On Animals and Ego

Sparky called me tonight.

“What are you doing?” he asked.

“I’m playing Civ4,” I said. “It’s great. I’m addicted.”

“Your iChat says you’re ‘writing about money’,” he said.

“Well, I’m not. I’m procrastinating writing about money. I’ll write about money later. Right now I’m conquering the world.”

“I need you to read something I’ve written,” said Sparky. “Hang up and go to iChat.”

And so I did.

I don’t know about you, but I find this story amusing on many, many levels.

Meanwhile, upstairs Kris was watching The Music Man on videotape. Since we connected the VCR to the television, she’s used it several times to watch films we don’t have on DVD. This time, though, she wasn’t just watching — she was singing along, sometimes loudly.

Meanwhile Sparky and I chatted. We discussed socially responsible investing. And then, after an hour, our conversation evolved into something more philosophical:

5:27:50 PM radiofreewog: I can’t let my ego control my behavior
5:28:05 PM jdroth: ?
5:28:07 PM jdroth: Ego is all there is.
5:28:13 PM jdroth: :)
5:28:27 PM radiofreewog: hmmm
5:28:42 PM radiofreewog: getting beyond ego is all there is
5:29:40 PM jdroth: “getting beyond ego” is just ego.
5:29:51 PM radiofreewog: no
5:30:01 PM radiofreewog: beyond ego is selflessness
5:30:27 PM jdroth: Selflessness is just another form of selfishness.
5:30:52 PM radiofreewog: i don’t agree
5:31:03 PM jdroth: (I don’t really agree, either. I’m just stirring the pot.)
5:31:25 PM radiofreewog: there is not pot to stir, JDsan
5:31:27 PM jdroth: (But I think it’s impossible to act without ego. Minimize, maybe. But impossible to “go beyond ego”.)
5:31:38 PM radiofreewog: not impossible
5:31:42 PM radiofreewog: difficult
5:31:49 PM radiofreewog: very difficult

This is an interesting concept, and one on which Paul and I are not likely ever to agree. He has spent the last several years looking inward, striving for a sort of spiritual realize through selflessness. He and Susan spent a week (ten days?) at a silent retreat as part of this quest. It’s an admirable thing on many levels, but I’m not ready to agree that it’s possible for any human being to achieve selflessness. I really do believe that selfishness is at the core of our interest. (Though perhaps I’m defining selfishness in a way that most people would classify as “self-interest”.) The conversation continued:

5:33:44 PM radiofreewog: it is your reaction to the entry of ego that defines selflessness
5:33:57 PM radiofreewog: complete slavery to ego is the American way
5:34:32 PM radiofreewog: there are those that do not react to the ego entering the mind and control their actions rationally
5:34:49 PM jdroth: But what is “rationally”?
5:34:50 PM radiofreewog: they experience nirvana
5:34:56 PM jdroth: How is that defined?
5:35:01 PM jdroth: Who is to say what is rational?
5:35:07 PM jdroth: And why is acting egotistically bad?
5:35:26 PM jdroth: If we didn’t act in our own self-interest, we’d still be living in the trees.
[Note to weblog readers: this is a subtle joke for my own sake. In a book group years ago, some of us were decrying the role of religion in society. Jeremy, in a typical Jeremy moment, threw up his arms and cried, “Fine! Get rid of the Bible! Get rid of religion! We’ll all be living in the trees again!” This is shorthand to myself that I think of “getting rid of ego” in the same way that Jeremy tought of “getting rid of religion”.]
5:35:35 PM jdroth: ALL animals act in their own self-interest.
5:35:38 PM radiofreewog: ego keeps you from being successful
5:35:47 PM jdroth: Come to think of it, all living things of any sort do.
5:35:52 PM radiofreewog: we are not “animals”
5:35:57 PM jdroth: I’d argue that ego is the only thing that makes you succesful.
5:36:01 PM jdroth: We most certainly are!
5:36:18 PM radiofreewog: biologically true
5:36:28 PM jdroth: And rationally. :)
5:36:30 PM radiofreewog: psychologically
5:36:38 PM radiofreewog: not true
5:36:53 PM jdroth: What do you mean by psychologically not true?
5:37:16 PM radiofreewog: i am a different psychological animal than the dog

And here, of course, we reach a topic near and dear to my heart: animal intelligence. I find it curious that so many people elevate humans so far beyond other animals. I can understand when this is argued from a religious perspective. There’s a logic behind that. (Whether I agree with the logic is another matter, but at least I recognize that the belief has a source.) But if, as in Paul’s case, you’re essentially an atheist and an evolutionist, then I believe it’s quite clear that from fish to dog to human is simply a matter of degrees. If we don’t perceive the emotional needs of chickens or moose, it’s simply because we’re approaching them from a human-centered universe. (If you want selflessness, move beyond that viewpoint!)

5:38:27 PM radiofreewog: dog = maslows lowest level of needs
5:38:41 PM radiofreewog: no higher
5:38:44 PM jdroth: You don’t think a dog needs to be self-actualized?
5:38:53 PM jdroth: (Maslow.)
5:39:42 PM jdroth: I guarantee that most animals need love/belonging (level 3)
5:39:43 PM radiofreewog: a dog does not self actualize
5:39:53 PM radiofreewog: only for DNA purposes
5:39:55 PM jdroth: I know that some animals need esteem (level 4)
5:40:10 PM radiofreewog: how?
5:40:26 PM jdroth: You’re being remarkably anthro-centric, especially for Paul! (Who I don’t think of in this regard.)
5:40:32 PM radiofreewog: love and belonging are correlated with food and protection
5:40:57 PM jdroth: ?
5:41:17 PM jdroth: If you’re going to say that particular level doesn’t apply to animals, then why does it apply to humans?
5:41:36 PM radiofreewog: because we are different
5:41:40 PM radiofreewog: HA!
5:41:42 PM radiofreewog: I win

I’ll grant that I don’t have any immediate specific examples of a cat expressing creativity or confidence or desiring respect. (All of these would be examples of Maslow’s fourth level.) Or do I? Who is to say what Simon thinks and feels. Yes, I believe it’s a mistake to project our own attitudes onto animals. But as I wrote elsewhere recently, I think that’s a mistake that’s less likely to be made than to ignore the possible mental states of animals completely. Just because we don’t understand them, doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

Web 2.0 Defined

Here’s an awesome video that conveys the power of the web as a communication tool:

This clip was produced by Michael Wesch of the Kansas State University anthropology department. I found it via blogarsay, though I suspect it’s been making the rounds. (I’m very out-of-touch with the blogosphere lately.)

Pam will be pleased to know that I sprang forward my clocks today. That’s right — for the next month, I’ll be living a world that’s one hour ahead of yours. I’m a time traveler.

Speaking of the Proffitt-Smiths: Happy birthday, Mackenzie! Mac is 33. He’s getting old.

I’m having a hell of a time deciding what to pick for book group. I need to announce my selection on Saturday morning. We’re discussing Undaunted Courage, which is, in part, about the Lewis and Clark expedition. I love this real-life adventure stuff, and am fascinated by history. It would be great to find a similar book, but for the periods 1810-1850 or 1870-1900. (Note how I’m intentionally avoiding the Civil War.) I’m considering The Devil in the White City, but I’m afraid that maybe it’s too strong for Lisa. Lonesome Dove is another possibility, but it’s l-o-n-g. I know that Kris, Bernie, and I would finish it, but I don’t know how many other members would. Any suggestions?

Scattered Thoughts on Intelligence

In a dark, secret corner of the internet, Tammy has dug herself in deep by choosing to rate her siblings in order of intelligence. Naturally she rates herself first on the list. I will not be so brazen, but I will rate my ~~children~~ cats in order of intelligence: Toto, Meatball, Simon, Nemo.

I believe one of Toto’s problems (and lordy does she have problems) is that she’s too damn smart. Ever since she was a kitten, she’s shown signs of extraordinary cat intellect. At one time she would eagerly play fetch. I had never seen a cat do this, though I’d read about it. It was great fun. Once or twice she was able to open the bathroom door while shut inside. She’s always had an uncanny ability to guess our intentions, and to convey her own.

Nemo’s at the opposite end of the spectrum. He’s a dopey, cross-eyed freak, but he’s a sweetie. He’s so dumb that the birds and the squirrels mock him. I once watched three squirrels torment him around the base of the walnut tree.

I think it’s dangerous to start rating how smart you think people are. We each think in different ways. There are different sorts of intelligence. I’m smart about some things, but woefully ignorant of others. I believe that my brothers and I are of roughly equal intelligence, but I doubt we’d test out as such. We each have different strengths. One of mine happens to be standardized tests. But Tony’s better at dealing with people, and Jeff’s better and dealing with space and numbers.

I have a tendency to think of others as brilliant who are capable of performing feats of which I am incapable. For example, when I first met her, I thought that Pam was the smartest person in the world. When I met Joel, I thought he was. Both are smart, but I came to realize that what I really admired was their ability to think and act in realms that were foreign to me.

I used to love to get together with Andrew and Dana. (Sadly those days seem to be gone.) Each of us is pretty bright, but each of us is borderline autistic in our his way. This leads to some entertaining discussions and arguments as we’re each convinced of our rectitude, unwilling to yield to another’s viewpoint. (Dana, in particular, is set in her ways. In our more than fifteen years of friendship, I’ve never seen her alter a viewpoint.) We each recognize that the three of us are pretty smart. It’s just that each of us thinks that he’s a little smarter than the other two.

Ultimately intelligence is overrated. Which would you rather be: dumb and happy, or smart and miserable?

Subscriber Counts for All My Sites

I use — and love — a service called FeedBurner to manage the RSS feeds for my sites. FeedBurner allows me to control how my feeds are displayed, to insert ads in feeds, and to track how many subscribers I have. They offer a “chicklet” which displays how many readers a particular site has. I was opposed to this at first (I can’t remember why), but now I find it rather useful, and actually consider it a form of promotional advertising: “Look! GRS has 5000 subscribers — why don’t you subscribe, too?”

I thought it would be fun to link to the FeedBurner chicklet for my various sites. Since the numbers change daily (as subscribership rises and falls), I’ve noted the current counts in parentheses (as of 01 Feb 2007) . I’ve also jotted a few notes about each site. (By the way, you can subscribe to any of these sites by clicking on the appropriate chicklet.)

Get Rich Slowly (6784 readers) — Yes, GRS really is read by over 6000 daily subscribers right now. (And 600 people subscribe via e-mail.) I try not to think about it. It’s a little scary. GRS readership has hovered above 6500 for the past few days, but I expect it to drop to around 5000 before long. (The method FeedBurner uses to measure subscribers seems finicky, and is greatly influenced by “pick-ups” from large sites.)

foldedspace.org (330 readers) — Who are all you people? For a personal blog, this site enjoys a moderate readership. I attribute it to the wide variety of topics I discuss. But maybe people just like my cat pictures.

Money Hacks (93 readers) — The new GRS companion site already has about 100 subscribers. I just went public with the site on February 1st, though I haven’t made any sort of official “grand opening” announcement. I’m just test-driving it for now.

Four Color Comics (31 readers) — The Four Color Comics subscribers are wonderful, long-suffering folk. I’ve maybe posted ten entries there in the past six months. I do plan to post here more often, though, and to remodel the look, which I hate.

Animal Intelligence (23 readers) — This number is actually in the mid-30s on days that I post an entry. This brings up another point: the FeedBurner numbers rise and fall depending on how much is posted to a site, so I don’t think they truly reflect the number of “subscribers”, but possibly the number of feedreaders that ping a site in a day. Geeky talk, I know, but it’s stuff I think about.

Bibliophilic (11 readers) — My new book site actually has some readers already! This is going to be an odd one to gauge. Bibliophilic is going to be rather schizophrenic, home to all my various book reviews (comic book, personal finance, and otherwise), as well as thoughts on book news. The target reader is basically me, which I’m sure you’ll agree is a pretty narrow audience.

Vintage Pop (3 readers) — Who are the people subscribing to Vintage Pop? It’s not even a real weblog yet! I currently use it as a workspace to post guest entries for other sites, entries for which I need the author to approve my edits. Three subscribers? Why?

Believe it or not, I’m done adding weblogs to my little internet empire. This is about all that I can handle. Now I’d like to shepherd the ones I have and see if I can’t get them to grow.

A Salty Snack

We had dinner with our friends Chris and Cari on Saturday night. Michael and Laura joined us. And, of course, the kids were there: Kaden, Ethan, Emma, and Sophia.

Kaden is nearly seven, and has begun to exhibit strong personality traits. He was born on Leap Day, and so I always kid him about his age. “You’re still only one,” I say. “You’ll be two soon.” The other night he frowned a little and told me, “That’s not really funny anymore.” Touché! He likes his tropical fish, and he loves his Legos. I think he’s a great kid. (The other three kids are great, too, but this entry is about K.C.)

While at dinner Kaden commented that he liked salt. Kris told him how I have a habit of eating salt when I’m very, very hungry. We’ll be sitting in a restaurant waiting for our food, and I’ll tide myself over with a touch of salt from the shaker. Kris thinks it’s strange, and I suppose she’s right.

Anyhow, K.C. was effusive in his praise of salt, so I took a page from Craig‘s book. I’ve created a salt sampler for him from the various flavors in my library, and I’ll mail it to him later today.

The flavors I sent him include:

Top row: sea salt, real sea salt (very salty), sea smoke salt, garlic salt.
Bottom row: herbed salt (from Italy — very good), seasoned salt, Caribbean salt (from Connecticut), hickory smoked salt (I use this all the time).

The herbed salt came from Amy Jo (who has recently resurrected From a Corner Table). Craig and Amy Jo appreciate my love of salt, and encourage it with salty gifts from time-to-time. And now I’m passing these gifts on to the next generation of salt-lovers.

This Day Would Have Been Enough

It’s been a strange “twilight zone” kind of week for me. On Wednesday I was interviewed by The New York Times. Yesterday I had my cataclysmic radio interview. And tonight I went roller skating for the first time in years.

I actually felt the Times interview went very well. My first newspaper interview regarding Get Rich Slowly was with the Wall Street Journal last June. The reporter was nice, but I was very wary. I didn’t trust his motives for some reason. I was always second-guessing him, and not very forthcoming. I wasn’t a good interview subject, and I realized that after the piece was published. (By the way, if anyone has a way of getting me a physical copy of the 24 June 2006 issue of the Wall Street Journal, I would be much obliged.)

In September I was interviewed for a podcast. I was much more relaxed for that interview, largely because I took the time to listen to all of the other interviews in the series. I knew what to expect. Plus, it wasn’t really live. The host and I both made some gaffes, but he just edited them out. No sweat.

So on Wednesday I spoke with Damon Darlin, who was writing a piece about how bloggers are taking up the mantle of consumer advocates. He profiled Ben Popken of The Consumerist and Gina Trapani of Lifehacker. These are bloggers I respect and sites I admire. I feel honored to be included in their company. I aspire for Get Rich Slowly to be a peer to their sites.

Yesterday, of course, I had my disastrous radio interview. I’ve already written about that.

Today I felt off-kilter from the start. I wrote a short article — suggested by Nick — about how it’s strange that people are so willing to expose themselves to advertising during the Super Bowl. It’s one of those pieces that never quite seems to gel, and yet I published it anyhow. Response has been mostly negative, and it was bumming me out until Kris told me how much she admired it. All the negative comments in the world don’t mean a whit so long as Kris likes it.

Then tonight we went roller-skating to celebrate Nikki’s ~~30th~~ 27th birthday. I haven’t been skating since Kris was still teaching at Canby. And I’ve always been awkward at it. This time was no different. I was flailing my arms and biting my lip and doing my best not to fall. I was a hazard. But I kept at it. I skated for two hours solid in the middle of a thick crowd at Oaks Park. (I was shocked by how many people were there. It was amazing.) I only fell twice (and one of the falls occurred while trying to avoid a near-collision in front of me). I developed two huge blisters on my right foot. But I kept at it. I just kept skating. By the end of the night I was skating much better.

But what’s most amazing is that for two hours I was completely in another world. Sweat was pouring down my forehead, pouring down my back. I was breathing hard, but in a good way, like after a long hike. My legs were sore. I was parched. But I didn’t care. For two hours I was transported, completely forgetting about blogs or e-mail or bad radio interviews or anything else. I was just caught up in the moment. It was bliss.

When we returned home, I had a message telling me that the New York Times article was out. The three paragraphs that profile me read as follows:

Frugality is a frequent theme among these sites, like GetRichSlowly.com. John David Roth, a 37-year-old office manager at a Portland, Ore., box manufacturer, was an avid reader of financial self-help books when he started a blog to summarize them. “You can find a lot of information on how to get rich quick,” he said, “but I know what it is like to be broke. For years, I struggled with debt.”

His site, which receives about 300,000 page views a month and makes him about $1,500 a month from advertising, reminds people of the simple things in life. For instance, he tells them to borrow books from the library, instead of buying new ones.

He just started another site, MoneyHacks.org, with more common-sense advice as well as links to other sites that save a person money, like priceprotectr.com, which tracks price drops.

Can you spot the huge error there? No it’s not using my full name instead of “J.D.” (I mentioned in our conversation that I preferred J.D.) Nor is it describing my job as “office manager”. (I did say something to the effect that I ran the office, so that’s kosher.) No, it’s much worse: the URL for Get Rich Slowly is listed as .COM instead of .ORG.

sigh

Actually, though, I don’t mind so much. I enjoyed the conversation I had with Damon Darlin the other day. He answered some of my questions, and even provided a recommendation for a book on animal intelligence. When I voiced my desire to write a book, he mentioned Gina Trapani’s recent posts about her experience publishing the Lifehacker book. (I’d already read these — and even exchanged e-mail with Gina about them — but it was kind of Damon to point them out.) Sure it would be nice to have the correct URL in the paper (and, especially, on the Times web site), but it’s not the end of the world.

Plus, I just got to spend two hours roller-skating. And that makes everything right.

[The title of this post comes from the “blurb” for dienu.com, one of my new favorite blogs. I can’t explain why exactly, but every time I visit the site I’m inspired. Part of it is the list of 101 things the author would like to do in 1001 days. But a lot of it is that saying: “This day would have been enough.” That is a motto worth living by.]

Suicide Bomb

I had a mortifying experience yesterday. I was a guest for a live interview on a radio station in Seattle — I crashed and burned. I was an embarrassment. Fortunately, the hosts made a graceful exit and let me off the hook.

I like to think that I’m generally a fairly confident guy. I write well. I can carry on an intelligent conversation. I’m a trained salesman. I acted on stage in high school. In college I could deliver (and enjoy) speeches of all sorts. I can even hold my own when interviewed for the newspaper or for a podcast. But when it comes to speaking on live radio, I’m a nervous wreck.

Yesterday morning a host at KOMO radio in Seattle e-mailed to ask if they could interview me about the nation’s negative savings rate and about what people can do to save for retirement. I knew that this was treading dangerous ground, but I agreed to participate. (Over the past year I’ve been trying to “just say yes”. Basically I try not to shy away from situations that normally I’d avoid.)

As the interview approached I felt nauseated. I remembered two other times I’d been interviewed on live radio (about completely different topics, and long, long ago), and how those interviews also went poorly. I remembered how when Kris asked me to say a few words at a dinner party once, I mumbled and fumbled and stumbled over myself. “But I’m good at this,” I told myself, trying to psych myself up. “I was one class short of a minor in speech communication.”

It didn’t matter. The moment came. The station phoned me. The hosts were gentle. They asked leading questions. They did their best to help me. But my brain froze and I couldn’t remember even basic concepts, concepts I deal with every day. Retirement? Savings? HA! All I could say is, “People should start saving now.”

After my minute or two on the air, I was shaking all over. A year or two ago, this would have been enough to drive me into a deep, blue funk. The new, improved J.D., however, couldn’t help but find the whole situation amusing in a sad, pathetic sort of way. I immediately fired off an e-mail apology to the hosts. One of them replied:

Those little freezes happen all the time! Don’t worry. I’m just glad we got your website out to our listeners. I expect you’ll be getting more interview opportunities and we’ll certainly keep you in the mind for the future. Main thing is not to focus on it…and make a bigger deal out of it than it is. Don’t draw attention to the freeze….People normally listen with just half an ear…and as long as you try to keep going they won’t notice even if you aren’t saying what you want to say. You could try to have a couple talking points written down that you can go to…But relax and enjoy. Think of it as a one-on-one with a friend.

I thought that was a gracious reply. I also posted a question at Ask Metafilter: How do I learn to speak well in radio interviews? The tips there are very good. I’ll make note of them.

In times past, I would have felt defeated by this. Now, though, I see it as a learning experience, a chance to improve for next time.

And there will be a next time…

Cannonballs and Splinters

After reading even a little nautical fiction one is impressed by the brutish qualities of life aboard ship. This is especially true during the battles at sea, during which heavy lead balls were flung across the water, hurtling into air, into ship, into rigging, and into men. One of the most memorable passages in Patrick O’Brian’s Aubrey/Maturin series occurs during just such an engagement. Captain Aubrey is on deck, giving orders, and he turns to speak to one of his men, only to find that the man’s head has just been taken off by a cannonball. Not pretty.

But one gets the impression from these tales that even more deadly than cannonballs was the shrapnel they created. These “splinters” of wood (it seems odd to call a large hunk of jagged wood a splinter, yet such is the case) were reportedly a common source of injuries.

Apparently the show Mythbusters recently attempted to answer the question, “What hurt more people, cannonballs or the splinters they made?” From what I can gather, they weren’t able to produce satisfactory splinters, which led the hosts to conclude the splinters weren’t as dangerous as many people think. (This paragraph is all based on third-hand accounts, but I think I have the gist of things correct.)

This led to a fascinating AskMetafilter question regarding cannonballs, splinters, and the Mythbuster methodology. (The thread features a response from one of the show’s hosts, Adam Savage.)

All of this is prologue, however. What this entry is really about is showing Dave and Joel and Andrew (and all my other pirate buddies) the keen Fighting Sail Exhibit page. It’s awesome, particularly for the video of cannons being fired into a reconstructed mid-section. I’ve mirrored the video here in case the original page goes away. Watch and enjoy!

[I wouldn’t have found this without Matt pointing it out]