Currently reading, well sampling, lots of books. I just finished both books in Ben Tripp's Rise Again duology, for the second time (this time via audiobook). Now I'm trying to focus a bit on The Philosophy of Science: Key Concepts by Steven French. A couple of chapters in, I find it's an interesting blend of academic resources and what you might think of as conversational blog writing. He's quoted Feyerabend already so I'm pretty sure it's legit.
Watched all of each. Pretty good afternoon of football. In light of Brady's struggles hitting targets, I'm not sure Manning was entirely on the hook for the misses. Still, I'm guessing not being able to plant completely is something he still hasn't adjusted to. There were plenty of excellent completions, though, e.g., the first TD to Daniels. I'm hoping the SB is a good game, and I know Kubiak and Manning and the rest of the Broncos team know what to look for, what to prepare for. It'll be pretty impressive to see Carolina struggle, given how much fun they're having and especially how much fun they had beating the Cardinals. I don't know that Palmer's passing index finger wasn't perhaps more problematic than Peyton's foot, though, and so made Carolina look even tougher when the Cardinals had to go all-in on a passing strategy.
I'm impressed by the play in the Denver/Steelers game. I think it was a pretty even battle, and feel it was a success for my team who made it pretty far on 4th- and 5th-string running backs (who were very solid) and without Antonio Brown. It showed they have nice depth. Plus the Steelers defense defended the pass pretty well. I would've liked a win but I feel everything was earned on merit so am not really disappointed.
Confirmed: Steelers fan 4 LIFE OMG LOL FBI! But yeah, some really critical drops on the part of the Denver receiving core. I'll take it but it doesn't bode well for the Steelers defense if they're getting help from the wind and some dropsies. Not going to happen in NE.
Great drive to the end of Seattle/Carolina. Both teams are excellent. I wanted each to win so any result would've been bittersweet, but I'll admit I have a soft spot for Russell Wilson. Watching Pittsburgh/Denver and am pleasantly surprised at how competitive it is. Of course Ben's sacked for the second time just as I type this.
Resolutions, like everything else, are pointless unless they're not. Whatever model of motivation or activity works for you works for you. I do find it interesting that we so preoccupy ourselves with the means and ideals of productivity, as if producing some material good in the world is a universal necessity. I don't even know how to approach that, though, in any systematic way. That said, I don't do resolutions tied to a particular date but I am in need of developing a practice of some sort, a daily ritual structure to hang my obligations on. Otherwise, I list about and fuss and contemplate how much I don't want to be doing whatever it is I'm obliged, typically by my own choice, to do. But these rituals feel as arbitrary as they are so it's a challenge to actually commit to following them. In other words, I don't like being bossed around, least by me.
That was a day of statistically similar games that couldn't have been more different. I only watched the latter half of the fourth quarter of the Arizone/Green Bay game, but having tracked the NE/KC game via the ESPN app, it seems that KC was never really in their game. Oh my, Mr. Fitzgerald. Today's games? I think Carolina's gonna roll, honestly. My impression is that Seattle's O-line is pretty rough and I don't see them getting through with Wilson running around crazy all day. And while I really want the Steelers to win (natch) I think it'll almost require the emergence of new stars. Toussaint and Todman ran fairly well against the Bengals but Denver's had a week to watch film on them. More importantly, no one knows what's up with Ben, which Tomlin might be using strategically. But Manning has, if memory serves, done pretty well against Pittsburgh and the Steelers' pass D is a large reason why they do so well against the run in gross terms: opponents know passing is the path of least resistance.
Do I correctly understand that the attraction noted is to a less-severe (positively or negatively) reaction to a success or failure regarding a particular moral responsibility? I haven't read more than a little bit of Caruso's precis and admit the terminology leaves me a little behind, but I think that's the thrust.
What is particularly attractive about that? That is, assume one has the absolute control, the free will, required for moral responsibility, and an agent (the one him- or herself or some other) is assessing a particular act against the standard of moral responsibility. What is gained by diluting the severity of the response, either the praise or reprobation? Is it merely the dampening effect, the resultant tendency for smaller perturbations of appraisal, or is there something else typically discussed in this domain?