I saw it explained this way: with square tiles, for example, you could shift the pattern over a certain distance (say one square width to the right) and the tiles would line up perfectly with the original. With this tile, you can’t ever do that.
Why are today so many problems perceived as problems of intolerance, not as problems of inequality, exploitation, injustice? Why is the proposed remedy tolerance, not emancipation, political struggle, even armed struggle? The immediate answer is the liberal multiculturalist's basic ideological operation: the "culturalization of politics" - political differences, differences conditioned by political inequality, economic exploitation, etc., are naturalized/neutralized into "cultural" differences, different "ways of life," which are something given, something that cannot be overcome, but merely "tolerated."
When I worked at a supermarket one of my duties was collecting shopping carts from the parking lot and moving them to the front of the store. It was the best part of the job because I didn’t have to deal with customers and I had an excuse for not hearing the telecom if someone needed me to do a price check or whatever. So yeah, not putting your cart back is good and praxis
They aren’t recommended due to the stress they put on your back. From Stuart McGill’s textbook, Low Back Disorders:
The traditional sit-up imposes approximately 3,300 N of compression on the spine (Axler and McGill, 1997).
Further, the spine is very flexed during the period of this load (McGill, 1998). The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (1981) in the United States has set the action limit for low back compression at 3,300 N; repetitive loading above this level is linked with higher injury rates in workers, yet this is imposed on the spine with each repetition of the sit-up!
Many recommend performing sit-ups with the knees bent, the theory being that the psoas is realigned to reduce compressive loading, or perhaps the psoas is shortened on the length–tension relationship so that the resulting forces are reduced. After examining both of these ideas, we found them to be untenable.
The psoas does not change its role from a flexor to an extensor as a function of lordosis—this interpretation error occurred from models in which the psoas was represented as a straight-line puller. In fact, the psoas follows the lordotic curve as the lumbar spine flexes and extends. Further, it is true that the psoas is shortened with hip flexion, but its activation level is higher during bent-knee sit-ups (Juker, McGill, Kropf, and Steffen, 1998), not lower as has been previously thought. This is because the hip flexion torque must come from somewhere, and the shortened psoas must contract to higher levels of activation given its compromised length.
Given that the sit-up imposes such a large compression load on the spine, regardless of whether the leg is bent or straight, the issue is not which type of sit-up should be recommended. Rather, sit-ups should not be performed at all by most people. Far better ways exist to preserve the abdominal muscle challenge while imposing lower spine loads. Those who are training for health never need to perform a sit-up; those training for performance may get better results by judiciously incorporating them into their routine.
He also noted that more than one exercise is needed:
Quantitative data have confirmed that no single abdominal exercise challenges all of the abdominal musculature while sparing the back (Axler and McGill, 1997).
Instead, he recommends a set of three core exercises (the so-called “big three”). There are many videos demonstrating the, e.g. here.
I haven’t read the book so I might be full of it but here’s my take.
I take humanization to mean human flourishing, hence why humanization is “axiologically” our central problem, i.e. it’s the problem of realizing what we are or are meant to be.
I think they’re saying that once you recognize the possibility of flourishing you have to recognize the logical/“ontological” possibility of it’s negation (dehumanization), and that in fact dehumanization isn’t just a possibility, it’s the norm in our society (historical reality) which raises the question of whether humanization is even possible in our historical situation.
Then they say that both humanization and dehumanization are possibilities if we are aware of our incompletion, which I guess means that if we are aware of this historical situation we can change it to promote humanization.
I’m glad your mobility is OK at least! But yeah chronic pain is horrible. I reallyyyy feel you on the impotent rage
I’m not sure it’s torn. The doctor I saw didn’t grade it, they just said to give it 5-6 weeks. I’m at 3 and a half weeks in and I feel like it isn’t getting better, but I’m in a really pessimistic place right now so the outlook might be better than I think
I have chronic lower back pain from an injury 10 years ago. I’m recovering from flare ups way more slowly now that I’m in my 30s. And now I tore a hamstring from the exercises/stretches my physiotherapist put me on.. it just compounds and gets worse and worse
Pulled a muscle in back half a year back while deadlifting and after having sunk money into MRI, X-ray, physiotherapy and medication and resting amply it is no better thanks to doctors in private hospitals not giving a fuck.
God damn this isn’t what I needed to hear right now hahhaha. How is your mobility now? I don’t know how much longer I can take this. Just getting around my apartment is rough right now
Shout out to our disabled comrades because this shit is absolutely fucked. Not being able to clean or get groceries or just go for a walk is taking such a toll on my mental health
When I worked at a supermarket one of my jobs was to collect all the shopping carts from the back of the parking lot and bring them to the entrance. If I wanted to get away from customers I would do that and take my sweet time with it. Also, I kept my "new employee" sticker on my name tag the entire time I worked there, and whenever someone asked me where they could find something I pointed to the sticker and said I was new
I'm the same way. I don't spam anyone, but the itch is there and I feel miserable a lot of the time. I recommend looking into attachment theory and a therapist who specializes in it.
A close friend actually did ghost me out of the blue six months ago, which validated my anxiety and just crushed me, basically. That forced me to recognize that people may come and go in my life and it doesn't mean no one will ever like me or I'm a bad person (OK maybe I haven't 100% internalized it emotionally, but I'm working on it). It's like I think Zizek said somewhere, jealousy is pathological even if your spouse actually is cheating on you.
Additionally, that friend was very avoidant (didn't like texting, rarely initiated, cancelled plans at the last minute, etc.), and so she constantly triggered my anxiety. If someone like that is a key relationship in your life, it can be tremendously damaging to your mental health. Even though we had great chemistry when we were together and I care about her a lot, I don't think we were ever compatible. On the other hand, I have another friend who is very attentive, and knowing that she will be there for me even if no one else will is an enormous relief.
Also, I've come to realize that I'm a pretty good friend. I'm self-aware enough to give people their space, but I'm always there for people, I initiate a lot if they are receptive, etc. I think that's clearly true of you as well, since you resist the urge to spam people even at the cost of a lot of anxiety for yourself.
Hopefully some of the insights I've had can help you :)
Going by memory, I think he made this argument in favor of a lottery system over council system:
Suppose you have hierarchy of direct democratic councils in which each council votes and then sends a delegate up to the next level. To use a simplified example, there might be 100 councils of 10 at the bottom level, each sending one delegate up to the next level where there are 10 councils of 10, each sending one delegate up to the final level where there is one council of 10 which will make the final decision.
If the population is split 40:60 in each council at the bottom level, then obviously the minority view will be completed eliminated by the time you get to the second level. And even if the minority has a majority in some councils at the bottom level, it's unlikely they will make it to the top since most of their sympathizers will have been eliminated in the other councils, since it's winner take all. So there's a tendency for a council system to filter out opposing views, even when the majority isn't enormous. The larger the hierarchy (and any real system would be much larger than the example above) the stronger this effect would be.
This isn't a problem if you take a random sample. I kind of like the idea since it allows direct democracy without everyone having to spend all their time in meetings. :grillman:
I saw it explained this way: with square tiles, for example, you could shift the pattern over a certain distance (say one square width to the right) and the tiles would line up perfectly with the original. With this tile, you can’t ever do that.