Still on a Lacan kick, now reading Jacques Lacan himself after finishing a primer on Freud and a clinical intro by Bruce Fink. I have some thoughts on my first forays into Lacan proper, as well as some on the Fink book (which Scott Alexander also read and reviewed).
Initially the recommendation was to absolutely avoid Ecrits, read supplementary material like Fink, and read Lacan's seminars starting at 11 and 7, then going back to 1. I tried 11 and it's a bit too hard to understand; too mired in previous work, I think. The recommendation stems from it being a turning point in his work, but I'd rather have the context to know what it is turning from.
I'm reading Lacan's first seminar now, which seems to ask more coherent questions. It is a direct offshoot from Freud and so far is commenting on Freud's writing directly, while throwing shade at other offshoots (ego psychology). The primary questions seem to be things like, what actually is the unconscious, what is the goal of analysis, what is the process of analysis, what is the position of the analyst, how should the analyst approach analysis...? These all seem to stem from the fact that Freud's actual methods are veiled and only communicated in a limited scope (i.e. what Freud actually wrote down). I'm still very early in the book, though.
I feel that I can actually grasp some of what Lacan is saying here, which is a nice change of pace. I'm sure that will change, but before this I wasn't sure there was a foundation to turn away from, so I'm feeling confident in my decision to divert from the suggested starting place and go chronologically.
A bit of commentary on the Fink book after finishing:
I feel like it was a good intro that avoided a lot of the roundabout references that permeate Lacanian commentary. At the risk of sounding like Goldilocks, it was perhaps too grounded, in the sense that the examples, case studies, and commentary by Fink were the biggest issues. The gist I have picked up from other third parties is that Lacan is all about abstracting and structuring Freudian analysis, moving away from the particulars in the abstract sense so that the actual particulars of any given case can be dealt with. Some of Fink's comments seemed closer to symptomizing than structuralizing, more cause -> effect proselytizing than observational.
In general it provides an overview of key concepts, and is a good jumping off point for anyone who is curious about Lacan. Extremely readable and engrossing at points. Very different from Lacan's own work, which is probably a big plus for some.
I've decided that undrrstanding Lacanian psychoanalysis will be my next intellectual venture, so right now I am reading Sigmund Freud by Pamela Thurschwell, and A Clinical Introduction to Lacanian Psychoanalysis by Bruce Fink.
The Freud book is to familiarize myself with some of the foundational concepts of psychoanalysis. It seems like a pretty straightforward historical account of Freud's life and an overview of his ideas.
The Fink book has been really fascinating so far. I am coming at this as someone who has no experience with psychoanalysis or therapy in general, and the book provides a lot of insight on the actual theraputic techniques of psychoanalysis, rather than the philosophical ideas behind it. I started inteoducing myself to Lacan by listening to some podcasts on basic concepts, but they still felt like they were avoiding the heart of everything. This book is grounding, which is refreshing.
It requires a decent income, which prevents other demographics from getting into it (at such a high rate). Climbing gyms around me are 100 bucks a month (double what a nice lifting gym costs), and that's without rentals. Factor in shoes, harness, chalk bag, belay device and it's a big initial investment (or money going towards renting gear ever time you go).
And there's a big intersection with hippies. Might be different in other parts of the world, but in the mountains of Canada, I associate traditional rock climbing with west coast hippy/vanlife folks, who are either a-politcal weird lifestyle people who are not traditional in any sense of the word except in rock climbing, or default left wing. Those are the folks who are often foundational to climbing gyms (work there, teach there, or park their modified school-bus-turned-home outside there to climb in the off season).
Boarchariot
5mo ago
Me too. Can't stand his films or Michael Moore's, but they sure are popular and have made some impact. Most people are not very good at figuring out how seriously they should take something, but love a good show. Moore and Spurlock are quite smart in that sense, and stuff like that will get more attention than any sort of proof.
Those are all terrible situations with no good solutions. I'm sorry you had to deal with them, and I think it can be normal to respond to powerless scenarios with power fantasies. But that said, I understand why you want to avoid anti-social thinking, and I would consider two contexts.
The first is that you aren't treating these things as mere objects or obstacles. You are expressly thinking of them as enemies or antagonists, with purpose behind their actions. People don't think of how to take vengeance on a road closed for construction, they take vengeance on those who have wronged them. Working on identifying the emotions behind your thoughts and addressing them in productive ways (intense exercise, for example) can help.
In a more Kantian sense I understand how you are looking at them as obstacles, rather than people. It sounds like you get caught up in finding a solution, and that just doesn't stop when someone makes a personal decision. For example:
They claimed their expenses went up that much but I did the math on the publicly available property taxes and determined their costs did not go up anywhere near as much as they raised rent.
To me, that speaks of an intense focus and determination to find a solution well before it reaches machiavellian brainstorming. It's harder to stop a heavy and quickly moving object; the same goes for thoughts.
It's not an easy solution, but you have to find a way to let go of lines of thinking that aren't productive, and that is usually well before the self-destructive and anti-social thoughts you describe. My experience is that when you enter the realm of obsessive specification, you are losing sight of more realistic options, and certainly losing touch with the general audience of normies in the world, who are the primary people you will deal with in these situations.
Aside from learning to deal with the average person (most people don't want completely rational discussions and taking that route makes them less agreeable), one thing that has helped me is zooming out to the bigger picture. For the HR situation: do you want to work for a company that refuses you a raise when you are doing a good job? From their perspective, they were either being disingenuous about what they thought of your performance (a symptom of the larger ecosystem), or stupid (also a symptom of the larger ecosystem). Do you want to be a part of that ecosystem?
Understanding how you fit into all the systems around you will give you a better idea of where you can force your position, and where you are powerless and better off searching for another solution (lest you delve into unsavory thoughts, or frustration more generally).
In short: stop the trolley before it's at max velocity, and learn how to change tracks before it becomes more difficult.
Boarchariot
5mo ago
It wasn't meant to prove, it was made to convince.
Boarchariot
5mo ago
Can you give some examples of when people were uncooperative or irrational?
Boarchariot
6mo ago
I think the points you bring up vary by person.
I had similar thoughts when I was younger (hence why I waited until I was in my 30s). I used to specifically say that I thought natural skin was nicer than any tattoo... then I started looking at tattoos I actually liked. I have always had a lot of confidence in my own taste, probably from looking back and being quite happy in the things I surrounded myself with and created no matter how old I am or was when I made them. What if that were to change? It didn't, and I don't think it ever will: I still like what I like. While my tastes are always changing, I don't see the previous iterations of my own taste as a foreign object - sometimes they are quite refreshing.
Personally I never really felt that meaning in an image is important. The meaning is less about the image, and more about the associative memories surrounding the tattoo, so there's no drive to find the perfect image (for me), or fear that the idea will change. It's more like a personal memory for me than a statue built to commemorate something specific - but that sort of thing is not a hard line for a lot of people. The idea that an image transposed into my skin, chosen by me, could feel foreign is also a foreign idea to me at this point, but certainly not unheard of for others. In fact, I have even heard some people say that it is a useful psychological breakthrough for them to integrate a new tattoo into their perception of themself. I suppose that speaks to the vast underlying reasons people have for getting tattooed. As another commenter mentioned, it is a bit ritualistic. As you note, it's addictive in many ways.
Realistically, I think your best bet is to focus on everything but tattoos, since firm directives without any backbone will get you no where with rebellious kids, or with kids who are smart enough to think for themselves. What are the reasons someone would never even consider tattoos as an option (rather than having to weigh both sides)? Well, in short, they have hobbies, interests, friends, and investments far outside the scope of tattoos. Why do people get tattoos? To rebel, to modify, to stake a claim, to look cool, to appreciate, to remember, to cover themselves... among many other reasons. You need to consider how your kids will either not run into those problems, or will have strategies that solve those sorts of things in a satisfying way.
How can I convince my kids in 5 years that they do not need or want to have one just to fit in, and that they're too expensive and most people will regret having them for various reasons?
Do things that get them to respect your values and opinions. There is no argument you can provide that will convince them if that foundation isn't there.
I'll also give you a different perspective, since there are many people who are anti-tattoo here. If you really hate the idea of tattoos on your kids, you can consider my point of view and work against it for maximum protection. Personally, I would say your post is a great argument against bad tattoos, and making permanent decisions based on peer pressure. Hopefully your kids don't fall into either of those traps. It's important for you to instill a good sense of taste and self-assuredness in them - that may or may not mean that they end up getting into tattoo culture, but hopefully that means they avoid a saggy butterfly tramp stamp.
I only recently got into tattoos, and I am in my 30s. I had no desire in my younger years - my earliest memory of a tattoo was a no-longer-recognizable rose on my mum, which she didn't like, and I thought was weird. I recently got into tattoos because I am very familiar with my body, and I like art. Now I can get a tattoo and see cool art any time I want, and I don't miss having bare skin (I might have when I was younger). It's a similar experience to something like carrying a nice pocket knife (which I also do when I am working). I can take it out, look at it, and it brightens my day a little every time. And similar to a nice pocket knife, I expect it will last decades, and change over time. Do I expect it to look the same for decades? Definitely not, but seeing the change is part of the experience. Old tattoos have a certain charm for some people, just like grandpa's over-sharpened slipjoint.
Of course there are people who get tattoos for the image of being a gangster or individualualist (and of course there is an irony to the latter that they will never understand). The majority of tattoos, like the majority of any cultural expression, reflect bad taste (as you note with your examples). But I think that's a bad argument, because it doesn't apply to everyone, and even the people it does apply to won't think that is does. I think tattoos have become ubiquitous in part because they allow anyone to showcase their taste. Whether it's good or bad, that's irrelevant. What matters is finding people who share it or respect it, and tattoos do that well. They can be an immediate talking point, and for people who are really into tattoos, they are a hobby like any other to bond over - both the result on your skin, and the experience of getting them.
The other aspect to their popularity is that no one can take them away. You note their longevity as a negative point, but that's double-edged. Go back to the pocket knife example - they are durable, can be beautiful, and are certainly more useful than a tattoo. But they are also extremely easy to lose, and produced in large numbers (well, aside for extremely expensive customs). Tattoos fill a gap that is hard to fill in contemporary life: individualized modification, which is an external representation of change that you enact on your surroundings. Some people like modifying their cars, some people like modifying their homes, and some like working in their gardens. But the fact is that tattoos can be less expensive than any of these, and are more accessible and meaningful for many. Many younger people can't afford their own spaces, which means they can't meaningfully modify their environments to reflect their tastes - but they can modify their bodies.
So maybe get your kids into landscaping?
Aside from having some form of output (if they are prone to needing that) and building a foundation of respect for your opinion as their parent, you have to protect them from the notion that tattoos are normal. That's tough because eventually you will have no control over their social circle, and many normal people have tattoos these days. Having friends or colleagues with tattoos is the biggest impact, I would guess. I started getting tattooed because my partner has tattoos, and I wanted to have that shared experience. I think that is something different from peer pressure. It's not the idea that you should do something because others want you to do it, but the idea that you can do something because you want to and the people you respect won't judge you for it.
Good luck.
Boarchariot
6mo ago
You do you. I don't see the cost. If you want to write, write. Make it public if you want the chance for people to read it.
Boarchariot
6mo ago
You should make one if you want people to read it. They might not, but they certainly can't if it doesn’t exist. You probably shouldn’t go into it with the expectation that it will be popular, but if you’re going to write things anyway, why not?
Boarchariot
6mo ago
Glad you're feeling better. As someone who's gone through the misery of back pain, I know the dread and pessimism of a twinge. As long as you don't charge through it with youthful stupidity, they usually bounce back just fine.
Have fun with the climbing and yoga. Both are great options for limbering up (and providing a good dose of mobility humility - easy to forget with strength training).
Boarchariot
6mo ago
I was single until I was 30 and very happy.
The biggest thing that kept me sane and happy was having a career that I love. When you're single you can put as much time and effort into whatever you want, without considering other people. A career is great for that, and I was able to significantly advance mine. That was also the biggest source of socialization and local friendships for me. It really covered most of my bases outside of longterm friends I would talk to every so often.
Personally, I find the only way TV is bearable is watching it with a partner because it's basically an excuse to lie around together on the couch. I never watched TV single. You should try to find hobbies that you are interested in and provide a sense of improvement. I like weight training, but anything between ultramarathons and Warhammer 40k is good. Pick something you really want to do and go full in. You don't have to consider anyone's taste but your own.
Speaking of taste, treat yourself to going out to concerts or restaurants. Solo diners often get extra attention at higher end restaurants. Try some new wines (if you drink), taste some new foods, ask the server for recommendations and pick whatever strikes your fancy. One of the worst things about a bad relationship is having to accomodate someone else's bad taste in food or music, or anything else. Bring a book and sit at the bar if you feel weird.
Boarchariot
6mo ago
I went to Montessori school, and then a regular local public school. I don't know if it was that the Montessori style complemented my natural inclinations or formed some of them, but I was always an independent student. Also weird in a variety of ways, and I think my parents gave up on curbing my eccentricities pretty early (and my teachers were all very accepting). I would have been miserable or rebellious if that wasn't the case, I'm sure. But in terms of school and learning I was always interested and curious, and naturally did well (which is what every parent hopes for, but is entirely unhelpful as advice).
I went to the local grade school by foot every day, and came home for lunch for most of my early school years. It felt like school was just an extension of my backyard. That changed in middle school, which was reached by bus. The only extracaricular activity I was ever part of was band in middle school, and the teacher was great. Most of the teachers I had were good, and a handful were very formatice and memorable. My parents did not push any interests on me and supported my interests when they arose.
My mom went to the local high school as a kid and hated it, and it was known for being even rougher by the time I was set to go. I applied to a few different special programs in the area and ended up going to an arts program a bit further away. The extra expenses (bus transport and material fees) were paid by my parents.
It was a regular local high school for some people, and you could see the difference in investment between students who chose to be there versus the students who were local. The teachers were exceptional, but I think students wanting to be there made their jobs easy. I'm confident that I was much happier going to that school than I would have been at the local school. As you can imagine the music, theatre and art kids in highschool were a pretty open minded crowd. I never felt weird or ostracized, and I was able to focus on learning and making friends. The horror stories from other high schools (fights, bullying, drugs) weren't really an issue at mine.
Boarchariot
6mo ago
I am very against holding onto things. Personally, my job (chef) has taught me that space is as much of a resource as time or money (or charity). Cluttered spaces are unpleasant, less productive, and (as you note) really weigh on your mind. And very often, holding onto something just means throwing it out later, and losing out on the free space in the meantime.
My partner is a bit like your wife. She picked up some habits from her parents and situation growing up, and doesn’t like to waste anything. I think it's an admirable trait and something I also strive for, but there is a cost/benefit ratio that just doesn’t pay off sometimes.
I would recommend talking and seeing if she would be willing to compromise on certain things. Let her determine the things that absolutely shouldn't be thrown out, and work your way down. Maybe something like a value threshold for larger items, or a par level (>10 rags means garbage). You can look at it more globally, like considering how much you value an hour of your time in dollars. Compare that to the value of the item and how much work it takes to properly dispose of it, and you might find that stuff under $50 (or whatever amount) isn't worth the hassle.
What I found with my partner is that she feels bad getting rid of stuff that could be put to better use, but that dissipates if I want to deal with it. I would say aim to start fresh. See if she is OK with you dealing with the current pile, and you can discuss what guidelines to follow in the future. I think just starting to deal with it will help get the ball rolling.
Boarchariot
6mo ago
On the contrary to the comments below, you should consider your activity overall. Hurting your back rolling over in bed is a sad fact of adulthood for many people, but if it happens after a week of intense back or leg workouts...
No sense in being ashamed. I also don't think you have to totally reassess your summer. However, you need to consider easing into extra training volume or new training loads. That means not going all out, or even moderately hard at first. Your body is going to stop moving optimally before you can't move a weight. Usually that means compensating somewhere else when a weaker muscle gets tired, and something gets tweaked.
The first thing that popped into my head when I read what happened to you is that you were doing a one-sided twisting motion followed by kettlebell exercises. It's easy to overwork specific parts of the body that way. Training volume plays a role in injury, but training while subtly twisting your core or favouring one side is what is likely the direct cause. Taking time to recalibrate your balance and symmetry between those things can help, if you plan on golfing more often. Stretching and mobility is often left by the wayside, but it will help you recover (and prevent those freak accidents while shaving). Warm up to your working sets with mobility, balance, lighter weights, and concern for how your body feels. Numbers are a measure of performance, but performance is what you actully want to improve.
Boarchariot
6mo ago
Pressure, stress, and thinking hard are connected to movement which probably plays a role. Pacing, tapping a foot or shaking a leg while sitting, just being more tense in general... along with the things you've noticed.
Boarchariot
7mo ago
Do chin-ups as long as they feel OK to you. Negatives are decent, so are bodyweight row variations. If you want, you can do assisted pull-ups using bands.
The simple answer, though, is that if tou want to get better at something, do more of it.
Boarchariot
7mo ago
Anec-datally, many non-runners end up unable to walk. As with most sports, extreme performers will be prone to performance-related injuries. But I don't think there's any reason to believe that moderate running leads to debilitating joint health. You'll find a lot of conflictong studies and ways of looking at things.
Running sessions should probably be less intense than people normally think, and coupled with exercises to help form and general strength. Joints, bones and tendons are the most likely things to get injured from overuse, and take a lot of training to strengthen. Cardiovascular endurance in an untrained athlete improves much faster than tendon strength. Distance should be increased quite gradually, while paying respect to your ability to run with proper form.
Boarchariot
7mo ago
Everyone's got a story about how they read so much back in the 90's/00's. But they pick up a book now, and... it's just not entertaining.
Personally I see it as two seperate issues.
First, phones/videogames/social media are addicting. I find myself messing around on my phone long after it is fun, just cycling between apps. For whatever reason that's hard to quit, even if doing almost anything would be more entertaining.
Second, I still read. Usually just before bed (highly recommend doing this instead of phone use before bed). But learning to enjoy books is hard if you don't read a lot. I don't think it's any different from other media; you have to develop and choose books that are to your taste. I distinctly remember reading many books as a kid and not liking them (I was a more voracious reader then). There are still books I read because I think they are valuable but not particularly viscerally enjoyable. But if you want to compare they joy from reading to the dopamine rush of social media, you need to read books you enjoy reading.
Sounds silly, but I think people have the tendency to choose books because they should read them rather than because they want to read them (self included). Go read a book meant for entertainment if you need a fun replacement to social media. Or don't be afraid to put a book down. Reading isn't inherently a slog, but some books are.
Boarchariot
8mo ago
My partner takes ADHD medication regularly. She works an office job (mostly from home) that imvolves a lot of tedious grunt work.
The impression I have is that her medication is necessary for her to succeed at her job. Some of that is practical (being able to concentrate) and some of that is mental (not getting down about being disorganized or meeting the expectations of her colleagues).
From an outside perspective it seems like a constructed problem. Staring at spreadsheets, meeting arbitrary deadlines, and having no personal interaction with anything tangible seem like huge hurdles to focus. So the issue isn't concentration in general, it is concentration in the face of really tedious and unengaging tasks for long periods of time. I don't know if you’re in the same situation, or if agreeing with that would make you feel better about having to take stimulants. Like most things, it's a combination of personal abilities and the environment to which people are forced to adjust, rather than just a personal shortcoming.
Boarchariot
8mo ago
Not only have you been friends with childhood pals for a long time, but you also had numbers on your side. 20+ people to make friends with every year for 12 years is incomparable to the (lack of) opportunities you have as an adult. On the bright side you hopefully have a better idea of the kind of person you like in a friend.
Meeting friends of friends can be a decent way of meeting people outside your usual sphere. But the real question is, what do you want out of your friends? Intimacy, mutual support, etc? To do that you have to gradually expand the scope of a friendship. It happens with time and effort.
Boarchariot
8mo ago
Something along those lines is common, in my experience. It's a bit discouraging, but the subset of people will get progressively interested in you gets progresively smaller.
Total people on the app > people who will see your profile > people who will like you > people who will actually respond > people who agree to a date > dates that actually happen
For a lot of people, online dating is nerve-wracking, leading to flakiness. And most people will prioritize other events or commitments above a first date with someone they've never met, leading to further flakiness.
Just stick with it. You're going to have to talk to a lot of people before you click with someone.
Boarchariot
8mo ago
Move states. A change in scenery can help. An honest consideration might just moving somewhere with more sunlight. Places that are cold and dark most of the year don't help anhedonia.
Or take the opposite route and go volunteer for something purposeful. What purpose? Whatever you want. Don't want anything? Try something arbitrary that other people want, and maybe you'll see what they see.
Or invest in bettering yourself in some pursuit. Running, lifting weights, origami, piano tuning... whatever.
But I don't think there is any way for people on the internet to convince you of meaning, purpose, or enjoyment. You have to venture out and do things.
Doing things hasn't worked? Do new things.
I also learned to drive recently, in my 30s. I also found lessons really exhausting, but I totally chalked it up to nerves. Not that I was panicked or fearful, but driving takes a lot of focus and concentration, as well as multitasking and anticipation. With lessons that is even more true. You're paying attention to the road, to the car, to other drivers, and to the instructor, all while learning and doing new things.
Now that I've had my liscence for two years, it is a lot less exhausting. I can easily drive for many hours. A lot of things that you have to actively focus on while you are learning become second nature.
More options
Context Copy link