Anonymouswizard's Astoundingly Assonant Random Banter #240

[Keltest]

....you should really know the name of the company you work for by the time you start working for them. Let alone seven years in.

If google is correct, which I admit is a big if, the name is now just the acronym and it no longer stands for anything.

[Bartmanhomer]

If google is correct, which I admit is a big if, the name is now just the acronym and it no longer stands for anything.

It's an acronym now.

So anyway my Thanksgiving is turning out great. My older brother is cooking food as usual and I was watching the Macy Thanksgiving Parade on TV. I was going to the parade but I didn't feel like going because of this silly pandemic but I don't think people are still talking about the pandemic that much anymore. Next year, I'm going to the parade.

[Rater202]

The homemade cranberry sauce turned out absolutely perfectly.

[Bartmanhomer]

The homemade cranberry sauce turned out absolutely perfectly.

Yum. That sounds good.

[LaZodiac]

I'm watching training videos at work to pass time and so far 11 minutes of this hour long video is "the people setting up the training video get distracted discussing actual work stuff" and this is beautiful chaos.

They edit these. These are edited. They could have fixed this.

[Fyraltari]

I'm watching training videos at work to pass time and so far 11 minutes of this hour long video is "the people setting up the training video get distracted discussing actual work stuff" and this is beautiful chaos.

They edit these. These are edited. They could have fixed this.

They are training your tolerance for irrelevant nonsense, a most useful quality in the workplace.

[Anonymouswizard]

They are training your tolerance for irrelevant nonsense, a most useful quality in the workplace.

...I just realised why I never get promoted.

[Bartmanhomer]

Here is something that you don't know about me:

I don't like funerals even though I've never been to a funeral in my entire life. The reason why I don't like funerals it's a triggered warning for me. I don't think I can't handle keeping my emotions in check. It's very sad to me.

[2D8HP]

This morning I woke up at the new place (that has views of the Inner Sea and the River Hlal) alone for the first time.

Went to meet my roommate and bring her a wool blanket over to her house/pet-sitting gig, then we had Thanksgiving coffee together in an expensive suburb south of Lankhmar damn it’s nice there!

Picked up some food and headed over the bridge to spend some days with my wife and the kids.

Got a good raise this year thanks to my union while rents haven’t gone up.

Most excitedly: got word this last month from her doctors that my roommate’s remaining tumors are benign and not growing, chemotherapy for her has been canceled with a check back in six months; she walks with a cane now but she can walk again.

Things could be worse.

[LaZodiac]

They are training your tolerance for irrelevant nonsense, a most useful quality in the workplace.

Jokes on them I've worked in a law office for fourish years prior to this, I can handle any of that easy peasy.

This morning I woke up at the new place (that has views of the Inner Sea and the River Hlal) alone for the first time.

Went to meet my roommate and bring her a wool blanket over to her house/pet-sitting gig, then we had Thanksgiving coffee together in an expensive suburb south of Lankhmar damn it’s nice there!

Picked up some food and headed over the bridge to spend some days with my wife and the kids.

Got a good raise this year thanks to my union while rents haven’t gone up.

Most excitedly: got word this last month from her doctors that my roommate’s remaining tumors are benign and not growing, chemotherapy for her has been canceled with a check back in six months; she walks with a cane now but she can walk again.

Things could be worse.

I'm glad things are turning upways for you.

[Rater202]

In the short story The Monkey's Paw, the titular paw exists to teach people not to defy fate... By giving them horrific consequences for everything they wish for.

Wish for 200 pounds? You get it as compensation after a loved one is horribly mangled to death in a workplace accident. Wish them back to life, they come back as a horribly mutilated corpse man. The only wish that doesn't get warped is the one where you wish to undo a previous wish. (and thats assuming that the wife going mad with grief was natural.)

It's meant to show humility but... This isn't just some random naturally occurring phenomenon. This is a talisman created by a fakir in order to teach that lesson.

The horrific consequences of making a wish aren't the result of fate punishing hubris... They're the result of the fakir who created the talisman being an *******. The act of trying to teach the lesson undermined the lesson.

...Semi-related: What would 200 pounds in 1902 translate to today? I'm having a hell of a time finding an inflation chart that'll just tell me in plain English and I never could figure out whether or not asking for 200 pounds was all that much.

[Anonymouswizard]

A bit under £20,000 today. So about 64USD

More seriously, a bit under £20,000, so about a year's wages for the poorest in society. It's a significant amount, but nothing amazing. Closer to upgrading your kitchen than buying a house.

[Peelee]

In the short story The Monkey's Paw, the titular paw exists to teach people not to defy fate... By giving them horrific consequences for everything they wish for.

Wish for 200 pounds? You get it as compensation after a loved one is horribly mangled to death in a workplace accident. Wish them back to life, they come back as a horribly mutilated corpse man. The only wish that doesn't get warped is the one where you wish to undo a previous wish. (and thats assuming that the wife going mad with grief was natural.)

It's meant to show humility but... This isn't just some random naturally occurring phenomenon. This is a talisman created by a fakir in order to teach that lesson.

The horrific consequences of making a wish aren't the result of fate punishing hubris... They're the result of the fakir who created the talisman being an *******. The act of trying to teach the lesson undermined the lesson.

...Semi-related: What would 200 pounds in 1902 translate to today? I'm having a hell of a time finding an inflation chart that'll just tell me in plain English and I never could figure out whether or not asking for 200 pounds was all that much.

How is that meant to show humility?

[Rater202]

How is that meant to show humility?

Error on my part, it's meant to teach humility.

The paw exists to punish hubris. Hubris being defined as "not being completly satisfied with your lot in life as is."

...Though the fact that the person who made the paw thinks that they have the right to judge people and punish them for what they decide is hubris breaks the moral, since that's also hubris.

[Fyraltari]

Error on my part, it's meant to teach humility.

The paw exists to punish hubris. Hubris being defined as "not being completly satisfied with your lot in life as is."

...Though the fact that the person who made the paw thinks that they have the right to judge people and punish them for what they decide is hubris breaks the moral, since that's also hubris.

That depends on the specifics of the spell, no? If the fakir earnestly believed that good things always have unintended prices, then he could simply have bewitched the paw to make wishes come true, confident in his wisdom that fate would attend to itself.

[Peelee]

Error on my part, it's meant to teach humility.

The paw exists to punish hubris. Hubris being defined as "not being completly satisfied with your lot in life as is."

...Though the fact that the person who made the paw thinks that they have the right to judge people and punish them for what they decide is hubris breaks the moral, since that's also hubris.

Yeah, that's not to teach humility or punish hubris. It's to teach to jot tempt fate.

[Rater202]

That depends on the specifics of the spell, no? If the fakir earnestly believed that good things always have unintended prices, then he could simply have bewitched the paw to make wishes come true, confident in his wisdom that fate would attend to itself.

Yeah, that's not to teach humility or punish hubris. It's to teach to jot tempt fate.

It amounts to the same thing: "I received 200 pounds" does not innately have the consequence of "my son died so horribly that I had to identify him by his clothes."

That's not fate, that's the monkey's paw, and by extension that man who created it, being a jackass. Which undermines the moral.

[Peelee]

It amounts to the same thing: "I received 200 pounds" does not innately have the consequence of "my son died so horribly that I had to identify him by his clothes."

That's not fate, that's the monkey's paw, and by extension that man who created it, being a jackass. Which undermines the moral.

It doesn't amount to the same thing at all.

[Fyraltari]

It amounts to the same thing: "I received 200 pounds" does not innately have the consequence of "my son died so horribly that I had to identify him by his clothes."

That's not fate, that's the monkey's paw, and by extension that man who created it, being a jackass. Which undermines the moral.

How do you know the difference between fate being a jackass and the monkey's paw's creator being a jackass? Do you know how the mechanism of the monkey's paw?

Yes there are ways to receive 200£ without your son's death, but the point of the story, whether you agree to it or not, is that every boon comes at a price, in this case it was the son's death, but it could have been something else.

Your problem isn't with the magic of the paw, it's with the moral of the story.

[Rater202]

How do you know the difference between fate being a jackass and the monkey's paw's creator being a jackass? Do you know how the mechanism of the monkey's paw?

Yes there are ways to receive 200£ without your son's death, but the point of the story, whether you agree to it or not, is that every boon comes at a price, in this case it was the son's death, but it could have been something else.

Your problem isn't with the magic of the paw, it's with the moral of the story.

The point of the story is that you should be content with your lot in life rather than having the hubris to tempt or defy fate.

The fakir who created the paw did so with the intent to teach humility and punish hubris. It tempts people with the promise of more and then wists their desires in the worst possible way.

[Fyraltari]

The point of the story is that you should be content with your lot in life rather than having the hubris to tempt or defy fate.

The fakir who created the paw did so with the intent to teach humility and punish hubris. It tempts people with the promise of more and then wists their desires in the worst possible way.

Yes, I know the story. Nowhere does it imply the fakir wasn't content with his own lot in life or that he was wrong. You may think that that wanting your lot in life to improve is not wrong (and I would agree with you) but the story does not contradict itself the way you implied.

[Rater202]

Yes, I know the story. Nowhere does it imply the fakir wasn't content with his own lot in life or that he was wrong. You may think that that wanting your lot in life to improve is not wrong (and I would agree with you) but the story does not contradict itself the way you implied.

The contradiction is that the moral of the story talks about temping or defying fate.

But the very fact that the monkey's paw was deliberately made undermines the moral, because it's not "fate" punishing people's hubris, it's the monkey's paw.

It wasn't fated for the paw to exist, the fakir took fate into his own hands to create a means by which people would be tempted to and punished for reaching beyond their lot in life.

If the monkey's paw was just some naturally occurring phenomenon we wouldn't be having this conversation, but the fact that it was deliberately made with the intent of punishing people who use it undermines the message because it is not fate doing this, it's the magic of the monkey's paw.

Additionally, the act of assuming that he had the right to do so, the right to judge, the right to punish, the right to force lessons on others is far more hubristic than anything we see people wishing for in the novel, which makes the fakir a hypocrite: He's punishing the hubris of others without considering his own. We know that the first person to have the Monkey's paw used their third wish to kill themself. Who's learning anything there?

[Peelee]

The point of the story is that you should be content with your lot in life rather than having the hubris to tempt or defy fate.

Did anyone get punished for trying to improve themselves in any other way? No. They got punished for trying to simply wish their problems away.

I suspect you dislike this because all of your fantasies are some form of wishing your problems away.

[Fyraltari]

The contradiction is that the moral of the story talks about temping or defying fate.

But the very fact that the monkey's paw was deliberately made undermines the moral, because it's not "fate" punishing people's hubris, it's the monkey's paw.

Again, how do you know that the monkey's paw doesn't simply insure you get what you wish for (as opposed to usual wishful thinking, where there's no guarantee of anything) and lets fate dole out the punishment?

It wasn't fated for the paw to exist, the fakir took fate into his own hands to create a means by which people would be tempted to and punished for reaching beyond their lot in life.
If the monkey's paw was just some naturally occurring phenomenon we wouldn't be having this conversation, but the fact that it was deliberately made with the intent of punishing people who use it undermines the message because it is not fate doing this, it's the magic of the monkey's paw.

How do you know the paw wasn't fated to exist? Its creator has magic powers, for all we know he could have seen that it was his fate to create it. Also, the paw doesn't tempt anyone, people come up with their wishes on their own. PEople already make all sorts of wishes all the time without it.

Additionally, the act of assuming that he had the right to do so, the right to judge, the right to punish, the right to force lessons on others is far more hubristic than anything we see people wishing for in the novel, which makes the fakir a hypocrite: He's punishing the hubris of others without considering his own. We know that the first person to have the Monkey's paw used their third wish to kill themself. Who's learning anything there?

But he's not punishing anyone, he's saying "for all good fortune there are unforeseen consequences, if you still want to ask for things, go ahead, but you'll regret it."

As for the fakir's hybris, we know nothing about him. He's not in the story, it's not even clear that anyone in the story ever met him. For all we know the paw could very well be a "naturally occuring phenomenon". He's not a character, he's a plot device.

[Anonymouswizard]

Potentially unpopular opinion: good meat substitutes have been actively harmful to vegetarian cooking.

I wanted a bean burger the other day and didn't want to make it myself. So I went to the veggie premade food part of my local supermarket and almost all the burgers were meat replacements with one mixed veg burger. I got one, it was kind of meat-like but clearly had a soy texture, but it wasn't as good as a bean burger.

At best it made me forget I wasn't eating meat. But I don't get excited by the idea that I won't miss something. I got excited by the idea that I was going to eat a bean burger, and it would taste like its own thing and be really delicious.

It's why I don't mind mushroom balls. I can eat them and immediately tell they're made of fungus, but they're nice. If I wanted some soy I'd eat some tofu.

I'll probably make a tofu curry this weekend.

[Rater202]

Did anyone get punished for trying to improve themselves in any other way? No. They got punished for trying to simply wish their problems away..

"It had a spell put on it by an old Fakir," said the Sergeant-Major, "a very holy man. He wanted to show that fate ruled people's lives, and that those who interfered with it did so to their sorrow. He put a spell on it so that three separate men could each have three wishes from it."

Direct quote from the story, emphasis mine.

The fakkir believed that any attempt to defy fate would lead to sorrow and so created the paw to emphasize the fact.

Beyond that, it's a short story taking place over a few weeks tops and the main characters are an elderly couple. There's not much opportunity to change your lot in life at that point.

[Peelee]

Direct quote from the story, emphasis mine.

The fakkir believed that any attempt to defy fate would lead to sorrow and so created the paw to emphasize the fact.

Beyond that, it's a short story taking place over a few weeks tops and the main characters are an elderly couple. There's not much opportunity to change your lot in life at that point.

Again, the only negative outcomes are for trying to wish the problems away. If attempting to change your scenario was already fated to give you a negative outcome for doing so then he wouldn't need to create the monkey paw to start with. It would already be self evident to everyone.

[Metastachydium]

I took a fresh look at the story myself, just now. Nowhere is it stated that the fakir's spell specifically perverts the wish, only that it will grant a finite number of wishes and the fakir believed manipulating fate has dire consequences. The fakir himself would seem to have appended a warning to the item (otherwise Morris's predecessor and through him, Morris wouldn't have known its stated purpose), and Morris was warned by the dead man (whether directly or indirectly) just as the Whites were warned by Morris.

Now, the fakir's act of crafting the paw is hardly the same thing as the others using the paw. What the fakir warns against is (selfishly) tampering with fate. He had the power to do that (as demonstrated by his crafting the paw), but he didn't do it (as demonstrated by the fact that he never used it).

[Rater202]

Topic Change.

My mom's been doing ancestry research, a family tree and history for us, for a long time.

Apparently, we've got a lot of English nobility in our tree, for as much as that's worth...

But the oldest of her own ancestors she can find is referred to as both a Baron and an Earl and I'm not sure why that is... Even if the person held both titles they're not equivalent to each other so wouldn't the higher-ranking title supersede the other?

[Bartmanhomer]

I took a fresh look at the story myself, just now. Nowhere is it stated that the fakir's spell specifically perverts the wish, only that it will grant a finite number of wishes and the fakir believed manipulating fate has dire consequences. The fakir himself would seem to have appended a warning to the item (otherwise Morris's predecessor and through him, Morris wouldn't have known its stated purpose), and Morris was warned by the dead man (whether directly or indirectly) just as the Whites were warned by Morris.

Now, the fakir's act of crafting the paw is hardly the same thing as the others using the paw. What the fakir warns against is (selfishly) tampering with fate. He had the power to do that (as demonstrated by his crafting the paw), but he didn't do it (as demonstrated by the fact that he never used it).

What's the name of the story by the way?