Git whitespace

Required reading to understand git whitespace errors and end-of-line characters:

http://adaptivepatchwork.com/2012/03/01/mind-the-end-of-your-line/

-Max

--

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

Sounds

Merry Christmas!

https://soundcloud.com/maximilian-wilson/christmasstorymp3

--

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

Hybrid frogs

J.,

Whoa. Apparently these frogs have only halfway speciated.

P. esculentus ( genome RL) generally produces offspring by mating with another species, usually P. lessonae. In most populations, they produce gametes that only contain the R genome (the L genome is discarded): mating with P. Lessonae restores the L genome. Presto, more hybrids.

They can mate with others of their kind, but few tadpoles survive – essentially because the parental genome (R) does not go through sexual recombination – thus mutations have accumulated over the many generations since the original hybridization. Muller's ratchet.

In eastern Europe, it's the other way around: the L genome is clonal and the hybrids have to mate with P. ridibundus, with complex results (3/4 hybrids, 1/4 pure ridibundus).

Crazy, huh?

-Max


--
If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,
Loved I not Honor more.

Beatitudes

Hey,

I just realized this morning that these thoughts (in 3 Nephi 12) are all connected:

11 And blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake;

12 For ye shall have great joy and be exceedingly glad, for great shall be your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets who were before you.

13 Verily, verily, I say unto you, I give unto you to be the salt of the earth; but if the salt shall lose its savor wherewith shall the earth be salted? The salt shall be thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out and to be trodden under foot of men.

14 Verily, verily, I say unto you, I give unto you to be the light of this people. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid.

In other words, when men revile against you falsely, turn the other cheek. It is tempting (especially for me!) to get crabby and point out how the other party is being intellectually dishonest. That is the spirit of pride/enmity/contention, and giving in to it is akin to salt losing its savor. Rather, the Savior gives unto us to be the light of the world in maintaining charity and good humor even in the face of unjust persecution. Instead of fighting fire with fire, he urges us to live by the spirit, and "A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid." Those with eyes to see will see.

Remind me of this please, next time I get crabby about straw men. :)

-Max

--
If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,
Loved I not Honor more.

Santa Claus

I wouldn't be comfortable telling my kids that Santa wasn't real, because it would feel like a lie. I'd say, "Santa is metaphorically real, not a literal physical presence. Santa Claus is a collective identity for those who wish to do good with plausible deniability, a sort of nom de guerre if you will, a name which can legitimately be assumed for a time by anyone who wishes to do good anonymously, in company with others who are doing the same. You can legitimately claim to be Santa instead of yourself whenever you are doing the things that Santa Claus would do."

If they look confused at that, I'll give them the shorter summary: "I'll explain it when you're older."

--
If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,
Loved I not Honor more.

Daesh/ISIS and existential threats

Dear J.,

There's a medium-sized fight going on right now in the policy space about whether to prioritize military spending or fiscal prudence, and whether or not the U.S. should get involved directly in fighting Daesh/ISIS in Syria. I don't know if you've heard about that fight, but a major decision factor is whether or not ISIS is an existential threat to the U.S. or if that is just panicky overreaction to a threat which is still far militarily weaker than, say, Italy.

For me, here's the thing about Daesh/ISIS: I don't know if they're an existential threat to the U.S. because I don't know what it would take to destroy us, practically speaking. I don't know why the economy works in the first place and I don't know what it would take to break it. Say somebody launches a cyber attack that takes down 50% of the power plants in the U.S. for six months and crashes the databases of half of the Fortune 500 companies, losing a lot of financial data in the process. Or if somebody does an EMP over New York, and another over Los Angeles, that destroys 90% of all electronics in those areas. Neither of these things will physically kill all the people in the U.S., but does either of them push us into a Great Depression? My answer: I have no idea. I can believe in scenario where we're up and running again in a year, and I can believe in a scenario where the country dissolves into mass chaos (unemployment, Ferguson-style rioting, martial law declared, backlash against martial law). I don't REALLY believe in the mass chaos scenario, in the same way that as a kid I never really thought my parents would get a divorce, but that disbelief is founded more in emotional inertia than logical analysis.

I don't know if Daesh/ISIS is an existential threat because I don't know what an existential threat to the nation looks like any more. We're fragile.

See also 3 Nephi 8, where the murder of the chief judge destroyed the government: "And the people were divided one against another; and they did separate one from another into tribes, every man according to his family and his kindred and friends; and thus they did destroy the government of the land." Looking at the fault lines in America, that pattern (in response to a different stimulus) is not at all implausible. I guess we'll see, huh?

Happy American Thanksgiving, by the way! See you tomorrow.

Love,
M.


--
If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,
Loved I not Honor more.

Enmity

Dear Y.A.

I want to share an experience with you.

In Elders' Quorum yesterday, re-reading President Benson's definition of "enmity" really brought something home to me. I don't really do "hatred" enmity, but he also includes "a state of opposition," and when arguments occur (about anything) I'm quite easily inclined to think, "No, what you're asking for won't work the way you think and is a bad idea. We shouldn't do that" which actually does qualify as "a state of opposition" and therefore enmity and therefore pride.

So I need to find a way to hold my opinions without opposition, without thinking to myself, "I don't want you to get what you are asking for." Non-religious example: gun control. I think trying to ban guns in the U.S. would be horribly counterproductive and just punishes law-abiders with more hassle without actually making anyone safer; but when someone starts talking about "gun crime," I need to not oppose them and want to gripe about their desires. Instead, I should find a way to disagree without opposing, which tends to emphasize areas of agreement and possible compromise. I don't have to think, "I hope you manage to ban guns in the U.S." but I CAN think, "I really value the culture of freedom in the U.S., and I value simple laws that people can actually keep. I hope you find a way to get what you want in terms of increased safety for everyone without compromising the things that I value." If I can do that I will avoid feelings of enmity and therefore pride.

It seems to me that the primary "re-thinking" the Church has done in recent years is to studiously avoid encouraging any kind of enmity or opposition between its members and gay activists. That doesn't mean that some people won't take offense anyway, but I do see a pattern of trying very hard to avoid opposition and seek mutually-agreeable compromises. Presumably this same approach would be taken by the Church on any potentially-contentious issue, not just this one. It's an emphasis on charity.

Hope you're doing great. I love you!

-B.C.

--

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

Git magic, git

Written by Dan Glick:

You remind me of the branch
What branch? branch with the code
What code? code that hasn't shipped
Ship who? ship you
You do? remind me of the branch

My code was in too many folder trees, oh my
What could I do
My code was so spread out, and what were actual diffs?
Nobody knew

What kind of source control to use
SVN
or TFS
Maybe Perforce
Then somebody said

Git magic, git magic
Git magic, git magic
Pull my push and merge my change
Cherry-pick my commit range
DAG magic, DAG magic
DAG magic, DAG magic
Careful with rebase and squash
Pull the tip before you push

I couldn't find the hotfixes from prod
What could I do
Each file had conflicts left and right, and how to merge?
Nobody knew

What kind of source control to use
CVS
or VSS
Source Depot? Never!
Then somebody said

Git magic, git magic
etc.

--

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

An Entire Separation

November, 2015

Dear Y.A.,

I sometimes see people ominously speaking of what the Church needs to do "to survive", and threatening ("more in sorrow than in anger") a mass exodus of their presumably legion like-minded cohorts if certain doctrinal changes are not made to their liking. I find this a striking, and surprising, fulfillment of the words written in 1831, in the Doctrine and Covenants, Section 63:

"These things are the things that ye must look for; and, speaking after the manner of the Lord, they are now nigh at hand, and in a time to come, even in the day of the coming of the Son of Man. And until that hour there will be foolish virgins among the wise; and at that hour cometh an entire separation of the righteous and the wicked..."

I never could have imagined that the "entire separation" would happen THIS way. I always sort of expected to see the foolish virgins fall away in fatigue or embarrassment when faced with mockery and persecution and the need to sacrifice; it never occurred to me that they would threaten to hurl themselves out of the Church as a form of coercion against God.

We are always sad to see anyone leave, and yet no one can say the Lord never warned us that it was coming. Matthew 24:24. "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." Our job is to make sure that, at least for ourselves, it is NOT possible to be deceived. Read your scriptures, say your prayers, listen to the Spirit. Amen, amen.

I love you! Good luck.

~B.C.

--

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

Stupor of Thought

"But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right. But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong."

One thing you need to know about the Holy Ghost in order to understand revelation is that God is never, ever pedantic in his corrections. He will never tell you you're wrong in an minor detail that you weren't intending to ask about. This is why the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon has grammatical errors, and this is (one reason) why even plans you've made with inspired guidance need course corrections over time. If you're on the right track, the Holy Ghost will tell you to move forward even if you're 10 or 15 degrees off at first.

--

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

Epistemology

Interesting analogy:

'I am told, and there seems to be ample evidence to support it, that matter is indestructible, that it is eternal. As a youth, if I had been told by my teacher in school that the desk on which I wrote was indestructible, and then when the schoolhouse burned had seen the mocking ashes where my desk had been, I doubtless would have lost faith in my teacher. Clearly, and before me, was the evidence of his folly. But later in High School and University, where in the laboratory, I learned how to catch and weigh the gases, oils, and ashes that resulted from burning wood and found that the process of burning had not in fact destroyed anything, I concluded that my youthful skepticism was but evidence of the narrow limits of my knowledge. From then on, humility bade me hesitate before questioning the truths which witnesses of research and observation had established. My questing soul still questions, but my questions had to do with ways and means of deciphering and getting at the truth and finding the relationship between observation and intuition, between knowledge and faith.' -Hugh B. Brown

--
If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,
Loved I not Honor more.

My Fair Lady and Pygmalion

So, everybody knows that the epilogue of Shaw's Pygmalion has Eliza Doolittle marrying Freddie. What I didn't know until I actually read the epilogue today (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3825/3825-h/3825-h.htm) is WHY. Shaw's reasoning is twofold:

1.) Shaw's Henry Higgins is a bachelor because he is a mama's boy; she is the primary woman in his life and always will be, and Eliza doesn't want to compete with that. In other words, Shaw's Higgins has no character arc--he's still basically the same person at the end of the play as at the beginning.

2.) Strong people are drawn to weak people, not other strong people. "This being the state of human affairs, what is Eliza fairly sure to do when she is placed between Freddy and Higgins? Will she look forward to a lifetime of fetching Higgins's slippers or to a lifetime of Freddy fetching hers?"

#2 is debatable (I don't agree with it myself) but #1 clearly doesn't apply to My Fair Lady as written, or as filmed with Rex Harrison and Audrey Hepburn. Henry does arc. Ergo, Henry and Eliza probably do wind up together in the end--even in Shaw's telling, Eliza still idolizes Henry and occasionally fantasizes about him in private, so in a universe where Henry has actually realized that Eliza matters to him more than his mother does (as he does in My Fair Lady), odds are good that the interest will be reciprocated. Besides, they totally deserve each other.

-M.

--
If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,
Loved I not Honor more.

On tolerance

You might like this. It makes me reflect on how I treat people who really, really get my goat. I think in some cases I do okay but I could do better.

-Max

The Emperor summons before him Bodhidharma and asks: "Master, I have been tolerant of innumerable gays, lesbians, bisexuals, asexuals, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, transgender people, and Jews. How many Tolerance Points have I earned for my meritorious deeds?"

Bodhidharma answers: "None at all".

The Emperor, somewhat put out, demands to know why not.

Bodhidharma asks: "Well, what do you think of gay people?"

The Emperor answers: "What do you think I am, some kind of homophobic bigot? Of course I have nothing against gay people!"

And Bodhidharma answers: "Thus do you gain no merit by tolerating them!"

If I had to define "tolerance" it would be something like "respect and kindness toward members of an outgroup".

--

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

Epiphany

Subject: Epiphany

I just had an epiphany!!!!!

We were reading Alma 36 as part of Family Night and suddenly it hit me: the phrase "from time to time" in the Book of Mormon is not equivalent to the current English usage where it means "occasionally." In the Book of Mormon it means "time and again," or in other words, "continually."

Check out how that changes the way these scriptures read.

Alma 36:28-29
And I know that he will raise me up at the last day, to dwell with him in glory; yea, and I will praise him forever, for he has brought our fathers out of Egypt, and he has swallowed up the Egyptians in the Red Sea; and he led them by his power into the promised land; yea, and he has delivered them out of bondage and captivity from time to time.

Yea, and he has also brought our fathers out of the land of Jerusalem; and he has also, by his everlasting power, delivered them out of bondage and captivity, from time to time even down to the present day; and I have always retained in remembrance their captivity; yea, and ye also ought to retain in remembrance, as I have done, their captivity.

1 Nephi 18:1
And it came to pass that they did worship the Lord, and did go forth with me; and we did work timbers of curious workmanship. And the Lord did show me from time to time after what manner I should work the timbers of the ship.

2 Nephi 10:22
For behold, the Lord God has led away from time to time from the house of Israel, according to his will and pleasure. And now behold, the Lord remembereth all them who have been broken off, wherefore he remembereth us also.

Alma 49:21
And it came to pass that the captains of the Lamanites brought up their armies before the place of entrance, and began to contend with the Nephites, to get into their place of security; but behold, they were driven back from time to time, insomuch that they were slain with an immense slaughter.

Jacob 7:5
And he had hope to shake me from the faith, notwithstanding the many revelations and the many things which I had seen concerning these things; for I truly had seen angels, and they had ministered unto me. And also, I had heard the voice of the Lord speaking unto me in very word, from time to time; wherefore, I could not be shaken.

Omni 1:17
And at the time that Mosiah discovered them, they had become exceedingly numerous. Nevertheless, they had had many wars and serious contentions, and had fallen by the sword from time to time; and their language had become corrupted; and they had brought no records with them; and they denied the being of their Creator; and Mosiah, nor the people of Mosiah, could understand them.

1 Nephi 16:29
And there was also written upon them a new writing, which was plain to be read, which did give us understanding concerning the ways of the Lord; and it was written and changed from time to time, according to the faith and diligence which we gave unto it. And thus we see that by small means the Lord can bring about great things.

1 Nephi 17:45
Ye are swift to do iniquity but slow to remember the Lord your God. Ye have seen an angel, and he spake unto you; yea, ye have heard his voice from time to time; and he hath spoken unto you in a still small voice, but ye were past feeling, that ye could not feel his words; wherefore, he has spoken unto you like unto the voice of thunder, which did cause the earth to shake as if it were to divide asunder.

See, in many of these cases, an English reader will at first think it's some kind of caveat, but in reality it's a very strong emphasis that the event in question is happening over and over. I know that this interpretation is true because it makes all of these scriptures' meanings clearer.

Note BTW that Doctrine and Covenants doesn't seem to use the phrase this way--in D&C, "from time to time" seems (for the most part?) to mean the same thing as it does in English. For example:

Doctrine and Covenants 20:61
The several elders composing this church of Christ are to meet in conference once in three months, or from time to time as said conferences shall direct or appoint;

I know the Book of Mormon is true, and that Nephi and Alma and Moroni were real people!

--

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

Adventure Journal - from Chapter 2

The goblins were taken completely by surprise. Eladriel hammered two of them into unconsciousness with staff and elbow, then winded the third with a brutal kick to the solar plexus. Crossbow bolts thudded into wood and sod, none striking flesh. A wolf somewhere howled and fled. The remaining goblin pulled out a sword and, laughing savagely, drove it past El's guard and into her lower kidney. A wolf leaped at El's throat and came away with a mouthful of blood--she had ducked, but not enough, although she did keep her feet. Then her quarterstaff thunked into the goblin's temple, and her elbow hammered the wolf to the ground just as Vlad's quarrel took it in the ribs.

Then all was still.

El sagged in exhaustion, feeling her wounds. A moment later, Jack and Vlad appeared out of the forest growth. "Can you take care of these?" she asked, gesturing to the goblinoids. "Also, I think we should stop for lunch."

*****

An hour later, after a meal and some hydration, Eladriel was feeling much better, and all the goblins were still unconscious. We decided to take their weapons with us and burn down their supply cache, so Jack and I spent a few minutes disassembling the barrels and stacking the goods, and then I set everything on fire. Hopefully these goblins will accept the loss and go home.

Finally we made it to East Landing. We had been forcing our pace and arrived quite late, but Eladriel insisted on speaking with a royal representative, which eventually got us Lord Waldemar, the chancellor.

-Vlad

*****

El was seated at a table when tubby old Waldemar opened the door. Gauging her audience, she waited for him to be seated, and then he ran his fingers through his thinning hair and finally looked at her. "Well, milady DuMorne, what can their Majesties do for the Countess this evening? I suppose she wants an extension on the annual apple tax receipts? It's no use asking, you know, the Treasury is in a dreadful state already."

El said seriously, "Milord Waldemar, as you know, I was recently attached to the staff of the Lord Mordenkainen's punitive expedition against the hobgoblin incursion. The army was ambushed. Mordenkainen is dead, and of the army only 280 men of 8000 remain effective, and those men are desperately short on supplies and require relief. When I left them a week and a half ago, they were fortifying a temporary position in case of renewed attack, but they could be wiped out any day."

Waldemar gaped. "The Army of Landing?"

She nodded grimly. "Gone. I must see the king and queen and beg for relief."

--

Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.

Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.

Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.

Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret.

Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

On Job

My email .sig comes from the Book of Job, in the Old Testament.

The whole point of the Book of Job is trusting God can make more of you than you can of yourself. That's why it talks so much about Leviathan. But to me, this passage right here is the crux of the whole book:

Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; 

  and array thyself with glory and beauty.

Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: 

  and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.

Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; 

  and tread down the wicked in their place.

Hide them in the dust together; 

  and bind their faces in secret.

Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.

Job's agony all along consists in not knowing WHY these things are happening to him. "On the one hand," he says, "I know God is righteous and just. I will not complain against him." But then, "On the other hand," he says, "I don't understand why this is happening! Haven't I done everything right? It would be nice if I could just believe my friends that I somehow brought this on myself through sin, at least then I wouldn't have cognitive dissonance--but why does a righteous God punish innocents? Because clearly he does." And the resolution comes when he finally "gets it," although since Job doesn't voice his epiphany aloud you don't actually understand what's happening unless you get it too. 

To an outsider it looks very random: Satan tricks God into punishing Job, Job's friends say he's bad, Job says he isn't, there's a lot of poetry, eventually God shows up and talks a lot about animals, and then suddenly it's over and Job gets his life back (although his original sons and daughters are still dead). No closure, no satisfaction. God never even says, "Sorry for letting Satan trick me." To someone who knows what is going on it looks very different, and in fact it looks a lot like it was actually God tricking Satan and not vice-versa, since after all he was the one who drew Satan's attention in that direction in the first place--and he must have known how predictably Satan would react. God doesn't explain precisely why he judged it necessary for Job to suffer these particular trials along his journey to exaltation (and we do know that no one can be exalted without enduring sore trials first), but it doesn't matter: once Job understands that this really, truly, is for his own good, he exclaims, "Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes!" and is once more at peace. If mine own right hand cannot exalt me, shall I not trust in Him who can? He paid the price in his own blood and infinite pain.

And that's why it is in my .sig.

-Max

--

Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.

Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.

Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.

Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret.

Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

Letter to Sister Br----

Tuesday, Sept 9, 2014

Dear Sister Br-----,

Hi! Congrats on getting your visa! I hope things are going well and that you're liking your companion.

I just recently left Wicresoft to come back to Microsoft. As part of having joined a new company, I've been doing a bunch of corporate training, and when I was doing my Legal 101 Training, the section on contracts struck me. Paraphrasing, "If you are in a position to sign a contract for Microsoft, it is important to know what agreements you are authorized to make, and which entities within Microsoft you are authorized to sign for." It seems to me that these concepts correspond in interesting ways to priesthood keys and priesthood stewardships, respectively. (Although technically, stewardships are actually a part of keys--a stake president has the keys for his stake. But you know what I mean.) Additionally, there are those who fulfill contracts which have been signed on the company's behalf--priesthood assignments from those who hold keys. The analogy isn't perfect, but I really do think it is useful to think of ordinances and the priesthood as a form of contract law.

As an aside, can I share a personal opinion with you? It seems to me that the temple endowment is pretty blunt about whom a priestess speaks for, in eternity, and it isn't her father. One thing that blows my mind about the whole Ordain Women movement (which has largely gone quiescent) is that they are seeking ordination to the wrong priesthood. (Of course, seeking ordination to the "right" priesthoods wouldn't make any sense right now either because those don't exist yet.)

Have you ever noticed how the sacrament, when it's covered, looks a lot like a body under a burial shroud? I'm sure that's on purpose. What do you think the difference is between the bread and the water? Here's what I think: blood is associated with mortality (Lev 17:14, Deut 12:23, and the fact that resurrected being have no blood). When I take the sacrament, I think of different things on different days (sometimes by drinking to the dregs I am covenanting to finish all of mortality, even the parts I hate because Earth life is stupid--like ninety-plus years of middle school) but most commonly the water (BTW wine is red like blood) reminds me that there is a price for sin, but that price has been paid, and that I can move forward and leave the past behind. I also think it is symbolically important that this happens AFTER I have just covenanted to take upon me the nature of Christ (bread = flesh, and "you are what you eat") in a covenant which is NOT tied to the mortal flesh but to "always" and eternity. ("That they may always have his Spirit to be with them" is not in the blessing on the water. Maybe I'm reading too much into that omission but it fits doctrinally: in eternity there is no blood, only flesh and bone, so the covenant of the blood doesn't concern itself with always and forever, only now. "That they do always remember him" is therefore an "always" meaning "continually," not "of infinite duration.")

One of my favorite things about dying is going to be when I talk to someone who actually KNOWS everything and ask, "So, which of these things [i.e. doctrines] did I get right? At least partially?" I remember how pleased I was one day when I discovered that President Joseph F. Smith shared my aversion to raffles, on the same grounds that I dislike them: gambling is the hope of getting something for nothing, and also taking without giving. I remember one time in high school how a girl I know was selling raffles for the school volleyball team; I bought some to support the cause, but she was quite shocked when I told her to keep the tickets. I hope she got something nice out of them.

Hope you're doing well!

Love,

Maximilian

--

Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.

Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.

Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.

Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret.

Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

Dates In The Book of Mormon

[from http://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/09/07/the-genghis-khan-effect/]

8% of the men in  Central Asia carry this y-chromosome, half a percent of all men. One of the authors of that study made an interesting mistake: Chris Tyler-Smith, in an interview, said "We don't think that Genghis Khan was the common ancestor, because our best estimate of the time when the common ancestor lived was a few generations before he was born."

Now that's silly, because are big error bars in that kind of TMRCA, not least when you're doing Y-chromosomes with STRs, the state of the art at that time. If you found a piece of trinitite at Alamagordo and came up with a date of  1943 from some kind of radioactive dating, forget it: it was July 16th, 1945, 05:29:21 MWT (plus or minus 2 seconds)...

It seems to me that this error stems from geneticists thinking that genetic data is the only real data: sloppy genetic time estimates trump precise historical dates.  In much the same way, people (using the old too-high mutation rate) estimated that the split with Neanderthals was ~300,000  years ago, even though the fossil record clearly showed hominids in Europe shambling towards Neanderhood half a million years ago.  The new, lower estimates of the mutation rate have reconciled genetic and paleontological evidence on the split time  – but the geneticists should have realized that there was an inconsistency.

Unfortunately other disciplines have the exact same problem.

I would include "Biblical scholarship" among disciplines that can have this problem. Biblical scholars often estimate the reign of king Zedekiah as beginning around 597 BC, and the birth of Christ at somewhere between 1 and 5 BC. For pure Biblical scholars, that's fine, but for LDS Biblical scholars the more precise dates are available and should be preferred: Christ was born 600 years from the time Lehi left Jerusalem and 92 years into the reign of the judges. While there is some uncertainty as to how literally to take D&C 20 when it comes to the date of Christ's birth, when it comes to king Zedekiah, the Book of Mormon trumps the biblical scholarship estimates: 597 BC is wrong. We know this because the Book of Mormon date is not reconstructed from multiple historical sources, they were tracking this specifically as the foundation of their calendar. Unless you think that Nephites were total incompetents at basic arithmetic, you have to take this date more seriously than the indirect arguments which result in the 597 general consensus.

-Max

--

Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.

Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.

Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.

Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret.

Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

Kingdoms of Glory

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Dear Sister G--------,

Have I mentioned to you lately how much I like your weekly status updates? Even setting aside how much I like you personally--even on top of that, you always have interesting stories that make me think. I was thinking this morning about your latest missive in which you describe a member's attempt to characterize the kingdoms of glory for her son. "Snakes! Fire! Worms!" It made me ponder how I would try to teach this principle to someone--just as I suppose it made you ponder the same.

Suppose I'm dealing with someone who spends time outdoors occasionally. I think I would explain it something like this:

First imagine that you are outside in the mountains. It is cold, and wet, and muddy, and miserable. You can try to seek shelter under a tree but it is still wet and miserable, and you can dig a hole in the ground, but with only your bare hands as tools you cannot make yourself very comfortable. I will compare this to outer darkness.

Now imagine that someone takes you to a concrete bunker. Inside this bunker there is no rain and no wind. There is a shower facility with hot water that lets you get the mud off, and there is temperature control and a sleeping bag and a few cans of baked beans for you to eat. Maybe there is even an automatic dishwasher. Compared to where you were before, this is great! I will compare this to the telestial kingdom, which is the lowest of the kingdoms of glory.

Now imagine that someone takes you from that bunker to a large mansion. You have nice furniture, a swimming pool, a fancing dining room where your friends can come and visit you. You have a pantry stocked with good things to eat, and a kitchen with all the latest electric appliances for your convenience. Upstairs you have fancy bedrooms with soft feather beds for you and your guests. There are recreation rooms filled with gadgets and gizmos and entertainment centers and every kind of play-box and x-box and other electronic device. Compared to where you were, this is fantastic! I will compare this to the terrestrial kingdom, which is a higher kingdom of glory than the telestial.

Now imagine that someone takes you from that mansion to a high-tech mansion factory. In this place you have comforts not only for yourself and your friends comparable to the mansion, but you have the capability to actually construct mansions for your friends and your children. There are drafting machines and automated diggers, and 3D printers, and solar-powered tractors, and robots that can make anything you can imagine. Compared to where you were, this is magical! I will compare this to the celestial kingdom, where God dwells.

Now I want you to realize something about all of these places in my story. They each have requirements, and so it is with the kingdoms of glory. 

To move from a muddy hole in the woods to the clean bunker, you must be willing to accept help from someone else. You cannot be too proud. Likewise the scripture says (D&C 88:32-33) that those who refuse to accept Christ's gifts must remain in outer darkness and not in a kingdom of glory, because they will not receive that which has been given to them. 

In order to move from the bunker to the mansion, you must be prepared to take care of nice things--you must know how to take care of swimming pools, and vacuum floors, and make beds. Otherwise your mansion will not remain a mansion for long. Likewise the scriptures say (D&C 76:98, 103) that those who break the commandments, who lie and steal and commit adultery, cannot come into the terrestrial kingdom but remain in the telestial kingdom.

To move from the mansion to the mansion factory, you must be prepared to utilize the tools in the factory. You must be someone who has a desire to build and discover and create things to serve others--otherwise the tools will go unused and you might as well just have stayed in the mansion! I cannot fully describe the celestial kingdom because I cannot see it now, but I do know this: the scriptures say (D&C 76:55-59, 70) that they will dwell with God and receive all things, and become "gods, even the sons [and daughters] of God," and that only those who are valiant in the testimony of Jesus can dwell there. And I know that the work and the glory of God is "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man," so I know that those who are in the celestial kingdom must also be those who are dedicated to that work.

And I think that's pretty much how I would describe the kingdoms of glory.

And now for a quick snippet, here is something that a friend of mine wrote on Facebook about her boys. [Names changed]

This morning while checking pockets in jeans, so I could throw them in the wash, I smiled when I realized that I could tell who's jeans were who's just by the contents of their pockets. Andy's pocket are always full of candy wrappers, Kyle's have knives, or some sharp object in them, Brian's have lego men. A pocket size glimpse into their personalities.

Max adds: Something left in a pocket is so ordinary and everyday that you probably never even think about it. It's just a consequence of the life you live every day. When the Savior comes, what will he find in my pockets?

Love always,

Maximilian

--

Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.

Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.

Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.

Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret.

Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

--
Be pretty if you are,
Be witty if you can,
But be cheerful if it kills you.

If you're so evil, eat this kitten!

Disbelief and mental models

[excerpted from a letter to Sister G.]

Okay, last thing I wanted to tell you about: I want to share with you a thought about investigators' concerns and the conversion process, but first I have to read to you from a CIA publication called /The Psychology of Intelligence Analysis./ The CIA is pretty good at collecting lots of information but relatively bad at making good predictions, and the book is aimed at helping CIA analysts improve their analysis by, among other things, understanding the human mind and how memory works and the difference between how people think they think and how they actually often think.

Experienced analysts have an imperfect understanding of what information they actually use in making judgments. They are unaware of the extent to which their judgments are determined by a few dominant factors, rather than by the systematic integration of all available information. Analysts actually use much less of the available information than they think they do.

The expert perceives his or her own judgmental process, including the number of different kinds of information taken into account, as being considerably more complex than is in fact the case. Experts overestimate the importance of factors that have only a minor impact on their judgment and underestimate the extent to which their decisions are based on a few major variables. In short, people's mental models are simpler than they think, and the analyst is typically unaware not only of which variables should have the greatest influence, but also which variables actually are having the greatest influence. 

All this has been demonstrated by experiments in which analysts were asked to make quantitative estimates concerning a relatively large number of cases in their area of expertise, with each case defined by a number of quantifiable factors. In one experiment, for example, stock market analysts were asked to predict long-term price appreciation for 50 securities, with each security being described in such terms as price/earnings ratio, corporate earnings growth trend, and dividend yield. After completing this task, the analysts were asked to explain how they reached their conclusions, including how much weight they attached to each of the variables. They were instructed to be sufficiently explicit that another person going through the same information could apply the same judgmental rules and arrive at the same conclusions. 

In order to compare this verbal rationalization with the judgmental policy reflected in the stock market analysts' actual decisions, multiple regression analysis or other similar statistical procedures can be used to develop a mathematical model of how each analyst actually weighed and combined information on the relevant variables. There have been at least eight studies of this type in diverse fields, including one involving prediction of future socioeconomic growth of underdeveloped nations. The mathematical model based on the analyst's actual decisions is invariably a more accurate description of that analyst's decision making than the analyst's own verbal description of how the judgments were made. 

Although the existence of this phenomenon has been amply demonstrated, its causes are not well understood. The literature on these experiments contains only the following speculative explanation: Possibly our feeling that we can take into account a host of different factors comes about because, although we remember that at some time or other we have attended to each of the different factors, we fail to notice that it is seldom more than one or two that we consider at any one time.

So what's the relevance of this to missionary work? I think, Sister G--------, that people's mental models for believing or disbelieving the gospel are also often simpler than they think. I'm not saying that there aren't people who have genuine issues with doctrine or history or whatever, but I think there are also people who think they have issues when those issues would actually pretty much resolve themselves (or at least recede) if they had a spiritual witness of the truth and a desire to change their lives. If a stock analyst can fool himself about the real reasons why he thinks a stock is going to go up or down, how much easier is it for us to see false complexity in matters of faith!?!

--

Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.

Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.

Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.

Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret.

Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.