I had never heart of HIT training. After reading about the good Dr Mosely, it sounds very interesting. However I believe most Cross Training classes do the same thing, but in a more structured environment.
Of more concern to me is the AI title. I opened the link expecting to read about dudes in their sixties, but apparently over 35 is 'Older'??? When did this happen?
Bit of a bummer start to the day.
To you and SolipsismY (and anybody else interested, of course)I forgot to include the link
1) I agree that one needs to start doing some exercise, regardless of a device tracking your moves, making an excuse to buy something. Usually people end up not doing their intended exercise and waste spending money on something (though an Apple Watch will still be useful, that's the beauty of a smartwatch)
Don't forget that a stationary bicycle also makes an excellent clothes rack so the money is not wasted at all.
1) I agree that one needs to start doing some exercise, regardless of a device tracking your moves, making an excuse to buy something. Usually people end up not doing their intended exercise and waste spending money on something (though an Apple Watch will still be useful, that's the beauty of a smartwatch)
Don't forget that a stationary bicycle also makes an excellent clothes rack so the money is not wasted at all.
That'll be one heck of a high bicycle!
But, thanks for the link. I watched about 10 minutes of it, and probably will watch the rest when I open my iPad tomorrow. Cheers.
My iPhone serves most of my other minute to minute digital needs and my laptop is my forklift truck. I'd like to simplify rather than complexify my life at the moment and I am even thinking of getting a larger iPhone, perhaps even a 6+ and ditching the iPad.
That makes sense though I suspect I will struggle with achieving 10 000 steps per day even counting dog walking. It sounds an awful lot. Have you ever tried 'hit'? There is a lot of interesting reports done on its value - here's an interesting video (BBC Horizon) - with Dr Michael Mosely. It also preaches the value of walking.
I suspect I would react the same. I wore a watch for many years.
1) About 2,000 steps is a mile. For me, I tend to walk fast and have a long stride so it's about 4.8-4.9 miles and doesn't take me too long… although longer than I like. My biggest issue is really getting into the habit of doing throughout the day so I set up on-the-hour reminders to take a break and walk for a bit. I'm enjoying it, although today I've decided to break it up into 3 sections of about 3,500 steps since I'm feeling kind of blah.
2) I'm loading that video you posted now, but I'm in the middle of nowhere with poor cell data rates and even worse hotel internet speeds so I might have to save the video for later.
That's two people in the same thread you've incorrectly assumed the wrong terms. Your lack of awareness of synonyms is not the same as those terms not existing.
What? Are you certain? (Hint: you are not)
There is a subtle but distinct difference in practical terms. Once the complexity has been overcome simplification may be the result.
1) About 2,000 steps is a mile. For me, I tend to walk fast and have a long stride so it's about 4.8-4.9 miles and doesn't take me too long… although longer than I like. My biggest issue is really getting into the habit of doing throughout the day so I set up on-the-hour reminders to take a break and walk for a bit. I'm enjoying it, although today I've decided to break it up into 3 sections of about 3,500 steps since I'm feeling kind of blah.
2) I'm loading that video you posted now, but I'm in the middle of nowhere with poor cell data rates and even worse hotel internet speeds so I might have to save the video for later.
Counting my steps would expose my lack of exercise, without a doubt. Let me know what you think of the video. He has done a couple of other ones that are very interesting. The one on 'fasting', in particular. I'll see if I can find it if you are interested.
Counting my steps would expose my lack of exercise, without a doubt. Let me know what you think of the video. He has done a couple of other ones that are very interesting. The one on 'fasting', in particular. I'll see if I can find it if you are interested.
1) I didn't realize how few steps I walk in a day. Then there are days like today where I simply wasn't in the mood where I would have thought I had done 10k by around only 4k. The logging is a good motivator and so far I've done over 10k the last 6 days in a row. I hope I can keep it up, and don't think it's that tough as walking every aisle in my grocery store once is about 1.5 miles (3000 steps) right there.
2) I am interested in the one on fasting. Many religions include fasting so I suspect there are some potential long term health benefits in doing so. Is there a list of videos I can look at?
What? Are you certain? (Hint: you are not)
There is a subtle but distinct difference in practical terms. Once the complexity has been overcome simplification may be the result.
And another way to look at it: "complicate" is usually pejorative. "Complexify" is neutral, or it can be positive. When McKenna used it, he was referring to the tendency of evolution to elaborate new species, new adaptations, just more novelty, both biological and cultural. There's also a nice rhetorical parallel in the original post: simplify vs. complexify, but that's an aesthetic issue.
And another way to look at it: "complicate" is usually pejorative. "Complexify" is neutral, or it can be positive. When McKenna used it, he was referring to the tendency of evolution to elaborate new species, new adaptations, just more novelty, both biological and cultural. There's also a nice rhetorical parallel in the original post: simplify vs. complexify, but that's an aesthetic issue.
I think your distinction is to the point though 'complicate' can also be positive, of course. It depends on the person and the activity.
Re the rhetorical parallel and its aesthetic appeal - to be quite honest I often have no idea of what comes first, the aesthetic or the or the idea. Often the words just appear and help shape the thought - there is no plan. But often as the words appear the thought evolves and... well, complexify . Not so great in debate but helpful in creative writing.
I suspect your linguistic skills are much more developed than my own, to be truthful.
Counting my steps would expose my lack of exercise, without a doubt. Let me know what you think of the video. He has done a couple of other ones that are very interesting. The one on 'fasting', in particular. I'll see if I can find it if you are interested.
1) I didn't realize how few steps I walk in a day. Then there are days like today where I simply wasn't in the mood where I would have thought I had done 10k by around only 4k. The logging is a good motivator and so far I've done over 10k the last 6 days in a row. I hope I can keep it up, and don't think it's that tough as walking every aisle in my grocery store once is about 1.5 miles (3000 steps) right there.
2) I am interested in the one on fasting. Many religions include fasting so I suspect there are some potential long term health benefits in doing so. Is there a list of videos I can look at?
Glad to see you're motivated to walk more. It may help your brain, too.
As to fasting: I recommend fasting from after supper until breakfast.
There is a subtle but distinct difference in practical terms. Once the complexity has been overcome simplification may be the result.
And another way to look at it: "complicate" is usually pejorative. "Complexify" is neutral, or it can be positive. When McKenna used it, he was referring to the tendency of evolution to elaborate new species, new adaptations, just more novelty, both biological and cultural. There's also a nice rhetorical parallel in the original post: simplify vs. complexify, but that's an aesthetic issue.
There is a subtle but distinct difference in practical terms. Once the complexity has been overcome simplification may be the result.
And another way to look at it: "complicate" is usually pejorative. "Complexify" is neutral, or it can be positive. When McKenna used it, he was referring to the tendency of evolution to elaborate new species, new adaptations, just more novelty, both biological and cultural. There's also a nice rhetorical parallel in the original post: simplify vs. complexify, but that's an aesthetic issue.
Not so.
We simply happen to live in an age where simplicity is savoured and complexity is condemned. It’s a shame, as the truth is to be found in complexity just as much.
Comments
I had never heart of HIT training. After reading about the good Dr Mosely, it sounds very interesting. However I believe most Cross Training classes do the same thing, but in a more structured environment.
Of more concern to me is the AI title. I opened the link expecting to read about dudes in their sixties, but apparently over 35 is 'Older'??? When did this happen?
Bit of a bummer start to the day.
To you and SolipsismY (and anybody else interested, of course)I forgot to include the link
1) I agree that one needs to start doing some exercise, regardless of a device tracking your moves, making an excuse to buy something. Usually people end up not doing their intended exercise and waste spending money on something (though an Apple Watch will still be useful, that's the beauty of a smartwatch)
Don't forget that a stationary bicycle also makes an excellent clothes rack so the money is not wasted at all.
buying any 'smartwatch' before the AppleWatch comes out would be stupidity.
Because?
That'll be one heck of a high bicycle!
But, thanks for the link. I watched about 10 minutes of it, and probably will watch the rest when I open my iPad tomorrow. Cheers.
Complicate is the word he was looking for.
The first recorded usage seems to be circa 1830 CE.
He used the word he was looking for.
1) About 2,000 steps is a mile. For me, I tend to walk fast and have a long stride so it's about 4.8-4.9 miles and doesn't take me too long… although longer than I like. My biggest issue is really getting into the habit of doing throughout the day so I set up on-the-hour reminders to take a break and walk for a bit. I'm enjoying it, although today I've decided to break it up into 3 sections of about 3,500 steps since I'm feeling kind of blah.
2) I'm loading that video you posted now, but I'm in the middle of nowhere with poor cell data rates and even worse hotel internet speeds so I might have to save the video for later.
You mean 1830 AD.
Complicate is a real word; complexify is not.
It's always good to better ourselves and others.
That's two people in the same thread you've incorrectly assumed the wrong terms. Your lack of awareness of synonyms is not the same as those terms not existing.
There is a subtle but distinct difference in practical terms. Once the complexity has been overcome simplification may be the result.
1) I didn't realize how few steps I walk in a day. Then there are days like today where I simply wasn't in the mood where I would have thought I had done 10k by around only 4k. The logging is a good motivator and so far I've done over 10k the last 6 days in a row. I hope I can keep it up, and don't think it's that tough as walking every aisle in my grocery store once is about 1.5 miles (3000 steps) right there.
2) I am interested in the one on fasting. Many religions include fasting so I suspect there are some potential long term health benefits in doing so. Is there a list of videos I can look at?
And another way to look at it: "complicate" is usually pejorative. "Complexify" is neutral, or it can be positive. When McKenna used it, he was referring to the tendency of evolution to elaborate new species, new adaptations, just more novelty, both biological and cultural. There's also a nice rhetorical parallel in the original post: simplify vs. complexify, but that's an aesthetic issue.
And another way to look at it: "complicate" is usually pejorative. "Complexify" is neutral, or it can be positive. When McKenna used it, he was referring to the tendency of evolution to elaborate new species, new adaptations, just more novelty, both biological and cultural. There's also a nice rhetorical parallel in the original post: simplify vs. complexify, but that's an aesthetic issue.
I think your distinction is to the point though 'complicate' can also be positive, of course. It depends on the person and the activity.
Re the rhetorical parallel and its aesthetic appeal - to be quite honest I often have no idea of what comes first, the aesthetic or the or the idea. Often the words just appear and help shape the thought - there is no plan. But often as the words appear the thought evolves and... well, complexify
I suspect your linguistic skills are much more developed than my own, to be truthful.
Counting my steps would expose my lack of exercise, without a doubt. Let me know what you think of the video. He has done a couple of other ones that are very interesting. The one on 'fasting', in particular. I'll see if I can find it if you are interested.
1) I didn't realize how few steps I walk in a day. Then there are days like today where I simply wasn't in the mood where I would have thought I had done 10k by around only 4k. The logging is a good motivator and so far I've done over 10k the last 6 days in a row. I hope I can keep it up, and don't think it's that tough as walking every aisle in my grocery store once is about 1.5 miles (3000 steps) right there.
2) I am interested in the one on fasting. Many religions include fasting so I suspect there are some potential long term health benefits in doing so. Is there a list of videos I can look at?
Glad to see you're motivated to walk more. It may help your brain, too.
As to fasting: I recommend fasting from after supper until breakfast.
What? Are you certain? (Hint: you are not)
There is a subtle but distinct difference in practical terms. Once the complexity has been overcome simplification may be the result.
And another way to look at it: "complicate" is usually pejorative. "Complexify" is neutral, or it can be positive. When McKenna used it, he was referring to the tendency of evolution to elaborate new species, new adaptations, just more novelty, both biological and cultural. There's also a nice rhetorical parallel in the original post: simplify vs. complexify, but that's an aesthetic issue.
Complexify isn't a word; complicate is.
What? Are you certain? (Hint: you are not)
There is a subtle but distinct difference in practical terms. Once the complexity has been overcome simplification may be the result.
And another way to look at it: "complicate" is usually pejorative. "Complexify" is neutral, or it can be positive. When McKenna used it, he was referring to the tendency of evolution to elaborate new species, new adaptations, just more novelty, both biological and cultural. There's also a nice rhetorical parallel in the original post: simplify vs. complexify, but that's an aesthetic issue.
Not so.
We simply happen to live in an age where simplicity is savoured and complexity is condemned. It’s a shame, as the truth is to be found in complexity just as much.