In Tenure Veritas: Libations From The Ivory Tower

 This morning, I will wrap up my discussion of K.J. Parker's Engineer Trilogy, with The Escapement .  It is perhaps appropriate that the final book is partially mechanical, both in its writing technique and plotting, making it the first K.J. Parker book I have read that was not a 100% success, if not precisely a disappointment.  The ever-expanding war between Mezentia, Eremia, the Vadani and the Aram Chantat of the Cure Hardy began, and snowballed because, as the characters never cease to remind us, they love .  Their circumstances, consequently, leave them no choice.  Of course, Parker (pen name for Tom Holt) does not intend to say that wars happen, nor that anything happens because we are clockwork automatons without choice, fulfilling the functions set by an engineer like Ziani Vaatzes who is, himself, acting without choice.  We have choice.  In the end, that is all that we have. Refresher.  The series takes place on a non-magical alternate world.  The Vadani and the Eremians op

 With Thanksgiving this past week, a quintessentially American holiday that has turned into a celebration of gluttony and excess rather than anything more high-minded, I think we shall return to Musonius Rufus.  I wrote several posts about Musonius and his philosophy, and this seems to be a nice opportunity to wrap up that series for now, although I will likely return to him on occasion.  We shall consider several points from the surviving lectures of Musonius, while connecting his school of philosophic thought to modern political ideology, and even the nature of that strange thing that happened with next year's "where are they now," Oliver Anthony. Consider your eating habits, and here, we note that the tension between philosophers like Musonius and Epicurus can be overstated.  Epicurus (as in, " epicurious.com ," which does have some good cooking advice), was among the more misunderstood philosophers.  He claimed that life and experience could be reduced to se

 Most years, I post some snarky thing about bating one's relatives on Thanksgiving, but actually, I like this ritual.  Instead of writing something snide about how to torment either the drunken, racist uncle, or the insufferably arrogant, woke college sophomore and the sudden peace between them as they find common ground this year upon discovering their mutual hatred of the Jews (you're welcome!), I have some observations about why this one is actually a useful ritual, cloistered among so much cultural detritus. The giving of thanks.  To whom?  It does not matter, and perhaps we should broaden our conception.  Appreciation.  Appreciation has no person as the direct object, grammatically speaking.  Appreciation has, as its direct object, the thing one appreciates.  What is that thing?  We'll come to that.  It is the direct, logical opposite of resentment.  To appreciate having a thing-- physical or better yet, otherwise-- is the opposite of resenting others for having what t

 Do you think that you observe some sort of ruling class?  How did it arise?  Did some external and all-powerful thing called a "system" come into being, self-formed, creating rulers and a subordinate class?  Or, if I may take an interpretation that is almost certainly not that of the author, but perhaps one that would be offered by some of the philosophers I reference more frequently, and indeed, are vaguely appropriate given the Greco-Roman references of the novel itself, consider.  What do you seek?  What do you desire?  If you seek that which is outside your control, you make yourself a slave to whomever does control the thing you seek, and you create that order.  Let us take an interpretation of Nick Harkaway's Titanium Noir  which I am reasonably certain he did not intend. At some future (?) point in time, someone invents a drug called Titanium 7.  If you take it, you will be rejuvenated, have your life dramatically extended to functional immortality, and also, grow

 ... not a claimant's filing.  Let us take several steps back, into the bowels of disciplinary and meta-disciplinary methodology and ask the question, why we study history, for those who bother?  Consider world events, whichever events you have in mind, national conditions, whichever national conditions you have in mind, persistent policy problems, whichever policy problems you have in mind and ask, do you know the history of this thing?  Have you studied the history of this thing?  Do you demand that others study the history of this thing? Have you observed when a commentator, scholar, bloviator or any other interlocutor claims to have or demands that you study the history, whatever that history may be?  What argument are you given?  What demand is made, not of you, but of the history?  History, therefore what?  What is the syllogism? History is not my primary discipline, but then, neither is economics, nor literature, nor any of the other fields on which my observations touch, bu

 I do not know what has happened to the youth of America, with their rock and/or roll music.  There is that hillbilly fellow, shaking his hips on Sullivan's show, a lack of respect for elders, and this country is going straight to tarnation, if you will forgive my language!  One may note, as I have in the past, that some years past, there was a moral panic over chess and the question of whether it was an anti-social pursuit.  It is a game of war, in which the players stare silently at the board instead of speaking or engaging productively, and one may extrapolate from there, as past moral panicky people did.  Closer to home, for me, there was the Dungeons & Dragons moral panic, and generally speaking, every generation looks at the next and says, get off my lawn.  These kids today, or some variation thereof.  And so, if briefly this morning, I note the strange and not at all surprising fascination of today's youth with Osama Bin Laden. If you are not following the latest in

 The Washington, D.C. police had to engage violent protesters to protect a meeting of the Democratic National Committee from leftist protesters last night.  In contrast, there was a rally in defense of Israel, and against anti-Semitism several days ago, which was 100% peaceful, with no chants of "nuke Gaza," or anything of the sort.  Compare and contrast.  When protesters gather on the Palestinians' side, one hears chants of "gas the Jews," as in Sydney.  There is this, from the UK. These are hardly isolated.  There are violent assaults and threats against Jews on college campuses on a regular basis in the US.  And now, leftists pull this. When there is one  protest on the other side, do you see anything of the sort? Evaluate the cause by the protests. Obviously, there are very fine people on both sides, right?  Oopsies!

 How many years of bad luck do you incur for walking underneath a ladder?  As many as you deem unlucky after doing so.  Luck is little more than some combination of a quirk of random noise and observer bias, for whatever my favorite philosophers say about it under the capitalized form of "Fortune" in most translations.  Behold, the savior of the Republican Party's House caucus, in all his Jebuz-y form, and very Jebuz-y he is.  Mike Johnson.  Interesting guy.  We are nearing another fiscal cliff, because of course we are.  Welcome to the United States under divided government, 21st Century Edition.  McCarthy's doom-- his continuing resolution-- is about to end, so we face a government shutdown unless Mike Johnson does something, and here is his brilliant idea.  I mean, he could  pass some appropriations bills, if we were in normal-verse, but we aren't.  He could pass another continuing resolution, if he wanted to get McCarthy'ed, so thread, meet needle.  He has

 Nobody in the West cares about Darfur, but the U.N. has issued a feckless statement about the fact that another ethnic cleansing is underway.  The Massalit are being targeted, again.  The fact that the Massalit are Muslim rather than Jewish means that the U.N. can bring its useless self to condemn the horrific violence against them, even though the perpetrators are also Muslim.  However, the fact that the perpetrators are Muslims rather than Jews means that the coalition of leftists and anti-Semites who want Israel to lay down and die-- literally raped to death-- get no virtue-signaling points by raising hell, threatening and killing Jews in violent protests while they chant "gas the Jews" because they can't say the Massalit brought it on themselves by being money-grubbing Jews.  Their bigger problem is who the villains are.  The Massalit are Muslims, true, but the genocide being carried out is being done by Arab  Muslims, and don't you dare  say anything about them!

 This morning, we have another potentially timely topic as we consider Book 2 in K. J. Parker's Engineer Trilogy, Evil For Evil .  The first book in this series, Devices & Desires , was distressing, quite good, and a bad choice for what to read at this particular time in human events, but fuck it.  Once I'm in, I'm in.  Thinking through some of the larger issues in Book 2, we will focus on what happens when a nation at war loses sight of its goals.  I have argued that the commentariat's obsession with whether or not Israel is losing sight of its goals right now  is wrongheaded, but that does not mean that long-term analysis shouldn't maintain perspective.  We consider K.J. Parker. Here, then, is the very quick recap of Book 1, before we delve into Evil For Evil .  On a non-magical fantasy world, two duchies finally reach a peace agreement-- the Vadani and the Eremians.  Unfortunately, the Eremian Duke, while well-intentioned, is a bit of a moron.  He starts a wa

 Let's step back again, and do more stoic philosophy, relevant to issues of the day, but not direct policy analysis.  As promised, we shall continue examining the ideas of Musonius Rufus, who was among the more challenging thinkers of his school.  I began a series addressing Musonius last weekend, as I find many of his surviving lectures to be insightful.  Yet, I feel no obligation to defer to anyone, ever , including Musonius Rufus.  Of course, when someone makes a compelling case for an idea with which I disagree, I must consider, and if nothing else, Musonius will make you think.  Let us consider, now, the question of a right of self-defense.  I think that this is a universal right.  Musonius disagrees, and given the importance of the notion to all things political in the world today, we must consider Musonius.  His lectures were not sermons on the mount.  He was a stoic philosopher, linking Zeno of Citium and Chrysippus to his student, Epictetus.  As such, his ideas were notabl