Another fantastic post. Your writing is excellent: clear, focused, and direct. There's no superfluous language, every sentence contributes something of value to the piece, and the ideas are genuinely interesting. I'd buy a book of yours in an instant (and I hope you write one!).
Thank you for this and the previous article, it was really interesting and helpful! (Also came across here via Aaron Renn).
Was just thinking about the antonym to specialization. Isn't that generalization? Kind of like medical doctors can have a specialty or be a general practitioner.
Yeah, this was actually an error because of how I was trying to use the word specialization. I was trying to capture not only narrowness of aptitude but of focus and competence and there just isn't a sufficient word. Then, as writing, I lost track of that a little and so I the paragraph was left making a claim that wasn't what I intended.
I keep going back and considering fixing it.
But what I meant was generalist of skill absent depth... the classic "jack of all trades, master of none." Again, the concept exists but not a precise enough word for it.
German IS an excellent language for this and yet they also don't quite get there. It's that second part that's missing... I need to keep digging but this was excellent so thank you. I wonder if the word properly exists anywhere?
Hmmm... I'm just wondering if I should correct the article?
I hopped on here after Aaron Renn picked up on it and shared it. My question: what do you think about the feminine as corporate and the masculine as singular. The union of masculine and feminine is an aspect of the relation between the one and the many.
Well that is an interesting concept... I hadn't thought of it like that. I'd say that they're aspects of the individual as that's where the concept itself is derived, i.e., from observed individual behavior.
However, conceptualizing femininity as a plural is an interesting idea. It would take some time to evaluate such a proposition. I'll look into it but an answer might be a long way off, ha ha.
Jun 13, 2022·edited Jun 13, 2022Liked by Kennaquhair
So, I’ve been thinking about this for a while, but haven’t really researched it. Boats are female, so are other corporate entities. The boat contains within her “womb” or lower decks the crew. In the Bible Israel is both son and bride. The church is bride in Revelation. This makes intuitive sense, the female contains within her the sons and daughters, so the church contains within it the children of God. In the old days you never knew if your wife was pregnant until she started to show, she was potentially a plurality at any moment. This fits I think with the feminine as that which tried to hold the group together.
Very interesting. This is a really good insight. I'll look into it (though not to steal your thunder as I encourage you to do the same!) and I'll write up what I find.
These things take forever though as you have to find a sufficiently compelling body of evidence cross-culturally.
Another fantastic post. Your writing is excellent: clear, focused, and direct. There's no superfluous language, every sentence contributes something of value to the piece, and the ideas are genuinely interesting. I'd buy a book of yours in an instant (and I hope you write one!).
Thank you for this and the previous article, it was really interesting and helpful! (Also came across here via Aaron Renn).
Was just thinking about the antonym to specialization. Isn't that generalization? Kind of like medical doctors can have a specialty or be a general practitioner.
Yeah, this was actually an error because of how I was trying to use the word specialization. I was trying to capture not only narrowness of aptitude but of focus and competence and there just isn't a sufficient word. Then, as writing, I lost track of that a little and so I the paragraph was left making a claim that wasn't what I intended.
I keep going back and considering fixing it.
But what I meant was generalist of skill absent depth... the classic "jack of all trades, master of none." Again, the concept exists but not a precise enough word for it.
Thanks.
That makes sense!
In baseball it's a utility player.
German is really good for putting concepts into one word :)
https://german.stackexchange.com/questions/24208/german-equivalent-of-jack-of-all-trades
German IS an excellent language for this and yet they also don't quite get there. It's that second part that's missing... I need to keep digging but this was excellent so thank you. I wonder if the word properly exists anywhere?
Hmmm... I'm just wondering if I should correct the article?
I hopped on here after Aaron Renn picked up on it and shared it. My question: what do you think about the feminine as corporate and the masculine as singular. The union of masculine and feminine is an aspect of the relation between the one and the many.
Well that is an interesting concept... I hadn't thought of it like that. I'd say that they're aspects of the individual as that's where the concept itself is derived, i.e., from observed individual behavior.
However, conceptualizing femininity as a plural is an interesting idea. It would take some time to evaluate such a proposition. I'll look into it but an answer might be a long way off, ha ha.
So, I’ve been thinking about this for a while, but haven’t really researched it. Boats are female, so are other corporate entities. The boat contains within her “womb” or lower decks the crew. In the Bible Israel is both son and bride. The church is bride in Revelation. This makes intuitive sense, the female contains within her the sons and daughters, so the church contains within it the children of God. In the old days you never knew if your wife was pregnant until she started to show, she was potentially a plurality at any moment. This fits I think with the feminine as that which tried to hold the group together.
Very interesting. This is a really good insight. I'll look into it (though not to steal your thunder as I encourage you to do the same!) and I'll write up what I find.
These things take forever though as you have to find a sufficiently compelling body of evidence cross-culturally.