Greg Scott

Yes, I wonder if hormesis/xenohormesis is a form of Mithridatism.

Thanks Brian for the interesting comments. Wikipedia article on Political_spectrum: "...the contemporary American right is often considered communitarian (or populist) on sociocultural issues and individualist (or libertarian) on economic issues." I don't know how "scientific" such descriptions are, but they can certainly be entertaining. Similarly for the proliferation of chatter about "Generations" such as "Gen X" versus "Millenials". Are these collections of humans mere constructs, or do they really exist? It's all good, clean fun and I enjoy reading about these constructs even while wondering if the groups are real or imaginary.

Sounds like an askhole.

A variation on the Tibetan Buddhist Sand mandala. The sand fights back...

Unless your roommate is a psychopath. Ahem. Well said Sthira. If you're feeling lonesome, read The Stranger Beside Me by Ann Rule.

Agreed. Now that's good stuff Sthira. You've got talent, sonny.

Dean, This sounds like a contrast between an ordinary person and a genius. No contempt is intended in my use of the term "ordinary person". It also brings to mind this quotation: "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." It could be that the inspiration for this quotation Is Henry Buckle: Background is on p.32, the gist of the quotation is on p.33: Haud Immemor (Not Unmindful) by Charles Stewart. Here is the quotation for the click-averse: "Buckle said, in his dogmatic way: "Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence ; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons ; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest, by their preference for the discussion of ideas" The epigram, for an epigram, is, I think, unusually true; but the modifications it requires for practical life are too obvious to dwell on. The fact, of course, is that any of one's friends who was incapable of a little intermingling of these condiments would soon be consigned to the home for dull dogs." For more on Buckle: Wikipedia: Henry Buckle. Here is another excerpt you might like from "Haud Immemor" (p.158): " The best years of life are after fifty or sixty, when you know what the world really is and what it has to offer. One knows more, and can do more for others; has more experience, and is free from illusions about wealth or rank or love ; or even about religion, for one begins to see what is really valuable in it, and what is half physical and half emotional."

Dean, Thanks for this excellent post. You have produced a number of these educational posts with great screenshots. Can you tag those posts so we can get a listing of all your meta-forum posts? They really deserve to be spotlighted with some forum heading, like FAQ or "Tips for getting the most out of this website".

Sthira, Don't be hard on yourself. I'd bet Dean meant it like "saucy" or "cheeky", something like this ad hoc "definition": taking things less seriously than the stuffed shirts do, in a way that is regarded as entertaining or amusing; In other words, nobody felt disrespected, and you are more amusing than offensive. No worries. That is interesting. I too don't expect to live longer than my genetic program dictates. All I am doing is avoiding an undue shortening of my potential by abusing my body through overeating or other harmful treatment.

Huh? At least it appeared you were going to modify your diet in several significant ways as a result of some of these discussions. The hazards of a fruitarian diet thread seemed like it had some reasonable, actionable advice you at least said you were inclined to adopt. No? Yes Dean, I am a backslider. The alterations to my regimen didn't "take" or "stick". I got sick of nuts, for one thing. So the only behavior change I am aware of is the use of CRON-O-METER and my taking many of the vegan supplements on "the Dean's list". I was already drinking coffee, so all the research on the benefits of coffee consumption don't matter to me. Anyway, I'll probably find out that the benefits don't accrue to someone drinking my coffee, or my coffee prepared the way I do it. Ah - the naturalistic fallacy. You do know it's natural for humans to eat meat,... This raises the question of what is "natural". Among humans, is eating meat more natural than smoking tobacco? I read that 92% of Chinese men smoke, so it would appear to be as natural as eating meat in America. Or is there more to it than prevalence? I could never tolerate alcohol, and eating meat never appealed to me. Veganism is effortless and seems nearly instinctive. Is that quirk "unnatural"? I'm missing your point here. What "experiments" do you mean? I'm all for sanitation that promotes health and longevity, quarantine of the infected. Is that what you mean by experiments that offset the "natural" tendency to die young?

My feeling exactly (that such arguments are "fairly weak and not especially convincing". I don't believe there is any amount of ratiocination that could produce defensible "theorems" about purpose in life. It all boils down to preference. Saying that preferences are inherited, based on eons of selection (i.e. they have survival value) doesn't justify the preferences. They might be useful for propagating genes, but survival itself is pointless in a universe devoid of purpose (or at least a universe in which animal life has no purpose (in a philosophical, teleological sense) other than proliferation or continuance of genetic factors). I find most instances of "life purpose" to be *very* arbitrary, rather than merely *somewhat* arbitrary. But we all need to pass our time somehow, so I applaud anyone who latches on to some "purpose" that provides self-justification or gratification and doesn't hurt anyone else. I like that way of putting it, and concur. However pointless and arbitrary the adoption of his principle might appear, it is certainly admirable. My "take" is probably clear from the foregoing remarks, but I'll elaborate anyhow. I have an esthetic approach to this issue. [it seems the quaint spelling aesthetic might still be predominant, but I'm all for spelling reform] There are behaviors that appear ugly, including selfish or hurtful attitudes and actions. They appear so to me, no matter what anyone says. However, I am not a unique machine, so I expect many other humans to think just as I do. You made a comment earlier about a framework being "convincing or ennobling", and that nails it. The "convincing" part covers the need we have for rational notions, and the "ennobling" part covers what I call the esthetic approach. Attitudes and behaviors that we would call noble attract us. Their opposites (ignoble, selfish, heinous,... whatever expressions of distaste or disapprobation we use) are repellant, ugly, offensive to our delicate esthetic sensibilities. The ugly reality is that there are people who don't share our esthetic values. That compels us to do a cost/benefit analysis of confrontation with them. In some cases we defend our arbitrary values by attempting to obliterate the enemy. The outcome doesn't matter to anyone but us, here and now. Nothing matters really. But we do have our predispositions and preferences, and each of us can have a grand time, for it seems to me we live on an interesting little planet.

Dean, It might be premature to report after making only one long post, since that one post did not have much markup in it (such as LIST items). But I think your suggestion has merit. I did not see a proliferation of markup generated by the forum software. So it appears that the beast has been tamed.

Thank you Dean. As always, your response was helpful.

I compose a post in an external editor (not a component of the browser), then submit it to the forum software. After selecting "Preview Post", I often get a surprise at how it looks. In checking the composition area of the forum webpage, I see that the forum software has inserted markup that was not in my editor. This happens routinely with LIST tags and QUOTE tags. Is there any way to prevent the composition software from guessing what I intend and inserting its own markup?

The function "View New Content" is most useful. After a hiatus, there might be a great many posts listed. Is there a way to select and mark posts that are not of interest as read without actually selecting them? Email programs allow you to select multiple messages without reading them, then trash the group. Is there a similar function for removing posts from the "View New Content" display?