Wittgenstein notebooks rediscovered

Wittgenstein died 60 years ago today. The Guardian reports some rediscovered notebooks:

... the only known handwritten version of Wittgenstein's Brown Book – notes from his Cambridge lectures in the mid-1930s. There are an additional 60 pages of manuscript for the Brown Book with a revised opening and other changes.

Gibson also believes that a pinkish Norwegian school exercise book in the archive, which has a complete and previously unknown narrative, may in fact be a missing Wittgenstein gem – something talked about but never seen. "This may or may not be the missing item called the Pink Book or Yellow Book that scholars have long been hoping for." There is also a series of thousands of mathematical calculations in which Wittgenstein examines Fermat's little theorem.

Check the sell-by date!

In a rare reversal, my wife was the one visiting Walmart yesterday, and she sent me a picture of one of her acquisitions:

Your reaction -- "huh?" or "oh yeah!" -- tells something about your age.

According to Wikipedia -- amazing, aren't they? -- this actually came out late 2010, but I guess it's only just now filtering down to the provinces. Apparently the Taco flavor was phased out around 1977.

Numerous impromptu online support groups have sprung up over the years among devoted fans who miss the original Taco Doritos flavor formula. Reincarnations and relaunches of the Taco Doritos, including the recent "Back By Popular Demand" campaign, did not recreate the original Taco flavor. The Taco chips included in the Zesty Taco/Chipotle Ranch "Collisions" bags were very close to the original, but were since discontinued in most of the country.[8]In late 2010 the Taco flavor recipe that was used in the 1980's returned in a limited edition "retro" styled bag incorporating the original Doritos logo, and in early 2011 the company announced that this incarnation would remain in the permanent product line-up.

The Taco flavor was pretty awesome, so I'm glad to see it return, though not to the extent that I regret having omitted to join any online support groups.

... From the article, an interesting Daubert "angle" (heh):

The company was sued in 2003 by Charles Grady, who claimed that his throat had been damaged because of eating Doritos. According to him, the shape and rigidity of the chips made them inherently dangerous. Grady attempted to admit into evidence a study by a former chemistry professor that calculated how best to safely swallow the chips. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court later ruled that the study did not meet scientific standards and could not be presented as evidence.

Fortunately for most of America, they're clustered where I live

Obama's long-form birth certificate has provided yet more empirical evidence for ... the crazification factor:

A new SurveyUSA poll finds that of those who have seen President Obama's newly-released detailed birth certificate, 71% are satisfied that he was born in the United States but 18% still have doubts and another 10% say the document released by the White House is a forgery.

28%. It's like the blackbody curve. Plus, the 18/10 split suggests we may be able to pin down the Special/General crazification values.

John: Objectively crazy or crazy vis-a-vis my own inertial reference frame for rational behaviour? I mean, are you creating the Theory of Special Crazification or General Crazification?

Tyrone: Hadn't thought about it. Let's split the difference. Half just have worldviews which lead them to disagree with what you consider rationality even though they arrive at their positions through rational means, and the other half are the core of the Crazification -- either genuinely crazy; or so woefully misinformed about how the world works, the bases for their decision making is so flawed they may as well be crazy.

So the core value is around 10%.

Doctors in the torture chambers

Of course, nothing will happen to these people.

We reviewed GTMO medical records and relevant case files (client affidavits, attorney–client notes and summaries, and legal affidavits of medical experts) of nine individuals for evidence of torture and ill treatment and documentation by medical personnel. In each of the nine cases, GTMO detainees alleged abusive interrogation methods that are consistent with torture as defined by the UN Convention Against Torture as well as the more restrictive US definition of torture that was operational at the time. The medical affidavits in each of the nine cases indicate that the specific allegations of torture and ill treatment are highly consistent with physical and psychological evidence documented in the medical records and evaluations by non-governmental medical experts. However, the medical personnel who treated the detainees at GTMO failed to inquire and/or document causes of the physical injuries and psychological symptoms they observed. Psychological symptoms were commonly attributed to “personality disorders” and “routine stressors of confinement.” Temporary psychotic symptoms and hallucinations did not prompt consideration of abusive treatment. Psychological assessments conducted by non-governmental medical experts revealed diagnostic criteria for current major depression and/or PTSD in all nine cases.

Conclusion

The findings in these nine cases from GTMO indicate that medical doctors and mental health personnel assigned to the DoD neglected and/or concealed medical evidence of intentional harm.

Of course, they didn't have to inquire -- they knew damn well what was happening. As Sullivan says, "the psychologists were part of the torture." Where's Robert Jay Lifton when you need him?

... Not to let my snark mislead, Lifton has been active in his condemnation of medical assistance in American torture.

Weird

Gates to leave, Panetta to Defense, Petraeus to CIA?

We knew Gates was ready to leave, but this suggests a grave lack of talent in Democratic ranks. Panetta's inability to reform CIA does not bode well for his taking over the Pentagon. And Petraeus at CIA is simply, well, weird.

Someone break the news to Jon Chait

Depriving at least one liberal blogger of the chance to write "Boss Hogg" posts for the next year and a half, Haley Barbour has announced he won't run for president.

Objectively, it's sensible. It's a long-shot race, he doesn't have the health for it, and he would do much better to run virtually unopposed for Thad Cochran's Senate seat in 2014, assuming Cochran doesn't step down sooner and give Barbour's (presumably GOP) successor the chance to appoint Barbour.

Attacking the lawyers, not the clients

Via Sullyblog, we see that the law firm hired by the House to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (which, recall, DOJ said it would not defend in court) has backed out, apparently under gay-rights pressure.

I'm with Sullivan on this one. I thought it was wrong, wrong, wrong to attack law firms who provided counsel to Gitmo prisoners. That doesn't stop being wrong when you flip the +/- signs.

"Remedy is the guts of the judicial power. The rest is book reports."

Per CharleyCarp's suggestion in comments, here is Sabin Willett on what the D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court have done to his clients and to the rule of law. A snippet:

In the end it wasn’t about enemies at all. For it was the Uighurs, of all people, upon whom the court house door at last was shut. With so much talk of Palau, people forget that when Judge Urbina ruled — when the stay entered, when Kiyemba I was decided — there was no Palau. And that decision is reinstated. So the options are irrelevant. No judge can order release in any place where his orders have effect. Whatever his view of the law of war, a reader of this blog must wince, a little, at the idea that the judicial power consists of being reassured by the jailer that the jailer will attend to his own unlawful act — at the idea that what controls a judicial remedy is not law, but the politics of Yemen, of Bermuda, of Obamacare, of the New Hampshire Primary. The court can do no more than accept the President’s representation that he is attempting to arrange an “appropriate” resettlement. Imagine that representation from, say, President Trump. Will we call that a judicial remedy?

Read the whole thing. If "Uighurs" makes you go "huh?" try Wikipedia.

A blog post of great social and political import

Eugene Volokh has an analytical post on vibrators, tho from a sociological perspective not a legal one. But as that's was always a TBA preoccupation (moreso perhaps in earlier incarntions of this blog, before the 5th Circuit legalized 'em), we link to it nonetheless.

Ole Miss professors teach witchcraft to tots!

How was the Reverend Wildmon not all over this?

In 2005, just before Halloween, psychologists at the Universities of Mississippi and Texas introduced 81 children from preschool through first grade to the "Candy Witch," who would replace leftover Halloween candy with a toy if the child asked for the Candy Witch to visit. In one group of children, the parents "simulated" a visit from the Candy Witch, while in the other group, the children did not receive any "visit." The researchers interviewed the children twice after Halloween, and once a year later, to measure levels of belief.

Summoning witches to receive toys in exchange for a pledge of faith? And this Satanic corruption of innocent children was paid for by your federal tax dollars, no doubt. Release the hounds!

"The bows and scrapes of mistresses and confessors"

Finally getting to reading Churchill's biography of Marlborough, and his fine rant on Louis XIV deserves posting. Apropos of the revocation of the Edict of Nantes and associated persecutions:

We have no patience with the lackey pens which have sought to invest this long, hateful process with the appearances of dignity and honour. During the whole of his life Louis XIV was the curse and pest of Europe. No worse enemy of human freedom has ever appeared in the trappings of polite civilization. Insatiable appetite, cold, calculating ruthlessness, monumental conceit, presented themselves armed with fire and sword. The veneer of culture and good manners, of brilliant ceremonies and elaborate etiquette, only adds a heightening effect to the villainy of his life's story. Better the barbarian conquerors of antiquity, primordial figures of the abyss, than this high-heeled, beperiwigged dandy, strutting amid the bows and scrapes of mistresses and confessors to the torment of his age. Petty and mediocre in all except his lusts and power, the Sun King disturbed and harried mankind during more than fifty years of arrogant pomp.

... Without pretending to any analysis of his prose, note how Churchill is unafraid to marshal cliches -- "fire and sword," "cold and calculating" -- and assimilate them in a paragraph that doesn't sound at all cliched.

Unhappily, that qualifier about "in the trappings of polite civilization" has to do more heavy lifting now than it did when Churchill wrote.

Well, except for # 18.

Being busy with other matters, I failed to notice that April 13 was "Ask an Atheist Day." ("An opportunity for the general public — particularly people of faith — to approach us and ask questions about secular life.") So, almost, did Avram Grumer.

Unfortunately, I didn’t find out about National Ask an Atheist Day until pretty late, and there isn’t much time left. So I’m skipping the question phase and going straight to answers:

1. Nope, not ever.
2. Yeah, sometimes.
3. Not since Grant Morrison stopped writing it.
4. Well, I don’t really see that as a distinction worth drawing.
5. Take the N, Q, or R train to 57th Street, and walk one block north.
6. I don’t know that it’s really a meaningful question, given that the key terms are never defined.
7. A different breath weapon from each head.
8. No, that would be a terrible idea.
9. One’s an analogy Bertrand Russell came up with, another’s an early 3D CAD model, and the third’s a distinctive geological feature associated with a 1920s political scandal.
10. Templar, Arizona, by Charlie “Spike” Trotman.
11. Yeah, I’m pretty sure you could pick a dozen lines each from the Bible and the Koran and mix them together, and most Americans wouldn’t be able to tell which came from which book.
12. Murray’s Bagels, Sixth Avenue, between 12th and 13th Streets. Be sure to ask for belly lox; that’s the real stuff.
13. Well, I’m flattered, but no, thank you.
14. It seems that somewhere between PHP3 and PHP5, they changed how to access environment variables, and that bolloxed things up. Took me two hours to find the problem, but just a few seconds to fix it once I found it.
15. Well, I’ve seen different people use the word “numinous” to mean different things, so I really couldn’t say.
16. Three: One to change the bulb, and two to perform “É il Sol Dell’Anima” from Rigoletto.
17. You use it in the early game to pare down your hand by getting rid of Copper and Estates. Make sure to pick up some Silver or Gold first, or some Action card that grants a money bonus.
18. Boxers.

I'm not sure how different these are from the answers available on "Ask a Skeptical Lutheran Day."

Back to the drawing board!

The Pulitzers came out, and we are pleased by the absence of Jonathan Franzen's name on the list. Not that awards mean anything of course.

... The only winner I've read was Chernow's Washington, which was pretty good, but I'm a little sad if that was really the best American biography in 2010.

What? Insufficient time spent petting those little dogs?

Douglas Kmiec, the conservative law prof who made a small stir by supporting Obama in 2008, was rewarded by being named ambassador to Malta.

Now, having been criticized by the State Department's inspector general for excessive extracurricular activity, Kmiec has resigned:

The American ambassador to Malta resigned his post Saturday after criticism from the State Department's inspector general that he was devoting too much time to promoting better relations between religions.

Douglas Kmiec, a prominent conservative constitutional lawyer and member of the Pepperdine University faculty, said in letters to President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that he rejected the inspector general's conclusion that his advocacy was outside his official mission.

Kmiec wrote that the inspector general had a "flawed and narrow vision of our diplomatic mission" and said his writings had a "highly positive effect on our diplomatic relations."

He thinks he knows why the IG targeted him:

Kmiec said that when he worked for the Office of Legal Counsel in 1989 he recommended that inspector generals' work be confined to rooting out waste rather than evaluating departmental policies.

"I suspect I have just experienced a 'sting back,'" Kmiec wrote to Clinton.

Based on the article's description of Kmiec's transgressions, I gotta say I'm on his side:

But the inspector general's report, issued in February, says he had an "unconventional approach to his role" and devoted much time to writing on the "interfaith initiative." It said his official schedule was "uncharacteristically light," and that he had had "friction with principal officials in Washington, especially over his reluctance to accept their guidance and instructions."

At the same time, the report says, Kmiec had "achieved some policy successes" and was respected by Maltese officials and embassy staff members.

Department officials spent considerable time reviewing and editing Kmiec's writings related to religion, and they barred him from organizing conferences aimed at improving relations between religions, officials said.

Uh, excuse me? The guy is ambassador to Malta. I'm not even sure why we *have* a full ambassador in Malta, but how demanding can the job be? He could probably spend 10 hours a week on his "official schedule" and do just fine.

Because what could be more judicious than a Xerox?

A while back we noted the issue of judicial adoptions of a party's proposed findings, so it's interesting to note that a Canadian court has reversed a trial court on just that basis.