This Too Shall Pass: Helplessness and Hope

      Everyone is familiar with the old “bell curve”. It is used as an indication of distribution for many different things from school grades, to “IQ”, to the ability to afford housing, and so forth. But, there is another graph that applies to attitudes. I am sure that it has a real name but I will just call it a “fallen cake” model. Although it does not happen often nowadays (does anyone know why?), cake batter within a mold will raise uniformly across the pan and then, because of a strong vibration or other event, the middle can just fall — leaving the edges relatively high with a wide plateau in-between that looks more like a crater. Unlike the bell curve which has its peak in the “center”, a fallen cake model will have two highs — one at each end of the graph.

     The fallen cake provides the shape but not the interpretation. For attitudes on most issues (pick your favorite, or least favorite, one) — there will be a group of people actively supporting the issue and another group actively fighting against the issue. These are the two “humps” at the ends of the horizontal axis. The height of the humps is a reflection of the activity of the group.

     That big flat area in-between are people who are passive. The flat area is almost always a wide area. If the humps are about the same height then they are fairly well matched though the width does come into play as it indicates the number of people in that active group. The shape changes as various factors are involved. Those passive people still make a difference as they still control votes or taxes or other means of input. Both humps will try to make the passive folk amenable to their position. The various “controversies” about issues are indicators of the flux within attitudes.

     Homosexuality, as well as all other folk within the LGBTQIA+ area, is not new. Various accounts have been recorded as far back as there have been written records. The First Nations were well aware of the diversity within humans and celebrated them. In various studies, there have been indications that external factors can affect the numbers in diversity but they are involved with gestation factors and occur before birth. Numbers of such are not zero and never have been and have never been a choice. The width and height of the humps, indicating acceptance or xenophobia, have vacillated throughout history.

    The medical, and recreational, use of marijuana has been reflected in attitudes throughout the past 60 or 70 years. My father talked about usage of marijuana as an ordinary, non-controversial, type of recreational drug within the Navy during deployment in the Korean War. At that point, it was a “who cares” issue. But with political and idealogical involvement, the fallen cake model started mobilizing against usage and, of late (with profit models being developed), for generalized usage once again. On one side are people who don’t think it is an issue with which the government should be involved and on the other side are people who think that all vices should be rigidly controlled. People who profit from the “drug wars” are particularly opposed to legalization.

     The United States is the only “developed” country which does not provide a baseline set of health care services for all citizens. Most countries do have the opportunity to pay for private insurance but such plans are in addition to that provided within their individual universal health care plans. This is very similar to those in the US able to be covered by Medicare, with private insurer “Part B” and “Part D” able to boost your benefits above basic Medicare. Yet, after indication of the majority of the US population indicating a desire to implement Universal Health Care, it continues to face uphill struggles. I talked about this in another blog recently. It fits the fallen cake pattern. There are people actively trying to get the US to provide for Universal Health Care and others who are actively trying to maintain the existing unique for-profit healthcare business model.

     There are many attitudinal issues for which the fallen cake model can be applied — climate change, AI development and ethical issues, the death penalty, mandatory vaccinations, public education, disarmament versus weaponization, participatory democracy versus authoritarianism, and so forth. There are also issues which appear to be “settled” that are actually still part of a fallen cake model and attitudes are still in flux. Many of the social support and movement aspects are in this category. I often place a pin on a history graph, at the point where feudalism started to become less acceptable, as a starting place for improvement on general social issues. As brought out in “The Handmaid’s Tale” attitudes can backslide.

When a person is actively involved with one of these issues, it can feel like

• There is no chance of change in attitudes (completely stable and accepted)

• People will never agree on a new attitude (discouragement)

• Change is “just around the corner” (enthusiasm and exultation)

     The reality is that attitudes change. Attitudes about measurable facts can change. Attitudes about emotional issues can change. What is an accepted situation can become a forbidden situation (and vice versa). Hope for change is always reasonable and apathy about the inability (though not necessarily the difficulty) to change is to be overcome.

     Hope and helplessness can, and do, co-exist.

Ideas & Interpretations is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

A Thought and a Word: Language to its core

     I have always been fascinated by languages (including programming languages). There are a lot of people that have the general feeling that it is “just” a matter of different words, different spellings, perhaps even a different alphabet. Or — for speech — different sounds and combinations that make a different language go together. Certainly the ways that we interact with languages — through the eyes, the ears, through the fingers and touch — are all a part of the distinctiveness of language. And, please, don’t let us forget the languages of art — of music, of sculpture, painting and drawing, photography, weaving, folk art, and all.

     But that is still on the surface. I have delved into more than a half-dozen languages in my life (more than a couple of dozen if you count programming languages), but I cannot claim fluency in any except English. For a single language, English is certainly sufficiently challenging — primarily because English is an absorbing language. If you don’t have a word in English to describe something and another language does have such a word — take it into English and make it part of the language (no promises that pronunciation or spelling will remain intact).

     This is a different approach from that of many languages. German puts two, or more, word building blocks together to expand their language. French monitors general use constantly to maintain an illusion of control over what will be considered to be part of French. Every colonial, or fought-over, region has had the invading language forced upon the people of the region, either blending languages or creating an effectively new “trade” or local dialect.

     I have talked about “if you don’t have a word for something, take it from another language”. Okay. That is what is DONE — but what does that mean?

     Languages are used for communication within a community. Everyday actions and ideas must be able to be expressed. People that live in a desert region will have a different environment affecting their language from those who live in a rainforest. It is also a reflection of the internal community. The peoples who have lived in the Russian region have been long dominated by centralized, authoritarian (and often stratified — layers of “nobility” or privilege) government and bureaucratic structures. The general people have no feeling of control so they don’t DO anything — everything is DONE TO them. In language, this is called a “passive” voice and the Russian language is built upon passivity. It also works both directions — passive in response to the environment and passive in actions because of less of a foundation of thought for active structures.

     People who have vocations, or jobs, as translators are required to pass beyond the point of word-for-word translation. Dictionary word substitutions only get oneself a small way toward expressing oneself in a different language. Professional translators have to absorb the reality that GROUPS of words, in specific CONTEXTS, have particular meanings.

     In all these cases (and more to think about and explore), we have communication between our inner selves and the outside world. Words, lyrics, paintings, are all approximations to expressing ourselves to the outside world and hoping that others will understand what is being expressed. There is a central core concept that is sometimes best expressed in writing and sometimes expressed in song. And, if done in both, they complement one another — both offering more perspectives on an inner reality.

     In the case of translation, the listening to a language brings one close to the central core concepts that are desired to be expressed. The translator then expresses that in a different language. In many ways, artists are translators attempting to bring those core concepts to life and to others’ interpretations as much as possible. The process of translation is the process of “grokking” (deep understanding — read “Stranger In a Strange Land”) the core concepts and expressing them into the same or a different language.

     Can English be translated into English? Absolutely. There are the easy cases of translating a period dialect (“Old English” to modern English) and the more pervasive, and less blatant, act of the creator getting in touch (in whatever manner) with a core concept and then expressing it in their mother tongue. Some languages are best suited for concrete actions, situations, and activities. Such languages (for example, English, Quechua, or Swahili) express doing and existing and interactions (“I read a book today”). Other languages are better suited for emotions — such as the various artistic languages. These are not isolated from one another — prose can express emotion and painting can demonstrate actions, events, and interactions. “A drawing is worth a thousand words.” Is this a saying about the acts of translation?

     Although greatly interested, I have had very little professional experience with natural language processing as done via computational power. However, I would guess that the levels operate in much the same way. Words can translate via online dictionaries. Sentences require a gestalt of the complete thought. And essays require knowledge of history and context. Doing such, we are progressing to the central core concepts. Once obtained to the best of one’s current ability, it is possible to then express those concepts in other languages.

Ideas & Interpretations is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

False Savings: When a Bargain costs you more

     U.S. people love to get “bargains”. Even relatively rich people like to think that they are getting more from their money. But, often, those bargains are just not what people think they are. One example that always comes to mind for me is that of our daughter when she was purchasing perishable vegetables. But three tomatoes for $2 instead of getting a single tomato for a $1. Obviously a bargain — right? But what about if you only eat one tomato out of the three before the other two go bad? You now have paid $2 for one tomato. No longer a bargain is it? Quantities of perishable food is one category of potential false bargains.

     People like to watch movies about wars (that they aren’t part of and don’t have any risks from). Tanks are always a favorite to watch. They’re so big. They obviously show a strong defence don’t they? Well, no — not within the current wars around the world. (I’m sure there are still specialized needs for them.)

     However, the money used to construct them (and store them) are important to local economies (but NOT important to any war/defence budget) — so these end up part of the many “porkbarrel” contracts which inflate the defence department’s budget. (So strange — huge amounts of known waste but “sacred” because they are (inappropriately) associated with “defence”.) This is a category of obsolescent needs.

     People in the US seem to often celebrate their lack of arithmetic skills. Who needs them? We have calculators and Yahoo and all, don’t we? We expect, when we go into a supermarket, that we will get lower prices (per unit) for large quantities in comparison to small quantities. And, most of the time, that will be true. But you have to watch it. A 32 oz. jar at $3 is NOT a bargain in comparison to a 16 oz jar at $1.25. (Another trick, whole numbers seem to be smaller.) How about 16 oz. for $1.25 and a quart at $3? Changing the units (from ounce to quart) is an acceptable ploy to mislead.

     Similar to the tanks above, maybe we just don’t need it? We have walked along in a shopping mall and often encountered a nice briefcase, in a display, for $50. But we don’t really need a briefcase and $50 seems like a lot of money. But, we are used to seeing it and thinking about it. What happens if we come back from work and see the window with a clearance sign saying “$22.50 for briefcase”. We’ve been looking at it for what seems like “forever” and it might not be there soon. So, we buy it. Nice looking briefcase gathering dust in the closet. Did we save $27.50 or spend $22.50? Both, of course — but how many such items of “bargains” do you have hidden away within your house?

     Go down to the local car lot. See that gorgeous truck there in the lot. It has the capacity to carry an entire living room’s worth of furniture just in that truck bed. You lean back and have fantasies of the neighbors all wanting to use it and thinking you are great because you have such a piece of machinery. But, what is reality? How often do you need to haul around a living room’s worth of furniture? For all purposes, how often do you need to haul around something larger, or heavier, than fits into the trunk of your compact car? Our economy loves you for it but buying something that you may use one or two days out of the year is certainly a luxury.

Ideas & Interpretations is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Silence: A living interval

     As a long time Quaker (or member of the Religious Society of Friends), I have always had an extra awareness of silence, its meaning, and its uses. (Not to say that other, non-Quakers, cannot have similar awareness.) Generally, most people seem to divide silence into “comfortable” silence and “uncomfortable” silence. This is defined by periods when you think someone (perhaps yourself) “should” be speaking but aren’t — and periods when it is mutually felt that there is nothing that needs to be said. But silence can also be used as an active part of communication especially when elements exist which do not have the capacity for traditional speech — nature, God, the ill, and so forth.

     Although Quakers have experienced the same types of divisions of perspective and practice as most religions of the world have, there is usually some period, within the time set aside for worship, where there is a general silence. Some people within the Quaker community call the silent periods within worship — “expectant worship”. I prefer to call it a “living silence”.

     Believing that there is an ongoing connection to something beyond us (the exact word is not that important — God, Holy Spirit, Allah, Mother Earth, …) we sit in silence to try to listen to that which is unsaid. Some people do the same thing within an informal situation where they stroll through the woods and listen for something within themselves or, perhaps, outside of themselves. It is likely a part of a person’s spirituality but it does not necessarily have to be part of any organized religion.

     It does not always work. It requires “centering” by most of the people within the group. This centering closes the door to everyday concerns — did I lock the car, will I get the project done in time, I must remember to get milk on the way home, … The centering can also be blocked by feelings of urgency prompted by world, local, or personal events. Connection to that something else must be allowed to happen within its own time scale; it cannot be rushed. Perhaps not “real” but I have felt a sort of “electricity” in the air within the group on those occasions when the centering does work. It is a feeling that the connection is real, and active, and can lead you to wherever you need to go.

     Sometimes, it really doesn’t work. We call those “popcorn meetings” where people pop up to say something that they feel they just MUST say at the moment and then, after sitting back down, someone else “pops up” either to contribute something new and different or to comment upon previous spoken worship. Without the time to renew centering, it is doubtful (though not impossible) whether such continued messages come from anything other than our own everyday ponderings (though those ponderings may be acute and profound).

     In modern society, many (probably most) are uncomfortable with silence. Conversations are filled with”small talk” or — worse — absent minds pecking at their smartphones. I think that it is likely that the difficulty with silence is closely related to the shift in attention span to shorter and shorter intervals between “actions”.

     Drink eight glasses of water. Learn to breathe properly. Keep your back straight in the chair. And — to be added — learn to love, cherish, and appreciate the silence around you.

     Ideas & Interpretations is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Perspective: Minimized or Exaggerated?

     Over in a small city in Spain, the children of the house head out to walk to a local playground to be with their friends. Their parents do not spend their time fantasizing disaster and worrying about their safety. All is as it should be — children are being children and the adults are doing what they need to do for themselves and family. Now jump across the ocean to a small town in the United States. A child decides that they want to go to the playground to play. They ask their parents but the parents are distracted and do not reply so the child leaves a note. Soon, the parent notices they are gone and reads the note. Immediately, they panic. They call the police telling them of their plight. On the way to the playground, a neighbor sees the child walking along the sidewalk without accompaniment, and they call the police to report neglect and endangerment. The child must remain under the “umbrella” of their parents’ control and fear or the parents may have problems.

     Is there a danger? Certainly. Life is uncertain. They may trip on the sidewalk and hit their head. A stranger may drive along and decide that this child should not be permitted sweet dreams and should live through nightmares. A meteorite may fall from the sky, striking the child. They might make it to the playground and, in spite of great efforts to remove all equipment on which they might get hurt, fall off and break an arm.

     Is the potential danger different between that city in Spain and that small town in the US? Maybe a bit but not much. Children do the same types of things all over the world. There are good people and bad people in every country and of every background. People talk about the “good old days” of the 1950s or 1960s when everything was safer and they could just walk to school or go to the playground without any cares. Is the potential danger very different between the 1950s and the 2020s?

     It is probably a bit more dangerous now than it was — but it’s because of population growth, traffic, climate change, pollution, and such. Children are more likely to develop breathing problems because of increased pollution or have greater health problems because of factory food production or pollutants and contaminants. They have a higher chance of being hit by a car because there are more cars on the road. There are more people with mental problems on the streets because the US decided to save money by getting rid of the public hospitals and sanitariums and release them to roam rather than working with them to improve their situation.

     But, at the core, it isn’t much different now from that which it was back “then”. So, why do we have all of these “helicopter” parents — and an attitude from others that demands that they BE “helicopter” parents (or else …).

Perspective..

     One of the big changes over the years, especially in the US but somewhat contagious to the rest of the world is that journalism has declined while infotainment has risen greatly. Journalism is concerned with facts (possibly commented upon or even extrapolated from). Infotainment is concerned with presenting information to people such that they are interested and will continue to pay attention in order to sell advertising. The information may be factual or it may be invented. It is possible for infotainment to include factual research that meets journalistic standards — but that is not a requirement.

     There have always been media stories (newspapers, television, …) that have been more for public interest than because people really need to know. Sometimes coverage of a remote disaster or a family in trouble can bring people together to be their best selves and provide assistance as they can. But when a terrible thing happens to a child 1500 miles away it is a tragedy — a local, isolated tragedy. One child out of 335 million people. Is your child likely to encounter a similar situation? No. But it is always possible to win a lottery and it is always possible that it could be your child hitting that one out of a 335 million people situation. No one wants their child to be that child.

     But in Spain dangers are considered a part of life. In the 1950s USA, dangers were considered to be a part of life. Today, we are often presented with tragedies and problems around the country and world — but, to make it more urgent locally and of greater importance for watchability, it gets lost that this is happening to one out of 335 million (or, globally, 8.05 billion). Danger SEEMS much more likely and, thus, we must hover, we must distrust, we must keep our illusion of control. We have lost perspective. And politicians love fear as they can so easily manipulate people who are angry or fearful.

Perspective can also be minimized.

     The opposite can also occur. An unjustifiable shooting of a minority person occurs and it gets reported. However, there are many more that are NOT reported. If the infotainment media decides that people do not want to see this, or their owners do not want people to see this, then it can be de-emphasized. They may declare it to be a solitary event when it is really something that happens much more often. A journalistic approach would make it clear that this is a single reported occurrence from a pool of many actual occurrences. An infotainment approach is concerned with presenting what their viewers want to see — whether it is appropriately shown or not.

     Why does the infotainment approach maintain and grow? Money. Many people want to be scared, they want to watch hours-long police chases of people in cars, they want to have scapegoats or feel more fortunate than others. Not all, perhaps not even a majority — but enough to keep the owners of infotainment media away from the factual journalistic approach.

     My grandmother used to hand out homemade donuts to trick-or-treaters. My aunt made huge popcorn balls to hand out. In 1968, it was reported — the media inundated with — a story about razor blades found in apples. Was it true? Maybe — but there was never reported health damage from such. But, in 1969 trick-or-treaters would no longer take my grandmother’s donuts. She cried about it. Record profits boomed for candy manufacturers. There are periodically other isolated events forced into people’s awareness about Halloween treats. But it is more of an illusion that the old magician’s tricks at a birthday party. Certainly horribly out of perspective.

     People can demand journalistic integrity by not giving money towards those media without it. But will they? It does not look good.

I am moving my blog over to substack. If you want to see these posts please subscribe here.

Feedback: Needed for Everything and Everybody

     There are non-technical synonyms for the word, or expression, “feedback” but it provides a good term to use in many different situations. More precise terms may need to be used in physics but in social situations it works quite well. I do, or say, something and you respond (or the environment responds) in accordance with what I have done or said. Sometimes the connection between action and response is unclear and sometimes the response, or feedback, is prolonged or delayed but — when it does occur then that it is feedback that occurs.

     It can be said that it is the feedback that is the principal desire. If I get something back that I do not like, or is not what I expected, then that tells me that I said, or did, something poorly. I need to change my actions to obtain the desired feedback. The actions, in themselves, don’t actually do anything. I can smile broadly in the middle of a forest and, without others around to react, I am basically just exercising the facial muscles needed to perform the smile. I can sing at the seaside with no one near and it will bother nobody (I used to be a good singer but, without practice and over time, I am not sure I can make that claim anymore). Or within the realm of mechanics (which is not a focus of this newsletter), pressing on an accelerator does nothing unless it is connected to something that will increase, or lessen, the amount of fuel entering the motor system. Pushing down on the accelerator has no use in itself — it is what it triggers that is of importance.

     Feedback is an intrinsic part of learning. During Machine Learning or Generative AI training, feedback is a constant, vital, aspect of the process. The system has no inherent knowledge of good/bad, true/false, beneficial/destructive. But, as it receives feedback about the results created from input, it can learn. It can also learn incorrectly. If it is told that something is true when it is actually false then, once trained, it will not be reliable to give correct responses. This is the primary reason why any AI system has to be trained by people — and why it is mandatory that any input is validated for accuracy and facts.

     Inaccurate feedback can create alternate worlds — and not just for Machine Learning or Generative AI. The novel “1984” by George Orwell shows what can happen when history becomes malleable — changeable at will. Once again, this indicates the need for feedback based on accuracy and facts. (“Truth” is more a part of philosophy as it depends on history, point-of-view, and access to information. “Facts” are observable and recordable — though such documentation must be precise and detailed.)

     Feedback is a vital aspect of education in general. During the recent pandemic, many colleges and universities who were not already experienced in remote learning panicked and tried this or that peculiar approach to remote learning. Many failed. The mathematics department of a local community college back in Maryland decided that their biggest concern during remote education was cheating. Their answer? Don’t give tests back, don’t review tests for right and wrong answers — eliminate feedback. One of my sons had to take a course three times before passing — because, without feedback, it is impossible to learn. He was the one who had to repeat the class but the community college was the entity that FAILED in its duty to teach. This failure on the part of the college carried over when presented to a university that had the illogical premise that it is the student’s fault if they have to take a course over. It would have been better to have given our children a sabbatical from school until post-pandemic times.

     Feedback can take many forms. It may be a physical reaction or a verbal one. It may take place in the absence of approval — implying disapproval. Note that explicit feedback is always to be favored as there will be times when most people will not be able to interpret implied feedback correctly — and some (especially those with poor social skills and abilities) cannot interpret implied feedback at all. Some justify implied negative feedback by saying it is “nicer” and “more polite” but, if interpreted correctly, there is no difference to the recipient. And, if not interpreted correctly by the recipient, it causes more confusion and problems. The only advantages about the implied negative feedback is that it allows the giver an attempt to deflect any discomfort for giving the feedback.

     At base, feedback enables potential directed change. Without feedback, change can only be random. Feedback is needed for education — with education being defined as adding new verifiable knowledge and the ability to add new verifiable knowledge. Feedback is needed for healthy social relationships. Feedback is also needed for physical/mechanical actions.

I am trying to move my blogs onto the substack newsletter community. If you are interested in these thoughts, then please look at, and subscribe to, my substack newsletter. Please click here, enter your email address and subscribe (free or paid). Thank you.

Inclusion: Are there any downsides to including everyone?

     A business (AA) sells products. Because of the views of the owner of the company, they decide that they will only sell to 40% of the possible clientele. Another business (BB) is willing to sell to everyone without restriction. Which business do you think will do better?

     A development company (CC) decides they will only hire people who meet a specific set of criteria. Only about 40% of the possible new hires meet this set of criteria. Another development company (DD) interviews everyone to see if they will add value to the company. Which company is most likely to bring new, well designed, products to the marketplace?

     The above scenarios are simple ones. Yet they are the scenarios that most often apply when people try to push for exclusion policies. Inclusive policies for hiring and selling make better products and better profits. I cannot think of any situation where a company benefits from not selling to people who can afford, and properly use, their product.

     Ah, but some of those being excluded for employment are not as “good’ as those who are being included in company AA or BB. Really? Is there a way to prove this if they are not included? Actually, there is. Have companies of the nature of AA or CC in the marketplace. Have companies of the nature of BB or DD competing in the marketplace. Which ones do better overall? If AA/CC companies do better then exclusion works best. If BB/DD companies do better then inclusion works best.

     So, what is the answer? I have no facts at my fingertips to back up an answer so I cannot say “See! This answer is obvious” (though I do have my strong opinion based on profit patterns that changed during the 1960s and 1970s as segregation was reduced). But, I don’t need to prove one answer over another. The market will do it.

     Why would there ever be a desire to force the issue? To say “yes, you shall include”. Well, humanity has a long history of not doing what benefits them if it conflicts with the status quo. That is, people and companies really dislike change, in general. Policies that mandate inclusion (or exclusion) put all companies “on a level playing field”. If the policy proves beneficial, it continues. If the policy proves non-beneficial it may change (with the strong attraction of the status quo still in effect).

     Ah, but how can a company be proven to be inclusive? A typical method is via quotas. If 20% of the population has characteristics G, then the company should have 20% of its employees with characteristics G. And that has problems — for the person hired and for the people not hired. How can it be proven that the person hired is truly qualified (even “best” qualified) for the job? As it is, it really cannot and that is the semi-rational excuse (it is still often really based on historical beliefs about qualifications rather than true qualifications) for bitterness from the not-hired.

     So, do “blind hiring”. Real names are hidden from the interviewer (because they often give hints about ethnicity/”race”/gender). Live interviews happen via web interviews with no video and disguised speech. Eliminate identifying aspects as much as possible. There still may be aspects such as speech patterns, familiarity with the interview language, and so forth that cannot be obscured — but the interviewer would have to work hard to get past the blinds. Elimination of passive bias can be greatly reduced.

     What about after-hiring? Promotions? People in powerful groups, etc.? If you can get rid of the bias at the hiring point then it is reasonable that the same percentages should maintain as one goes through the corporate structure. If they do not, there is likely to be active biases and prejudices involved.

     What about there still being fewer people in certain groups being hired? Isn’t a quota still necessary? Otherwise, won’t the composition of levels in society stay stagnant and less-represented groups stay that way? It is possible to do it without quotas but it may take decades or generations for underlying social inequities to change. Doing it with quotas, blind hiring can still enforce the concept of qualified hires but it can still create bad feelings within those who were previously preferred.

     Is there a complete answer? On selling to — yes. On employment, not with society the way it presently is. The status quo always means that some do better and some do worse — and those who do better will struggle to remain in that situation.

     And there probably is not an answer to that. We do not have a perfect world or perfect people in it.

Ideas & Interpretations is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber by following this link and scrolling to the end.