{"id":1888,"date":"2011-08-11T07:06:37","date_gmt":"2011-08-11T12:06:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/?p=1888"},"modified":"2011-08-11T07:06:37","modified_gmt":"2011-08-11T12:06:37","slug":"benji-risks-and-the-100","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/2011\/08\/benji-risks-and-the-100\/","title":{"rendered":"Benji, Risks, and the 100"},"content":{"rendered":"

Monday, 8 August 2011<\/strong><\/p>\n

This evening, the five of us (my mom is staying at our place right now) watched the film Benji<\/em><\/a>. I saw the film years ago and had only a vague recollection of it. Jennifer and I thought it would be a good family film to watch – tame enough for the kids + starring a dog so my mom would like it.<\/p>\n

Turns out, it is<\/em> a good family film. It even bills itself as such, the words “A family film from Joe Camp” appearing on screen both before and after the film. However, There’s this one scene where one of the thugs kicks Benji’s ‘girlfriend’ Tiffany. The poor dog looks like she only weights about 8 pounds, so it doesn’t take too much force from his boot to scoot her across the room. She whimpers, slams into a wall, then just lies there.<\/p>\n

This came as kind of an upsetting shock to some members of our viewing party. We tried to say it wasn’t that bad – that this was just a movie and the real dog wasn’t hurt and that Tiffany (the character) would be fine by the end of the film. The problem is, it’s still an upsetting visual. Three seconds of upsetting footage in an hour and a half long movie isn’t so bad. What made it worse, though, is that this scene is immediately followed by a segment of Benji running for help. The segment is largely in slow motion, with dramatic music playing, and while the hero runs, we are shown several quick shots of, apparently, what Benji is thinking. And what is he thinking? He’s recalling that his friend Tiffany was just kicked in the leg. So, we get to see her kicked in the leg about 5 more times. Yikes. Pretty brutal. I imagine that even if I was just watching the film alone, I would probably think, “Alright, enough already with the dog abuse scene.”<\/p>\n

All in all, however, it was a fun little film to watch. I opened up my list of films I’ve seen and saw that I had previously given it a rating of 6 years ago. I decided to leave it at that.<\/p>\n

Tuesday, 9 August 2011<\/strong><\/p>\n

This morning, my wife took Isla to Children’s Hospital in St. Paul<\/a>. Isla had a fever, and a few incidents from the last couple of days led us to believe she might have a bladder infection.<\/p>\n

While there, the doctor said that Isla would need to be catheterized. My wife, knowing that this can be a traumatic procedure for little children, requested that Isla be sedated. The doctor said that this was not a good idea, as it carried some risks with it.<\/p>\n

“What kind of risks?” my wife asked.<\/p>\n

“Well…death!” the doctor said slowly and ominously.<\/p>\n

Okay…how stupid is that? Is that how doctors operate these days (excuse the pun)? They just state the most extreme, least likely risk for any procedure they don’t feel like doing? What if a doctor tells me they need to draw blood, and I ask what the risk are – would they say, “Well…death.” I mean, it’s true, right? There is a risk that I could die from getting a blood sample drawn. Or maybe Jennifer shouldn’t even have taken Isla into the hospital because, you know, leaving the house and driving into downtown carries the risk of death. Certainly the risk is exponentially increased from just staying home.<\/p>\n

Anyway, the doctor (in what surely made the insurance company proud) finally relented and agreed to have nitrous oxide administered. Jennifer and Isla had to wait approximately 40 minutes until a laughing gas specialist arrived on site. The nurses ended up preferring performing the procedure on a sedated baby, as they didn’t have to fight against a kicking, screaming baby, or even just a fidgety baby. They also drew blood, which was easier than usual as the oxide widened Isla’s veins. Isla, meanwhile, looked loopy and kept lifting her feet in the air, evidently under the belief that she was floating.<\/p>\n

The doctor, pleased that everything went so well for the staff and the patient, then asked my wife to write a letter to the hospital board of directors telling them how successful sedation was and that, in an effort to minimize trauma, the staff should suggest it as an appealing option.<\/p>\n

Wednesday, 10 August 2011<\/strong><\/p>\n

Today I delivered my sixth speech in Toastmasters. My speech was titled “The 100” and in it, I discussed Michael Hart’s awesome book The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

I first mentioned how compelling the idea of such a list is, and that creating such a list is more complicated than we might think at first. Next, I explained the difference (as set forth by Hart) between widespread influence and depth of influence (using Jerry Seinfeld and Joseph Smith as examples).<\/p>\n

The bulk of my presentation was given to explaining Hart’s “ground rules.” I numbered them one through four:<\/p>\n

First: only real people are eligible. In some cases, I noted, this is obvious. Mickey Mouse is influential, but he\u2019s not real. But in other cases, Hart has to make an educated guess. Was Aesop real? How about Homer?<\/p>\n

Second, we have to know who the person was. Again, sometimes this is easy. Who invented the telephone? That\u2019s easy. But who invented the wheel? If, indeed, it was invented by a single person, that person is of monumental influence. But, unfortunately, we just don\u2019t know who it was. So, they don\u2019t count.<\/p>\n

Third, the people on the list need to be on there for being influential. Not great. To illustrate the difference, I noted Hart’s admission that he is disgusted at having to place Adolf Hitler on his list, but he reminds his readers that whether someone\u2019s influence is positive or negative, it still counts as influence.<\/p>\n

Fourth, we have to consider that a major historical event is not usually the work of a single person. Hart received much criticism for not including the developers of the computer, but he replied that no one individual had overriding influence and, thus, none of them attain top 100 status. For that reason, there\u2019s no one listed who helped with the development of firearms, the women\u2019s liberation movement, or the evolution of Hinduism. Lots of people contributed \u2013 which is great for us \u2013 but bad for them in regards making it onto this list.<\/p>\n

I next called up a slide listing the top ten from the list of 100, and I gave my thoughts on this portion of the list. Here are the top ten:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Muhammad<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n
  2. Isaac Newton<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n
  3. Jesus Christ<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n
  4. Buddha<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n
  5. Confucius<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n
  6. St. Paul<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n
  7. Ts’ai Lun<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n
  8. Johann Gutenberg<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n
  9. Christopher Columbus<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n
  10. Albert Einstein<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    I told the audience that my first reaction upon seeing this list was that Jesus should be #1. Christianity, after all, is bigger than Islam, and it’s been around longer. But then I read the book. Hart notes that Muhammad was also a supremely successful military leader. More importantly, the origins of Christianity need to be divided between a few people – most notable Jesus and Paul (who falls at #6). <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

    It’s funny, a lot of criticism I read about the book is that Jesus is not #1. Most of these people haven’t read the book, such as this doofus <\/a>who claims the book is biased for not putting Jesus at #1. His argument is that the calendar is based on Jesus, so that should be influence enough. This is beyond stupid. Just because later humans decided to base the calendar on Jesus’ birth has little to do with Jesus’ actual influence. For that matter, perhaps Julius Caesar should be placed at #12, because 1\/12th of the year is named after him. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

    I also told the audience that another thought I had upon seeing this list was: “Who the heck is Ts’ai Lun?” <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

    I then added: “I had never heard of Ts’ai Lun until I read this book. But I read the chapter about him and I agree with Hart – Lun does <\/em>belong in the top ten. Do you want to know who he was? You’ll have to read the book.” That got a few laughs.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

    I then said that I respect Einstein and, indeed, of all the people in the top ten, he’s the one I would most like to meet (for one thing – he would speak my language!). However, even after reading Hart’s argument, I still don’t think he belongs in the top ten. Top 100, yes, but not top 10.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

    I told everyone that I hope I had whetted their appetite for reading the book and, should they ever read it, to please let me know so we could do lunch together and discuss the merits of Hart’s selections.
    \n<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Monday, 8 August 2011 This evening, the five of us (my mom is staying at our place right now) watched the film Benji. I saw the film years ago and had only a vague recollection of it. Jennifer and I thought it would be a good family film to watch – tame enough for the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1888","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-current-events"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1888","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1888"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1888\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1889,"href":"https:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1888\/revisions\/1889"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1888"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1888"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zimmerscope.com\/Verbisaurus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1888"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}