Fractal Radio | Episode 19 – Pundits Disease


Public discourse is vital to a free and open society. Effective public discourse faces many challenges. One such challenge is Pundits Diseasemoralizing about pet issues from a high tower.

Pundits and commentators whether mainstream or independent tend to be removed from direct involvement in what they are discussing. A position that leads them to cover vague notions more than they do the practical application of those notions.

A huge problem with this trend is that it dwarves huge issues behind a cloud of hot air and trendy topics.


https://www.fractaljournal.com | Stories, Essays, and More!
https://www.minds.com/Weirmellow | Social Media
https://www.patreon.com/TheFractalJournal | Buy me a shirt or suffer my nipples

Saturday Morning Musings – Is ‘Pitch Culture’ gonna improve Novels?

Image result for sales pitch


Saturdays often find me gathering strength for the coming week.  They are often as productive as any other day but their charm lies in that they don’t have to be.

So I sit here giving my eyes a rest, nearly blind without my contacts, perusing Vanity Fair. I come across an article discussing a zeitgeist shift of ‘serious writers’ ceasing to shun Television writing. Opting instead to embrace it and taking TV shows they watch ‘very seriously.’

Image result for vanity fair novel ambitions
(Novel Ambitions by Joy Press | Vanity Fair – August 2018)

 

I did not put ‘serious writers’ in snark quotes for any elitist reason. I am huge Michael Crichton fan and have always (when it’s done right) understood both the big and small screen as rich and valid mediums.

I put serious writers in quotes because the term confuses me. I feel that anyone who takes the trouble to write is a serious writer. Perhaps the piece was using the language to highlight the fact that accomplished writers (whose work is expressive of the sort of nuance that one associates with those who appreciate literary art) were no longer shunning an industry pariah.

Which is fine but I can’t help but fiddle the hilt of my sword. I am on guard for the king called disinterest and his prince ‘l’art pour l’art.’ A position that I feel is increasingly rare. When I hear ‘serious this or that pursuit’ these days I am wont to think that ‘serious’ means commercially viable.

I am decidedly steeped in Classicism as I’ve come to understand it. I do not mean by this any restrictive form but rather a mindset. A mindset tracing its roots back to the ancient city states of Greece where merchants were shunned.

The commercialization of science and art is a decades old story. It is a story too broad and important for this uncharacteristically cool Carolina morning. Books will be written about it for decades. The purpose of this wee essay is to serve as reminder that every fertile thing that elevated civilization is now being processed into quick, unnaturally tasty, canned goods.

Classicism is important because even if you choose Spam over a ribeye the makers of Spam should still try to make it taste like a ribeye. (Folks privy to the differences between the pop music of the 60’s and 70’s and the pop music of today will more readily understand this analogy.)

The Vanity Fair article is an excellent springboard for thrusting the Classic outlook back into the collective conscience. It’s a rich little morsel that raises all sorts of questions.

Questions like the namesake of this article: “Is ‘pitch culture’ gonna improve novels?”

If ‘serious writers’ are being funneled from the world of the novel into the world of the sitcom as the authoress suggests then what does this mean for novels?

I do not necessarily think it means anything foul. The pithier more economic approach of television writing is certainly good to have and maintain in one’s literary tool belt. And I do enjoy a good show so the presence of ‘serious writers’ means that I will have a richer life.

But, even if these pros I’ve highlighted existed without their shadow cons then one must still remember the ground bass of classicism. That little voice that says, “Is the greatest number, the greatest good?”

Paradoxically, I think that history attests to the fact that the greatest good, for the greatest number is meted out by that little voice. A voice that is often too modest and too much of a minority.

avoiding the cons of ‘Pitch Culture’ means giving ear to that voice.

What do I mean by pitch culture? To those unfamiliar with marketing a pitch is a proposal. It’s putting forward an idea that’s likely to get people hooked to a guy in the business of making money getting people hooked. And getting the guy to think that the idea will get people hooked. With so many hooks you can see how quickly the process gets crooked.

The obvious problem here is the difficulty of making something as inherently subjective as art as objective as a studios bottom line. This is an art in itself that I don’t necessarily disdain, I just think it like any market requires ethics and oversight.

You don’t want metrics, things that in themselves are fraught with the chaotic problem domain of social statistics, to become the cookie cutter for your artistic treats.

The article argues that today due to the presence of serious writers this cookie cutter approach is rarer. I do see some evidence for this but that evidence is of course shows that I happen to find engaging and is thus suspect.

That being said I feel that many shows are not so much abdicating the cookie cutter but simply using a cookie cutter that tries really hard to not seem like a cookie cutter.

Bill Hick’s classic bit on marketing where he mimics a sales panels thoughts ‘o you see what he did there, he’s going for the anti-marketing dollar, that’s really smart – the anti-marketing dollar is huge.’ (Not an exact quote) This impression is exactly what I’m talking about with the ‘anti cookie cutter cookie cutter’.

Everytime I hear words like ‘groundbreaking, raw, gritty, etc’ I immediately encounter a funny sensation. It’s a dull sort of malaise that settles over my mind as I picture a litany of industry standards like ‘Dr. House accepting his lesbian daughter while taking potshots at corporations and Jesus as he fights off zombies that put him face to face with the surprisingly violent nature of average people in a shitty situation.’ This is the cookie cutter that I call ‘shit just got real.

South Park did a really great bit that highlights the overindulgence of shocking realities when the character Butters tires of ‘all the gay weiners’ in Game of Thrones.

A pretty standard line of advice for any profession is that ‘you have to know the rules before you can break them.’

I think that the lack of a strong reading culture makes audiences particularly susceptible to cheap tricks. And if serious writers are going to revolutionize an industry known for cheap tricks they’d better be careful when catering to the whims of that audience and the farmers at Madison Avenue.


http://www.minds.com/Weirmellow | Follow me on Minds!

http://www.patreon.com/TheFractalJournal | Support independent media

Let a Sleeping Dog Lie

let-sleeping-dogs-lie.jpg


Hey, I bought into the myth myself…. for a long time. The idea that sleep is for the weak, that I was somehow special, needing less sleep than your average schmuck. This was part of my modus operandi for a good decade.

I eventually let go of this notion when I realized that I couldn’t focus on anything substantive for longer than a few hours and some days a few minutes.

My transformation into a person who demands that love, family, money, bosses, friends, and even Jesus Christ himself bugger off for at least eight hours a day came with a few interesting realizations.

Like the only sober guy in a group of giggling stoners – I began to see, with laser-like clarity that my fellow dudes and dudettes weren’t being profound, they were being idiots.

It’s an epiphany that has allowed me to be paradoxically sympathetic and impatient.

A few months ago I was at a job interview and couldn’t help but let my eyes glaze over when the interviewer described their drive (“I love the grind!”) in glowing detail. I don’t mind boasting. I think when done properly it can be a valid assertion of one’s accomplishments in a world that loves to pick apart your every weakness. But I can no longer stomach heaping praise on maladaptive behavior.

Part of this man’s pride seemed to come from his capacity for privation. He explained in exquisite detail how on many nights for a good long while he was only getting two hours of sleep. Well..no wonder he was balding before thirty. Sure genetics may play a role…but, supposing this tale of robbing the Sandman blind were true…I wouldn’t doubt it was a contributing factor.

Generally, things that are high quality require a lot of effort. I think that’s how the myth really digs its way into the psyche. Going without sleep is difficult, it gives you more hours in a day that never seems to have enough, ergo going without sleep is a feat of self-sacrifice on par with the very Cross.

Sleep is for the lazy and the weak. The strong drink an espresso and soldier on. Towards what exactly…I don’t know. But I’ll wager that it looks a lot like early mortality and an increasingly burdened medical system.

The United States has a serious issue with chronic illness. Chronic illness is expensive. It is expensive in every possible way. It damages the life of the afflicted and the lives of those around them and costs a hell of a lot of money. The times, the cheers, and the laughs that could be spent living well and healthy are instead sopped up by hospital visits, little blood sugar kits, and lots of feverish accounting.

This trend has been attributed to a number of factors like diet, work, and exercise habits. All of which are valid. Sleep has also been implicated though I fear that its not been implicated strongly enough. Because culturally the myth of the Insomniac Ubermensch still reigns. Hence, my interviewers glowing opinion of the practice. It’s what achievers do!

I’m a tad skeptical when it comes to suburban achievements. 40, 50, 60 k a year, some degree in something spiffy, etc all seem like tawdry compensation for health. I really doubt that had these talented and dedicated individuals, spent their time truly critically assessing what it was that allowed for real excellence,  that they would have hopped onto a giddy predetermined little maze.

With the resources and technology, we have at our disposal today we could do far better than more of the same.

It never ceases to amaze me how awkward social interactions are. How weird and spacey people are. At first, I thought that I was just seeing things. But as I adopted healthier habits and gained more confidence in my powers of observation I really only found my impressions confirmed.
This is, of course, likely due to a number of factors. But peoples inability to critically assess concepts, to remember things, and to hold a sustained polysyllabic conversation definitely has something to do with everybody being constantly shagged out.

As I got more and more refreshing shuteye, like the former drunk who notices the slur in his AA buddies speech, I noticed the lapses in attention, the moodiness, and the infuriatingly obvious missed cues of the sleep deprived.

A good portion of the dangerous myth of the Insomniac Superman has to do with an ignorance of biology. It’s really funny because there is so much in our culture that people now use to cast off responsibility and cultivation. O you’re a bit blue: HERE’S A Pill! They have no trouble attributing the blues to biology but they don’t attribute their ability to perform to the most natural and biological of things: sleep.

Well, the NIH, Harvard, and a good number of researchers and scientists have done great work in isolating the exact role of sleep. Everything from weight to memory, to the susceptibility to accidents and cancer, is affected by sleep.

As I have already said sure there are many factors that contribute to something like cancer. I’ve heard people wonder aloud as to why we see so much ailment, why we have such a high rate of chronic illnesses. Despite the fact that plastics and pollutants and longer lifespans are a factor we must never leave out behavior.

Not sleeping is bad behavior. If you don’t believe me here are some links to people with bigger diploma shaped Phalluses than I:

https://medlineplus.gov/magazine/issues/summer12/articles/summer12pg17.html

https://www.health.harvard.edu/press_releases/importance_of_sleep_and_health

As for me I’ve just awoken from a lovely post work siesta and am going to use my relaxed natural energy to enjoy a beer and play the piano.

Go forth and nap!

TFJ Vlogs – Addressing Trendy Minimalism


There’s a sort of sterile spirit around these days. It disguises itself in the frock of ‘minimalism.’ But its really closer to provincial laziness. I track the problem a bit and conclude: Don’t throw the burgers out with the beer.

The triggering: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/10/01/the-low-information-diet/

– I actually agree with the general gist of that article. I’m just using it as a spring-board to discuss some of the slippery slope effects that come from adopting a :’low information diet.’

My main site: http://www.fractaljournal.com

Why I Don’ t Facebook

O dear, it’s happened again, someone asked me if I Facebook…

There is a now ancient video of Michael Crichton sitting in with a panel of sci-fi writers discussing the state of that industry. During that discussion he brings up how the increasing presence of cameras has the potential to change the way that people interact. He says that being in front of a camera certainly makes him act differently than he does in a more private setting.



This behavioral shift is the problem with sites like Facebook.

Ok, but behavior changes from generation to generation and is often brought about by technology. So why is this particular behavioral shift a bad thing? Aren’t these Luddite concerns?

The sort of behavioral shift that seems to be the trouble is group-think, confirmation bias, and insecurity. Though the three things are distinct phenomenon they share a common thread and are thus treated as the ‘behavioral shift’ in question.

This phenomenon is supported by four ‘emergent properties’ common to all social networks, electronic, and otherwise.

1) The Constant Peanut Gallery

2) Increased Misunderstanding

3) False Security

4) Increased Preening

All of these properties emerge from the need for validation.

Validation is the core of many goods and many ills. It is important to check your perceptions, ideas, and at times your very person against the ideas, opinions, and persons of others. It helps to form a balanced opinion and is arguably the animating principle behind parliamentary government and peer review.

Yet, peer review and parliament often act as agents of confirmation bias rather than guardians of truth. Galileo’s works were reviewed by the experts of his day and found lacking. Does this mean that we should do away with parliament and peer review?

By no means. It was corroboration of his findings that eventually led to their acceptance in the scientific canon. Bad peer review can be reviewed by good peer review. So long as the process is ongoing issues will be resolved.

This brings us to the core of the problem with Facebook: Stagnation.

The constant peanut gallery often leads one to adopt the biologically expedient role of ‘crowd pleasing’ whether consciously or unconsciously. Increased misunderstandings arise because folks choose to share views dampened by crowd pleasing. A false security arises from the perceived confirmation of one’s views and person leading to increased preening or display of those characteristics.

All of these are the recipe for group-think, confirmation bias, and insecurity that form the stagnation which makes Facebook an unsavory medium. The sort of things that I believe to be at the core of Crichton’s concerns while on that panel.

I use Word Press, YouTube, Mastodon, and Minds. These are all social networks in their own right. Am I then being unfair to Facebook? Isn’t vlogging and blogging and posting subject to the same problems as Facebook. Why don’t I get a Facebook account?

Well, for one Facebook has a rather checkered history. It is also different from the sites I choose because it involves ones immediate circle. Due to its reaching so close to home its effectiveness for debate and unbiased analysis of ideas and persons becomes compromised.

It is much easier to focus on ideas and arguments with sites like Word Press and YouTube. All the problems with Facebook do of course occur there but it is with less frequency and degree that they do. This is as I have said due to the close and personal nature of Facebook.

Which not only compromises privacy but brings us all the dark sides of a global village with alarming speed. I am rather cosmopolitan in my outlook so I am not at all promoting provincialism in criticizing ‘the global village.’

It is in fact provincialization that we have to fear from ‘the global village.’ The provincialism of ideas. Human beings despite their variety of cultures and philosophies do share a certain common psychological profile. Due to this common thread all of their variety becomes endangered rather quickly when filtered through one global ‘common room.’

This is why the majority of the world is now California. I’m serious. Look at all the dudes, and jeans, beards, and t-shirts. It’s been going on for quiet a while. This narrowing of style and ideation. Where a girl in Frankfurt is nearly indistinguishable from one in Orange County.

Yes, all right but, Facebook isn’t meant to be a place for the exchange of ideas. It’s meant to be a way to connect with friends!

Ok, well I do have a phone and a car, and an email, and a post office. Why does the whole world need to know of my circle of friends? Why does my circle of friends need to be privy to my every interaction with my circle of friends?

Is shooting messages and inviting/excluding people from events publicly really ‘connecting?’

I rather think it has the opposite effect. To where I can hardly enjoy a beer with friends, without one of them shoving a little screen in my face. Bearing the latest meme or Facebook faux pas, glowing with hi-def brightness that the table behind me can read.

This is why I don’t Facebook.

TFJ Vlogs – The Case for Integrative Analysis


 

In this snippet I discuss how good questions are better than quick answers. How one must slow down to really explore a ‘problem domain.’ It is unfortunate how our ‘results’ (sic) obsessed culture has largely abandoned this ethos…which explains the quality of a lot of such…results.

The Second Brain – https://www.amazon.com/Second-Brain-Groundbreaking-Understanding-Disorders/dp/0060930721/ref=sr_1_1/138-6261393-6916830?ie=UTF8&qid=1516365410&sr=8-1&keywords=the+second+brain

 

 

TAP # 11 – Glib, Glam, and Guano (Vlog)


In this installment of TAP (The Audity Podcast), I discuss pitfalls in reasoning that come from the way that information is popularly presented.

Presented in gloriously anachronistic black and white because I am a shameless hep-cat hypocrite!


Example One: http://psychologyofeating.com/mind-over-food/

Example Two: http://reason.com/archives/2002/09/25/i-dont-care-where-my-food-come


Further reading:

Antonio Damasio’s – Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00AFY2XVK/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

Jamie Whyte’s – Crime’s Against Logic

https://www.amazon.com/Crimes-Against-Logic-Politicians-Journalists/dp/0071446435

Is Twenty-Seven the Perfect Time to Start a Band?

hqdefault


 

The popular conception is a hard thing to qualify. It is difficult to define a common view because there are so many common views. Yet it can be done. At least insofar as setting the stage for social, psychological, historical, and philosophical analysis.

There do seem to be pervasive opinions that though rarely vocalized may as well be set in stone.

For instance, everyone always expects artists and musicians to be young. At least no older than thirty. This is strange.

It might be because most bands that society is currently familiar with made their mark in their twenties.

There may be some biological reasons for youths blessing of artistic endeavors.

Neurology and the endocrine system come to mind. Then there are the social and psychological variables.

First there is the naivete that’s fertile ground for creative exploration, then there is abundant energy to till that ground, and finally, there is a drive to define and prove oneself. Society also fosters and encourages young creators* whereas there is a greater onus on the mature to be ‘responsible’ and ‘settled in.’

All these factors seem to wane as people age into their thirties. So is it meant to be? Should everyone north of thirty settle into the proverbial accountant’s office and repair their gutters on the weekends?

No.

First, there are many examples of artists who didn’t ‘make it’ until ‘later’ in life. Andreas Bocelli and Leonard Cohen to name a couple.

Second, there are many examples of artists who continued creating masterpieces throughout their lives. Bach springs to mind. As do Johannes Brahms, Richard Wagner, and Stevie Wonder.

Third, if one decides to view life as having many stages, then each stage of life has its own music its own landscapes to offer.

To begin the analysis of creative stages of life let’s examine the art of the young.

The case can be made that the young are too histrionic to produce anything of lasting value. As evidence, one can cite the similarity of subject matter and delivery of bands in the last century.

First, there is the sex, drugs, and joyously cacophonous ROCK starting somewhere around the time of ‘The Doors’ and lasting well through the eighties hair-metal scene. Libidinous excess and boundary flaunting tests of one’s limits through psychedelics and alcohol aren’t the only tritely recurring sins of the young.

There is also the angst and neurotic introspection of Grunge, Alternative, and Progressive genres that cropped up in the late eighties and still hold sway into the era of whistling ironic ukulele hipsterdom. Are maudlin sentiment and bitter emotion really the best subjects to set to music? The young musicians of the last three decades seem to think so.

Given its subject matter and focus, the art of the young has unsurprisingly taken a morbid turn. The 27 Club is ‘a notional roll of remembrance’ that pays homage to the fact that many of the 20th centuries musical luminaries died young. Numbers can be mystic things and the fact that Jim Morrisson, Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain, and Amy Winehouse all died at 27 lends an air of tragic magic to that arbitrary figure. Hence the ‘colloquialization’ of ‘27 Club.’

Death has a certain finality that often lends weight and perceived substance to the art of those who passed. ‘The good die young.’

The audience ‘knew’ these folks as an explosion, as a passionate flame that burned too bright and quick, and suddenly there is the mystery of eternal silence. What more would they have made would they have said? What secret pain, what uniquely anguished insight not accessible to average joe, did these brilliant people harbor? What was it that made people who wrote such tuneful and evocative things so self-destructive?

It would be wrong to characterize these artists as immature. It is a silly business indeed to hover over history like a daft-shrink-bog-wraith psychoanalyzing the minutiae of the lives of its actors. Yet there does seem to be an air of self-fulfilling prophecy to the art of the young.

The deification of such art, the raising of it to some sort of deep expression of the human condition, while at times valid, can also be foolish and dangerous. It is the former because foolish and dangerous things are indeed a part of the human condition. It is the latter because despite the melodic and lyrical finesse of such works they were tainted by hormones and substance abuse. A tainting that leads to a sort of ‘Opera Buffa‘ where those who gained much admiration and success, freshly minted aristocrats in a sense, weren’t sated by such things and chose to become a tragedy for a convoluted sense of authenticity or psychic chaos magnified by chemicals and overcharged emotions.

The creative stages seem to fit pretty neatly into the categories of the prodigy, the rockstar, the craftsman, and the master.

  • The Rockstar has already been discussed, the rockstar is the art of the young, it is somebody that might very well be talented or not so talented but they have something to say and by God, they will say it.
  • The preceding ‘Prodigy’ is a precocious child with uncanny technical skills and well-directed enthusiasm.
  • The Craftsman is a stage that comes after prodigy and rockstar and is a person dedicated to the disciplined acquisition of skills and diligent creative output who has a broader repertoire of life experience to draw from and can do so effectively and judiciously.
  • The Master is the craftsman after many years of practice. One can look to Bach responding to the challenge of Friderich the II, improvising a three and then six-part fugue on a theme presented by that monarch.

The space of this essay will only allow the exploration of two out of four of the stages of creative life. So in light of all the information considered which would be best to unpack?

Since the ‘rockstar’ has been addressed it seems fitting to move next in line to ‘the craftsman.’

As the world approaches the cusp of a new decade, is it not fitting to promote a new sort of ‘27 Club’? Why not popularly consider 27 to mark the beginning of careers rather than looking with perverse expectation towards the demise of heroically dysfunctional musicians?

Twenty-seven may, in fact, be the perfect time to start a band. One still has abundant energy which can be used in conjunction with greater mastery over one’s emotions to select which insights and life experiences to magnify through art. Further, it is a time when hormonal needs and spastic bursts of energy will be less of a barrier to serious practice. Your bandmates are more likely to show up on time.

Why disparage the rockstar and highlight the craftsman?

The prodigy, the rockstar, and the master need no encouragement. They will do what they do as a matter of compulsion. The craftsman is the most suspicious of compulsion. As a person moving further into adulthood and feeling the weight of experience, the craftsman becomes wary and guarded, sensing a profounder need to be ‘serious and secure.’
Sometimes this need to be ‘serious and secure,’ to be a steady sort, manifests itself as studied avoidance of creative endeavors. Partly because one is keenly determined to avoid wasting time which has greater weight than ever before. Partly because one wants to avoid seeming gauche.

The truth is that music and art are never a waste of time. They sharpen all the skills and faculties necessary to succeed in work and relationships. Communication and synthesis are two skills most readily and deeply refined through creative endeavor. Atop this boon, there is another in that the magnification of life through art makes you very appreciative of even the most mundane and prosaic aspects of living.

There is nothing gauche about loving life or succeeding in relationships and the workplace.

These stages are of course guides rather than rules. Some may find themselves at a place of overlapping stages. Whatever stage you’re at…what are you waiting for?

Go forth and create.

*There will soon be another essay on the unique challenges of creative youths in the present college and structure obsessed society that purports itself to be a bastion of free-thinking creativity.

Related Links and Reading

https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2015/08/03/18-musicians-who-made-it-later-in-life/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OtouQnfnZU

Keeping the Flame

The DOD’s Position on your Beerbelly

 

Image result for beer belly cartoon                                                                                                     Image result for nuclear bomb explosion

Gut Bomb Indeed!

There’s trouble Jim!

Our plush lovable beer holsters are a threat to national security.

By the year 2040, 100% of the federal budget will be on Medicare and Medicaid.

Sick people are a liability, which is why the DOD has put a sick nation on par with nuclear war.

According to Chris Kresser, an author and health researcher, the DOD has in fact named health care as an existential threat.

That’s truly wild.

While I do think it reasonable to make conservative guesses, on the potential future outcomes of trends, based on solid data and interpretative frameworks (I’m real fun at parties!); I’m generally cautious about taking predictions completely on board, no matter the source.

Despite the click-baitiness of Kresser’s claims* they’re probably not far off target.

What makes me say this is the data that we already have.

Kresser threw down some hard facts on his recent appearance, on a popular podcast known as The Joe Rogan Experience.

One in two American’s has a chronic disease. That’s either you or the guy next to you.

One of the most common chronic diseases is diabetes.

1/3 of Americans are either pre-diabetic or diabetic. Diabetes-like all chronic diseases is expensive, with treatment costs adding up to 630, 000 dollars over an average lifespan – 45 years at an average of $14k/yr.

Add that to our other well known financial woes and a truly cataclysmic outcome doesn’t seem unlikely.

Catastrophist I am not. I am cataclysm averse. I don’t think they happen that often. I know they don’t happen as often as people who stand to profit, from the various doomsday cottage industries, would like you to believe.

But catastrophes do occur. Floods, hurricanes, stock market crashes, wars, such things aren’t uncommon. And when one such thing gets sufficiently out of hand, then it approaches the parameters of cataclysm.

‘1/3 of Americans’ is getting parametrically awkward.

I call this the calculus of: Oh shit.

So what’s to be done?

Fixing the federal budget is beyond the scope of this article.

The answer to this looming disaster is simple. It is far simpler than becoming vigilant and educated citizens.

It is the doctrine of personal responsibility. Ok, doctrine doesn’t sound simple. I promise I’m not a libertarian...So…. how about eat less pasta, play more Tennis. Or just good ol’ ‘Put down that cheeseburger.’

While it’s simple it’s not necessarily easy. One of Kresser’s more plausible tidbits was informing us that food companies paid scientists, to exploit our penchant for the yummies to create hyper-addictive foods.

Fortunately, it seems that the more good choices you make the easier it is to make good choices. Knowing that your Cheetos are engineered to make you buy Cheetos will probably help along the rocky path to healthier living.

One aspect of Kresser’s recent appearance that I especially appreciated was his focus on the psychology of change.

Preaching of the virtues of vigor and promising the Valhalla of washboard abs isn’t really helpful. And despite Milo Yinappolis’s claims to the contrary, ‘shaming’ didn’t work terribly well when I tried the tactic on my heavier brethren.

Kresser skipped these standard pitches and instead focused on laying out methods for working with your biology to build better habits. Stuff like the potato hack. (To get more on this I recommend you visit his website and listen to JRE #1037.)

Kresser stressed the need to take people on a case by case basis since each person’s body responds to various techniques differently. Joe Rogan hammered this point home by pointing out how Robb Wolf’s wife was healthier despite the couple living and eating almost exactly the same.

There is, of course, a bit more than dietary changes and commitments to exercise needed to resolve today’s grim health issues. What we need to do is undergo a paradigm shift in how we approach our health.

The impression I have is that despite all the organic brick-a-brac and Yoga, we’re still functioning under the idea that we’re eventually ‘just going to get sick.’ That the first thing to do when this happens is to go to the doctor and get some pills, the sooner the better.

You should, of course, go to the doctor if you’re feeling sick but you have to understand that the doctor isn’t there to ‘fix you.’ You should understand that you don’t want the doctor to fix you. Just like you don’t want the mechanic to fix your car. The doctor should be there to help you when accidents happen or when certain specialized maintenance should be done. The doctor is not a magical backup.

I really don’t mean to be patronizing. I know this is simple stuff and most people know it. But as Rogan and Kresser pointed out knowing something and putting it into practice are two different ballgames.

There are various cultural assumptions and lifestyle habits that lead us to a somewhat mystical notion of modern medicine.

We must remember that modern medicine is a specific science for solving specific problems. We must understand that ‘repair’ is not the same thing as ‘maintenance.’

Putting that knowledge into practice means educating yourself on the limits of medical intervention and its true role: a method to get you back to ‘LIVING’ healthily rather than ‘MAKING’ you healthy.

What you’ll find if you listen to the podcast will have you buying potatoes and signing up for the gym post haste.


* These may well be true but my lackadaisical Googling has yielded several think tank studies which will just have to wait.

– This article was brought to you by Big Potato. They’re not paying. Simply threatening me with vague warnings about being careful where my chips fall, something about the Knights Tuber, and Spudtaneous Combustion. Therefore I’m scared and need a drink so visit my Patreon.

Image result for potato mafia