shaped symbol. the mayan number system was based on a base 20 system and included a symbol for zero, which was used in the same way that we use zero today.

the concept of zero as a number was later transmitted to the islamic world, where it was further developed by mathematicians like al-khwarizmi and later spread to europe through the work of scholars like fibonacci. today, zero is an integral part of the modern decimal number system, which is used worldwide.

(see: god complex)

chernobyl's new spin off documentary that will be coming to hbo and hbo max later june 2022.

catharsis (meaning "purification" or "cleansing" or "clarification") is the purification and purgation of emotions through dramatic art, or it may be any extreme emotional state that results in renewal and restoration. in its literal medical sense, it refers to the evacuation of the catamenia—the menstrual fluid or other reproductive material from the patient. but as a metaphor it was originally used by aristotle in the poetics, comparing the effects of tragedy on the mind of a spectator to the effect of catharsis on the body.

in psychology, the term is associated with freudian psychoanalysis and specifically relates to the expression of buried trauma, bringing it into consciousness and thereby releasing it permanently. however, there is considerable debate as to its therapeutic usefulness. social catharsis may be regarded as the collective expression of extreme emotion, when groups gather together, such as in large crowds at sporting events.

catharsis in platonism

in platonism, catharsis is part of the soul's progressive ascent to knowledge. it is a means to go beyond the senses and embrace the pure world of the intelligible. specifically for the neoplatonists plotinus and porphyry, catharsis is the elimination of passions. this leads to a clear distinction in the virtues. in the second tractate of the first ennead, plotinus lays out the difference between the civic virtues and the cathartic virtues and explains that the civic, or political, virtues are inferior. they are a principle of order and beauty and concern material existence. although they maintain a trace of the absolute good, they do not lead to the unification of the soul with the divinity. as porphyry makes clear, their function is to moderate individual passions and allow for peaceful coexistence with others. the purificatory, or cathartic, virtues are a condition for assimilation to the divinity. they separate the soul from the sensible, from everything that is not its true self, enabling it to contemplate the mind.

never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
napoleon bonaparte

rabbi abraham twerski talks about the difference between selfish love and true love, which must be a love of giving and not of receiving.

transcript:

"'young man. why are you eating that fish?' the young mans says, 'because i love fish.' he says, 'oh. you love the fish. that's why you took it out of the water and killed it and boiled it.' he says, 'don't tell me you love the fish. you love yourself, and because the fish tastes good to you; therefore, you took it out of the water and killed it and boiled it.'

"so much of what is love is fish love. young couple falls in love. young man and young woman fall in love. what does that mean? that means that he saw in this woman someone who he felt could provide him with all of his physical and emotional needs, and she felt in this man somebody she feels that she can write, that was love, but each one is looking out for their own needs. it's not love for the other. the other person becomes a vehicle for my gratification.

"too much of what is called love is fish love. an external love is not on what i'm going to get but i'm going to give. we had an ethicist rabbi dessler, who said, 'people make a serious mistake in thinking that you give to those whom you love, and the real answer is you love those to whom you give.'

his point is if i give something to you, i've invested myself in you. since self-love is a given, everybody loves themselves, now that part of me has become in you, there's part of me in you that i love. true love is a love of giving, not a love of receiving.'

group a: qatar (hosts), netherlands, senegal, ecuador
group b: england, united states, iran, wales/scotland/ukraine
group c: argentina, mexico, poland, saudi arabia
group d: france, denmark, tunisia, peru/australia/uae
group e: spain, germany, japan, costa rica/new zealand
group f: belgium, croatia, morocco, canada
group g: brazil, switzerland, serbia, cameroon

love doesn't just sit there, like a stone, it has to be made, like bread; remade all the time, made new.

after awhile you could get used to anything.

cratylism is the belief that the words or names that we use for things accurately reflect the true nature of those things. this belief is based on the idea that words have an inherent meaning that is intrinsic to the things they represent, and that this meaning is somehow encoded in the structure or sound of the word itself.

one example of cratylism might be the belief that the word "dog" accurately reflects the true nature of dogs, because the word itself contains some inherent meaning that corresponds to the characteristics of dogs. for example, some proponents of cratylism might argue that the word "dog" contains the sound "d-o-g," which represents the barking sound that dogs make, or that the word "dog" is derived from an ancient word that means "protector" or "guardian," which reflects the role that dogs often play as protective companions.

another example of cratylism might be the belief that the word "tree" accurately reflects the true nature of trees, because the word itself contains some inherent meaning that corresponds to the characteristics of trees. for example, some proponents of cratylism might argue that the word "tree" is derived from an ancient word that means "life," which reflects the role that trees play in supporting and sustaining life on earth.

in practice, however, cratylism is generally considered to be a flawed or unscientific approach to understanding the meaning and use of words. most modern linguists and philosophers reject the idea that words have an inherent meaning that is intrinsic to the things they represent, and instead view the meaning of words as a social or cultural construct that is shaped by the way that they are used and understood by speakers of a particular language.

a 14 year old australian boy who wanted to explore the world, so he snuck to a plane wheel well, it opened in mid-air and the boy fell out. the photographer was just testing his new lenses and was shocked after developing those images. image
wheel-well stowaway

life in ancient greece varied greatly depending on a person's status, occupation, and location, but there were some common elements that characterized daily life for the majority of the population.

for most ancient greeks, the day began with a simple breakfast of bread, cheese, and perhaps a cup of wine. afterward, they would set off to work, whether that meant farming, crafting, or trading. the workday would typically last from sunrise to sunset.

after work, ancient greeks would return home to their families. dinner, the main meal of the day, was typically a communal affair, with the family eating together at a table. dinner might include a variety of foods such as vegetables, fruits, grains, and legumes, as well as fish, meat, and dairy products.

after dinner, ancient greeks might engage in leisure activities such as playing games, visiting with friends and neighbors, or attending cultural events such as plays or athletic competitions. some people also spent their evenings studying or engaging in religious rituals.

it's important to note that ancient greek society was highly stratified, with a small elite class of wealthy landowners and politicians at the top, and a large class of poor peasants and slaves at the bottom. daily life would have been very different for these two groups, with the wealthy enjoying a much higher standard of living and more leisure time, while the poor were burdened with hard manual labor and had little time for leisure.