Somebody asked me: Why does the suffering of animals matter?
I have to say I'm with Spinoza on this one. Nothing matters at all except in relation to someone or something else.
The universe really doesn't give a shit, it just goes on on it's very own course, in all it's beauty and all it's violence.
However, to the animal it matters more than anything in the world. They suffer a horrendous subjective experiences when we harm them.
I encourage people to be kind to animals, and not to pay other people keep them in horrid conditions then kill them just so they can enjoy eating them for twenty minutes or however long it takes to eat a meal. It seems such little luxury to exchange for so much suffering.
If you do eat animals maybe try to eat less of them or buy grass-fed ones who are reared in better conditions. It might not help you directly, but it will make the world of difference to some living creature who has feelings not that different from your own ♥ xXx
Tuesday, 23 October 2012
Tuesday, 16 October 2012
I was spanked and I deserved it!
Supposing you were spanked for violent antisocial behaviour, lets say, biting another child.
Some say in this instance they "deserved" physical punishment.
But just because you acted out in violence, does not mean there was not alternative ways of educating you not to repeat the behaviour or not to act violently. How can violence teach a child not to use violence to get what they want? It can only teach them that it's ok for the more powerful party to use violence.
There are also environmental factors that would have shaped you into the kind of child who would bite.
What would spanking do to reverse those? The likelyhood is none whereas there are other methods of educating children which could have.
It could be that you were very angry, and had you been taught how to express anger effectively and non-violently you never would have bit in the first place. It could be if you were taught those skills in response to your behaviour, that you would never feel the inclination to bite another child again, nor do other things that were violent or in other ways felt unpleasant to other individuals the next time you were angry. It could be that you'd still be able to use whatever skills you learned then as a child you would still find served you today. You'd be well practiced in them by now and use those skills to your benefit and to benefit those around you.
When a child is spanked they are fundamentally short changed of a proper developmental education in two ways:
1) They are taught to be selfish - as they are taught by the implication that they should perform some "naughty" action because of the negative consequences to themselves, as opposed to based on an empathetic understanding of how such an action negatively affects another.
2) They miss out on the opportunity to learn from other non-violent methods that can teach them how to reason, be sensitive to others, be sensitive to themselves and manage their own behaviour. To develop genuine values that concern caring about the consequences of their actions, and learn talents that can serve them in adult life where the use of violence and force is unacceptible.
There are other ways of dealing with children biting other children that build lasting values that remove the need to scare children into a front of acting social.
Some say in this instance they "deserved" physical punishment.
But just because you acted out in violence, does not mean there was not alternative ways of educating you not to repeat the behaviour or not to act violently. How can violence teach a child not to use violence to get what they want? It can only teach them that it's ok for the more powerful party to use violence.
There are also environmental factors that would have shaped you into the kind of child who would bite.
What would spanking do to reverse those? The likelyhood is none whereas there are other methods of educating children which could have.
It could be that you were very angry, and had you been taught how to express anger effectively and non-violently you never would have bit in the first place. It could be if you were taught those skills in response to your behaviour, that you would never feel the inclination to bite another child again, nor do other things that were violent or in other ways felt unpleasant to other individuals the next time you were angry. It could be that you'd still be able to use whatever skills you learned then as a child you would still find served you today. You'd be well practiced in them by now and use those skills to your benefit and to benefit those around you.
When a child is spanked they are fundamentally short changed of a proper developmental education in two ways:
1) They are taught to be selfish - as they are taught by the implication that they should perform some "naughty" action because of the negative consequences to themselves, as opposed to based on an empathetic understanding of how such an action negatively affects another.
2) They miss out on the opportunity to learn from other non-violent methods that can teach them how to reason, be sensitive to others, be sensitive to themselves and manage their own behaviour. To develop genuine values that concern caring about the consequences of their actions, and learn talents that can serve them in adult life where the use of violence and force is unacceptible.
There are other ways of dealing with children biting other children that build lasting values that remove the need to scare children into a front of acting social.
Monday, 8 October 2012
not close enough for jazz
"Well ye'v really gone and done it this time son.
This time ye'v really gone an let me down.
Ye couldae ran off tae the circus...
...I wouldnae huv minded that much
Ye couldae married a catholic...
...I'd live
Christ! If only ye'd been GAY!
Bit naw,
You had tae join a jazz group...
Somehow ah alwayz knew ye'd turn out tae be a jazzer,
Ah alwayz knew ye'd disappoint me!
Your Maw is probably turning in her grave...
...she loved classical music.
None ay they blue notes.
Aeolian modes...
Phrygian Scales!
G major 7ths with a flattened 9th and an Augmented 5th!!!
Makes me sick tae ma stomach!
-> Am sorry da!
Naw! Jist... go...
Haven't ye done enough? With yer Miles Davis.
Oscar Peterson.
Ella Fitzgerald, Billy Holiday, Chett Baker... George Gershwin!!!
He wis a jew n' aw.
-> Ye seem tae know a lot about jazz da'
Too much son! Too much!
I tried tae warn ye off!
I flirted ma'sel' wae jazz when I wis your age.
Ah didnae want ye tae make the same mistakes that ah made!
-> Bit da! Ah jist like jammin!
Enough!!!! I lost ma'sel' tae jazz wan too many times. Playin' in the flat key of the leading tone while the rest of the band was still in the tonic...
...that's dorian mode.
I'm no losin' ma first born son tae it as well.
Naw.
I huvnae goat a son.
Get oot...
...Come back when you're intae new age.
This time ye'v really gone an let me down.
Ye couldae ran off tae the circus...
...I wouldnae huv minded that much
Ye couldae married a catholic...
...I'd live
Christ! If only ye'd been GAY!
Bit naw,
You had tae join a jazz group...
Somehow ah alwayz knew ye'd turn out tae be a jazzer,
Ah alwayz knew ye'd disappoint me!
Your Maw is probably turning in her grave...
...she loved classical music.
None ay they blue notes.
Aeolian modes...
Phrygian Scales!
G major 7ths with a flattened 9th and an Augmented 5th!!!
Makes me sick tae ma stomach!
-> Am sorry da!
Naw! Jist... go...
Haven't ye done enough? With yer Miles Davis.
Oscar Peterson.
Ella Fitzgerald, Billy Holiday, Chett Baker... George Gershwin!!!
He wis a jew n' aw.
-> Ye seem tae know a lot about jazz da'
Too much son! Too much!
I tried tae warn ye off!
I flirted ma'sel' wae jazz when I wis your age.
Ah didnae want ye tae make the same mistakes that ah made!
-> Bit da! Ah jist like jammin!
Enough!!!! I lost ma'sel' tae jazz wan too many times. Playin' in the flat key of the leading tone while the rest of the band was still in the tonic...
...that's dorian mode.
I'm no losin' ma first born son tae it as well.
Naw.
I huvnae goat a son.
Get oot...
...Come back when you're intae new age.
Tuesday, 2 October 2012
"Lying is the most fun a girl can have without taking her clothes off, but it's better if you do."
Review of Broken Bird Theatre's performance of Closer by Patrick Marber
at The Old Hairdressers
at The Old Hairdressers
Closer, a play concerning honesty, co-dependency, trust,
love as object-obsession and other heady themes, holds some considerable acumen
having won the Laurence Olivier Award for Best New Play and New York Drama
Critics' Circle Award for Best Foreign Play, as well as being nominated for a
Tony after its London premiere in 1997.
This often comedic romantic drama, made into a film
featuring Jude Law, Natalie Portman, Clive Owen and Julia Roberts in 2004,
follows the emotional ups and downs of four individuals, each in their own way
psychologically dubious, as they fall in and out of each other’s arms, trading
partners for love and lust. Dan is cold, Alice is wayward, Anna can’t follow
her best interests, and Larry claims the moral high ground while acting out
unscrupulous sexual fantasies and taking opportunities in opposition to his
values.
Happenstance and sometimes the most unlikely of coincidences
brings them together – in one hilarious scene, Dan tricks Larry into turning up
for a date after posing as a cyber slut named Anna in an internet chat room,
only for Larry to meet the real Anna and begin a romantic relationship with
her, much to Dan’s Chagrin. Alice and Larry, the more co-dependents in love,
are betrayed. Arguments ensue over who deserves whom and finally happy endings
are lost over the desire for candour.
Sometimes these four
carry on a little as though there are only three other people in the rest of
the universe, but the writing is consistently high standing - with tight
plotting, interesting structure, and occasional flashes of psychological
excellence such as the unconscious tie between Larry’s slavish co-dependency in
love as a flipside to his sexual violence: he devours his partner in conquest
of his slavery.
The constructive use of a minimal set helps enhance the
drama and naturalistic feel. The merging
of two scenes into one stage is ubiquitously well achieved: when one character
walks into another couple’s scene only to steal one of them into a flashback of
a previous scenario the effect is immersive.
Broken Bird is a company that shows immense competence both
in acting and execution, although sometimes a closer reading of the script could
yield yet deeper results. For example, Larry makes several references to his
working class heritage but his performance does not particularly exploit this as
a character point, likewise while Dan’s portrayal is completely consistent
internally, he does not seem to exude the cool, detached sexuality wanting of a
man whom women involuntarily fall in love with, despite themselves. Still, the
company, formed earlier this year by young actors, has the potential to raise
the stakes for independent theatre in Glasgow, they emanate professionalism.
Sunday, 23 September 2012
Debunking the Nuclear Renaissance
ok I rustled this up for you tell me what you think
The nuclear industry was economically dead for decades. In 2005 the American Congress breathed 12 billion tax payer dollars to bring it back from the brink, and where there is nuclear power the same state-capitalist croneyism follows the world over. Without free money from the public sector, the nuclear industry does not survive. No one would insure a nuclear powerplant on a free market because it simply wouldn't be worth the risk. Instead states take liabily.
Nuclear power was never really introduced to produce energy as such, it was used in the 50s as a front for producing plutonium for nuclear weapons and to offset the cost somewhat. Time and time again it's proven itself be the most expensive form of energy production.
The anti-greenhouse argument for nuclear energy is very weak. Fossil fuel energy is needed to mine uranium and transport it, produce the cement and transporting that too, build the reactor, deal with the waste and many other processes. Then there is the processes of purifying what comes out the ground (which is becoming increasingly inpure.) This itself create a lot of carbon emissions and puts poison chemicals into the ground. The radioactity that was released from uranium mining in into the environment many decades ago still poisons the landscape, the water, and damages health - when the Uranium-235 is split it gives off polutants that affect the air, water, ditches... Mining for the fuel has been an environmental disaster which has destroyed the lands of native peoples like American Indians and Aboriginies. As supplies become rarer and rarer more sites need to be located for aquiring it at the expense of natural landscapes and indigenous peoples.
Conservation of Energy bests producing more every time. In one study students found that every pound spent on energy efficiency saved seven times as much carbon as every pound spent on nuclear power. In 1993 the book Energy Without End by Michael Flood featured a house built in British Columbia, which has a climate similar to South England, that received an Annual Electric Heating Bill of £12. It was four times the size of an average British house.
Heat is thrown away from our powerstations, poured into the sky as flue gases and steam. Instead this "waste steam" could be piped in order to heat homes an workplaces, afterall, what is the best way to eliminate hypothermia which kills many elderly people in their own homes evey winter? To produce more energy at great cost and hope they can afford it or to insulate their houses so that they retain heat at less expense? The government should spend money on grants for insulation instead of nuclear power. Energy efficiency also creates more jobs.
We have a lot better chance of making solar and wind work now than we have of isolating the enormous amounts of nuclear waste that are being created every day. Plutonium 239, just one of the bi-products, has a half-life of 24,400 years - 4 times longer than recorded history! It could takes over 500,000 years for even a small quantity of it to become harmless. The lethal dosage is a thousandth of a gram.
Wasting money on the irresponsivle act of producing pqwer through nuclear fission inhibits us as a society from making the leap to sustainables. Perhaps future generations will never forgive us for leaving them our nuclear legacy to manage but perhaps we can stop adding fuel to the nuclear fire.
The nuclear industry was economically dead for decades. In 2005 the American Congress breathed 12 billion tax payer dollars to bring it back from the brink, and where there is nuclear power the same state-capitalist croneyism follows the world over. Without free money from the public sector, the nuclear industry does not survive. No one would insure a nuclear powerplant on a free market because it simply wouldn't be worth the risk. Instead states take liabily.
Nuclear power was never really introduced to produce energy as such, it was used in the 50s as a front for producing plutonium for nuclear weapons and to offset the cost somewhat. Time and time again it's proven itself be the most expensive form of energy production.
The anti-greenhouse argument for nuclear energy is very weak. Fossil fuel energy is needed to mine uranium and transport it, produce the cement and transporting that too, build the reactor, deal with the waste and many other processes. Then there is the processes of purifying what comes out the ground (which is becoming increasingly inpure.) This itself create a lot of carbon emissions and puts poison chemicals into the ground. The radioactity that was released from uranium mining in into the environment many decades ago still poisons the landscape, the water, and damages health - when the Uranium-235 is split it gives off polutants that affect the air, water, ditches... Mining for the fuel has been an environmental disaster which has destroyed the lands of native peoples like American Indians and Aboriginies. As supplies become rarer and rarer more sites need to be located for aquiring it at the expense of natural landscapes and indigenous peoples.
Conservation of Energy bests producing more every time. In one study students found that every pound spent on energy efficiency saved seven times as much carbon as every pound spent on nuclear power. In 1993 the book Energy Without End by Michael Flood featured a house built in British Columbia, which has a climate similar to South England, that received an Annual Electric Heating Bill of £12. It was four times the size of an average British house.
Heat is thrown away from our powerstations, poured into the sky as flue gases and steam. Instead this "waste steam" could be piped in order to heat homes an workplaces, afterall, what is the best way to eliminate hypothermia which kills many elderly people in their own homes evey winter? To produce more energy at great cost and hope they can afford it or to insulate their houses so that they retain heat at less expense? The government should spend money on grants for insulation instead of nuclear power. Energy efficiency also creates more jobs.
We have a lot better chance of making solar and wind work now than we have of isolating the enormous amounts of nuclear waste that are being created every day. Plutonium 239, just one of the bi-products, has a half-life of 24,400 years - 4 times longer than recorded history! It could takes over 500,000 years for even a small quantity of it to become harmless. The lethal dosage is a thousandth of a gram.
Wasting money on the irresponsivle act of producing pqwer through nuclear fission inhibits us as a society from making the leap to sustainables. Perhaps future generations will never forgive us for leaving them our nuclear legacy to manage but perhaps we can stop adding fuel to the nuclear fire.
Friday, 21 September 2012
Music - visceral vs. intellectual
An interesting thing about music is that it is often very much seen as a largely visceral creative outlet and, by non musicians, there is some kind of sorcery or magic involved - I remember a key moment when I was in primary school and the teacher split the class in four to sing the canon: "London's Burning." I was utterly astounded, that these four simple melodies could be superimposed to create such a wonderful and hypnotic cacophony! (It certainly seemed to resemble wizardry!) Yet the more we learn about how music works the more we appreciate the fact that a musician is simply just someone who has heard music and loved it enough to want to understand how to do it. Songs and compositions are designed much in the way an architect designs a beautiful building: with an eye for aesthetics, but based on certain principles steeped in science and always built out of the correct materials for the job. In our case these materials are rhythmic and melodic features which merge with harmonic and timbral choices. Having quite an analytic mind, the aspects of music that I have seen myself to be particularly apt for, I have often noticed while teaching, are breaking elements that seem rather complex down into their constituent parts so that they can be more easily assimilated and then reconstructed. Sometimes when a student is having trouble learning part of a piece it can help to create "easier versions" that go through graded stages of picking up certain melodic or rhythmic features of the music that lead up to being able to play the piece as it is written, also understanding what each of these elements contributes to the concrete totality of the piece. I always refer to myself as a "better teacher than player," as I know I am not the most virtuossic player to be found.
Saturday, 15 September 2012
My Facebook Song
Don't want to engaged to you on Facebook
Don't ask me why
It's complicated
And just because I like your status
That doesn't mean that we are
In a relationship
Why wont you just quit poking me
Please don't take this comment personally
Don't want to get engaged to you in Facebook
May I suggest we just be friends
I've seen your profile
I've even liked your page
You've switched to timeline
We're not at the same stage because I
Don't want to engaged to you on Facebook
Don't ask me why
It's complicated
And just because I like your status
That doesn't mean that we are
In a relationship
Why wont you just quit poking me
I can't be LinkedIn definitely
Don't want to get engaged to you in Facebook
I'm anti-social media
I've checked your news feed
It says you want to chat
Please get the message
I won't install that app because I
Don't want to engaged to you on Facebook
Don't ask me why
It's complicated
And just because I like your status
That doesn't mean that we are
In a relationship
Why wont you just quit poking me
No I won't approve you as family
Don't want to get engaged to you in Facebook
May I suggest we just be friends
I'm tagged in pictures
I'm in all of your groups
Your application requests a second look because I
Don't want to engaged to you on Facebook
Don't ask me why
It's complicated
And just because I like your status
That doesn't mean that we are
In a relationship
Why wont you just quit poking me
Won't you take my update seriously
Don't want to get engaged to you in Facebook
I'm logging off for the last time
Don't ask me why
It's complicated
And just because I like your status
That doesn't mean that we are
In a relationship
Why wont you just quit poking me
Please don't take this comment personally
Don't want to get engaged to you in Facebook
May I suggest we just be friends
I've seen your profile
I've even liked your page
You've switched to timeline
We're not at the same stage because I
Don't want to engaged to you on Facebook
Don't ask me why
It's complicated
And just because I like your status
That doesn't mean that we are
In a relationship
Why wont you just quit poking me
I can't be LinkedIn definitely
Don't want to get engaged to you in Facebook
I'm anti-social media
I've checked your news feed
It says you want to chat
Please get the message
I won't install that app because I
Don't want to engaged to you on Facebook
Don't ask me why
It's complicated
And just because I like your status
That doesn't mean that we are
In a relationship
Why wont you just quit poking me
No I won't approve you as family
Don't want to get engaged to you in Facebook
May I suggest we just be friends
I'm tagged in pictures
I'm in all of your groups
Your application requests a second look because I
Don't want to engaged to you on Facebook
Don't ask me why
It's complicated
And just because I like your status
That doesn't mean that we are
In a relationship
Why wont you just quit poking me
Won't you take my update seriously
Don't want to get engaged to you in Facebook
I'm logging off for the last time
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)