hash
July 9th, 2014
Or, to give it its correct spelling, cornby fash.
Patrons who have pledged $2 or more per month can now download any or all of the PDFs of the J&M books. Check your Patreon messages for the links. Thank you!
Latest book…
Random oldie…
October 9, 2019-
- NICE T-SHIRT (Thank you for not provoking my uncontrollable lust). Currently unavailable.
“what you are you”????
I like corned beef hash; I’ll have Mo’s π
Sorry is this is a dupe, my first attempt didn’t appear so I thought I might have used the wrong email address or something?
Thanks, MarkyWarky. Fixed it now.
Hilarious.
With the exception perhaps of cornby fash, every word carries truth. That is the most compelling sentiment in the bible but the book deserves no special commendation for stating the universal obvious. It even supermerses morality rather than underpinning it.
Yet it remains almost irrelevant as Jesus so ably demonstrates. We humans will always act in whatsoever way most contents our selves – our spirits, if you will – and be that for ‘good’ or ‘bad’ matters not one jot. Sure one can reprogram our machine selves to behave differently but only by reprogramming what makes one content.
I might add that modifying human behaviour (for the better) is precisely what all religions profess to be their very raison d’Γͺtre. Which is all perfectly admirable and should indeed serve to benefit society – but there is no reason to bring supernaturally sanctioned reward and punishment into the picture to achieve it.
Not least because of the likelihood of the baby being thrown out with the proverbial bath water.
Spot on, Author! The Golden Rule works with like-minded individuals, but you need to keep an eye out for anyone wearing a gimp mask.
Do unto others as you’d have them do unto you?
Interesting concept, lets give it a boo.
Islam does, apparently it is known
That they would like each other to stone.
BY way of deciding what might be true.
Should’ve been a baked ham. π
This is why the Platinum Rule is a better one to live by: treat others as THEY wish to be treated. π
Talk about synchronicity…. was just discussing this very idea a couple of days ago.
Sheila, what people wish for isn’t always what is best for them. The Platinum Rule would morally oblige you to beat up the guy in the gimp mask and perhaps push the potential suicide victim off of the bridge. There is also an interesting impasse should you meet a sadist: do you insist that he hurts you because of his preferences, or does he have to be nice to you because of yours?
As moral agents, the meta-rule we all agree on is: do unto others as you ought to do unto them. This is, of course, empty until you fill out what the ‘ought’ implies. One assumes that, given the possible clashes between various moral desiderata (rights, duties, utility, and so on), there is little chance of a pat one liner that works without exception.
Corn beef hash, yes!
But only when cooked with Worcestershire sauce and served with Baked Beans and HP sauce and washed down with a pint of Bass.
Everything else is sacrilege
Macha, add a goodly dollop of Marmite to that and you have Paradise on a plate.
O.t. golden rule is negative – don’t do to others what you wouldn’t want done to you!
N.t. golden rule is more positive – do unto others what you’d like them to do to you! ~ hopefully reciprocated?
As kids, we used to say “make sure we do it to them before they get the chance to do it to us”
bloody little heathens ..
AoS, to be perfectly frank, I much prefer Lobscouse.
… and Chinese Chip Shop Chicken Curry with 1/2 and 1/2
As an ex-infantryman, I learned the grunts’ golden rule: Do unto others before others do unto you.
Get your retaliation in first.
Nice one Author.
Macha and AoS I have serious worries for your innards – and your nearests.
The cartoon reminds me of when my sibs and I were kids. On gift-giving occasions, we’d give our mom a box of chocolates, because we knew she’d share them with us π . My friend tells me a story along the same lines about the time her young son treated her to a Mother’s Day full of all his favorite activities & foods. She was touched that he wanted her to have a wonderful day, and amused by how he (consciously or unconsciously) managed to have everything his way all day.
As for corned beef hash, the first time I encountered it was when I was staying home from grade school with a stomach bug, and my grandmother served it for lunch. Even today (decades later!) I can’t stand the smell of it. And then Acolyte of Sagan suggests adding Marmite to it! Horrors! π
Oh, well. I’ll just move to a corner of the pub where I can’t smell it, and leave more of it for MarkyWarky and the rest of you!
One version of the Golden Rule that hasn’t been mentioned here yet is the Wiccan one: An it harm none, do what ye will. Of course, QuineDuhem’s point about defining “ought” can also be made about “harm.”
And let’s not forget the civilian counterpart of the grunts’ version: He who has the gold makes the rules.
WalterWalcarpit, Paaahh! Or possibly THPPTPHTPHPHHPH?
Ah, that’s better.
This reminds me: There are two reactions to being sick. Some want to be fussed over and get lots of attention while others want to crawl away to suffer in complete solitude. The fun starts when one of a couple would want to be fussed over and the other would want solitude. This results in the one who wants to be fussed over feeling like their partner doesn’t care about them because they are left strictly alone, while the one who wants to have solitude ends up saying “Please go away. Honey, can’t you see I’m sick.” Each giving the other what they assume they would want.
Just one more way the Golden Rule can give bad results. The other way, as Author points out, is to knowingly do what you would like regardless of what the other person would like. Makes it not much of a moral guide at all.
Darwin Harmless, you’ve reminded me of another dichotomy: when they’re sad, some people want a sympathetic ear and a shoulder to cry on; others prefer to grieve in private and to find a way to keep their minds off their sadness when they’re with of other people. The same person, when sad, can have different preferences depending on the circumstances.
When I’m not sure of the person’s preference, I use a diffident or kind tone of voice to ask a question (such as, “Would you like to talk about it, or would you prefer to talk about something else?”) and then respond based on the person’s stated preference. This approach works well more often than not, and it definitely works better than if I guess the person’s preference and get it wrong.
MY Golden Rule – Make Myself happy first, in whatever way suits me at the time.
Then, if I feel so inclined, make someone else happy by, first, asking what would make them happy right now.
Everything changes with time, even what pleases us.
two cent’s worth, thanks for that. I’ll try to remember to ask that question in future.
I posted a response to you on the last thread. Cheers.
You could make an argument (if you want to quibble over these things) that the “Golden Rule” requires a certain way of defining the acts done between people.
In this comic for example: on one level, what Jesus is doing can be defined as “making dinner for Mo”. That may or may not be a good thing to have done unto you, depending on the dinner in question and the preferences of all involved.
On another level, what Jesus is doing can be defined as “deliberately acting like a self-serving, passive-aggressive little snot” – that’s probably not something you would want done unto you in any case.
So, taking intent into account, the “Golden Rule” would still apply.
I think two cents’ worth’s Wiccan phrase is probably a much ‘safer’ way of putting it: just don’t be mean to people.
Darwin, did you notice that an old ‘friend’ of yours popped in two cartoons back to add his barely-literate two-pennies-worth?
I thought he’d been banned (the only person in the history of J&M to be shown the door of the Cock & Bull), but surely there can’t be two of them with the same incoherent style and who make exactly the same points.
Can there?
Anyway, for the amusement of all:
Mohamad says:
July 9, 2014 at 10:38 am
In Al-Quran, the process of human creation was same as research in science, but in Origin of Species, the silliest book that believed by atheism have no perfect answer the process of human creation.
In Al-Quran, human was made from soil, through science, research done was proven in human bodies have same mineral in soil.
In Origin of Species, Darwin said humans are from apes, but why the rest of apes now not transform to human yet?
So ridiculous human was from apes because the transformation apes to human is not logic.
May atheism tell me how the apes transform to human? Is one day the apes leg transform to human leg, tomorrow ape hand transform to human hand? How the process, how long the process needed?
There are no atheism can give me the answer because they know their belief was wrong, but they still stupid to believe it.
Makes our recent trolls seem like amateurs.
In Al-Quran, human was made from soil, through science, research done was proven in human bodies have same mineral in soil.
A question for Mohamad:
Why is there still soil? Why has all the soil not transformed into humans?
Saw this on the NSS site and thought it worth posting: https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/end-compulsory-worship-in-schools
My take on the whole ‘golden rule’ thing is basically the same as Jesus’ to be honest, but a little more crass: “Don’t be a dick”.
Obviously it sums up a lot, essentially live your life as care-free and happy as you can, without ever deliberately provoking anger or hatred in others, and without intentionally causing someone to come to harm. Take due consideration of others but try to get by as best you can. I feel “don’t be a dick” condenses all this rather well.
Also, Mohamad’s argument do sound completely deliberately troll-like. Everything about it screams “Mock me! Mock me!” Best not to engage methinks.
Thanks for the link Stephen Mynett – just signed it. Quite agree. In SA the best private schools are usually religious (not all). Friends ask why I refuse to send my kids to one. I reply – if the best school was Muslim (they are Christian) would they send their little darlings there?
@hotrats
Why is there still soil? Why has all the soil not transformed into humans?
If you compute the current exponential rate of increase of mass of humanity, and you know the mass of the surface layer of the planet, it becomes rather trivial to compute a date by which this might occur. It is also fairly trivial to discover how long it took for our ape-like ancestor to evolve into us.
The soil transformation is much, much quicker. Which is rather scary, don’t you think?
A sadist is a person who is kind to a masochist.
Sam Huff:
And a masochist is someone who likes an ice-cold shower, so he has a hot one.
I was sure he would cook pork roast or something.
Mo should be grateful that he is not on a train and eating protein bars made out of bugs. It’s a stretch, so I’ll admit that this is just more shameless promoting of a fascinating movie that I just reviewed. http://www.ruthlessreviews.com/23591/snowpiercer/ No gods on this train.
JohnM, just out of idle curiosity, what human population growth data did you use to determine that the Earth’s soil will transform into humans much faster than it took for our species to evolve from the one that is the ancestor to humans and apes? Have you seen Hans Rosling’s TED Talk that touches on human population growth? (It’s available at https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_the_good_news_of_the_decade .) If Rosling’s projections for human population are correct, how would that change your soil transformation estimate?
Time for me to stop idling and get some sleep!
Looks like the comments are timestamped using GMT. It’s 12:44 a.m. where I am–well past my bedtime, even for a Friday night. (I’m going, I’m going!)
@ two cents’ worth
I didn’t need to even bother with the data. Human evolution took millions of years, so even if our growth rate is a fraction of a percent, when you exponentiate that a few million times the number becomes astronomical.
Thanks for the link. I’ll take a look wen I get a moment.
Damn. no edit function. It’s “when”, of course.
Author, are you sure you fixed the typo? I only ask because in the third panel Mo is still asking ‘What you are you cooking?’.
A clear example of why “do unto others…” doesn’t really work. So, I guess we need a re-wording of a one-size-fits-all moral statement.
In his excellent book ‘The Blank Slate – The Modern Denial of Human Nature’, Steven Pinker dismantles three myths of human nature; the Blank Slate, according to which we are entirely programmed by our upbringing and environment, the Noble Savage, which claims that in a state of nature man is naturally co-operative and altruistic, and the Ghost in the Machine, the idea that a mind is just the organ of an eternal soul.
Pinker demonstrates that a lot of the excesses and absurdities in modern academia are constructed upon these shaky foundations, and its attempt to deny and vilify the concept of an intrinsic human nature, while sensitive to minorities and the oppressed, does not take account of the improvements in the human condition brought about by recognising a common humanity:
Not only is acknowledging human nature compatible with social and moral progress, but it can help explain the obvious progress that has taken place over millennia. Customs that were common throughout history and prehistory – slavery, punishment by mutilation, execution by torture, genocide for convenience, endless blood feuds, the summary killing of strangers, rape as the spoils of war, infanticide as a form of birth control, and the legal ownership of women – have vanished from large parts of the world.
So there we have it, the biggest practical obstacle to Sharia Law; improvements in human nature over the last few centuries.
@AoS – you need to give your browser a hard refresh (shift key + refresh button)
Sorry Author, but that hard refresh didn’t work for me. There’s still a superfluous “you” in there.
Sam Huff, surely being nice to a masochist hurts? As being evil to a masochist also hurts, but in a way the masochist likes, the only logical thing for a sadist to do is ignore him.
Author, might the typographical error be in the hosting company’s cached version? I’ve hard-refreshed and re-started the browser and the spare “you” is still there.
OnTopic: were I cooking a nice meal for a friend, or even a house-guest or lodger, I would cook something he enjoyed. Does that make me a far better man than this week’s Jesus? I suspect most of us would. Does that make most of us better than Jesus?
Well, as we’re real [allegedly] and he’s a fictional character in a cartoon derived from a poorly written book, I’d say “yes”.
I’d expect our lady (?) Ephphatha to disagree but has anyone noticed that she, WhatsGoingOn and ShallowEnder all retired at about the same time? That is a very strange and suspicious occurrence.
Almost spooky.
I always thought that WhatsGoingOn was the alter ego of Ephphy.
Off topic, but the beloved CofE today voted to allow women bishops. This begs the question as to how do you decide which bits of the Babble are “cultural” and which bits “literal”?
Also, will a woman bishop have a Bishopric?
I’m sure a committee is working on that very issue.
Author:
[quote]@AoS β you need to give your browser a hard refresh (shift key + refresh button)[/quote]
Doesn’t work for me, Author.
Still a superfluous ‘you’ in there.
Macha – I always thought that to “take away his Bishopric” sounded a bit extreme – I wander what the women bishop equivalent would be.
Datwin Harmless: there are three reactions to being sick, the two you mentioned – wanting a sympathetic cuddle and lots of hot soups and alternatively wanting to be left alone to sulk in despair – and there is the odd, extreme and completely irrational reaction of wanting to go nuclear all over the place.(note 1) Luckily, folk with that reaction, folk who hate being ill and who want to take it out on the universe, are often far too weak to do any harm.
The Church of England did not allow women priests for four centuries. Nor did it allow women bishops or arch-bishops, but it did allow the supreme boss of all the bishops and priests to be female. Like, a Queen. It allowed lots of those and never once did any priest, bishop or arch-
villain-bishop make one single squawk about their lack of nuggets.I find that level of hypocrisy intensely interesting. Women couldn’t be mid-level managers but they could be supreme leaders for life. Defenders of the faith. seated on sky-daddy’s right hand. {An uncomfortable way to get goosed, but each to her own.}
I wonder how they ever reconciled this?
Note 1: Or is that just me?
To be explicit on what everyone is thinking, I suppose the term would be “bishopussy” or some variation. No doubt the derivation is incorrect, but it’s fun. At the least, it would make a good porno star name.
You’re right, LastResort, I am a better host than this Jesus. Pun intended.
As ShallowEnder isn’t regaling you with the latest sporting
fixtures from the “Dark Continent”,<a href=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-28034240. I thought I'd oblige just this once.
I’m not one to gloat, nor am I very supportive of ghosties and ghoulies but I do hope the demons and djinni keep up the good work. And, Shally, wherever you are, I hope you enjoy this news.
Hey, did my comment disappear into moderation, or did my computer hiccough?
LastResort, re. people’s reactions to illness: My sciatic nerve became trapped about six weeks ago, leaving my left leg in so much pain* that I have had to put my usual walking stick away and now rely on crutches. I wouldn’t say that I want to go nuclear but Mrs. o’S is now convinced that a trapped sciatic nerve causes Tourettes Syndrome.
*Intense, cramp-like pain in the left buttock, thigh and calf muscles, numbness down the left-side of the foot and three toes. Weird! Vast amounts of pain-killers merely take the edge off it, and the only thing that gives relief is an ice-pack pressed againgst the base of my spine. The only trouble is, I’m now in danger of getting frostbite.
Ah, the vagaries of age. π
Happy Birthday, Emmeline Pankhurst.
AoS, a lifetime of haemophilia has given me a few insights into pain control, I refuse to go along with homoeopaths and woo merchants but will try logival alternatives and there is one slight help. Cannabis has been proven medically to help with MS sufferers and although not strictly an analgesic the relaxant qualities can help. From experience, I find I can, sometimes, avoid stuff like Oramorph and use a lesser analgesic alongside cannabis, not legal I know but it can be effective.
The idea of an analgesic alongside a relaxant is not new, in the 70s a lot of doctors would stuff patients with valium alongside their pain killer. I know which I prefer.
Acolyte, you have my profoundest sympathies and best wishes for a speedy recovery. I have a damaged back, I know what pain is. Mrs. Resort knows quite well that I know what pain is. She should. I’ve told her, in very short Anglo-Saxon terms, repeatedly, how much I dislike it.
It really is quite amazing how inventive one can be when describing pain in unfavourable terms.
Just a thought but have you tried hot, deep baths with lots of smelly bubbles? That works well with me when my back flares up. I have found that punching lampposts, while extremely distracting, does not.
Stephen Mynett I would love to try unlawful pharmaceuticals for backpain and migraines as I am less than fond of dosing up on massive lots of painkillers but I have two issues with that approach, I wouldn’t know how to start going about getting any and it is unlawful. Even if I were to find out the how of it, the unlawfulness would stop me cold.
It’s a pity. Cannabis is otherwise such a useful set of drugs.
So sorry AoS – hope it resolves itself.
Google Doodle today – yes thanks for reminding us of Emmeline P.
Author – I’ve cleared by browser cache and rebooted. I still have the extra ‘you’. There was a Cloud Flare interruption yesterday – did it lose your update (or whatever the techy words are).
Washington State in America has recently made even recreational cannabis legal Apparently the white guys have figured out that they can make money doing what they’ve spent decades putting black kids in jail for doing. Disgusted as this makes me feel, it’s a welcome change to a very stupid law. ‘Bout fargin’ time.
Isaac Asimov got it right decades ago, I believe it was before he died, actually. “Do unto others as they would have you do unto them.” I call it the Platinum Rule.
well when i posted just now it didn’t say anything about ‘held for moderating’ or anything, so i guess you want real email addresses? sorry, won’t do that. please rethink whether you need our email addresses and discover that you don’t. it would also be a great way to slap the nsa in the face, and they need that slap as badly as we all need to give it. why not pick a side, and fight for it within your abilities, please! π
srsly, the entire web has to reconfigure itself, you are one of the people with a measurable, noticeable, possibly even significant amount of control – and stopping with the unreasonable demands on commenters is a great start
if there’s something big that i obviously don’t get (eg. a law), sorry for wasting your time (and maybe even your comment space – hell, why NOT post this?)
@TheBigBoss – A 1st-time poster has to be approved by a moderator (me). It’s just a safeguard against spammers and lunatics. Once your 1st comment has been approved, all subsequent comments go through automatically, provided you use the same username and email (neither of which has to be real). Thanks for commenting!
UPDATE: I have edited the notice above the comment box to explain this situation and prevent future misunderstandings. Thanks for raising this.
Wow! Am I innocent? It had never occurred to me that a fake email address would work.
LastResort, as far as cannabis is concerned the law is indubitably an ass. Indeed it has been so consistently asinine that has actually caused the development of strains of an otherwise incredibly versatile and overwhelmingly beneficial ancient herb that really can be harmful – a truly criminal consequence, in my opinion. A veritable case of ‘if you tell a lie often enough β¦’
You may well have an occupation, rather that a preoccupation, that precludes procurement but if not I would be extremely surprised if none of your circle could be able help you.
My healthful wishes to all.
TBB – It would have been remarkable indeed if Isaac Asimov had made that statement after his death ;-)! It would no doubt have garnered a lot more attention had he sent it back from beyond the grave.
TBB:
βDo unto others as they would have you do unto them.β I call it the Platinum Rule.
A mugger would have you give him all your money. A boss would have you work unpaid overtime. Your kids would have you double their pocket money. Still a ‘platinum’ rule?
I ran across the following anti-spammer boilerplate in the comment section of a certain pirate site (I was just visiting a friend, your honour).
Despite being invitation-only, they have decided to take a fairly tough line, but there’s much here to disagree with, other than the unfortunate necessity of having to spell it out:
Polite, reasonable, and considerate discourse is welcome, but because of the potentially controversial nature of some of the topics that appear in this section, we request that you think very carefully before posting here. Specifically, make sure that you do not stoop to personal attacks or pointless arguing. When something or someone irritates you, simply walk away else your post might be summarily removed. No political or religious proselytizing. Let’s keep XXXXX a peaceful place…
I should say straight away that this is only for your amusement and edification. I am not suggesting that J&M’s ‘mission statement’ and comment rules need any amendment; even with the new ‘moderation reassurance’, they remain a model of clarity and concision.
As Carl Sagan describes it, the best rule of the game is Tit-for-Tat:
http://www.freeonlineinformation.com/rulesofthegame.htm
Actually the golden rule implies the platinum rule when applied to itself, at a higher-order level. Ask yourself: would you want other people to do unto you what would satisfy you if you had your desires, or rather to do unto you what would satisfy the actual desires you have? If you wouldn’t want the former but would want the latter, then that is what you should do as well. According to the golden rule.