We could then take this to various "meta" levels as well to think about (as this article does really well): what does that tell us about how society thinks about deaths, disease, etc.? How does that reshape our views long term? 7/end

I'm more interested in what my first note in this thread suggested: who gets sick along with social and cultural questions. The social questions are about the levels I laid out and the cultural questions are why "we" (being broad as Americans here) care or don't about who gets sick and dies. 6/

Why does any of this matter for my own work on infectious diseases? Well, it probably shapes why I'm less interested in debates over "how many died" and "how the disease was transmitted geographically." Even when we have better data - such as 9/11 deaths - this thread shows the problems. 5/

That's just one level. Race, class, gender, and many other variables matter based on who gets monitored, access to healthcare later, etc. Again personal example: I took a bus every afternoon for a month through the pile zone to get to football practice and were just told "put your windows up." 4/

People who lived, worked, or went to school downtown afterward when government officials, business execs, etc. claimed it was healthy (either out of ignorance or knowingly) then exist in a lower down category from the first responders. Full disclosure: this includes me and many people I know 3/

Just one example. If someone died in the Towers, this is different than First Responders working the pile and got sick (via dust) afterward. This was famously shown via Jon Stewart's advocacy. First responders ceased being "heroes" (a loaded term) so non-NYers (being broad) ignored their deaths. 2/

There is a search function online and then the index on MGH editions is usually fairly solid (haven't tried Venantius on this tbh).

What do you want to do with them? You can search them online or download the PDF and print them. Or you can use the text from Roberts's translation: www.hup.harvard.edu/books/978067.... It's in my office so can't double check, but a quick search says it is the MGH with edits.

Study both? But I suppose the real question is the continued explosion in business major students, which I know where that idea comes from ideologically. But not how students get there like STEM (that is often "forced" on them).

So many things to say on this as I totally agree. The ideal classroom would be 15-20 students with full time faculty, which would solve most teaching related issues

Well I see it pop up from time to time. But there is a lot more dunking on something and then people agreeing on stuff, but I'm not sure if that is really that different from Twitter. No idea how to measure that

I think you managed to get your arguing on substantive topics based on the threads that you are on spiraling out of control at this point. Harari's Nexus is really not great if you haven't read that one.

The problem with Harari is that he is the manifestation of a 21st century individualistic capitalist, who cares about his brand and little else (just read profiles). Sapiens is a pleasant read that has no useful "there" there. Graeber/Wengrow are not right about everything, but they try something.

Step 2: no classes in the spring, but still paid. Followed step 3: inquiry that is never published but leading to retirement in the late summer with all rights, etc. Step 4: after 2 years, he is still writing random stuff and on paid boards, but just less public.

Addendum: I should have noted that @llassabe.bsky.social is the host of the American Campus podcast, since she seems to use her personal account more than the show account. Also University Keywords is an edited volume with many contributors as is "Lend and Rule."

Alright, that's my long series of threads, but happy to have others chime in with other suggestions or ideas, so please do share! What's my goal? Don't have one yet, but education and curiosity. If you work in higher ed as a faculty member, you should know how it works. 9/end