Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tradition is Smarter (2018)

scholars-stage.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 174 posts

Re: Tradition is Smarter (2018)

#61

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

nehal3m wrote: post #57
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #49

Rarely have I had such a negative reaction to a blog post, for 2 main reasons: 1. The author seems to "mysticize" tradition, basically taking the approach "sometimes you just have to take things on faith". Which I think is complete nonsense. If you look at the traditions that "work", like the manioc processing given in the article, this is basically just the scientific method at work, but where we've lost the documen…

To your point, assuming you're a Westerner, I quote you: "female circumcision wouldn't be questioned as the mutilation that it is" Maybe your traditions are blinding you to the fact that male circumcision falls in the same category. I agree with the sentiment though, and the italicized part of your comment is quite an elegant way to put it.

> Maybe your traditions are blinding you to the fact that male circumcision falls in the same category.

No, they are not. Perhaps this is "oversharing", but I (male) was circumcised when I was 11 years old, and it was my choice - I wasn't circumcised at birth because I had jaundice when I was born. I had "tight foreskin", making it difficult to follow my doctor's instructions to clean under the foreskin when bathing, which is why I opted to undergo circumcision as a pre-teen. The process itself was pretty brutal (took a couple weeks for everything to heal), but in retrospect I'm very glad that I did it, and only wish I could have done it as an infant so I would have no memory of the surgery.

Plus, circumcision has been definitively proven to greatly reduce the chance of HIV transmission from females to males.

Re: Tradition is Smarter (2018)

#62

Post by klyrs »

codemonkey-zeta wrote: post #13
klyrs wrote: post #2

Well, let's go back to worshipping the sun, then. Who knows, if we don't, it might not rise tomorrow... Or, just maybe, progress itself is a tradition that deserves its own reverence. Sometimes, Chesterson's fence was erected by a shepherd who no longer uses the field that you'd rather play soccer on. It was useful in its day, but no longer.

Maybe you should be worshipping the sun. Morning sunlight exposure is associated with all kinds of health benefits, not least of which producing Vitamin D, an essential vitamin that, among other things, provides vital protection against certain circulating diseases... Maybe you should also live everyday as though the possibility of the sun never rising again were real, then maybe you might get busy doing those import…

With that argument, you might hope to convince me to spend more time in the sun. Not worship it.

But no, as somebody with usually-moderate, sometimes-acute photosensitivity, even your usually-correct conventional wisdom isn't what the doctor orders in my case.

Re: Tradition is Smarter (2018)

#63

Post by mikkergp »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #61
nehal3m wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To your point, assuming you're a Westerner, I quote you: "female circumcision wouldn't be questioned as the mutilation that it is" Maybe your traditions are blinding you to the fact that male circumcision falls in the same category. I agree with the sentiment though, and the italicized part of your comment is quite an elegant way to put it.

> Maybe your traditions are blinding you to the fact that male circumcision falls in the same category. No, they are not. Perhaps this is "oversharing", but I (male) was circumcised when I was 11 years old, and it was my choice - I wasn't circumcised at birth because I had jaundice when I was born. I had "tight foreskin", making it difficult to follow my doctor's instructions to clean under the foreskin when bathing,…

Definitively proven? I can’t wait to see that randomized controlled clinical trial. FWIW the language I see used is compelling evidence, where are you getting definitively proven from?

Re: Tradition is Smarter (2018)

#65

Post by nehal3m »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #61
nehal3m wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To your point, assuming you're a Westerner, I quote you: "female circumcision wouldn't be questioned as the mutilation that it is" Maybe your traditions are blinding you to the fact that male circumcision falls in the same category. I agree with the sentiment though, and the italicized part of your comment is quite an elegant way to put it.

> Maybe your traditions are blinding you to the fact that male circumcision falls in the same category. No, they are not. Perhaps this is "oversharing", but I (male) was circumcised when I was 11 years old, and it was my choice - I wasn't circumcised at birth because I had jaundice when I was born. I had "tight foreskin", making it difficult to follow my doctor's instructions to clean under the foreskin when bathing,…

They're not equivalent in most cases (not all female genital mutilation is performed the same way and I cannot fathom a medical reason for any sort).

But that doesn't mean they aren't in the same general category when defined as surgical alterations of people's genitalia performed for religious or cultural reasons without any medical necessity.

A medically required circumcision when reasoned and self-chosen is an altogether different story.

Re: Tradition is Smarter (2018)

#66

Post by nixnax »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #49

Rarely have I had such a negative reaction to a blog post, for 2 main reasons: 1. The author seems to "mysticize" tradition, basically taking the approach "sometimes you just have to take things on faith". Which I think is complete nonsense. If you look at the traditions that "work", like the manioc processing given in the article, this is basically just the scientific method at work, but where we've lost the documen…

No post body was provided.

Re: Tradition is Smarter (2018)

#67

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

mikkergp wrote: post #63
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe your traditions are blinding you to the fact that male circumcision falls in the same category. No, they are not. Perhaps this is "oversharing", but I (male) was circumcised when I was 11 years old, and it was my choice - I wasn't circumcised at birth because I had jaundice when I was born. I had "tight foreskin", making it difficult to follow my doctor's instructions to clean under the foreskin when bathing,…

Definitively proven? I can’t wait to see that randomized controlled clinical trial. FWIW the language I see used is compelling evidence, where are you getting definitively proven from?

FWIW all I had to do was Google "male circumcision hiv clinical studies", it's not that hard to find:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4233247/

From the introduction: "Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in sub-Saharan Africa have shown that adult male circumcision reduces the risk of HIV acquisition in men by about 60% [1-3]."

Re: Tradition is Smarter (2018)

#68

Post by 1123581321 »

LAC-Tech wrote: post #51
1123581321 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You most likely did not descend from people who worshipped the sun, just people who used the sun in art and recognized its benefits to them. There were deities associated with the sun. Sol Invictus is the most commonly known, but was a relatively late addition to the Roman pantheon, intentionally appropriated from traditions from Syria and elevated by the empire for what they perceived to be civic benefit. Hardly tra…

The idea of Sol as a Syrian god has been challenged recently: It was long thought that Sol Invictus was a Syrian sun-god, and that Aurelian imported his cult into Rome after he had vanquished Zenobia and captured Palmyra. This sun-god, it was postulated, differed fundamentally from the old Roman sungod Sol Indiges, whose cult had long since disappeared from Rome. Scholars thus tended to postulate a hiatus in the firs…

Interesting! Thank you.

Re: Tradition is Smarter (2018)

#69

Post by 1123581321 »

klyrs wrote: post #58
1123581321 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You most likely did not descend from people who worshipped the sun, just people who used the sun in art and recognized its benefits to them. There were deities associated with the sun. Sol Invictus is the most commonly known, but was a relatively late addition to the Roman pantheon, intentionally appropriated from traditions from Syria and elevated by the empire for what they perceived to be civic benefit. Hardly tra…

> You most likely did not descend from people who worshipped the sun, just people who used the sun in art and recognized its benefits to them. a. You don't know my parents, don't be so sure. b. You're right, I should have gone with "washing hands before surgery" to avoid these low-effort rebuttals.

Boy. :) a) Yes, I understand you are a specific person, not a statistical average. b) I'm sorry you didn't find the bit of flavor I added to the thread interesting and wish you hadn't felt attacked by it.

Re: Tradition is Smarter (2018)

#70

Post by lazide »

aaaaaaaaaaab wrote: post #55
lazide wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not being circumcised meaningfully increases the odds of transmitting and contracting certain diseases, by around 50%ish (though reduces some, interestingly enough) [ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2907642/ ] and increases the risk of UTIs significantly (by about 75%, albeit still not super common). [ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6119846/ ] Consider a world without antibiotics, and a UTI…

>Consider a world without antibiotics In a world without antibiotics I’d rather not want anyone getting within 10 feet of my son’s penis with an unsterilized blade, thank you. Not to mention the whole “direct oral suctioning” tradition of some religious groups [1], which sounds like a recipe for spreading herpes and other goodies. [1] https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/health/health-topics/safe-bris...

Considering in that world said child, with or without circumcising, often only had 50:50 odds of making it to adult hood, but if they were an adult, these things would matter?

You’d likely have others overrule you.

Such is society, or something.

Post reply on HN