I’m gearing up for more posts on the iron enrichment hypothesis to explain dietary “paradoxes” (debunk please). More researchers are weighing in. There are a couple posts in the works, and believe it or not, the most delicious of the two is the history of bloodletting (in barber shops) and how people flocked to get bled regularly (bleeding reduces stored serum iron—like pre-menopausal women do every month). Some people are hooked on donating blood regularly—which some chalk up exclusively to social conscience—but might it really be a selfish endeavor, even beyond the selfishness inherent in feeling like you’re a community value?
On a practical level? My just-begun experiment with making artisanal whole grain breads and cereals a dietary staple, combined with lowish fat and lowish protein, with protein being accounted for by sardines, clams, mussels, oysters, and various liver pâté—and otherwise small portions of meat and fowl. Simple tasty mini-meal-esque stuff.
In the meantime, another post on the list is my individual take on the non-aggression principle, 25 years in the chewing. My two most recent Zac posts (here and here) about living in a largely American community on the tip of Baja California for 2 months had comment threads that in a couple of cases gave me the impression I was dealing with toddlers that will eventually raise their hand to hit you after you’ve been explaining algebra to them for a while. It’s a perfectly common reaction from a toddler. When dealing with adults, what’s going on is that they’re ignorant to such an extent that they don’t recognize that they’re ignorant. They lash out like toddlers.
Take “Mr Dave,” in this thread. He begins with verbal “hitting” over what he’s ignorant about, exposed at least twice. First, when he asked me to explain my position to him in a way he could better understand. Second, when I did, and he asked me to explain the operative principle, then ended up concluding it would be a waste of time anyway, because he’d just rather operate pragmatically; presumably, so he gets to fight it out with others doing likewise on a case-by-case basis. He can’t see the simplicity of a single “law” and two implicit corollaries.
1. No entity may initiate force against any other entity.
2. Force may only be used in contravention (those violating #1).
3. There are no exceptions to #1 or #2.
He thinks it’s “smart” to have a million laws and have hundreds of millions of people subjectively fight it out ad infinitum, to the immense pleasure of professionals, on what’s a “valid” initiation of force…then have everyone fight over the authority to initiate force, ad infinitum infinitely. Too ignorant to perceive ignorance. I saw the elegant simplicity of that 25 years ago, never wavered a second, and have laughed at a million ignoramuses since.
Then there’s Dr Dave (David L. Racette, MD), a retired general-sergury specialist who lives in Zac, whom I met a few times, judging those to be generally pleasant experiences. His too ignorant to know he’s ignorant comes from a different cause.
…It’s probably the fault of a friend there who set it up badly, for me: told me that Dr. Dave is the most intelligent man he’s ever met. I was very new there and you may not believe this—given how things went—but I was getting so much bullshit I’d normally call, that I had to let some of it slide by, which I did in this case and a few others. For example, this friend called me on the carpet for going off on poor Justin Blok, and I put on a complete act of semi-contrition. Fuck Justin Blok. I don’t care…which is euphemism for not giving a runny shit.
The friend thinks it’s a waste of time to “correct a fool,” for “he will hate you.” Instead, “correct a wise man,” and “he will appreciate you.” Well, how stupidly ignorant in the former (why bother with fools?), and how presumptuously condescending in the latter (do you “correct” your friends, and what kind of friends are they who would put up with that?).
…I tried to see if there’s botched surgery dirt on Dr. Dave during the time he was going after me in comments here and the Facebook group. Zilch. So, it’s not only presumption of innocence, but presumption of competence. Simple. That’s the way I roll. Judge, but being honest and objective requires discipline that nearly everyone (even many judges) lack. …Yet people get their pink panties in a wad when I tell people to go fuck off.
…Dr Dave is a specialist in a number of primarily abdominal, gastrointestinal surgical procedures (they do thyroid gland too). Had he made a bit of an effort, perhaps I’d have had the opportunity to tell him how I raised a high salute to surgeons here, in 2010: I Salute the Mechanics of Medicine. Ironically, that post could read like my own experience, three weeks before my move to Zac.
But the rub, prefigured by my friend’s assessment of Dr Dave’s general knowledge that I found I could not share, is that Dr Dave lives in a place where he’s never ever questioned on a single thing, ever. Ever. That’s unhealthy. Whether by design, or he just found himself that way in spite of all modest undertures, Dr Dave enjoys being perceived as a widely integrated generalist on virtually all matters (even legal matters), when he’s actually a very competent specialist in a realm where lives are at stake and the smart move is to stay as specialized as possible.
But I just have to judge that in matters of philosophy, principle—wide integrations of classical liberalism —as argued from Aristotle to Bastiat to Spinoza to Locke to Ricardo to Thoreau to Spencer to Hayek to Popper…to Freidman and Rothbard and Rand and Nozik, to name just a smattering: the guy is too ignorant to grasp his ignorance.
His quality of knowledge is wholly specialized. Specialization is critical to life on a complex planet, but you don’t get to have your cake and eat it too. And when you try to play with those far more adept than you in other areas you’re ignorant of, don’t be surprised when they dismiss you like a toddler hitting people because you’ve gone beyond the point where he understands he needs to learn something.
And so, here’s my 17-minute talk at the Ancestral Health Symposium at Harvard a few years back. Ostensibly, it’s about about Paleo Epistemology and Sociology. It’s really about anarchism that begins at home, once it’s generally rooted in the individual mind.