One of the stupidest human activities on prominent display?

By -
I just saw two TV announcers mocking how silly the fashions they wore 20 years ago look now.

But of course they are both still slaves to fashion. And what's more they think that what they're wearing on TV today is perfect and beyond reproach, because it is "current"!

Do they really not realize that in another 20 years there will be some other announcers on TV mocking how stupid what they are wearing today looks? This summer they will be wearing orange, because "orange is this summer's black," and announcers of the future will be ridiculing them for their ridiculous color choice.

Comments

  1. Silas Barta4:41 PM

    That's something that always nags at me: why isthere this consistent, predictable tendency to view fashions from N years ago as goofy? Under what conditions would we not do that? I imagine extreme or pre-industrial poverty, where no one cares for differential ornamentation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah4:43 PM

      I think it helps keep the fashion wheel turning: you can't wear that goofy jacket from 10 years ago! You need to get a new, non-goofy (for now) jacket!

      Delete
    2. Ken B11:52 AM

      Ornamentation is common even in poor pre industrial society. Iroquois, renaissance Florence, Viking settlements, Celtic settlements, ancient Egypt. Need I go on?

      Delete
    3. gcallah4:21 PM

      No, Ken, please don't go on, since my post was not a complaint against ornamentation, but against mocking last year's ornamentation as dumb.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more