Sloppy Thinking

For many years I have heard Donne dunning my ears, but his catchy lil blank verse really borders on stupidity, though it does have bearing on so many folks’ hyper-engagement in “news” reporting of current events (see above reference to “stupidity”).

‘No Man is an Island’

No man is an island entire of itself; every man
is a piece of the continent, a part of the main;
if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe
is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as
well as any manner of thy friends or of thine
own were; any man’s death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind.
And therefore never send to know for whom
the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

Pardon me while I both gag and throw the bullshit flag. Sure, in some theoretical way, the death of someone I do not know and never would have known “diminishes” me, but in reality? If someone dies and they are not at least a close acquaintance, I have no connection to them, and their death is something for their friends, family, and close acquaintances to be impacted by, not me.

Folks who get all “het up” over events that happen to others they have never even met are just borrowing troubles not their own and filling their lives with fake emotions. It’s the same sort of unhealthy behavior as being devoted to a professional sports team or idolizing some entertainer.

It’s stupid.

BTW, Donne’s death in no way impacted my life. I never knew him (of course) and I really DGARA when or how he died. His life impacted me mainly through my irritation at his stupid verse reproduced here. I would not have been “diminished” one whit had he never written this drivel.


I’ve taken the MMPI and MMPI-2 at different times, for different reasons (does, “For a lark” count as a reason?) and when the scoring comes back, it’s always a “Huh?!?”

Yeh, that’s what “Undifferentiated personality disorder” and other interpretive remarks (different “Huhs” at different times) all mean. The MMPI cannot classify me, except as “not normal.” I actually had one experience where the score interpreter (a p-sych grad student) told me I had been disingenuous on the test. He asked me to retake it and “play it straight” but got the same results, so threw them out of his pool. I’ve gotten that more than once–being thrown out of sample pools because I did not fit a preconceived model, sometimes in physical–lab test–results (blood lipids pseudo research in the 70s).

I’m fine with that, because I had classified myself as “not normal” way decades ago.

Other less detailed personality/p-sych inventories stumble around and place me somewhere on some contemporary “spectrum” or another, but all that means (since different inventories all say something different) is “You don’t fit our classification system. Go away.” *heh*

If one takes a bit of time and just sits down and browses through the DSM-IV, one soon realizes that EVERYONE is just a bit crazy–including oneself. Because p-sych cannot really classify human behavior1 like biology can classify species within a taxonomic system, but the DSM is great for creating billing classifications for insurance purposes. . . .

And finally, I suppose my fascination with Soren Kierkegaard is because a majority of the voices in my head find him so. ๐Ÿ™‚

(Most Norms are scratching their heads and thinking, “Where did that come from?” *heh*)

1OK, gross classification is possible. Some behavior is clearly crazy, such as delusional behavior that is harmful to the one suffering the delusion–and to others. Some behavior. Most “disorders” in the DSM can be reclassified as simply “This makes Norms uncomfortable,” though, or “I need a billing class so I can keep this person as a cash cow.” *heh*

Off the Wall (and around the corner). . .

Was DiCaprio so good as Arnie Grape because he was type cast? *heh*

(I only ask because his stupid pronouncements about Globull Warmening are so deeply at odds with his lifestyle, that only someone with severe mental retardation could rationalize the two.)

Seriously Creeped Out…

. the simple fact that so very, very many people cannot see the difference between

“All ____ aren’t” and “Not all ____ are.”

The two statements say distinctly different things, but many people (most, in my experience) use the first one when they intend the second meaning.

Mind-boggling to realize that so very many people are so far divorced from simple logic.

Viewpoint and Perspective

The Mass MEdia Podpeople Hivemind viewpoint exacerbated by an almost complete lack of historical knowledge and perspective in our society exaggerates the effect of reports of current events on public awareness and opinion. The Houston flooding is a current example.

There’s no doubt the flooding in the Houston area is devastating, and is comparable to some of the worst flooding the area has experienced in the last 100 years, but–and this is in no way intended to minimize the property damage and loss of life–while the flooding there has approached record levels, several floods in the past 100 years have had higher crests and been at least as widely spread and devastating.

Of course, Houston is more populous now than it was during what was arguably THE most devastating flood of the past, in 1935, but heck, even though I’m not really conversant in Texas history, I’ve had enough relatives from Texas (including grandparents who were Texas transplants in Oklahoma) to have been aware that Houston has experienced many floods in the past.

As always, when I hear of folks devastated by natural events in locales where such things are common, I have to wonder, “Why were folks so very unprepared for such an event?” (Let alone wondering, “Why live in a flood plain?” *heh*) Now, readers here may recall that in April we were surprised by a flood that affected our own property–even invading our basement, a flood that exceeded “100 year flood” levels and was widely, throughout the county, well above and beyond any flooding in the historical record, cresting over even a 100-year-old “historical” bridge that had never been flooded.

And yes, there were folks living in flood plains who were flooded far, far worse than we were, outside any known flood plain (and I have FEMA maps–outdated NOW!–showing we are not in a flood plain, for that matter). Yes, even with the commonsense precaution we took years ago to deliberately NOT buy a home in a flood plain, though we looked at some nice places that were in a flood plain–we experienced flooding, but. . .

Lil tidbit from the link above, for additional perspective:

“Dec. 8, 1935: Flooding to second and third floors of downtown buildings; Houston central water plant inoperable for weeks. . .”

  • My Wonder Woman had a bugout bag ready in case it got bad enough. We also had plenty of supplies on hand in case were had to “bug in,” as it were (including both wash water and potable water, as well as a means to filter and sanitize more, if necessary). Most folks I know were similarly prepared.
  • Most folks in the county handled things expeditiously, WELL before FEMA blundered in.
  • No lives lost. While some of that might be related to our sparse population, I suspect the most likely reason is that most folks didn’t need to be told when to seek higher ground, and also knew to not stupidly drive into high water.

Non-stupid behavior pays off.

While its nice to be able to depend on the kindness of strangers1, NOT having to depend on it is smarter, IMO. Just sayn’.

But, it’s so much better for Mass MEdia Podpeople Hivemind ratings to “celebrate” (as it were), or at least not condemn, mass stupidity.

Again, not minimizing the property damage and loss of life (stupid people are people too), just noting: no one who is at all aware of past events finds the Houston flood at all surprising.

1With a tip o’ the tam to Blanche DuBois. ๐Ÿ˜‰

Well, That’s Just Life

Just about no matter where I go on the Interwebs (a few bloggers aside), I have from time to time been chastised by poorly-read folks for my vocabulary. Hey, lazy-asses! I work HARD to dumb it down for you!


Normals Seem to Do This a LOT

Here’s an example of Normals mis-hearing and mis-interpreting spoken terms that is particularly humorous to me: “two-trek road.” An amusing lack of thought went into that mis-interpretation, since a “two-track road” is definitive: the two TRACKS are made by wheels on axeled vehicles wearing a path, in much the same way that game trails are made (though game trails are almost always “one-track” trails, of course). “Two-trek” seems to indicate to me that the person who has written the term in this way has never even seen a two-track road, or if he has, has any understanding of how such a thing is made by the TRACKS of two wheels (and more, repeated by another one or two axles).

Understanding what one hears requires thought much more frequently than most Normals seem to be aware of.