"The Pleasure Is Momentary, the Position Is Ridiculous"

"The pleasure is momentary, the position ridiculous, and the expense damnable." Attributed to Lord Chesterfield (1694 - 1773).

The author practising in Greece, the summer of 22

A relation of mine dismisses my practise of T'ai Chi.

"It's not exercise; it's just old people dancing. It's not a martial art; you wouldn't last thirty seconds with a boxer."

He is equally dismissive of religion.

"Just a bunch of old people kneeling down and mumbling. Boring and tedious. Pointless."

He does not express an opinion about sex but I don't doubt he'd share the (alleged) position of Lord Chesterfield above.

---

What's going on here? My relation is looking at the syntax of human activity and disregarding the semantics and the pragmatics (by which I mean the expression of consciousness and agency within these practices).

I was at the gym this morning. After warming up I ran through the T'ai Chi form. I have been practising it now for almost three years. Every time I learn something new.

If you watch a T'ai Chi master, they flow through the form. A novice, by contrast, is awkward and jerky, their actions staccato; not joined up.

To do T'ai Chi properly you internalise the flow of movement in muscle memory. Each posture is momentarily stable and controlled, yet also channels momentum into the next. Breathing here is important. Also balance.

But most important is a certain state-of-mind. You cannot daydream: the form loses focus and falls apart. You cannot be rigidly-controlled: the flow disappears. You have to be feeling what your body is doing, moment by moment, as an observer; but also keep the onward flow in mind, setting the body on trajectory within the designated envelope.

If you can't focus on this and avoid all worries or distractions, you cannot do it.

The effort to make the process work will help your state of mind - if it's amenable to being helped.

I felt a lot better after the gym work.

---

The Notebooks of Lazarus Long - Robert A. Heinlein

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Time-Enough-Love-Lazarus-Science/dp/0593437241/

I'm back into Heinlein mode.

A human being should be able to: 

1. change a diaper
2. plan an invasion
3. butcher a hog
4. conn a ship
5. design a building
6. write a sonnet
7. balance accounts
8. build a wall
9. set a bone
10. comfort the dying
11. take orders
12. give orders
13. cooperate
14. act alone
15. solve equations
16. analyze a new problem
17. pitch manure
18. program a computer
19. cook a tasty meal
20. fight efficiently
21. die gallantly.

Specialization is for insects.

---

I set in italics those obligations which I am either plainly unable to do, or have no idea whether I could (I would like to not italicise numbers 20 and 21).

Where did Heinlein get this list? 

It's implicitly gendered: it says 'human being' but reads as 'man': surely his list for women would be different - indeed we know so from elsewhere. It's a combination of artisanal (hogs; wall-building) and intellectual (invasion; programming). It reflects the culture of the western frontiersman transferred in time to the mid-twentieth century. But it also speaks to deep truths in human nature: the masculine virtues of good men with useful skills courageously banding together to defend against threats to their communities.

The fact that Heinlein's list stirs the emotions witnesses to its elemental truth.

Currently disparaged and despised, the need for Heinlein's ethos will be with us again soon enough.

---

Here are some more Heinlein aphorisms from (the intermissions within) the novel above.

---

Note: I abandoned "Time Enough For Love" after the first of the embedded stories (David Lamb, the Laziest Man in the World which by itself is quite a good story). Heinlein's work has not aged well. His characters are simplistic, implausible and often irritating. His attitudes - particularly on sexual matters - are self-indulgent and stupid, and his endless didacticism is wearying. 

"Starship Troopers" excepted, I think Heinlein is an author to miss.

No communism without abundance

PDF link

This is the exact quote I was looking for (page 11 of the text above).

"this development of productive forces ... is an absolutely necessary practical premise because without it want is merely made general, and with destitution the struggle for necessities and all the old filthy business would necessarily be reproduced"

Marx, The German Ideology, Part I, Feuerbach, Opposition of the Materialist and Idealist Outlook.

This remark seems commonplace, but its cold-eyed assessment of human nature contradicts the voluntarism which underlay Stalinism - and other over-enthusiastic projects to build the socialist utopia based on good intentions.