Blotter Paper

It used to be about politics, I guess now it's kind of about books. I miss being brash and in-your-face

  • About Me

    Rahul Kanakia's demoralizing blog that is not even on the first page of results for his name.
  • Top Posts

    • Categories

    • Archives

    Archive for the ‘General Principles’ Category

    Freedom…ehh…

    Posted by blotterpaper on January 26, 2009

    I was reading in the times today that the city of Belmont has banned smoking within all housing units that share a wall or ceiling with another, including condominiums (and, I suppose, town homes).

    I guess the common response to something like this to sneer “fascism” and talk about the nanny state infringing on your personal freedom. I have alot of sympathy for this argument. It’s hard to make a case against freedom.

    But that’s because freedom to do what makes you happy generally serves a public policy purpose and is of benefit to society. Since it’d be pretty difficult for the government to figure out what makes you happy and make you do it, and since happy citizens are of fairly paramount importance (at least theoretically) to a well-running, productive, society, it makes sense to allow people to choose what activities will make them happy and allow them to pursue them as best they are able, assuming they’re not bothering anyone else.

    Of course, everything you do bothers someone else somewhere. A man who likes to wear diapers and get spanked by midgets might offend some people’s sensibilities (arguably interfering with their happiness), which is where we, as a society, generally sit down and have a talk where we weigh the general pros and cons involved in banning said activity and decide that those fundamentalists need to get laid more.

    And, at first glance, these complaints seem to be of a similar nature. I don’t care whether you have emphysema. You’re inside your own apartment. If smoke from the apartment below you is bothering you…you should close the window. You cannot possibly be telling me that it is beyond the reach of modern science to prevent smoke from drifting from one open window into another room. So my instinct is to say that the harm being done here is relatively minor, and the guy upstairs should take a chill pill.

    But, on the other hand, when we look at the relative benefits of smoking, those seem pretty minor too. I mean, someone wants to engage in an activity that is extremely harmful to her health, and it’s not even that fun. I mean, correct me if I’m wrong, but the pleasurable portion of smoking mostly just comes from the temporary cessation of that addictive craving.

    If proponents of nicotine could clearly articulate any sort of benefit of smoking, then they’d have far more ground to stand on. As it is, anti-smoking people seem to win on every argument. Not only are they helping the other guy, they’re also helping you.

    And it’s not that hard, you know. I don’t know why smokers don’t put forward more positive arguments for smoking. Have we, as a society, just given up and decided that it’s bad in every situation, always?

    That’s why comparing cigarettes to coffee and booze always fails (well, first, because cigarettes are more harmful), but also because those things have clear benefits that all people can relate to. Coffee wakes people up and makes them more productive cogs in the corporate machine. And most everyone has taken a few drinks and felt a whole lot better for it.

    So why don’t people ever defend cigarettes in terms that other people can understand. Say that cigarettes give you time out of the day, time for reflection, time to be alone with yourself. It’s a time when it’s okay to be doing nothing. That, far from addiction being a downside, it is actually a benefit of smoking. It forces you, fifteen times a day, to stop, slow down, and re-evaluate what’s going on around you. It allows you to converse with strangers in an easy, unforced way. You’re not focused on each other so intently; instead you can simulate, at least for ciggie minutes, the easy camraderie of people who’ve known each other for years. And you also get to play with smoke and fire.

    I mean, that’s hardly Mark Twain. But until people understand smoking in psychological, rather than physiological, terms…smokers have no hope of fighting these bans.

    P.S. I also think most smokers don’t want to fight these bans, becuase they want to stop smoking. So they welcome every cigarette tax increase or smoking ban, hoping that it’ll prove the final impetus to quit. This might be a reasonable outlook, but it’s kind of pathetic. It’s like a fat man* who puts a lock on his refrigerator.

    *There’s no shame in being fat…but there has to be at least a little shame in putting a lock on your own refrigerator.

    Posted in General Principles | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

    Asking the Big Questions

    Posted by blotterpaper on July 18, 2008

    I resolved most of life’s large ethical questions to my own satisfaction many years ago, and I tend to shy away from college-level ethical philosophising. I see most of what are usually called “the Big Questions” as kind of boring. But sometimes I worry about how complacent I’ve become on other fronts. I was reading recently about aesthetics, what Wikipedia calls the study of sensory or sensori-emotional values. And I realized that I had never given any thought to why people find certain objects pleasing to the eye or ears. It was a huge aspect of my life that I had allowed to go unexamined. When I read about subjects outside my comfort zone I realize how much there is that I take for granted, questions both little and big. And then there all the questions I didn’t even know existed.

    What basis should we use to determine whether a law should be upheld? Why do most animals have four limbs? Would mermaids be mammals or fish?

    It’s so easy to get channeled along typical avenues of discourse. I can spend hours discussing trivia, like the latest person who said something racist about Barack Obama, or rehashing old debates, like how terrible the Bush administration is. And I feel comfortable taking up our little positions and playing our little part in the debate, deploying the same points of argument, taking offense at just the right time, and going away feeling the same emotions. I think the same thoughts, day after day. It’s easy, and its fun.

    Not that all this stuff isn’t important. It’s really important. But it’s also settled. One way or another, I made up your mind about most of this stuff a long time ago. But there’s all these other fun things to talk about out there. Things that I’ve never thought about, and much less made up my mind about. And while this blog will always be firmly devoted to trivia and rehashing old arguments, it will also have a little place for some of the other stuff.

    Posted in General Principles | Leave a Comment »

    Easing into this…

    Posted by blotterpaper on July 16, 2008

    I also don’t like the word “snark”. I guess it fulfills a valuable gap in the english language. God knows we need a word for rude comments that are also intended to be funny. But I hate the cuteness of it. It’s just another expression for making fun of something. But the connotation, and the very sound of the word is such that you feel like a bad sport if you don’t laugh.

    It’s also a word that I mostly hear women say or write. I’m not sure if the cuteness is something added by them so they can have a non-threatening word for making fun of people or if the word is cute merely because the fairer sex is speaking it.

    An exchange that just happened in the newspaper offices.

    Man: “Can I get some newspapers?”
    My Fellow Intern: “That’ll be a dollar each.”
    Man: “Okay, my wife’s obituary is in there.”

    After selling him the papers:

    Fellow Intern: “Have a good day.”
    Man: “Yeah, if I get a girlfriend.”

    Posted in General Principles, Little Moments | Leave a Comment »

    My very first entry

    Posted by blotterpaper on July 16, 2008

    I cannot abide the rule that states that periods always go inside the closing quotation mark. It just doesn’t look right to me sometimes, and that nags at me. The quotation is a discrete subsection of the sentence. The period serves to end the sentence. So why should the quotation mark get to hog it? What if I’m calling someone a “nitwit.” Does that look right to you? No, it should clearly be “nitwit”. It just looks better. And that’s what I am doing from now on.

    Posted in General Principles | Leave a Comment »