web analytics
Occasionally I wandered in where I was not wanted and gave truthful answers.
Sometimes I even did it deliberately. A little disruption now can prevent disaster later.

A work in progress. Explaining words and phrases that I often use. Noting new and interesting ideas. Discussing certain verbal warning signs. There’s no social justice or political correctness here.

Offsite links open a new window. Underlined links are internal to the site.
Uppercase links go to the lexicon. Script links go to the timetable.

A dashed border and red banner means I don't agree with the defintion
 or that it is a dangerous idea.


Today's secret word is
pagan       pagan attitudes on nudity & sex       pagan festival season       pagan of color       paleopaganism       Pangere       pansexual       pantheistic       Pareto principle       parity test       Parkinson's law       parkour       parlor       parvenu       pass‑alongs       passing       path       path vs. tradition       pathos       patriotic correctness       peak experience       pedestal problem       pendant       Pentacle Quest       pentacles or coins       people       people of color       People of The Book       perigee       perihelion       persona       The Personal Is Political       Personal Universes, The Law of       Personification, The Law of       Perspective, The Law of       pertinent magick       Perversity, The Law of       petrichor       peyote       philanthropia       philautia       philos       philosopher       phlegmatic       pilgrim       pillow talk problem       pith helmet       pizza threshold       placebo       Platinum Rule       playgan, polyester playgan       pluralism       Polarity, The Law of       political correctness       political ghouls       political links       politics       politics (partisan)       politics of victimhood       polyamory       polygamy       polymath       polytheistic       poor little me       portico       poseur or poser       Positive Attraction, The Law of       post hoc       post hoc ergo propter hoc       power over vs. power with       Practial Grudge Limit       pragma       Pragmatism, The Law of       praxis       precautionary principle       prime community       principal agent problem       privileges       progressive       proof       prosody       public forum vs. publisher       publisher vs. private forum       pumpkinize       Pyrex            


  1. (no longer in technical use) one of a people or community observing a polytheistic religion, as the ancient Romans and Greeks.
  2. a member of a religious, spiritual, or cultural community based on the worship of nature or the earth; a neopagan.
  3. Disparaging and Offensive.
    1. (in historical contexts) a person who is not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim; a heathen.
    2. an irreligious or hedonistic person.
    3. an uncivilized or unenlightened person.

  1. A nonreligious person or an unbeliever, from a monotheistic perspective.
  2. A person philosophically opposed to monotheisms on the grounds that they are life-denying cosmologies that desacralize the world. An example that I will return to is the French philosopher Alain de Benoist, known for his book On Being a Pagan, and other works. Camille Paglia fits here too. Such philosophical Pagans, however, often look down their noses at category 3.
  3. Persons who declare that they are following a Pagan religion. This may represent a reconstructed version of what their ancestors did or a new set of practices deemed compatible with ancient Paganism or a reconstructed version of practices from an admired ancient culture (for instance, if I were a Hellenic reconstructionist although not Greek by heritage). In addition, “Pagan” sometimes is employed to cover all polytheistic,2) animistic, and indigenous religions

Since the later 20th century, "Pagan" or "Paganism" has become widely used as a self-designation by adherents of Neopaganism. As such, various modern scholars have begun to apply the term to three separate groups of faiths: Historical Polytheism (such as Celtic polytheism and Norse paganism), Folk/ethnic/Indigenous religions (such as Chinese folk religion and African traditional religion), and Neo-paganism (such as Wicca and Germanic Neopaganism).
Back before Christianity was the dominant faith in Western Civilization, there wasn't a concept such as “pagan.” You either worshiped the gods or you did not. The choice of whether to worship, how much to worship, and which gods to worship was entirely up to you. Of course, you got to deal with the consequences if you fell out of favor with the Divine, but that was a given.

In the last few years, I've preferred not to capitalize the word “pagan.” It's not really a proper noun, it's not named after a specific Diety or person.
Pagan indicates that someone is a follower of paganism. For simplicity, paganism is defined as a religion rooted in the earth. Christianity came later and took roots in cities first. The people who were rustic and resided in rural, poor country settings had a desire to hold on to their polytheistic beliefs. These people were followers of all things natural with natural laws preceding and being above everything else. Pagans proudly ascribe their faith as being a pre-Christian faith.

It seems then that paganism is a rather generic term that includes all beliefs that precede major religions of the world. Earth-based spirituality is what paganism implies, and many of the followers of major faiths of the world, when they embrace paganism, have a feeling of homecoming within themselves. Christians often categorized pagans as rural people who did not worship Jesus as their God. For Christians, all including athiest (people who do not believe in God), monotheistic (people who believed in a single god though not the True God,) and polytheistic (people who believed in many gods) were all pagans. Hence, pagan is an umbrella term that includes within its fold many other sub groups. There are Asatru, Kemetic, Voodoo, shamanism, Wiccan, and many other beliefs under the generic term called paganism. So, Wiccan is just one of them.

Pagan was earlier considered as a derogatory term used by Romans, to refer to a country dweller who was not a follower of Christianity and rather followed a religion that was close to nature.

  page index             site home  

pagan festival season      Beltaine to Mabon

pagan attitudes on nudity & sex

Witchcraft traditions such as Wicca are highly visible in the Pagan movement when it comes to sexuality and sexual activity. Though Pagan traditions in general see the body as a blessing, they hold a variety of views on what the proper relationship is between sexuality and spirituality. Wiccans and other witches, however, embrace the holiness of sexuality as a central religious principle.

In joining the pagan community and choosing to be an active member of it, I ended up in more uncomfortable and unsafe sexual situations than I could ever have imagined with my darkest thoughts. I do not want this to happen to any of you. I do not want others to have a littany of these awful stories. We need to change how sex and boundaries are perceived in our community. It is not the 1960s hippie era anymore, we know it is not okay to tell young people that free love means having no boundaries and letting people sexually assault you at will. “Be a good girl, be a good boy, just let it happen”. What if it were your kids? Would you want them exposed to outdated, sexist, abusive, horrifying attitudes in a supposedly safe spiritual community?

Predators, pedophiles, molesters, rapists… we like to think they are not in our community. We like to think our bond of sharing the same spirituality nullifies their presence and that a spiritual person could never do harm. Time and time again, we are proven wrong. We forget that religious and fringe groups statistically attract predators as the trusting members often make easier prey. Just because someone is “nice”, pays their taxes, donates to charity, and attends church regularly does not mean they are a good person. It is not okay that a large percentage of our modern pagan community has to live in fear of predators and deal with abuse. Many assume or hope the days of Wiccan priests abusing their power to have sex with initiates are just stories from the 1970s, but unfortunately they are not. As long as we put people in leadership positions on a pedestal as spiritual gurus, we ourselves are putting them in a position of power over us and leaving an opening for abuse. Everyone, no matter who they are or say they are, is just a fallible human being. Let me say that again: EVERYONE is mortal and capable of making mistakes or doing wrong. Being a spiritual person or a spiritual leader is no exception: Buddhist monks, Catholic priests, Baptist ministers, and Pagan elders have all recently been accused of sexual assault and worse. If we confront this reality, it better prepares us when we find ourselves in uncomfortable or dangerous situations. Awareness also allows us to teach our children how to avoid predators and being taken advantage of.
Just because you are pagan and sex-positive, no one promised you sex. Your desire does not control another's choice.

Pagan paths do attract more than our fair share of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered. We also attract some alternative sexual practices. Not everyone is open about their sexual choices though, most pagans are pretty accepting when it comes to how private or public someone wants to be. Nor is every pagan focused on sex as part of rite and ritual.

Officially it's because we're not as dogmatic. I think it's because we're still arguing over the rules. Pagans can be just as intolerant as anyone else. Just as one example. there are Goddess centered traditions that are extremely anti-male.

American pagans can be less inhibited than most of our neighbors. We may show flesh in more varieties than you have ever dreamt of, we may talk and ESPECIALLY sing about sex, but the boundaries are still clear. Just because someone arouses you doesn’t mean they want sex with you. Even if they do show you more body parts than you’ve ever seen outside a bedroom.

We hug. We cuddle. We may even exchange “long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days.” But that doesn’t mean we allow just any fingers, toes or faces into our nether regions. That doesn’t mean you get to cop a feel. When you ask for sex, it’s always the other person’s choice.

Some misguided people see joining a pagan group as an easy way to get their rocks off. They could meet Hot Bisexual Pagan Chicks and have mind-blowing Ritual Sex under the Full Moon!

It doesn't work like that.

Those confused ones soon "wash out" or spin off to form their own sex-based group. When they can't attract members to the new group, they blame everyone but themselves. After all, they're open about sex. Why wouldn't people line up to have sex with them?

  page index             site home  

pagan of color    caution

A pagan claiming the label person of color.

From what I’ve seen, this is a way to “celebrate” victimhood and demand extra privileges by oh-so-carefully defining a minority within a minority and demanding even more special treatment and deference than the original minority would have received. And the original minority is supposed to stand aside because the "concerns" of the special minority come first always. It all depends on guilt and pity. Without guilt, there would be no power, no privileges, no special treatment, and no deference.

Since they are a minority's minority, they can never be a fully human adult either. Nor can the “majority” be allowed to escape it's guilt.

  page index             site home  


“Paleopaganism” or “Paleo-Paganism” is a general term for the original polytheistic, nature-centered faiths of tribal Europe, Africa, Asia, the Americas, Oceania and Australia, when they were (or in some rare cases, still are) practiced as intact belief systems. Of the so-called “Great Religions of the World,” Hinduism (prior to the influx of Islam into India), Taoism and Shinto, for example, fall under this category, though many members of these faiths might be reluctant to use the term. Some Paleopagan belief systems may be racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. There are billions of Paleopagans living and worshiping their deities today.

  page index             site home  

Pangere     originally October 7, 1987

second-person singular future passive indicative of pangō
I accepted myself as pagan on the last day of the bright Moon in October of 1987.

The term is Latin for to make fast, to fix, or to fasten. It is related to the term pagan through the root word “pag.”

So I chose to fasten myself to an Earth centered path rather than the semi-Gnostic Christian one I had been trying for.

I used to celebrate this anually on October 7th, but it seems to work better on the last day of October's bright moon.

See also Pangere

  page index             site home  

pansexual      See sexuality - orientation


I believe the Universe and natural law are themselves manifestations of the Divine. There's a lot of crossover with some Gnostic beliefs here. Pantheism as a term dates back only to about the 17th Century and described certain Christian cult practices, so that is not surprising.

  page index             site home  

Pareto principle      see ace factor

parity test      “Don’t do it if you don’t want it done to you.”

My paranoid version of the Golden Rule is a little more blunt. It still applies though.

If YOU are not willing to live under another's rules, why should they be willing to live under yours?

If your (faith/creed/politics/business model) can't exist without outside intervention, maybe it's not worth following.

  page index             site home  

Parkinson's law

Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.

My variation:

Work expands to consume the resources allocated for it's completion.
  page index            site home  


Parkour is a natural method for training the human body to be able to leap and move from place to place by climbing, jumping and flipping. This 'art of displacement' requires neither specific structures nor accessories for its practice: The body is the only tool. It takes perseverance, guts, and discipline, but the end is rewarding.

  page index             site home  


  1. (Architecture) old-fashioned a living room, esp one kept tidy for the reception of visitors
  2. (Ecclesiastical Terms) a reception room in a priest's house, convent, etc.
  3. a small room for guests away from the public rooms in an inn, club, etc
  4. (Commerce) chiefly US and Canadian and NZ a room or shop equipped as a place of business: a billiard parlor.
  5. (Commerce) Caribbean a small shop, esp one selling cakes and nonalcoholic drinks
  6. (Agriculture) Also called: milking parlour a building equipped for the milking of cows

  1. Older Use. a room for the reception and entertainment of visitors to one's home; living room.
  2. a room, apartment, or building serving as a place of business for certain businesses or professions: funeral parlor; beauty parlor.
  3. a somewhat private room in a hotel, club, or the like for relaxation, conversation, etc.; lounge.
  4. Also called locutorium. a room in a monastery or the like where the inhabitants may converse with visitors or with each other.

  page index             site home  


a person who has recently or suddenly acquired wealth, importance, position, or the like, but has not yet developed the conventionally appropriate manners, dress, surroundings, etc.

  page index             site home  


A short, better written quote by me designed to be passed along.

I've spent years trying to “do more with less” with my writing. Pass-alongs do exactly that.

  page index             site home  


  page index             site home  

path versus tradition

A person experiences and honors the Divine through their path, a system of effective rites and observances gathered through study and understanding. Of course that's my opinion.

A path is the individual Journey with the Divine. While it may not have long term connections to other humans, it's certainly binding to Someone.

A tradition is a formal version of a path that has been passed on at least once. I'd argue that a tradition has been systemized and has initiated at least two other people (gotta have that rule of three there somewhere). It depends on the connections and rules binding the initiate to the rest of the tradition. It's capitalized as a Proper Name.

It was hard for me to accept, but the practice of magick is not is not necessary for either a path or a tradtion. There is such a thing as pagan laity.

See also path, Some thoughts from my WebTree path, tradition

  page index             site home  


  1. the quality or power in an actual life experience or in literature, music, speech, or other forms of expression, of evoking a feeling of pity or compassion.
  2. pity.
  3. Obsolete. suffering.

An appeal to passion and emotion.
— Research inspired by an entry at Chas Clifton's
Letter from Hardscrabble Creek

See also ethos, logos, rhetoric, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modes_of_persuasion

  page index             site home  

patriotic correctness    caution

It’s a full-throated, un-nuanced, uncompromising defense of American nationalism, history and cherry-picked ideals.

Central to its thesis is the belief that nothing in America can’t be fixed by more patriotism enforced by public shaming, boycotts and policies to cut out foreign and non-American influences.

Insufficient displays of patriotism among the patriotically correct can result in exclusion from public life and ruined careers. It also restricts honest criticism of failed public policies.

While political correctness is typically associated with the American Left, modern conservatism has its own sacred totems that dare not be criticized. Like its progressive counterparts, the Right’s choices of sanctification fit together like an elegant jigsaw puzzle to form an internally consistent worldview. Police, Military, Bible, and Flag are all symbols of the Right—each embodying order, tradition, and Americanism to varying degrees.
On Patriotic Correctness from Libertarian Institute

Right-Wing Political Correctness (RWPC), also Conservative Correctness (CC) or Patriotic Correctness (PC), is a brand of political correctness practiced by conservatives. While left-wing political correctness (LWPC) attempts to minimize offense through the (often endless) rebranding of certain words to be neutral or inclusive, RWPC rebrands terms to increase offense, increase scorn, and increase political bias. For example, homosexuality isn't RWPC; instead, we should use "unnatural vice", in order to appeal to people's (here, hateful) religious beliefs over science and tolerance. All too often, people confuse this with political incorrectness due to both being against liberal political correctness, though political incorrectness is equally against both.

But conservatives have their own, nationalist version of PC, their own set of rules regulating speech, behavior and acceptable opinions. I call it “patriotic correctness.” It’s a full-throated, un-nuanced, uncompromising defense of American nationalism, history and cherry-picked ideals. Central to its thesis is the belief that nothing in America can’t be fixed by more patriotism enforced by public shaming, boycotts and policies to cut out foreign and non-American influences.

Conservatives use “patriotic correctness” to regulate speech, behavior and acceptable opinions. Insufficient displays of patriotism among the patriotically correct can result in exclusion from public life and ruined careers. It also restricts honest criticism of failed public policies, diverting blame for things like the war in Iraq to those Americans who didn’t support the war effort enough.
  page index            site home  

peak experience

American psychologist and philosopher Abraham H. Maslow (1908-1970) coined this term to describe nonreligious quasi-mystical and mystical experiences. Peak experiences are sudden feelings of intense happiness and well-being, and possibly the awareness of “ultimate truth” and the unity of all things. Accompanying these experiences is a heightened sense of control over the body and emotions, and a wider sense of awareness, as though one was standing upon a mountaintop. The experience fills the individual with wonder and awe. He feels at one with the world and is pleased with it; he or she has seen the ultimate truth or the essence of all things.
Peak experiences from the MYSTICA

Researchers who focus on positive emotions have amassed evidence suggesting that we are more likely to find more meaning in our lives on days when we experience positive emotions. In contrast, researchers taking a meaning-making perspective tend to focus on meaning in the context of adjustment to stressful events. These two areas of research are often treated separately from each other, making it difficult to answer the question about which valence of our emotional life-- positive or negative-- is most likely to be meaningful.

Both perspectives may be at least partly right. In their classic paper "Some Differences Between a Happy Life and a Meaningful Life", Roy Baumeister and his colleagues zoomed in on the different outcomes associated with happiness (controlling for meaning) and meaningfulness (controlling for happiness). Whereas happiness was positively correlated with the frequency of positive events in one's life and negatively related to the frequency of negative events, greater meaningfulness was related both to a higher frequency of positive events and a higher frequency of negative events, as well as reports of more stress, time spent worrying, and time spent reflecting on struggles and challenges. What's going on here? How can meaning be positively associated with both positive and negative experiences?

In a new paper, Sean Murphy and Brock Bastian suggest that a focus on emotional valence may have been a red herring for the field. By intentionally pitting "positive" experiences against "negative" experiences, researchers have focused on the difference between these experiences. However, Murphy and Bastian argue that this has neglected our understanding of similarities in how the positivity and negativity of experiences are related to meaningfulness. They raise the intriguing possibility that the more relevant factor may be the extremity of the experience, not the valence. Perhaps both extremely pleasant and extremely painful events relative to more neutral events share a common set of characteristics that might lead them to be found more meaningful.
We're not wired emotionally to differentiate between 'good' and 'bad.' We just recognize peak passion, the strongest emotions. If your peak passion is with your family and loved ones, those are the experiences you seek out. If your peak passion is because you built an amazing motorcycle, that is what you remember and seek out. And unfortunately, if your peak passion is abuse at work or abusing someone, that is what you seek out.

People cherish their passions. Under stress, people will use behaviors that have succeeded or that have delivered the most passion. It's not if the emotion is positive or negative, it's the amount of passion.

If their remembered passion is significantly higher than what someone experiences in their everyday life, then that is what they will crave.

Yes, this goes a long way towards explaining abusive relationships.

Most people are ruled by their passions, not their rationality. They seek an emotional intensity that matches or exceeds what they have experienced before. It doesn't matter if it is a “positive” or “negative” passion. it it the energy they want. The benefits or costs are never considered before the act. Almost any “reasoning” that follows is justification.

Most humans want experiences that will have at least as strong as an effect as what their bodies recall. A peak experience is all about the hormonal surge. It's why audiences want a film with three big explosions after a film with just one big explosion last year. It's why someone exercising will push for “just a little more.” It's why sex with the same persion using the same positions gets boring.

Again, it's the intensity, not if the emotion is “good” or “bad.”
Peak experiences are often described as transcendent moments of pure joy and elation. These are moments that stand out from everyday events. The memory of such events is lasting and people often liken them to a spiritual experience.

  page index             site home  

pedestal problem

Just because you admire someone doesn't mean they don't make mistakes. Don't let your passion blind you to another's faults. The deeper the passion, the harder it is to see beyond our expectations.

No one person, no one group has all the answers. No one should get a pass because of a label. Don't be afraid to ask questions.

But if a Leading Authority is something less than perfect morally, that doesn't mean you should dismiss everything they wrote and said because they are Unworthy. They haven't fallen from authority, you should just recognize that everyone has their limits and their failings.

See also Broken Pedestal from TVTropes,
The pedestal problem

  page index             site home  


A prominent and usually singular piece of jewelry hanging on a necklace.

I usually wear a pendant every day although I don't sleep in one. I never go out in public without a pendant. When I do go outside, I tie my pendant into a choker and tie my hair up in a bear tail.

All my pendants are on satin cord. I don't like chains. Leather cords tend to rot after a few months.

I use eight pendants regularly, these are the main six.

Tree Of Life pendant On the Fire Festivals and Solar Festivals (sabbats), I wear a Jen Delyth Tree of Life pendant. Click on the picture for the product page. The Tree of Life is the most meaningful symbol for me. This is probably my favorite TOL design.

I sometimes change when I am doing certain healing work.

Speaking of healing work, this is my medicine shield bear. I used to wear it during the waning moon. Now I use it for mending, healing, and renewal.

Now here’s the question, is he hiding from the dark or just cloaking his power? I see him as a very compassionate bear. He doesn’t ask questions, he just does what has to be done.

An e•friend did some photoshop stuff with this shot and another picture I took and it turned out very well.

I wear different pendants during the for each phase of the Moon.

Except for some crosses, this is my oldest and most fragile pendant. It’s pewter, simple, and very close to me. I use it for the dark Moon.

When I first bought it, I debated for a long time whether I should wear the spirals on the left or on the right. It depends on my mood, but I usually wear them on the left.

For the waxing Moon, I wear this malachite bear fetish.

It was a gift and is a personal favorite. In many ways, it sums up who I am. It’s not a “true” fetish, it’s very much a modern design. It’s Zuni influenced but made by a Navajo silversmith. It uses malachite, when the obvious stone to pick would have been turquoise. About the only thing you can say about it is that it’s a product of the desert and it has symbolic power. Obviously a perfect fit for me.

For the bright Moon, I wear this triskele pendant.

When I first saw it, it practically screamed Full Moon. It also sums up my story of Lady in the Court of Stars and Lady in the Court of Shadows. This tells me is that there is always a design within the design and each phase of a cycle has it’s own unique traits no matter how many times the cycle repeats (see weird). It's a favorite of both companions, although I can’t tell you why.

I use this raven pendent during the waning Moon. Click on the picture for the product page.

It's Celtic influenced and you have to look closely to see what it is. Almost nobody sees a raven at the first impression. So I identify with the design and the subject.

  page index             site home  

Pentacle Quest      23April

pentacles or coins     See earth, Tarot

people     See kin

people of color    caution

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
— Rev. Martin Luthor King, Jr.
The term "person of color" (plural: people of color, persons of color; sometimes abbreviated POC) today is used primarily in the United States to describe any person who is not European American or white. The term encompasses all non-white people, emphasizing common experiences of systemic racism. The term may also be used with other collective categories of people such as "communities of color", "men of color" (MOC), and "women of color" (WOC). The term "colored" was originally equivalent in use to the term person of color, but usage of the appellation "colored" in the Southern United States gradually came to be restricted to "negroes".

From “colored” to “minority” to “person of color,” the terminology used for those who are not white in the U.S. has evolved to be more inclusive. A simple definition for “person of color” provided by the Oxford University Press dictionary is “a person who is not white or of European parentage.” In theory, POC should be a straightforward, all-encompassing term for anyone who isn’t white in the U.S., but I’m often hesitant to publicly identify as a person of color.

Throughout my life, I have been told time and time again that Asians are not considered people of color. Or even worse, I’ve been told that Asians are “the new white people.” I’m obviously not white, but based on these ignorant statements, if I’m not a person of color, and I’m not white, then what am I?

I recently came across an NPR article written by Lindsey Yoo, social media coordinator for a website called Filthy Freedom, which is dedicated to publishing content on race, sexuality and culture. Yoo, who is Korean-American, posed two excellent questions in her article: “When people say ‘women of color,’ am I included in that equation, or does it not apply to Asian-American women?” and “Do people really want to hear from someone who looks like me when they engage in conversations about racial justice?”
Somehow no one is talking about the irony of an inclusive phrase specifically excluding “whites” because of something that happened before they were born, and often not even by their ancestors.

It all depends on guilt and pity. Without guilt, there would be no power, no privileges, no special treatment, and no deference.

Remember the important thing here is that as long as someone defines themselves as a anything of color, they will never be considered a "real" thing. It's doesn't matter if it's “pagan of color,” “woman of color,” or “bus driver of color.” They will always be less than is expected of the label, and that is deliberate. They always have an excuse that shifts responsibility from themselves to society.

  page index             site home  

People of the Book

Followers of a revealed faith provided by a holy book. The Book is the Way. They wait for the wisdom and experience and ethics to be poured into their minds so they can think the Right Thoughts and perform the Right Action. Many never move beyond this passivity. The ones who do move are worth talking to, the others just keep reciting the same dogma and doctrine.

See also Story

  page index             site home  


the instant when the Moon is closest to Earth

  page index             site home  


the instant when a planet is closest to the Sun

  page index             site home  


With regard to Carl Jung's analytic psychology, the public personality someone shows to the exterior world, converse to more fundamental and true character traits.
PERSONA from Psychology Dictionary

  1. : a character assumed by an author in a written work
    1. plural personas [ New Latin, from Latin ] : an individual's social facade or front that especially in the analytic psychology of C. G. Jung reflects the role in life the individual is playing
    2. the personality that a person (such as an actor or politician) projects in public
  2. plural personae : a character in a fictional presentation (such as a novel or play) —usually used in plural
persona from Merriam-Webster

See also anima, animus

  page index             site home  

The Personal Is Political    caution

"The personal is political" was a frequently heard feminist rallying cry, especially during the late 1960s and 1970s. The exact origin of the phrase is unknown and sometimes debated. Many second-wave feminists used the phrase "the personal is political" or its underlying meaning in their writing, speeches, consciousness-raising, and other activities.

The meaning has sometimes been interpreted to mean that political and personal issues affect each other.

It has also meant that the experience of women is the grounding of feminism, both personal and political. Some have seen it as a kind of practical model for creating feminist theory: begin with the small issues with which you have personal experience, and move from there to the larger systemic issues and dynamics which may explain and/or address those personal dynamics.

Stop making everything a moral issue.

The problem with making the personal political is that you drag everyone around you into politics, whether they want to be or not.

  page index             site home  

Personal Universes, The Law of
     See The Law of Personal Universes

Personification, The Law of
     See The Law of Personification

Perspective, The Law of     See WebTree

pertinent magick

The temporary fix. Kitbashing a specific situation under time pressure and with limted resources. Almost certainly will need to be reinforced or redone later. It’s something like rigging a temporary replacement for the a car fan belt. It might work for a bit, but it needs extra attention soon.

  page index             site home  

Perversity, The Law of      See The Law of Perversity


A pleasant smell that frequently accompanies the first rain after a long period of warm, dry weather.

  page index             site home  

peyote      Lophophora williamsii

Peyote is a small, spineless cactus, Lophophora williams ii, with the hallucinogen mescaline (3, 4, 5-trimethoxyphenethylamine) being the principal active ingredient. From earliest recorded time, peyote has been used by natives in northern Mexico and the south-western United States as a part of their religious rites.

  page index             site home  


“For the benefit of humanity.” It's become a cliche, but these days we hear of public philanthropy, we wonder what they are hiding. The ancients certainly didn't think like that, to their mind, it brought honor.

I use the Greek ideas for love.

  page index             site home  


Self-love. The healthier variety expands your ability to experience the other kinds of love.

I use the Greek ideas for love.

  page index             site home  


Communal, brotherly love. To me, this is the kind of thing that happens when you talk about matters great and small around a campfire. Philos, philosopher. Obviously I value this kind of love. Sadly, it's one of the things that there is all too little of in my life.

I use the Greek ideas for love.

  page index             site home  


  1. a person who offers views or theories on profound questions in ethics, metaphysics, logic, and other related fields.
  2. a person who is deeply versed in philosophy.
  3. a person who establishes the central ideas of some movement, cult, etc.

❝You know, in this day and age the term philosopher is disparaged. There are a bunch of academics debating the works of people long dead, trying to stretch writings and sayings to fit their own worldview. They argue over punctuation and the implication of what was not said in which edition. Most of the people called philosophers today are little better than research librarians. They don't think about the practical application, you see.❞
I am a philosopher in the old sense. I groove when I think about thinking.

It's not esoteric. People just think it's difficult. But a good piece of philosphy looks simple and basic, after someone else has done the hard work of refining the thought and removing the extra bits. Most settle with the first thing that works and never build for future use. Philosophy is practical.

That's the difference between philosophy and regular thought. Philosophy has applications beyond the immediate. It's the general case instead of the specific disposable tool.

I look for the hidden connections between disciplines. I take the working ideas from one field and see if I can find ways to make them work in another.

See also autodidact

  page index             site home  

phlegmatic  caution

A phlegmatic individual tends to be relaxed, peaceful, quiet, and easy-going. They are sympathetic and care about others, yet try to hide their emotions. Phlegmatic individuals also are good at generalizing ideas or problems to the world and making compromises.

  1. not easily excited to action or display of emotion; apathetic; sluggish.
  2. self-possessed, calm, or composed.
  3. of the nature of or abounding in the humor phlegm.

Someone with phlegmatic personality type is usually a people person. They seek interpersonal harmony and close relationships. Phlegmatic people are loyal spouses and loving parents. They preserve their relationships with old friends, distant family members, and neighbors. People with phlegmatic temperament tend to avoid conflicts and always try to mediate between others to restore peace and harmony.

  page index             site home  

pilgrim      (depreciated)

For a while I used this word for People of the Book. It caused too much misunderstanding.

  page index             site home  

pillow talk problem

What do we talk about after fucking?

Any relationship that has only one dimension of love is doomed. Two is a bare minimum, three is just about right. The more dimensions of love you share means the more directions that you can move together.

I use the Greek ideas for love.

See also love, eros, sex, love, eros, sex

  page index             site home  

pith helmet

pith helmet( 19c. ) Helmet-shaped hat of English army in India. Made from pith of the Indian spongewood tree, covered with white cotton and faced with green cloth. Originally worn in tropical regions as protection from the sun. worn by polo players in the 20c.

  page index             site home  

pizza threshold

The point in a conversation where it dawns on you that the solution to many of life’s problems and the answers to many philosophical questions can be found in pizza and the nature of pizza. Lack of sleep may generate a false pizza threshold.

  page index             site home  


A placebo is anything that seems to be a "real" medical treatment -- but isn't. It could be a pill, a shot, or some other type of "fake" treatment. What all placebos have in common is that they do not contain an active substance meant to affect health.

  page index             site home  

Platinum Rule

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst and meanwhile, do everything you can to make things better.

  page index             site home  


One who pretends paganism for the thrill but acts differently in their regular life.

I think the playgans do it more for the shock value. It's not about what they are, it's about how many of your buttons they can push. And then they go back to their lives and no one knows how secretly naughty they've been.

Sometimes it's polyester playgan.

  page index             site home  


  • the existence of different types of people, who have different beliefs and opinions, within the same society
  • the belief that the existence of different types of people within the same society is a good thing

  1. Philosophy.
    1. a theory that there is more than one basic substance or principle.
    2. a theory that reality consists of two or more independent elements.
  2. Ecclesiastical.
    1. the holding by one person of two or more offices at the same time.
  3. Sociology. cultural pluralism.
  4. state or quality of being plural.

  page index             site home  

Polarity, The Law of      See The Law of Polarity

political correctness    caution

I'm pretty sure that political correctness just means shaming the dissenters enough so they shut up.

Progressives and the left didn't invent the politics of shame, but they refined it.
Something that started out as a sort of moral common sense - actually not a bad idea, eg. saying 'black person' instead of 'god-damn cotton-pickin' nigger'.

However, the whole thing got utterly out of hand in the early 90s to the point where a lot of people will say 'Afro-Carribean' or 'Afro-American' because they think it's racist to say 'black'! It gets even more ridiculous when you consider that in some parts people think it's offensive to 'blackboard' or 'black coffee'.

What began as a force for good (considering the number of people who really are racist, sexist and homophobic) has since become a laughing stock beacause of the ridiculous extremes to which certain neurotic ultra-liberals took it - cf. a person being 'vertically challenged' rather than short. This has actually undone a lot of progress made in changing bigoted attitudes (as bigot can claim any offence taken at their views is 'political correctness gone mad), whilst making people feel guilty for enjoying anything but the blandest, most anaemic humour for fear of being 'offensive'. I mean, seriously, what's funnier out of 'Friends' and 'South Park'? (Or 'The League of Gentlemen' for the benefit of any Brits out there?)

At the same time as straight white able-bodied men are going out of their way to talk about 'ethnic people' (who ISN'T ethnic!?) and those of 'different sexual orientation', there are blacks calling themselves niggas (which has been going on for years), gays calling themselves (and eachother!) poof, queens and queers, and so on - the real way to neutralize a term used as as an insult is for those to whom it was applied to use it themselves.

At its worst, political correctness is nothing different form Orwell's Newspeak - an attempt to change the way people think by forcibly changing the way they speak. So let's have a backlash against the nannying, interefering, cotton-wool Stalinism 'ploitical correctness' has become - not to placate bigots, but to speak the truth and enjoy outrageous humour like we're meant to. Remember, the next time someone says they don't like Harry Potter because Hermione is a stereotypically sensitive girl, the relevant word to call them is 'cunt'.

  page index             site home  

political ghouls    caution

Those using tragedy for political benefit or opportunity, especially murder or a violent crime. People exploiting passion from catastrophe to prevent others from thinking.

  page index             site home  

One of the reasons that people hate politics is truth is rarely a politician's objective. Election and power are.
— Cal Thomas
Politics is controlling the other. Persuasion, shame, force, it's all meant to limit another's choice so the other will do what you want.

One of my darker passions. I follow political discussions and theory. I am better at behind the scenes politics and power games than any amateur has a right to be when I do practice. It gives me a thrill. I enjoy tying my opponent into semantic knots.

But here’s the thing. Politics is about controlling the other. Never you, always the other. It always has been. When government is involved, politics threatens or uses force behind it's control.

Politicians are never on your side. Even as they stand wrapped in the flag clutching holy writ promising that they will be your bestest friend ever no matter what.

One annoying thing about politics is that people are willing to overlook the misconduct of "their" side even while slinging wild accusations against the Enemy. The accusations may or may not be accurate. But you can count on the Enemy not being quite the Ultimate Horror Unleashed on Mankind. And you can count that your side is not quite the paragon of virtue and self-sacrifice that they claim.

These days I don’t indulge my political passions unless it is in the cause of liberty. I don’t do it unless the other party stepped over a line. If it’s “for their own good,” you’re lying to them and yourself.

I don't like to mix politics with paganism. But I'm fascinated by politics. So this entry gets a slightly different style of link table.

Political links

acknowledge but not celebrate    The Advanced Bonewits’ Cult Danger Evaluation Frame allies not servants    allies not servants    Ancestral Mystical Authority, anthropogenic climate change    Antifa    archate    as a rule, absolutes don’t     Asimov's Laws    aunts & grandmothers    Authority Figure™

Big Name Pagans    Billy Graham rule    black market    borders    Brosatru

cancel culture    catallaxy    classic liberal    compulsory approval condemnation of memory    conservative    cordon sanitaire    corporatism    corporate social responsibility    crusader    cui bono    cultural appropriation

damnatio memoriae    DARO    deep ecology    derivative    dhimmitude    dominionism    Dominion Theology    doublespeak    doxing    dualism    Dunbar's number   

E pluribus unum    Earth Day (original)    ecology, first law    ecology, fourth law    ecology, second law    ecology, third law    ecology vs. environmentalism    economics    environmentalism    EoR    ethanol    Ethic of Reciprocity    ethos

faith triumphant    fake news    false dichotomy    FamousFeminist    fascist    feminism (first wave)    feminism (fourth wave)    feminism (libertarian)    feminism (second wave)    feminism (third wave)    financial blacklisting    first law of ecology    four amendments    four questions    fourth law of ecology    fractional reserve banking    franchise community    free market   

gaslighting    gatekeeping    generalized argument    Go Fuck Yourself    GFY    Golden Rule    golden rule (inferior)    graft    Greater Pagan Community®    green slacktivism    Gresham's law   

hate crime    hate hoax    hate speech

I. Was. Different.    identity politics    inferior golden rule    inter arma silent leges    intersectionality    Iron Rule    IS or IS NOT

Judeo‑Christian heritage

kafkatrap    kafkatrap ‑ applying rational skepticism    kafkatrap ‑ arguing against the theory    kafkatrap ‑ demanding a definition    kafkatrap ‑ guilty because you have benefited    kafkatrap ‑ not authentic members    kafkatrap ‑ privileged position    kafkatrap ‑ refusal to acknowledge that you are guilty    kafkatrap ‑ skepticism about anecdotal account    Keep Your Freakin' Hands Off    kleptocracy    KYFHO

label    Laffer Curve    language game    Latinx    lawfare    legacy media    liberal, classic    liberal, modern    libertarian    liberty argument    live & let live works mostly    Lysenkoism   

oligarchy    othering    second law of ecology third law of ecology The Personal Is Political    qui bono Rule, ,Golden rule,inferior golden    Rule, Iron    slacktivism somebody else's problem    United We Stand virtue signaling Why does your enlightenment demand that I sacrifice?

  page index             site home  

politics (partisan)  Distract-Divide-Divert-Dissuade caution

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
— H. L. Mencken
Partisan is a committed member of a political party or army. In multi-party systems, the term is used for politicians who strongly support their party's policies and are reluctant to compromise with their political opponents.
One of the greatest scams in history.

People are taught that partisan politics are the best way of unifying people in a common cause. But actually partisan politics distract, divide, divert, and dissuade.
  • Distract -Those making decisions and planning actions work behind the scenes. They do not want too much public attention focused on them or their actions. They want very public figures to take both praise and blame with the public not asking too many questions or looking too closely at how the law is made and enforced. The “right hand” is shown the “left hand” but is kept deliberately ignorant of what the rest of the body is doing or how it is positioned. An “either/or” such as the “right/left” axis is a pretty good indication that partisan politics are at play.
  • Divide - On any given issue, the “Other Guys” will always be blamed for anything that goes wrong. Take Obamacare as an example. It wasn't written by the politicos. It was written by the technocrats and had been in the works since the failure of Hillarycare. The technocrats knew that a certain percentage of people could be convinced to blame the Democrats for the law's shortcomings and that a certain percentage of people could be convinced to blame the Republicans for not allowing everything the law was supposed to do.
        Assuming that percentage was thirty percent on both sides, that means that a full 60% of the electorate would be ready to blame the “Other Guys” no matter what the law did or did not do AND before anyone had actually read the law to know what was involved. Government wouldn't be blamed, politics and the “Other Guys” would.
        And of course it's not your fault. It's the “Other Guys.” Always it's the “Other Guys.” You're just a victim of circumstance and cruel political machinations.
  • Divert - Keeping public perception focused on the politics rather than the operation means that the technocrats are mostly shielded from accountability and responsibility.
        The politicos are the ones who must have screwed up, the government is just doing what it is told and legally bound to do.
        It's not government's fault. It's never government's fault. How dare you suggest otherwise!!!
  • Dissuade -If we can just elect enough of the right people at the right time, then we can change the world. If we don't win enough elections, well, we just have to try harder the next time. Government IS the solution, we should never look anywhere else. Really, we should just let the wise government experts solve the problem. They know better than we do. Ask them and they will tell us.
  • Partisan politics are a scam designed to keep you in your place and provide your outrage on demand and directed at the targets they choose.

    Most people get very uncomfortable with the solution.

    The “Other Guys” are not the source of all that is bad and unfair. “Your Guys” are not all saints and the source of goodness and light. The vice or virtue is not in the label, it's in the individual.

    No group is monolithic. People want different things. People have different motovations. No common cause is worth demonizing the Other. There's always something to share. Finding that something can be a problem.
  page index            site home  

politics of victimhood    caution

Four things mark the poltics of victimhood. First, the designated victim is never responsible, even if their circumstances are caused by their own actions or lack of actions.

Second, the designated victim is shielded from criticism.

Third, there is a hierarchy of victimhood defined by vicious infighting with some designated more victmized by society than others.

Finally, posititve benefits created by others must be transfered to the victims because they are victims.
Proponents of identity politics define individuals by their race, ethnicity, or sex, which in turn are defined by a history of oppression and exclusion. This history casts members of those groups as victims, no matter how far removed they actually are from oppression today. As victims, then, these groups have grievances that they claim the larger society has a moral obligation to address, mainly in the form of various kinds of reparations, such as affirmative action, government transfers, or other government set-asides based on race or sex. In the political arena of deliberation and debate over policy, the emotions aroused by that historical suffering bestow a specious authority on the self-proclaimed victim, who now is beyond criticism or accountability for the coherence or validity of his arguments. Critics are instantly branded as “insensitive” or “uncaring” at best and “racist” or “sexist” at worst.

The culture on display on many college and university campuses, by way of contrast, is “characterized by concern with status and sensitivity to slight combined with a heavy reliance on third parties. People are intolerant of insults, even if unintentional, and react by bringing them to the attention of authorities or to the public at large. Domination is the main form of deviance, and victimization a way of attracting sympathy, so rather than emphasize either their strength or inner worth, the aggrieved emphasize their oppression and social marginalization.”

So. All Americans are victims. Hence, a great failing of modern leftist thought is to suppose that if one can claim one is more oppressed then someone else, then one has won some kind of contest for attention, or justice, or fame — it only blinds us with rage, and we fail to understand (or explain) the above. Resentment comes to rule the day — instead of genuine understanding, of how predatory systems fail everyone in society, not just the most or least oppressed.

While of course there are different degrees of harm, no one is really made better off in the long run by predatory systems — at least as not as much as they could be with fairer, better ones. But the politics of victimhood, of resentment and grievance, leave us simmering with anger and shame, instead of giving us the power to lead, create, and transform. Hence, it’s self-evident to see, this kind of thinking, competing for victimhood, has advanced American society not one iota — it has only taken it backwards. How far backwards?

  page index             site home  


A committed romantic relationship between more than two partners. There's a difference between anonymous or ultra-casual sex and polyamory.

❝My feelings were irrelevant, I told him. My personal beliefs mean that The Lady Always Chooses. She was in a monogamous marriage to his dad. And that is where it stood. What he suggested wasn't even a possibility because her honor was more important to me than my own.❞
I’m not polygamous. For my definition, that’s one male with subserviant wives. Neither of my companions are subservient, they’d laugh at the idea. I do have polyamorous tendencies.

Polyamory is the nonpossessive, honest, responsible and ethical philosophy and practice of loving multiple people simultanously. Polyamory emphasizes consciously choosing how many partners one wishes to be involved with rather than accepting social norms which dictate loving only one person at a time. Polyamory is an umbrella term which integrates traditional mutipartner relationship terms with more evolved egalitarian terms. Polyamory embraces sexual equality and all sexual orientations towards an expanded circle of spousal intimacy and love. Polyamory is from the root words Poly meaning many and Amour meaning love hence “many loves” or Polyamory. Of course, love itself is a rather ambiguous term, but most polys seem to define it as a serious, intimate, romantic, or less stable, affectionate bond which a person has with another person or group of persons. This bond usually, though not necessarily always, involves sex. Sexualove or eromance are other words which have been coined to describe this kind of love. Other terms often used as synonyms for polyamory are responsible, ethical or intentional non-monogamy.

Polyamory (from Greek πολύ poly, "many, several", and Latin amor, "love") is the practice of, or desire for, intimate relationships with more than one partner, with the knowledge of all partners involved.It has been described as "consensual, ethical, and responsible non-monogamy." People who identify as polyamorous reject the view that sexual and relational exclusivity are necessary for deep, committed, long-term loving relationships.

the practice or condition of participating simultaneously in more than one serious romantic or sexual relationship with the knowledge and consent of all partners.

The practice, state or ability of having more than one sexual loving relationship at the same time, with the full knowledge and consent of all partners involved.

This is the definition used by California polyamorist Morning Glory Zell, who coined the term in the early 1980's.

Polyamory differs from adultery because all the partners know about each others' lovers, so there is not secrecy or betrayal.

Contemporary practitioners have coined the names “polyamory” and “polyfidelity” to describe a wide range of partner arrangements that vary as to the number of people involved, the sexes of those involved, the sexualities of those involved, the level of commitment of those involved, and the kinds of relationships pursued.

Imaged as a form of commitment which is flexible and responsive to the needs and interests of the individuals involved, rather than a rigid institution imposed in cookie cutter fashion on everyone, this new polygamy reflects postmodern critiques of patriarchy, gender, heterosexuality and genetic parenthood. Such a ‘postmodern polygamy’ might occasionally look like traditional patriarchal polygamy, but it differs in important ways. For example, it could as easily encompass one woman with several male partners as it could one man with multiple female partners. It also includes the expanded possibilities created by same-sex or bi-sexual relationships, neither of which in contemplated by traditional polygamy.
I can only speak for myself, but I’ve never found myself attracted to just one woman at a time. There’s been times I’ve only be involved with one lady, but the attraction was always to more than one.

These days, I avoid causual sex. I have two unbreakable rules when it comes to sex. Consenting adults only. If you promised to be another's one and only, you are off limits.

There's an assumption that a poly group means that everybody sleeps with everyone else. That's not even usually true. And yes, you can be poly without being homosexual or bisexual.

Sometimes it's not polyamory. Sometimes it really is just "friends with benefits." I've seldom seen that turn out well. Get the hormones carbonating and people confuse their feelings. All in all, I think things just work better with my second unbreakable sex rule.

Polyamory is a “romantic” relationship with multiple people. I’m not real sure about that romantic bit. It’s probably my cross-wired brain, but I don’t think I love in the conventional sense. I'm not sure if I can feel love at all. But it is friendship for a few close friends, and if some of those are ladies and it involves sex, I am certainly not going to say no. I just can't be exclusive about it, it is not in my nature.

I think exclusivity does hurt a lot of relationships, but then I was poly before I knew the meaning of the word. Also think that it is a mistake (and probably one of the greatest crimes that Christianity ever committed) to confuse love and sex and physical contact and intimacy.

I do think it does work, but like most fringe things polyamory attracts broken people and abusers.

  page index             site home  

polygamy    caution

“The practice or custom of having more than one wife or husband at the same time.”
Not to be confused with polyamory.

In the American Fundamentalist LDS Church, this is many wives and one husband. From what I've seen, American polygamy is usually a bad idea, especially in isolated communities where polygamy is the norm. Because of the Arizona Strip, the towns of Colorado City, Arizona and Hildale, Utah are just across the state border from each other (Short Creek). For decades, when the law from one state came to investigate, people would move across the border for a while.

Women tended to be very subservient. Young men without money or political connections couldn't marry. But the married men usually did very well at the expense of everyone else.

  page index             site home  


a person of great learning in several fields of study;
  page index            site home  


I recognize many faces of the Divine.

  page index             site home  

Using pity to evoke sympathy and control another. Common side effect of depression.

Since our culture currently celebrates victimhood, this behavior can be easily encouraged and rewarded. I try to avoid that.

  page index             site home  


a structure consisting of a roof supported by columns or piers,usually attached to a building as a porch.

  page index             site home  

poseur     American spelling is poser.

a person who attempts to impress others by assuming or affecting a manner, degree of elegance, sentiment, etc., other than his or her true one.

  page index             site home  

Positive Attraction, The Law of
     See The Law of Positive Attraction

post hoc     See false cause

post hoc ergo propter hoc     See false cause

power over versus power with

Willing cooperation usually works better then brute force. Popularized in paganism (but not originated) by Starhawk.
Most of what we think of as power is power over. Parents have the power to tell their children when curfew will be; bosses tell their employees what the quota will be; police tell drivers when to pull over; judges tell them what the fine will be. Even the power that the chair under me has is power over. It has power over my body to keep it upright and in position to type these words. Everyone and everything has power over.

There is another form of power which is less common but more powerful than power over. It is power with. Power with is constructed by an agreement in which all parties decide to act in ways that construct the welfare of all. We have decided how we are going to be with each other in a manner that serves us.

The first premise of a circle like this is that everyone’s presence is vital — the ones with whom I disagree, the ones I don’t quite trust ... even my own. Making a concept like this real is not easy, but what we begin to generate when we do so, when we listen with deep respect, when we speak our riskiest truths, when we discover our common humanity, is a collective energy that cannot help but change the world. It’s called, for lack of a better word, love, and it’s a force older than violence.

And this is what the term “power with” means: finding the leverage to meet my needs and accomplish my goals in partnership with others, not by dominating or outsmarting them or by beating them to the pot of gold. Cultivating the discipline to do this does not mean, as so many people fear, a subordination or loss of self, but precisely the opposite: the fulfillment of self beyond the wildest dreams we might spawn in our isolation.

Nor does it mean the sudden disappearance of conflict — or, eerily, its pseudo-disappearance, its burial under New Age platitudes: Can’t we all just get along? On the contrary, conflict is welcomed.

A core premise of the growing movement known as restorative, or transformative, justice is that conflict is opportunity. This is where we have our greatest chance to grow: at the friction points, as our emotions are heating up. We just have to face the situation with openness, calm and courage. Once again, this is no easy task. But the more we work at this, the more we realize the value of doing so, and the less inclined we become simply to swat our difficulties, and the people we blame them on, out of the way.

  page index             site home  

Practical Grudge Limit    Ro3 № 15

It’s not practical to hold someone responsible unless they were there, of age, and participating.

  • Outer Grudge Boundary - the birthday of your oldest grandparent. There’s nothing you can do about anything before that
  • Middle Grudge Boundary - the day you were born
  • Inner Grudge Boundary - your eighteenth birthday or age of consent. There’s nothing you should do about anything before that.

❝I'm a big believer in networking, and I keep a lot of information on some of my contacts. But too much information keeps me from focusing on the individual, so in my address book I have a one-off rule. Basically I'll go one degree of separation. So I may have their spouse's name, but I won't have their uncle's name. Unless he's a regular contract too.

So in keeping with that idea, let's be generous at put the Outer Grudge Boundary at your grandparent's birthday. It's just not practical to hold a grudge for something that happened before your grandparents were born. The chances of you being able to do anything is nill. As a Middle Grudge Boundary, let's say the day you were born. Yes, important things happened before that, but it's not likely that it affected you directly. Finally, the Inner Grudge Boundary should be your 18th birthday, or whenever you were recognized as an adult. That marks the practical limit of when you could start doing something about the things that happened to you.

Now, chances are I'd be willing to take a stand for any injustice that happened within your Inner Grudge Boundary. You'd have to really convince me before I would do something about an event that happened between your Inner and Middle Grudge Boundaries. Without a really important reason, I'm not going to help you between Middle and Outer Grudge Boundaries because I don't see how it affects you or me right now. Beyond your Outer Grudge Boundary, you're on your own.

Guess what? These boundaries work with people and not just time. If it happened to you, that's important and within your Inner Grudge Boundary and I can work with that. If it happened to someone you're close to, well, that's a Middle Grudge Boundary. If it happened to someone you know, that the Outer Grudge Boundary.

Yes, we can make noise about stuff beyond that, but what's the point? It doesn't touch us directly. Besides, like calls to like. If we are filling our minds with desires for revenge, it really doesn't leave much space to live a life, does it?❞

  page index             site home  


The long standing love that develops between longtime lovers like a husband and wife.

I use the Greek ideas for love.

See also love

  page index             site home  

Pragmatism, The Law of      See The Law of Pragmatism


  1. practice, as distinguished from theory; application or use, as of knowledge or skills.
  2. convention, habit, or custom.
  3. a set of examples for practice.

  page index             site home  

precautionary principle    caution

Supposedly it’s better to mitigate or avoid actions that might harm the environment even if the consequences are not known and with the burden of proof falling on those who propose to act.

Ultimately flawed and curiously selective.

Just one example, not a single solution to “climate change” could be justified under the precautionary principle.

I’ve studied enough science to know that it’s always about the tradeoffs.

  page index             site home  

prime community

A bottom-up, self-organizing and spontaneous group.

Prime communities start locally and grow from there. There aren’t necessarily standards to guide them, so they can go awry. But when they get it right, intentional communities tend to be stronger and more independent.

Prime communities aren't better because they are prime communities. But I think that prime communities have a much better chance than franchise communities.

  page index             site home  

principal agent problem

The principal-agent problem occurs when a principal creates an environment in which an agent's incentives don't align with those of the principle. Generally, the onus is on the principal to create incentives for the agent to ensure they act as the principal wants. This includes everything from financial incentives to avoidance of information asymmetry.

The Principal Agent Problem occurs when one person (the agent) is allowed to make decisions on behalf of another person (the principal). In this situation, there are issues of moral hazard and conflicts of interest.

The agent usually has more information than the principal. This difference in information is known as asymmetric information. The consequence is that the principal does not know how the agent will act. Also, he principal cannot always ensure that the agent acts in the principal’s best interests. This departure from the principal’s interest towards the agent’s interest is called an “agency cost.”

In many real-world examples, the agent will not prioritize the best interest of the principal, but will instead pursue his own goals. Politicians (the agents) and voters (the principals) is an example of the Principal Agent Problem.
The Principal Agent Problem from Intelligent Economist

  page index             site home  

public forum vs. publisher

A public forum is mostly open to anyone who would speak and write, but the owners and operators of the forum can't be held responsible for what others write and say.

A publisher selects content and is responsible for what is written and said.

The argument for framing platforms like Twitter as a publisher goes as follows: Twitter publishes their users’ content, therefore Twitter is a publisher and is held accountable for content it publishes. Therefore, Twitter must make sure to facilitate online speech and remain viewpoint neutral. But this argument quickly fails in light of section 230 of the CDA, which states that “no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” So, Twitter is not a publisher and, as nothing more than a curator, it has no obligation to censor user content or remain viewpoint neutral.

Conversely, the argument for framing Twitter and other social media platforms as a public forum is as follows: Twitter’s mission includes “giv[ing] everyone the power to create and share ideas instantly without barriers.” Furthermore, Twitter claims to “stand for freedom of expression for everyone.” Therefore, since nearly every adult can have a twitter account and can publicly share thoughts and ideas, Twitter must be a public forum. Public forums cannot engage in viewpoint or content discrimination without meeting a very strict scrutiny standard. But, this argument is wrong. The term “public forum” is a legal term of art with specific consequences. The United States Supreme Court has limited public forums to include mainly cities and private towns which operate with municipal authority (see Marsh v. Alabama and Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner). To be considered a public forum, these entities must have “all of the attributes of a state-created municipality and the exercise by that enterprise of semi-official municipal functions as a delegate of the State…” It is impossible for a social media platform to meet this standard. Twitter must be a private forum and private forums have no obligation to protect a users’ constitutional rights.

But, private forums are not immune to the law. Private actors must honor the contracts in which they engage or face the consequences, pecuniary or otherwise.

…Section 230 encourages Internet platforms to moderate “offensive” speech, but the law was not intended to facilitate political censorship. Online platforms should receive immunity only if they maintain viewpoint neutrality, consistent with traditional legal norms for distributors of information. Before the Internet, common law held that newsstands, bookstores, and libraries had no duty to ensure that each book and newspaper they distributed was not defamatory. Courts initially extended this principle to online platforms. Then, in 1995, a federal judge found Prodigy, an early online service, liable for content on its message boards because the company had advertised that it removed obscene posts. The court reasoned that “utilizing technology and the manpower to delete” objectionable content made Prodigy more like a publisher than a library.

Congress responded by enacting Section 230, establishing that platforms could not be held liable as publishers of user-generated content and clarifying that they could not be held liable for removing any content that they believed in good faith to be “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable.” This provision does not allow platforms to remove whatever they wish, however. Courts have held that “otherwise objectionable” does not mean whatever a social media company objects to, but “must, at a minimum, involve or be similar” to obscenity, violence, or harassment. Political viewpoints, no matter how extreme or unpopular, do not fall under this category.
Platform, or Publisher? from City Journal
The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not apply to private entities or individuals.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is a decent compromise. If I am a publisher or broadcaster or webmaster, I'm under no obligation to provide a place for your thoughts and opinions. My choice controls the content. But that makes me responsible for the content.

If I don't provide the content, then I don't have liability.

The more moderation I provide, the more liability.

The job of social media is to provide access while people make up their own minds.

  page index            site home  

privileges    caution

  1. a right, immunity, or benefit enjoyed only by a person beyond the advantages of most
  2. a special right, immunity, or exemption granted to persons in authority or office to free them from certain obligations or liabilities
  3. a grant to an individual, corporation, etc., of a special right or immunity, under certain conditions
  4. the principle or condition of enjoying special rights or immunities.
  1. to grant a privilege to
  2. to exempt (usually followed by from)
It's one of the simplest human guidelines. Everybody shares a right. You don't have a right unless the Other does.

Privileges exclude people. Only some get privileges. Privileges are not rights, and rights are not privileges.

It's why there are human rights. Many people muddy the waters and call privileges rights. Black rights? Christian rights? Police rights? These do not exist. These are privileges that rule out whole classes of people.

Everybody shares a right.

  page index             site home  

progressive     See libertarian


Evidence based on a shared understanding of cause and effect.

  page index             site home  


  1. the science or study of poetic meters and versification.
  2. a particular or distinctive system of metrics and versification.
  3. the stress and intonation patterns of an utterance.

  page index             site home  


Refering to when the day has been too long, one is too tired to continue at the normal energy level, and one wants to go and sleep. A family term.

  page index            site home  


By the late 1800s, the process for making it had been refined, and in 1915, a famous line of borosilicate kitchen products was released under the Pyrex label. Because it is stronger and more durable than conventional glass, it has a number of far reaching uses.

  page index             site home  

a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Pp…   q r s t u v w x y z

2019       2018       2017       2016       2015       2014       2011       2010       2009       2008       2007       2006       2005