Friday, March 31, 2023

Appointments to Ethics position, the holding pen for the unethical

Why is it that appointments to ethics positions always seem to involve questionable ethical conduct.

Back in 2014, I noted Ms. Boxill is now director of UNC’s Parr Center for Ethics.  Ms. Boxhill was a University of North Carolina Chapel Hill who was tasked with organizing the cheating necessary to keep designated athletes important to the university's revenue flow from sports events in academic good standing.  Despite not being able to complete the academic requirements.

After the scandal was uncovered, Ms. Boxhill was punished for her unethical behavior . . . by being appointed to the UNC Parr Center for Ethics.

Now we have from up north:

The defense of nepotism in the appointment to an ethics position.  

You really have to wonder about these people.
 

The slow retreat of the public health experts from epistemic heresy

We have known for a long time that most of the public health policy response to Covid-19 was ill-considered and unsupported by either historical experience or the scientific data.  Despite what our public health "experts" said at the time.  We have known that there should be some sort of institutional or public reconciling of what went wrong; some acknowledgement that the institutions of public health were wrong and the suppressed voices were right.  We need that for the health of our republic as well as the future health of our citizens. 

One of the lingering questions has been just how extensive are the ancillary damages from the mRNA vaccination forced on such a high percentage of the public.  The old institutions are still largely claiming that there are no, or little chance, of side effects.  Some though are beginning to acknowledge some of the more well-documented and notorious side-effects.  But again -  there is no real public discussion or acknowledgement.

But the ground seems to be shifting.  From The fiercest vaccine advocates are starting to admit the truth about the mRNAs by Alex Berenson.  The subheading is I am as shocked as you are.  

Berenson was one of the more vocal critics at the time and one of the voices who attracted the most explicit governmental efforts to suppress his speech.  It is not too surprising that there is a note of triumphalism.

Even the New York Times can’t hide reality about the mRNA jabs forever.

Last week, the Times published an article headlined, “Should You Get Another Covid Booster?”

The article’s subheadline noted “Britain and Canada have authorized another round of booster shots,” implying the United States has somehow been negligent in not doing so.

And the piece was written by Apoorva Mandavilli, among the worst Covid reporters. So I assumed the article would be filled with the usual nonsense, especially since the first person Mandavilli quoted was Dr. Celine Gounder, who has loudly pushed mRNA jabs.

[snip]

So I was stunned that Gounder offered the most tepid possible recommendation for further mRNA doses to Mandavilli.

Most people should not have boosters, even once a year, she said. She endorsed regular shots only for “immunocompromised people and people in nursing homes.”

The real tell there is “nursing homes.”

In mentioning them, Gounder was not suggesting that everyone over 65 - or even 85 - should get more shots. Nursing homes are effectively hospices for most residents. About one-third of their residents die each year, a 2018 study found; a 2010 study had even grimmer findings, reporting a median survival of five months after admission.

What Gounder was saying that only the very frail - who likely have little risk or benefit from the shots (or, in reality, any medical intervention) - should still receive them regularly.

In contrast, in October, Gounder offered very different advice, recommending boosters for everyone over age 50 “as soon as possible.”

Gounder is not the only one backing away from earlier fervid commitments to mRNA vaccination.

Mandavilli also talked to Dr. Paul Offit. No one will ever confuse Offit with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. - he is director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.

In April 2021, Offit had this to say about the mRNA jabs:

Certainly, no one would have predicted that these mRNA vaccines would have worked as well or been as safe as they are… I don’t think you could have devised a vaccine that appears to be more perfect.

Less than two years later, Offit rejected more doses of those “perfect” vaccines.

For everyone. Even the immunocompromised.

But even more stunning than Offit’s rejection were the words he used:

“Given the lack of data, I don’t think it’s fair to say to people, ‘Inject yourself with a biological agent,’” said Dr. Paul Offit.

Berenson was broadly right and the public health experts were broadly wrong.  The government used every mechanism they could to suppress Berenson's free speech to stop word from spreading.  

And now, in dribs and drabs, the public health experts are all beginning to back away from the wonder vaccination with which they were so misguidedly enamored.  

We are still a long way from a public accounting for the massive epistemic failure and the drastic abrogation of constitutional civil rights which occurred.  But it is worth noting the retreat by the public health experts.


History

 

Accidental verifications

From How Many Mass Shootings Have Been Carried Out by Transgender People? by Aleks Phillips in Newsweek.

Phillips notes:

A tweet listing four mass shootings in the past five years that were perpetrated by transgender people has gone viral, attracting 5.4 million views as of 8 a.m. ET on Tuesday and the attention of Twitter's owner, Elon Musk.

Benny Johnson, a political columnist and Turning Point U.S.A. official, wrote in his viral tweet: "One thing is VERY clear: the modern trans movement is radicalizing activists into terrorists."

The tweet is here.  

From the expected NGOs and advocacy groups there have been outraged denouncements of the stated facts and against the argument that trans people are disproportionately violent.  It was a striking argument by Johnson but . . .  was it right?

As it turns out, yes, the four mass shootings he referred to were all committed by trans people.

But is that disproportionate?

Newsweek reached out to the Gun Violence Archive for further details via email on Tuesday.

On its website, Everytown Research & Policy cites 306 mass shootings in the U.S. since 2009.

"4 shooters out of over 300 mass shooters since 2009 are transgender or non binary. That's just 1.3 percent of all shooters," Anthony Zenkus, a lecturer in social work at Columbia University, wrote on Twitter. "You just proved our point: 99 percent of mass shooters in the United States are cis gendered."

According to the Williams Institute research center, around 0.6 percent of Americans over the age of 13 identify as transgender.

There are a lot of definitional games to be played with what constitutes a mass shooting and what constitutes a trans person.  But if we accept these definitions, then we have an unstated conclusion.  

Phillips gives us the data but then does not connect the dots.  

0.6% of Americans aged 13 or older identify as transgender.  Transgender individuals constitute, per Anthony Zenkus, a professor at Columbia University, 1.3% of all mass shooters.

Consequently one can confirm the second implied argument made by Benny Johnson, they commit 116% more mass shootings than one would expect.  More than twice as many.

Professor Zenkus seems to think that his numbers rebut Benny Johnson's argument.  Phillips does not make the point that the cited numbers confirm Benn Johnson's argument.

It has been a staple observation on Thingfinder that journalists in the mainstream media are innumerate.  In this instance all we can see is that the Columbia University professor is innumerate.  Perhaps Phillips recognizes that Zenkus is wrong but is just being polite in not mentioning it.  Or perhaps Phillips is as innumerate as the Columbia University professor.  

Regardless.  Newsweek is confirming Benny Johnson's argument.  Trans people are commit mass shootings at more than twice the rate one would expect given their representation in the general population.  

Does a mass shooting involvement exceeding twice what one would expect constitute enough evidence to support the argument that:

"One thing is VERY clear: the modern trans movement is radicalizing activists into terrorists."?

That is a different question.  The statistics are consistent with the claim but are inadequate to prove it.  We know that they kill at twice the rate we would expect but we don't know whether they kill because they have been radicalized.  Mental illness is a known issue in the trans community and might be the motive force rather than radicalization per se.

Still, it is interesting to see a statistical claim so vociferously mocked and ridiculed by the received opinion people also being sotto voce confirmed by Newsweek.

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Blue vase with calendulas by CajsaStina Åkerström (Swedish, b. 1967)

Blue vase with calendulas by CajsaStina Åkerström (Swedish, b. 1967)





























Click to enlarge.

Thursday, March 30, 2023

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Cotswold Crossroads by Adrian Allinson

Cotswold Crossroads by Adrian Allinson


















Click to enlarge.

Wednesday, March 29, 2023

Our Guessing Game by the Moody Blues


Double click to enlarge.


Our Guessing Game
by Ray Thomas and the Moody Blues

Walking in the sand
Thinking of things, adventures in my mind
Tall ships that sail across the ocean wide
They won't wait for me
See how they glide away so gracefully
And with tomorrow what will become of me?
It leaves me so much to explain
That's the start of our guessing game

There are times when I think I've found the truth
There are times when I know that I'm wrong
And the days when I try to hide my fears
Bless the days when I'm feeling strong
Bless the days when I'm feeling strong

Wonder why we try so hard
Wonder why we try at all
You wonder why the world is turning around
In the end it won't matter at all

Standing in the town
Looking at people, counting their frowns
Unhappy faces hurrying around
So blind they cannot see
All of the things, the way life ought to be
And with tomorrow what will they make of me?
It leaves me so much to explain
That's the start of our guessing game

There are times when I think I've found the truth
There are times when I know that I'm wrong
And the days when I try to hide my fears
Bless the days when I'm feeling strong
Bless the days when I'm feeling strong

There are times when I think I've found the truth
There are times when I know that I'm wrong
And the days when I try to hide my fears
Bless the days when I'm feeling strong
Bless the days when I'm feeling strong

There are times when I think I've found the truth
There are times when I know that I'm wrong
And the days when I try to hide my fears
Bless the days when I'm feeling strong
Bless the days when I'm feeling strong

There are times when I think I've found the truth

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Spring Dance, 1917 by Arthur Frank Mathews (American, 1860-1945)

Spring Dance, 1917 by Arthur Frank Mathews (American, 1860-1945)























Click to enlarge.

Tuesday, March 28, 2023

History

 

History

 

An Insight

 

Man in the sky versus wet paint. Strategic authority gives way to individual curiosity.

A very worthwhile essay.  From Welcome to Wikipedia World by Leslie Bienen.  The subheading is The only way out is through.  From the author description "Leslie Bienen is a veterinarian and is on the faculty of the OHSU-Portland State University School of Public Health in Portland, Oregon."

Way back two or three decades ago, we had a similar experience with that which we have recently had with Covid.  Not a public health experience but an epistemic experience.  The experts were saying one thing and the history and data seemed to be saying something entirely different. 

Back then the argument was a bit clearer.  The IPCC position was that our emissions of CO2 were causing the globe to warm up.  Anthropogenic Global Warming.  That turned out to not be an easily defended argument so they gradually evolved it, moat-and-bailey style, into the assertion that we were at risk of global climate change from human activities (CO2 being one of the human activities.)

This is a much more defensible position as climate is always changing, sometimes in cycles, sometimes erratically, sometimes episodically.  Sometimes quickly and sometimes slowly.  In addition, it has always been the case that human activities affect local climate including forest clearances for agriculture, constructing cities, emissions of all sorts.  

But the moat, AGW, is as indefensible as ever.  In part because we simply don't have sufficient data, in part because we still do not understand the chaotic complexity of climate change, but largely because this was always an argument about computer models rather than climate.  Do our models reliably tell us anything useful about the weather and climate?  If the answer is yes, we should pay attention.  If no, then the whole debate is largely cognitive pollution.

In the early years, there was clearly problems with the models (see East Anglia University data and model leak).  In later years, lack of transparency became a problem.

I know that climate changes.  I know that different human activities affect at least local climate changes.  I suspect that land use might be a bigger causal element than emissions.  I see little evidence that CO2 emissions are the delicate dial they have been described as though I remain concerned about the sheer volume (and our lack of causal understanding.)  I am reasonably confident that the contribution of human activity of any sort is relatively modest in the context of solar output, astronomical factors, geological event, meteorological oscillations and cloud activity.  Even if only a small contribution, it theoretically might be significant in effect.  I have no confidence in the integrity of the existing models or their forecasts.  

Probably ten years after the first IPCC panics, already steeped in concerns about the disconnect between the IPCC arguments and the actual data, I took solace in the fact that meteorologists had a much more jaundiced interpretation of the models and forecasts than did the AGW advocates.  

Stuart Kauffman has the concept of the adjacent possible.  I sometimes think in epistemic terms of the near adjacent.  Meteorologists are near adjacent with climatologists.  Veterinarians with medical doctors.  Statisticians with mathematicians.  Civil engineers with hydrologists.  

None of them are substitutes for one another but there are clear overlaps or similarities in their knowledge domains.  If I, as a generalist, look at the climatologists models and their claims and see a disconnect, then I have the operating assumption that they are wrong but with a healthy degree of self-skepticism.  I don't know what I don't know.  Even if they are ineffective at clarifying their position, I must acknowledge that it is possible that they are right.

If, however, I see near adjacent experts to climatologists who also have grave doubts about their argument and claims, then my confidence in my own assessment rises.  

Bienen's piece is of that nature.  I am very confident at this point in my interpretation of the serial public health failures over the past three years but it certainly reinforces that confidence when a near adjacent expert such as Bienen has a similar interpretation.  

Independent of a shared, but not necessarily fully aligned interpretation of what happened, Bienen has an additional argument which I find intriguing and worth thinking about.

For the first time in history during a pandemic, everyone with access to the internet could access masses of data. Even when SARS hit, the last time there were major travel restrictions and business closures (though not domestically in the USA), and widespread infection panic, most people had limited access to public health data and little concept of where such data might be found. It was 2003; there were very few smartphones and about 50% of Americans did not have access to internet at home. I don’t recall whether state health departments had public-facing websites twenty years ago, but they certainly did not have millions of data points readily accessible to the public and people were much less sophisticated about how to find information on the internet.

These data posed a major counterfactual to the narratives that many public officials, including the CDC, were putting out. The most generous interpretation of these narratives is that they were spun because policy makers were afraid that if people did not fear a Covid-19 infection adequately they would behave recklessly. Recently leaked Whatsapp chats by UK leaders, for example, demonstrate this phenomenon explicitly.

But problems quickly arose with this rationale, because anyone could go look at data. Pres. Biden said the unvaccinated were facing “a winter of severe illness and death” in December of 2021, long after anyone who wanted to could be vaccinated. Hospitalizations were not surging and did not, throughout Omicron, though incidental hospitalizations ‘with’ Covid rose due to Omicron’s high infectivity. The Oregon Health Authority (OHA), for example, continued to push boosters for young children as a life saving measure, despite the fact that anyone could see on their website that few, if any, children were at risk of a severe Covid infection. 16 children under 19 in Oregon died of Covid during the last three years, and this figure does not account for incidental deaths which, according to the CDC, is likely at least half of total deaths. So, some number likely less than eight, most of whom—if not all—had major underlying health issues. At the same time, in 2021 alone 73 young people (under 24 years old) in Oregon died of fentanyl poisoning/overdoses. In 2021, 92 Oregon youth died from firearms. Yet the overwhelming barrage of information (email, Facebook posts, etcetera) about children’s health the OHA put out in 2020, 2021, and 2022 was about the importance of boosting children for Covid. The mismatch between the truth of what was—and still is-- killing children and the narrative was in plain sight, and anyone could find it with a one-minute Google search.

George Carlin once said “Tell people there’s an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure.” Public health, and to a large extent mainstream media, does not seem to realize that somewhere between 2000 and 2022, they went from being the people saying there is an invisible man in the sky, and being believed regardless of verifiability, to being the people saying the paint is wet. Even worse, they said the paint was wet and it wasn’t, and anyone and everyone could reach out and touch it for themselves in a matter of seconds spent at the computer. Of course, the paint was wet in some places (e.g.,very old people are still at risk of Covid hospitalization, and should get boosted and vaccines were very important for immune naïve people over fifty or with risk factors) but it wasn’t wet everywhere (children are incredibly low risk and do not need boosters or possibly even to be vaccinated at all) and it never was.

I want to believe this is an articulation of a major insight.  Between 2000 and 2022, we jolted from a position where the public was effectively excluded from the epistemic details of any particular issue to the position where virtually anyone could make an informed argument.  Granted, not all arguments were well made or well-informed.  But that is not the point.  Expert arguments are also often not well made or well-informed.

Experts can assert their guild privileges only so long as their assertions have credibility and as long as no one else has access to the models or data which underpin the assertions.  When everyone has access, the guild privileges evaporate (exhibit A - Fauci.)  

And the sources of extensive detailed data are proliferating, for example Our World in Data, FRED, and GapMinder.  There is more and more, high value data for bright people to access.

The number of experts in any particular field are usually small in number.  Let's say there are 3,000 expert level climatologists/forecasters.  If they can restrict the data and restrict the models, then almost tautologically, but not necessarily accurately, they are the experts.

But if the data is accessible and the modeling capability is available, then everyone in a near adjacent expert field can weigh in.  What are some near adjacent fields of knowledge to climatologists?  Certainly meteorologists, but also financial modelers, economic modelers, statisticians, historians, paleobotanists, dendrologists, geologists, etc.  

Similarly with public health.  What are some of the near adjacent knowledge domains to public health?  Lawyers, doctors, medical researchers, historians, statisticians, economic modelers, financial modelers, network theorists, social contagion specialists, medical examiners, veterinarians, animal husbandry experts, etc.  

Say there are 3,000 experts in each of 15 near adjacent fields to the 3,000 experts in public health policy.  Suddenly you have 45,000 experts with the capacity and the access to the data and models.  If all 3,000 public health experts take firm positions on whatever the issue might be then that is all we can know.  But if only 1/3 of the near adjacent actually exercise an interest in the issue, we go from 3,000 arguments to 18,000 arguments.

Further, not only do we have a much larger number of informed arguments, there are two other benefits to this extra-connected, hyper-accessible condition.  First, the risk of group think, very real among small numbers of homogenous experts, is significantly reduced.  Second, the likelihood of the discovery of relevant additional knowledge increases dramatically.

Building on Bienen's insight, I would argue that three things happened differently during the Covid-19 Pandemic.

Global Experts, not just local - Because of the internet and ubiquitous computing, we had access to global institutional knowledge.  We could compare ourselves to the UK, Israel, Netherlands, Sweden, Japan, etc. and see possible benefits from variant policies as well as variant data sets.

Greater and better leveraged expertise was brought to bare - Full connectivity and access has meant that the powerful effect of near adjacent knowledge expertise was demonstrated for the first time.

The probability of more robust and accurate arguments is materially enlarged - For any particular issue, the population of Guild experts is much smaller than the population of possible relevant experts from near adjacent knowledge domains.  With greater numbers from overlapping knowledge domains, the greater the probability that all knowledge will be incorporated.

I had been thinking in terms of loss of trust in institutions and my own incomprehension of how badly the CDC, NIH, etc. performed.

Bienen is pointing at a different way of interpreting what happened.  Because of computing power and connectivity and because this was a global incident with possibly dire consequences, we got our first view of collapsing knowledge guilds.  The emergent order, knowledge and insight from connected, informed, and motivated near adjacent experts (as well as merely interested cognitively competent general public) outpaced the Guild Experts (WHO, CDC, NIH, NHS, etc.) at every step.

The near adjacent experts came to more accurate conclusions, sooner, and with better empirical and rational arguments than did the Guild Experts of WHO, CDC, NIH, NHS, etc.  The Guild Experts are still not clearly aligned with the reality that has hit them.

I ascribed some of the bad decision making and more reprehensible public policies to institutional defensiveness.  CDC kept trying to hide their bad policies by doubling down.  There was perhaps some group think and epistemic isolation as well.  

I still think those aspects remain true but I wonder if Bienen is not on to something even more fundamental.  Perhaps the bad decisions were driven in part not just out of institutional defensiveness.  Perhaps it was also driven by an effort to protect the perks and benefits of the Guild Experts.  

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

An Experiment on a Bird in the Air Pump, 1768 by Joseph Wright of Derby (English, 1734–1797)

An Experiment on a Bird in the Air Pump, 1768 by Joseph Wright of Derby (English, 1734–1797)




















Click to enlarge.

Monday, March 27, 2023

Biking capital of the nation is down nearly 40% in their biking

Heh.

For a number of years, I served on our neighborhood association.  We had a keen enthusiast for bike lanes who lobbied for some years for the creation of bike lanes in the neighborhood.  There was no significant faction wanting this, just the single persistent enthusiast willing to put in the time on the board to bring her vision to fruition.  Which, in conjunction with City Department of Works, she finally did.  

And promptly then took another job in a different in a different state.  We are left with lanes allocated to bikes which are always empty.  Virtually no one uses them.  But they take up room and block parking.  The neighborhood never wanted them.  Many quietly objected.  And yet here we are with scarce road space allocated and unused.


Overall, Portland bicycle traffic in 2022 dropped more than a third compared to 2019, to levels not seen since approximately 2005-2006 (Table 1). This is based on a comparison of people counted at the 184 locations that were counted in both 2022 and 2019. Volunteers recorded 17,579 people biking at those 184 locations in 2022, a 37% drop from the 27,782 counted at the same locations in 2019.  This reversion to earlier and lower volumes is also reflected in bicycle commute data, as well as for driving, walking, and using transit to commute. (Tables 5-6)  Looking at data from 2013-2019 we see that bicycling remained relatively flat between 2013 and 2016. However, bicycle counts dropped significantly between 2016 and 2019. This drop is also reflected in census commute data.

And it wasn’t all Covid:

While 2022 data is anomalously low, it is also a continuation of a trend of declining bicycle use in Portland. Both annual count data and Census data demonstrates that bicycle use in Portland peaked in the 2013-2015 period and has been declining since.

For stating facts, his comments are filled up with enthusiasts outraged that he is pointing out that a cherished shibboleth is unpopular.  There are some good points made and conversations developed but an awful lot of spluttering and posturing as well.

He repeats his request in a later post:

Many people are upset at my rather anodyne remarks from earlier in the week.  Thus I have a simple question: what are the best cost-benefit studies of urban investments in bicycle lanes and other bicycle-friendly policies?  They have to take into account the opportunity cost of the land for bike lanes, the cost of cycling deaths and injuries, and the costs of slower vehicular traffic.  Counting those variables in addition to the rather considerable benefits of cycling is hardly a genius-level move, right?

Funny that, I can’t seem to find such a study!  But I am not an expert.  I am sure there are many such studies, so I am opening comments to all of you, so that I may pull in the appropriate references.  I will then read the best study or studies, and report back.

And if by some freak chance of nature no such studies can be found, what should we infer from that?

Addendum: And people (commentators), I don’t need the blah blah blah.  Don’t need the mood affiliation.  Don’t need the abstract citation of individual gross benefits.  Just the cost-benefit studies, please.  I am sure you will oblige.

Bike Lanes, Mass Transit, Vision Zero - all intuitively appealing.  In practice almost all of them are dramatic failures and/or misallocations of limited public capital.  The fact that the whiff of totalitarian hangs heavy around these advocates does not help the cause.

But all that is needed are robust and solid studies to at least to begin consideration of the proposals.  And after fifty years, these are still in short supply.

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

The Old Bookcase, 1929 by Friedrich Frotzel

The Old Bookcase, 1929 by Friedrich Frotzel

























Click to enlarge. 

Sunday, March 26, 2023

A sad update

From ‘What can we do?’: Millions in African countries need power by Mogomotsi Magome.  

From Zimbabwe, where many must work at night because it’s the only time there is power, to Nigeria where collapses of the grid are frequent, the reliable supply of electricity remains elusive across Africa.

[snip]

Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country, has grappled with an inadequate power supply for many years, generating just 4,000 megawatts though the population of more than 210 million people needs 30,000 megawatts, say experts. The oil-rich but energy-poor West African nation has ramped up investments in the power sector but endemic corruption and mismanagement have resulted in little gains.

I lived in Nigeria circa 1963-64, in Port Harcourt in eastern Nigeria. 

We were accustomed to rolling blackouts, brownouts and power spikes.  And then there were those times when the power just went off unannounced and for no known reason.  Everything had to be on a circuit breaker because spikes in power were frequent, blowing out appliances unless protected.  Flashlights and candles were strategically located in easily accessible places all over the house.  

Sixty years later and it appears nothing has changed.  There is a quiet tragedy there because it was avoidable.  The money was there, the talent was there, the demand was there.  Just not the markets or the governance.  

Paul’s Letter to the Galatians as the structural underpinning of Classical Liberalism


COWEN: Which Gospel do you view as most foundational for Western liberalism and why?

HOLLAND: I think that that is a treacherous question to ask because it implies that there would be a coherent line of descent from any one text that can be traced like that. I think that the line of descent that leads from the Gospels and from the New Testament and from the Bible and, indeed, from the entire corpus of early Christian texts to modern liberalism is too confused, too much of a swirl of influences for us to trace it back to a particular text.

If I had to choose any one book from the Bible, it wouldn’t be a Gospel. It would probably be Paul’s Letter to the Galatians because Paul’s Letter to the Galatians contains the famous verse that there is no Jew or Greek, there is no slave or free, there is no man or woman in Christ. In a way, that text — even if you bracket out and remove the “in Christ” from it — that idea that, properly, there should be no discrimination between people of different cultural and ethnic backgrounds, based on gender, based on class, remains pretty foundational for liberalism to this day.

I think that liberalism, in so many ways, is a secularized rendering of that extraordinary verse. But I think it’s almost impossible to avoid metaphor when thinking about what the relationship is of these biblical texts, these biblical verses to the present day. I variously compared Paul, in particular in his letters and his writings, rather unoriginally, to an acorn from which a mighty oak grows.

But I think actually, more appropriately, of a depth charge released beneath the vast fabric of classical civilization. And the ripples, the reverberations of it are faint to begin with, and they become louder and louder and more and more disruptive. Those echoes from that depth charge continue to reverberate to this day.

Healthy evidentiary arguments

I have been seeing a lot of noise about the need to ban Tik-Tok and increasing objections to social media.  In neither case am I seeing strong or robust evidence to the claimed negative impact.  Perhaps it is real but I sure would like to see something more solid than has been advanced so far.

Fortunately Stuart Ritchie steps into the breach.  You can't trust any analyst blindly but I advance a lot of confidence in Ritchie's work.  My default assumption, based on past experience, is that he is correct until proven otherwise.  For many or most otherwise, my default assumption is the reverse.  Assume that they are incorrect until proven otherwise.

From Don’t panic about social media harming your child’s mental health – the evidence is weak by Stuart Ritchie.  The subheading is ANALYSIS We’re told the internet destroys children’s mental health – but Stuart Ritchie read all the relevant studies and saw little to support the claim.  

And here’s the thing: when the authors of the “Facebook arrival” study raised their standards in this way, running a correction for multiple comparisons, all the results they found for well-being were no longer statistically significant. That is, a somewhat more conservative way of looking at the data indicated that every result they found was statistically indistinguishable from a scenario where Facebook had no effect on well-being whatsoever.

Now let’s turn to the second study, which was a randomised controlled trial where 1,637 adults were randomly assigned to shut down their Facebook account for four weeks, or go on using it as normal. Let’s call it the “deactivating Facebook” study. This “famous” study has been described as “the most impressive by far” in this area, and was the only study cited in the Financial Times as an example of the “growing body of research showing that reducing time on social media improves mental health”.

The bottom-line result was that leaving Facebook for a month led to higher well-being, as measured on a questionnaire at the end of the month. But again, looking in a bit more detail raises some important questions.

But it's not that straightforward.  I am also an admirer of Jonathan Haidt.  Not because his work is particularly rigorous but because it is insightful.  He is in the opposite camp of Ritchie.  From Social Media is a Major Cause of the Mental Illness Epidemic in Teen Girls. Here’s the Evidence by Jon Haidt.  The subheading is Journalists should stop saying that the evidence is just correlational.  

Haidt's argument is plausible and Ritchie's rigorous skepticism is warranted.  

We just don't know.  Yet.  

Before 1550, 30 percent of noble men died in battle. After 1550, it was less than 5 percent.

From Lifespans of the European Elite, 800–1800 by Neil Cummins.  From the abstract:  

I analyze the adult age at death of 115,650 European nobles from 800 to 1800. Longevity began increasing long before 1800 and the Industrial Revolution, with marked increases around 1400 and again around 1650. Declines in violent deaths from battle contributed to some of this increase, but the majority must reflect other changes in individual behavior. There are historic spatial contours to European elite mortality; Northwest Europe achieved greater adult lifespans than the rest of Europe even by 1000 AD.

He elaborates with four principle findings:

First, plague, which afflicted Europe 1348–1700, killed nobles at a much lower rate than it did the general population. Second there were significant declines in the proportion of male deaths from battle violence, mostly before 1550. I am able to estimate, from the timing of deaths within the year, the fraction of males who died violently in each epoch. Before 1550, 30 percent of noble men died in battle. After 1550, it was less than 5 percent.

Third finding there was a common upwards trend in the adult lifespan of nobles even before 1800. But this improvement was concentrated in two periods. Around 1400, and then again around 1650, there were relatively sudden upwards movements in longevity. In England and Wales, for example, the average age at death of noble adults increased from 48 for those born 800–1400, to 54 for 1400–1650, and then 56 for 1650–1800. This rise is independent of the fall in violent battle deaths. Finally, I find that there were regional differences in elite adult lifespan favoring Northwest Europe, that emerged around 1000 ad. While average lifespan in England in 1400 was 54, in Southern Europe, as well as in Central and Eastern Europe, it was only 50. The cause of this geographic “effect” is unknown.



History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Gas Station by Peregrine Heathcote

Gas Station by Peregrine Heathcote


















Click to enlarge.

Saturday, March 25, 2023

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

One line summaries of classics.

From Dean's List by Erica Rhodes.  Her father, who had MS, late in life undertook to read and synopsize the classics.  Here is one part of that effort.

1. Moby Dick — Melville: All things whale.

2. Old Man and the Sea — Hemingway: Not an intergenerational catch and release story.

3. Dead Souls — Gogol: Serf-scamming in Russia.

4. David Copperfield — Dickens: It’s all about David.

5. Return of the Native — Hardy: Soap opera on the heath.

6. Great Gatsby — Fitzgerald: Money doesn’t buy happiness.

7. Crime and Punishment — Dostoevsky: Russian decay among peasants, rags, alcohol, and ax murdering.

8. Middlemarch — George Eliot: Trembling lips, quivering chins, agonized sobbing.

9. Father Goriot — Balzac: Sordid tale of lodging decay, spoiled daughters, a crime boss, the seeking of wealth and romance, and a father (Goriot) in Paris.

10. The Bostonians — Henry James: Ambivalent sexuality in a sea of commas and semicolons.

11. A Portrait of The Artist as a Young Man — James Joyce: A young writer grapples with definitions of Hell.

12. Anna Karenina — Tolstoy: Be careful what you wish-iberatskya for-ilovitch.

13. Babbit — Sinclair Lewis: Blustering banality and Boosterism lead to moral corruption.

14. Of Human Bondage — Maugham: Human potential diverted by girls, the stock market, girls, poor career-planning, girls, and a club foot.

15. Don Quixote — Cervantes: Employer-employee relationship tested by adventures.

16. Madame Bovary — Flaubert: Wimpy doctor husband and botched club-foot operation lead to adultery.

17. Age of Innocence — Wharton: Upper-crust New York soap opera and then back to the future.

18. Wuthering Heights — Emily Bronte: Love thy Neighbor not taught at church; just hate or marry thy neighbor.

19. The Red and the Black — Stendhal: Teaching Latin leads to wealth, romance, and headlessness.

20. House of Seven Gables — Hawthorne: Should be refurbished as funeral home to conveniently handle gabled house demises.

21. Tristram Shandy — Sterne: Noses, breeches, fortificiations, digressions, and philosophick opinions.

22. Vanity Fair — Thackeray: Deadbeat grifters, love-sick galoot, vapid love interest, overweight prig.

23. The Path to Rome — Hilaire Belloc: The author walks to Rome while describing every rock, river, and tree on the trip.

24. The Decameron — Boccaccio: Squatters tell sex stories in abandoned palaces during plague.

25. Uncle Tom’s Cabin — Stowe: The power of the pen leads to abolition and a Civil War.

26. Woman in White — Wilkie Collins: No answer to over-long mystery of which detergent is used to keep woman’s clothes white.

27. Germinal — Zola: 19th Century French coal mining misery and Marxism.

28. The Betrothed — Manzoni: Hoped- for heavenly marital bliss preceded by betrothal from Hell.

29. O Pioneers — Cather: O plowing and O planting on the O prairie.

30. The Good Soldier — Ford: The good soldier didn’t do much soldiering and wasn’t very good.

31. Candide — Voltaire: Appears to be modeled on Don Quixote with more focus on buttocks.

32. Metamorphosis — Kafka: Parents finally get to move grown son out of house and into roach motel.

** The Deerslayer — James Fenimore Cooper: Stopped at 35% — cartoon dialogue, implausible action, juvenile; good tree and rock description.

33. The Prime Minister — Trollope: Girl grieves for no-good dead husband, grieves over grief she caused her family by marrying no-good guy, and grieves over grief she’s causing by her never-ending grieving.

34. Count of Monte Cristo — Dumas: Count’s accounting for revenge aCounts for Countless Countenances.

35. Magnificent Ambersons — Tarkington: Money doesn’t buy happiness, especially if you lose it all.

36. War of the Worlds — H.G. Wells: After interstellar strategic planning, Mars tries to conquer world by invading the island of England.

37. Moll Flanders — Daniel Defoe: Years of thievery and whoredom and almost executed… but, at heart, a good girl.

38. Hunchback of Notre Dame — Hugo: Don’t bring enchanted goats that can count to 15th century Paris.

39. The Financier — Dreiser: Stylistically drab writing seemingly written by, well, a financier.

40. Pride and Prejudice — Austen: Too bad no glass ceilings for Elizabeth to break.

41. Bel Ami — de Maupassant: Marrying mistresses and their daughters leads to wealth and power.

42. Two Years Before the Mast — R.H. Dana: Plenty of jibs, halyards and sail furling, no plank walking or timber shivering, and a little flogging.

43. Ivanhoe — Sir Walter Scott: Knights save distressed damsel before stake burning.

44. Cousin Betty — Balzac: Betty is bad news.

45. Martin Eden — London: Roustabout learns everything, writes bestsellers, debates, attains wealth, hates everybody.

46. Treasure Island — Stevenson: Beware of peg-legged parrot-petting pirates.

47. The Fat and the Thin — Zola: Some people interaction, with plenty of newly slaughtered meat, fish, fowl, cabbages and turnips.

48. Red Badge of Courage — Crane: Coming of age among muskets, and the fog of war.

49. Room with a View — Forster: Hotel-complaining leads to marriage.

50. Sons and Lovers — D.H. Lawrence: Sons, lovers and lousy literature.

51. History of Tom Jones — Fielding: Virtuous mono-syllabic Tom beset by problems instigated by multisyllabic Thwackum, Fitzpatrick, Partridge, Blifil, Western.

52. Bouvard and Pecuchet — Flaubert: Odd couple fail at frock-coated farming and philosophizing.

53. Huckleberry Finn — Twain: River rafting, visiting with pseudo-royalty, boys will be boys.

54. Lord Jim — Conrad: Lord, Jim isn’t helping me understand this book- is it groundbreaking, overly inventive, or just poorly written?

55. Three Musketeers — Dumas- Musketeer crew comprises boozer, gold-digging womanizer, religion-seeking swordster, lovesick hothead.

56. Washington Square — James: Dad loves ugly dumb daughter, but gold-digging fiancé bolts after father threatens disinheritance.

57. Gulliver’s Travels — Swift: Despite persistent shipwrecks, Gulliver still goes sailing but passengers quickly disembark.

58. The Pickwick Papers — Dickens: While banal and bespectacled, Pickwick’s principles earn Pickwickian plaudits.

59. The Picture of Dorian Gray — Wilde: A picture is worth 1000, er, 1500, um 3000 words.

60. The Brothers Karamazov — Dostoevsky: Drunks, death, and decay — typical Russian novel fare.

61. House of Mirth — Wharton: There’s absolutely no mirth in this house.

62. Tess of the d’Urbervilles — Hardy: Tess never learned the two B’s: Boys are Bad.

63. Charterhouse of Parma — Stendhal: Parma might be worth visiting; this book is not.

64. Portrait of a Lady — James: Unaccomplished wealthy villa-hopping travelers endlessly speak and think about themselves.

65. Silas Marner — George Eliot: Weaver is double-crossed, robbed, adopts toddler, waits, recovers money and robber skeleton.

66. The Way of all Flesh — Butler: Drab writing marked by no descriptions of sun-dappled rocks, trees and flowers.

67. Fortune of the Rougons — Zola: Struggling family struggles during political crisis while struggling with mediocre writing.

68. Daisy Miller — James: Henry James lite.

69. Frankenstein — Shelley: Monster fails to manage decomposition odor.

70. Heart of Darkness — Conrad: Hell distress compounded by Conrad narration technique.

71. Far from the Madding Crowd — Hardy: Typical 19th century English sheep & cow literature.

72. Lost Illusions — Balzac: Dissolution of delusion leads to lost illusion.

73. The Possessed — Dostoevsky: Title indecision and incoherent storyline imply that author had vodka problem.

74. Ethan Frome — Wharton: Lucky guy spends decades with complaining sickly wife and mentally incapacitated love interest.

75. My Antonia — Cather: Oh my, Antonia, very unsettling story about wolves eating newlyweds in Russia.

76. Barry Lyndon — Thackeray: Wealth, fame, charm, and smarts lead to debtor’s prison, family hatred and gout.

77. Dracula — Bram Stoker: Vampire advantage — immortality; disadvantage — limited liquid diet.

78. Sense and Sensibility — Austen: The reader should have the sense and sensibility to avoid reading this inferior Austen work.

79. L’ Assommoir — Zola: Russian novels don’t have a monopoly on drunks.

80. Oblomov — Goncharov: After writing about sleeping away one’s life, the author, never seen again, probably became a mattress salesman.

81. Typee — Melville: Two ship deserters try to avoid meal with local cannibals.

82. Jane Eyre — C. Bronte: Two guys fall in love with principled Jane.

83. Bleak House — Dickens: Law school attendance soars after book publication.

** The Idiot — Dostoevsky: The title refers to any reader who finishes the book.

84. Winesburg, Ohio — S. Anderson: Big city life more attractive than local banker’s daughter.

85. Mill on the Floss — G. Eliot: Beware of floating flotsam in flooded Floss.

86. Oliver Twist — Dickens: Pickpocketing and purse snatching pumps up prison population.

** The Nether World- Gissing: After reading 20%, it’s obvious why no one has heard of this author.

87. Fathers and Sons — Turgenev: Unlike other Russian novels, no drunks.

** Doctor Pascal — Zola- 20% read — a book about his other books and sheep brain medical experiments.

88. Little Women — Alcott: Little Women become Little Mothers who soon will be Little Grandmothers.

89. What Maisie Knew — James: What Maisie didn’t know was when this book would ever end.

90. Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea — Verne: Genius loner misfit builds submarine to go deep sea fishing.

91. Great Expectations — Dickens: Certainly, great expectations aren’t expected for people with a name like Pip.

92. The Gambler — Dostoevsky: You can lose just as much, gambling dollars, francs or rubles.

93. The Scarlet Letter — Hawthorne: Author rejected polka-dotted, turquoise letter color.

94. Mansfield Park — Austen: Well-off do nothings discuss wealth, clothes, and matrimonial prospects.

** War and Peace — Tolstoy: War, peace, and 1,000 pages.

95. Main Street — Lewis: Side streets might be worth visiting.

96. Tom Sawyer — Twain: Fence white-washing employment prospects explode.

97. Martin Chuzzlewit — Dickens: Don’t nuzzle a Chuzzlewit.

98. Song of the Lark — Cather: Too bad the lark didn’t fly away before it sang this mediocre song.

99. Under Western Eyes — Conrad- Some critics think the book should be underneath Eastern, Southern, and Northern eyes.

100. The Mayor of Casterbridge — Hardy: Mayor didn’t do a single day of work for the city.

101. The Old Curiosity Shop- Dickens: Though curious, I never learned what was in the shop.

102. Dodsworth — Lewis: Cars and cuckoldry.

103. Daniel Deronda — Eliot: By George, I’m done reading Eliot books.

104. Pendennis — Thackeray: Title character marries sister (or cousin).

105. Nicholas Nickleby — Dickens: Nicholas wasn’t Santa, but he truly was a Saint.

106. The Woodlanders — Hardy: An apple a day doesn’t keep the doctor away.

** Swann’s Way — Proust: So many words, so little to say.

107. Princess Casamassima — James: Bookbinder leads slum tours for princess — yeah, right.

108. Howard’s End — Forster: The book is about neither a Howard nor his anatomy.

109. Mrs. Dalloway — Woolf: Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa and there are books that make sense.

110. Little Dorrit — Dickens: Friendly-children policy at debtors’ prison doesn’t lead to student debt forgiveness.

111. Death in Venice — Mann: Writer ruminates about art, beauty, young boys and gondolas.

112. Scenes from a Courtesan’s Life — Balzac: Money, mistresses and mobsters in nineteenth-century Paris.

113. Roughing It — Twain: Spoiler alert: The story about the tree-climbing buffalo isn’t true.

114. Robinson Crusoe — Daniel Defoe: Don’t travel with this guy. Or with Gulliver.

115. The Scarlet Pimpernel — Emma Orczy: Pimpernel keeps his head to save French heads.

116. A Tale of Two Cities — Dickens: Hero heads off to date with Madame Guillotine.

117. The Sorrows of Young Werther — Goethe: Whiner shares sorrows with readers.

** Wings of the Dove — James: Even doves don’t finish this book

**Romola — Eliot: George should stay in England.

118. The Way We Live Now — Trollope: The way we try to read books that never end…now.

119. Death Comes for the Archbishop — Cather: Pueblos, mesas, and priests.

120. Taras Bulba — Gogol: Cossack lifestyle: old pal’s head is salted, put in cask and sent to Constantinople.

121. The Duel — Chekhov: If duel happened at beginning, readers would be saved a lot of time.

122. Jude the Obscure — Hardy: Readers would benefit if this novel were more obscure.

123. Billy Budd — Melville: Billy, we hardly knew ye.

124. Persuasion — Austen: I’m persuaded that Austen has written better books.

125. Innocents Abroad — Twain- Innocents got on board, innocents went abroad, and occasionally, innocents were bored.

126. Les Miserables — Hugo: Every character is cold, hungry and, well, miserable.

127. Benito Cereno — Melville: Don’t read this book on a ship.

128. Bartleby the Scrivener — Melville: This is what happens when they “scriven” too much.

129. The Confidence Man — Melville: Reading this caused me to lose a bit of confidence in Herman.

130. Short Stories — Gogol: Stories about witches, devils, melons, and a nose.

131. Virgin Soil — Turgenev: Typical love story: Boy meets girls, they fall in love, they become revolutionaries.

132. One of Ours — Cather: Farmer deals with failed marriage and WWII and also manages cow and pig problems.

133. A Passage to India — E.M. Forster: India was so hot that even the Kindle was sweating.

** Mysteries of Paris — Sue: Could be another chapter of Les Miserables.

134. Kim — Kipling: Street-savvy Irish-Indian kid seeks river with old man.

135. The Master and Margarita- Bulgakov: There’s a reason no one’s heard of this author.

136. Tender is the Night — Fitzgerald: Ethically challenged psychiatrist has affair with actress star of “Daddy’s Girl”/ marries mental patient who had incestuous relationship as Daddy’s girl.

137. Our Mutual Friend — Dickens: Finding dead bodies in the river, with cash in their pockets, is a good job if you can get it.

138. The House of Gentlefolk — Turgenev: They had gentle extramarital affairs.

139. Kidnapped — Stevenson: Don’t trust anyone named Ebenezer.

140. On the Eve — Turgenev- If writing a book, to ensure its success, add a mysterious Bulgarian character.

141. Agnes Grey — Anne Bronte: Governess educates worst of brats — in Germany these kids are known as “bratwurst.”

** A Sentimental Education — Flaubert: Another painter falls in love… ZZZZZ.

** Siddhartha — Hesse: Book for college freshmen seeking spiritual guidance.

142. A Connecticut Yankee — Twain: For a comedy, there sure are a lot of corpses.

143. Erewhon — Samuel Butler: It’s either a utopian dystopia or a dystopian utopia.

144. Sister Carrie — Dreiser: Sister Carrie was no nun.

145. Note from the Underground — Dostoevsky: The author of this book drank too much vodka.

146. Pudd’n head Wilson — Twain: The proof was in the pudding.

147. The Time Machine — Wells: The author doesn’t tell us how the machine works, but we know it contains nickel, bronze, and crystal.

148. House of the Dead — Dostoevsky: Free flogging amenities don’t attract customers.

149. The Gilded Age — Twain: This book suffers from “neverendingitis.”

** Emma- Austen: Sorry, Jane, but Emma, her friends and the dialogue are an absolute bore.

150. The Prince and the Pauper — Twain: While writing the book, Twain collaborated with Dickens and Shakespeare.

151. Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde — Stevenson: Apparently, a split personality requires separate wardrobes.

152. Short Stories and Novellas — Dostoevsky: Be sure not to miss the alligator exhibit.

153. The Works of Edgar Allan Poe Vol. II — Poe: Every time the narrator buries a victim behind the wall or under the floor of his house, he gets caught.

** Ulysses- Joyce:

154. Cesar Birotteaux — Balzac: Yet another French novel suffering from never-endingitis.

155. The Blithedale Romance — Hawthorne: The high point of this book was having a character named Zenobia.

156. Tono Bungay — H.G. Wells: Quack medicine Tono Bungay alleviates many imaginary ailments.

157. Down and Out in Paris & London — Orwell: French cook’s spit enhances high-end restaurant soup.

158. The Marble Faun — Hawthorne: Only marble readers would enjoy this book.

159. Keep the Aspidistra Flying — Orwell: You won’t learn how or why the aspidistra flew.

** Joan of Arc — Twain

160. Animal Farm — Orwell: Eat bacon at your own risk.

161. Letters from Two Young Wives — Balzac: Should be required reading for all newlyweds.

162. Habji Mourad — Tolstoy: Romance ends after decapitation.

163. Cousin Pons — Balzac: Art collector collects scam artists.

** Clarissa — S. Richardson

164. The Clergyman’s Daughter — Orwell: George should stick to farm animal books.

165. Cannery Row — Steinbeck: Bon appetit! Sardines and whiskey on the menu.

** Nineteen Eighty-Four — Orwell

** Look Homeward, Angel — Thomas Wolf

166. Dombey and Son — Dickens: Daughter pines for loveless father while countless guys pine for daughter; reader pines for book’s end.

167. Miss Marjoribanks — Oliphant: Smart socializer has deficient husband-picking skills

168. Hard Times — Dickens: Dickens must have had a hard time writing this.

Shakespeare:

1. The Tempest: Following a government overthrow, don’t get on a boat with dukes and kings, after a wedding.

2. The Winter’s Tale: While chiseling, sculptor surprised by marble statue’s cry of pain.

3. Cymbeline: King pleased that daughter, dressed as a guy, is a girl, and that son-in-law, is actually a Brit.

4. A Midsummer Night’s Dream: Fairy mismanagement leads to complications.

5. King Richard II: Ya gotta know your Dukes.

6. Hamlet: Spoiler alert — We never learn whether to be or not to be.

7. Twelfth Night: Cross-gartered yellow stockings used to woo servant’s lady boss.

8. King Lear: Employers cancel Take Your Daughter to Work Day after a production of Lear.

9. As You Like It: Matchmaker utilizes cross-dressing to facilitate services.

10. Macbeth: Witches try to sell soup with eye of newt and toe of frog but consumers show little interest.

11. Julius Caesar: Caesar ignores Ides of March warning, because no one understands what “Ides” means.

12. Antony and Cleopatra: Beware of figs, snakes, and queens.

13. King Henry V: Great motivational speaker, but should cut down on the massacres.

14. King Henry IV pt.1: The Welsh live on the same island but seem to be from another planet.

15. King Henry IV pt.2: King happy that son’s not a bum.

16. Troilus and Cressida: Deformed foul-mouthed slave calls it like it is.

17. Coriolanus: The guy should attend a public relations seminar.

18. Othello: Since handkerchieves play such a prominent role, it’s lucky that no one had a cold.

19. The Taming of the Shrew: Gold-digger brainwashes shrieking shrew.

20. Romeo and Juliet: Don’t go out for drinks with a friar.

21. The Merchant of Venice: Restaurant patron orders pound of flesh, but hold the blood.

22. Measure for Measure: Comedy about unwed mother’s problem’s being solved by executing fathers.

23. Comedy of Errors: Twin sons + slaves = Comedy of Errors.

24. Love’s Labour’s Lost: Love’s Labours were not Really Lost.

25. Much Ado About Nothing: Actually, it was much ado about something.

26. All’s Well That Ends Well: All isn’t well, because the protagonist married a bum.

27. King Richard III: All is not well, and nothing ends well when Richard’s around.

28. King John: Everyone has mother-in-law problems.

29. Pericles: I think his clerk wrote this play.

30. Timon of Athens: Timon should consult with Polonius.

31. Titus Andronicus: Heads, arms and a tongue are lopped off but only the heads are baked in a pie.

32. Two Noble Kinsmen: Noble cousins fight over girl who picks flowers, but one cousin is crushed by a horse.

33. Two Gentlemen of Verona: One gentleman was quite ungentlemanly.

34. King Henry VIII: The king’s newborn son will be trouble in future plays.

35. King Henry VI pts 1, 2, 3: Prithee, can’t we all just getteth along?

36. Merry Wives of Windsor: The husbands weren’t that merry.