Ressentiment Redux

Nietzsche, painted a vivid image of ressentiment that is applicable in modern times:

They monopolize virtue, these weak, hopelessly sick people, there is no doubt of it: "We alone are the good and just," they say, "we alone are homines bonae voluntatis.*" They walk among us as embodied reproaches, as warnings to us--as if health, well-constitutedness, strength, pride, and the sense of power were in themselves necessarily vicious things for which one must pay some day, and pay bitterly: how ready they themselves are at bottom to make one pay; how they crave to be hangmen. There is among them an abundance of the vengeful disguised as judges, who constantly bear the word "justice" in their mouths like poisonous spittle, always with pursed lips, always ready to spit upon all who are not discontented but go their way in good spirits. Nor is there lacking among them that most disgusting species of the vain, the mendacious failures whose aim is to appear as " beautiful souls" and who bring to market their deformed sensuality, wrapped up in verses and other swaddling clothes, as "purity of heart": the species of moral masturbators and "self-gratifiers." The will of the weak to represent some form of superiority, their instinct for devious paths to tyranny over the healthy--where can it not be discovered, this will to power of the weakest!

--Genealogy of Morals, Third Essay, Section 15 (1887)

Translation by Walter Kaufmann (1967)

*Men of good will

Continue ReadingRessentiment Redux

How to be a Human Animal: Chapter 29: How to Slow Down the Treadmill

[Note: I wrote this with an audience of college-aged young adults in mind, though I think the principles here are applicable to all human animals.]

Imagine putting 1,000 marbles into a big jar. Imagine removing one marble each month.

Those 1,000 marbles are the months you have. Those are all of the months you have, from the moment you are born until the day you die, on average, at age 80. That’s all you get. Time is non-replenishable, so you need to use it wisely or it will disappear in a flash without leaving you any notable memories.

And it’s worse than you might think because you need to pour 240 of those marbles out right now! You have already used them up because you are about 20 (x 12 month per year). Here’s more bad news: You might not make it to 80 in good shape. You might start showing signs of dementia at 65. You might be wheelchair bound at age 56 after getting into a car accident.

Did you remember to remove a marble from the jar on July 31? That was two weeks ago. That was the end point of another month. How quickly did July go by for you? Probably like a snap of your fingers, right? What did you accomplish in July? If you wrote down all the important and meaningful things you did in July, how many of those things could you write? When you get to be in your 40s or 50s, time will speed up dramatically. When you are middle-aged, which will happen soon, the marbles will be virtually pouring out of your jar.

The best way to slow down the treadmill is to create memories and meaning. This is not done by letting life merely happen to you. [More . . . ]

Continue ReadingHow to be a Human Animal: Chapter 29: How to Slow Down the Treadmill

FIRE Files Suit to Ask Federal Court to Declare that DEI Statements Constitute Compelled Speech

From FIRE: FIRE is suing to stop regulations that force our clients to espouse controversial views about “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Here is an excerpt from FIRE's announcement today:

Today, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression filed a lawsuit on behalf of six California community college professors to halt new, systemwide regulations forcing professors to espouse and teach politicized conceptions of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

Each of the professors teach at one of three Fresno-area community colleges within the State Center Community College District. Under the new regulations, all of the more-than-54,000 professors who teach in the California Community Colleges system must incorporate “anti-racist” viewpoints into classroom teaching.

The regulations explicitly require professors to pledge allegiance to contested ideological viewpoints. Professors must “acknowledge” that “cultural and social identities are diverse, fluid, and intersectional,” and they must develop “knowledge of the intersectionality of social identities and the multiple axes of oppression that people from different racial, ethnic, and other minoritized groups face.” Faculty performance and tenure will be evaluated based on professors’ commitment to and promotion of the government’s viewpoints.

“I’m a professor of chemistry. How am I supposed to incorporate DEI into my classroom instruction?” asked Reedley College professor Bill Blanken. “What’s the ‘anti-racist’ perspective on the atomic mass of boron?”

“These regulations are a totalitarian triple-whammy,” said FIRE attorney Daniel Ortner. “The government is forcing professors to teach and preach a politicized viewpoint they do not share, imposing incomprehensible guidelines, and threatening to punish professors when they cross an arbitrary, indiscernible line.”

DEI requirements are controversial within academia. FIRE’s research indicates that half of professors believe mandatory diversity statements violate academic freedom. The sole mention of academic freedom in California’s model framework frames it an inconvenience, warning professors not to “‘weaponize’ academic freedom” to “inflict curricular trauma on our students.”

“Hearing uncomfortable ideas is not ‘curricular trauma,’ and teaching all sides of an issue is not ‘weaponizing’ academic freedom,” said Loren Palsgaard, a professor of English at Madera Community College and a plaintiff in the suit. “That’s just called ‘education.’”

Continue ReadingFIRE Files Suit to Ask Federal Court to Declare that DEI Statements Constitute Compelled Speech

“What is Your Gender Identity?”

"What is Your Gender Identity?"

How would you respond to this question if you were put on the spot? Here's one approach . . .

If I were asked today, I would say something like this: "Unlike sex, "gender identity" is an incoherent and thus meaningless term."

Why do I think "gender identity" is an incoherent term? Here is one reason:

In other words, gender ideologists claim that one's genitals are both A) completely irrelevant to one's gender and B) highly relevant to one's gender. To make both of these claims is incoherent. Here's another thing I might add:

Another idea . . .

Perhaps you could point out that "gender ideology" embraces the regressive sex stereotypes most of us (not only feminists) have been trying to downplay for decades:

A comment to the above tweet:

It really sucks to know that we worked so hard to erase gender stereotypes. Let girls and boys dress how they want, play with whatever toys they wanted, play whatever sports, have whatever interests...boys can dance, girls can be mechanics. We fought so hard. Then this crap.

Or you could invite them to listen to this podcast where Bari Weiss interviews Andrew Sullivan, a pioneer in gay rights.  Sullivan doesn't support gender ideology because it is functionally homophobic. Most children claiming to be confused about their sex will, if left alone (not surgically butchered and rendered sterile by cross-sex hormones) grow up to accept their bodies, the great majority of them growing up to be gay (and see here).  For this reason, Sullivan characterizes gender ideology to be homophobic.

If things heat up too much, you might want to inject some humor:

Continue Reading“What is Your Gender Identity?”