Parfit’s Hitchhiker

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mypubliclands/16358796247
Image: Flickr

Suppose that I am driving at midnight through some desert. My car breaks down. You are a stranger, and the only other driver in this desert. I manage to stop you, and I offer you a great reward if you drive me to my home. I cannot pay you now, but I promise to do so when we reach my home. … If you drive me to my home, it would be worse for me if I pay you the promised reward. Since I know that I never do what will be worse for me, I know that I would break my promise. Given my inability to lie convincingly, you know this too. You do not believe my promise. I am stranded in the desert throughout the night.

— Derek Parfit, Reasons and Persons, 1984

Brainstorm

In 2015, Canadian politician Sheldon Bergson changed his name to Above Znoneofthe, so that it would appear on electoral ballots as “Znoneofthe, Above.” (The Z, which is silent, ensures that the name will appear last in a list of candidates.)

He ran in an Ontario provincial by-election the following year, winning 0.43 percent of the vote, and has participated in several races since. Amazingly, he’s not the first person to try this.

(Thanks, Alessia.)

Misc

  • Ajoritsedabi Oreghoyeyere Memaridieyin Okorodudu played basketball for Bucknell in 1980.
  • Spike Milligan said his father’s last word was “Aaargh!”
  • It’s illegal to take a lion to the movies in Baltimore.
  • In 2007 the UK Association of Chief Police Officers’ spokesman on knife crime was named Alfred Hitchcock.
  • “I banged the door with such a slam, / It sounded like a wooden d–n.” — Frederick Locker-Lampson

“Humility”

In a certain street are three tailors. The first to set up shop hung out this sign — ‘Here is the best tailor in the town.’ The next put up — ‘Here is the best tailor in the world.’ The third simply had this — ‘Here is the best tailor in this street.’

— John Scott, The Puzzle King, 1899

Ha!

In 1722, Jonathan Swift published the “last speech” of one Ebenezer Elliston, “a malefactor executed for street robbery,” “published at his desire for the common good”:

Now as I am a dying man I have done something which may be of good use to the public. I have left with an honest man (and, indeed, the only honest man I was ever acquainted with) the names of all my wicked brethren, the present places of their abode, with a short account of the chief crimes they have committed, in many of which I have been their accomplice, and heard the rest from their own mouths: I have likewise set down the names of those we call our setters, of the wicked houses we frequent, and of those who receive and buy our stolen goods. I have solemnly charged this honest man and have received his promise upon oath, that whenever he hears of any rogue to be tried for robbing or housebreaking, he will look into his list, and if he finds the name there of the thief concerned, to send the whole paper to the government. Of this I here give my companions fair and public warning, and hope they will take it.

Did it work? Who knows?

The Silver Rule

“When asked by a disciple if there were one single word which could serve as a principle of conduct for life, Confucius replied, ‘Perhaps the word reciprocity will do. Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself.'” — Analects

The Last Straw

In Marriage and Morals (1929), Bertrand Russell mentions that, while “[c]ruelty is in theory a perfectly adequate ground for divorce, … it may be interpreted so as to become absurd”:

When the most eminent of all film stars was divorced by his wife for cruelty, one of the counts in the proof of cruelty was that he used to bring home friends who talked about Kant.

I haven’t been able to figure out who this is. Russell writes, “I hardly suppose that it was the intention of the California legislators to enable any woman to divorce her husband on the ground that he was sometimes guilty of intelligent conversation in her presence.”

05/11/2026 UPDATE: Russell was referring to the 1920 divorce of Mildred Harris from Charlie Chaplin. The two had married in 1918, when Chaplin was 29 and Harris was 16. In 2015, Silent Film Quarterly republished an interview with Harris: “He brought men home to dinner. But such men! Old, grave, and intellectual men! They were 50 years old or more. They talked of things I could not possibly understand. I was seventeen. What could I know of philosophy, or of Voltaire, or Rousseau, or Kant?” Thanks to everyone who wrote in about this.

Progress

https://www.lookandlearn.com/history-images/YYA0031561/Morning-of-the-Gale-November-23-1824-in-Catwater-at-Plymouth

I do not mean to be disrespectful, but the attempt of the lords to stop the progress of reform reminds me very forcibly of the great storm of Sidmouth, and of the conduct of the excellent Mrs. Partington on that occasion. In the winter of 1824, there set in a great flood upon that town; the tide rose to an incredible height; the waves rushed in upon the houses, and everything was threatened with destruction. In the midst of this sublime and terrible storm, Dame Partington, who lived upon the beach, was seen at the door of her house with mop and pattens, trundling her mop, squeezing out the sea-water, and vigorously pushing away the Atlantic Ocean. The Atlantic was roused. Mrs. Partington’s spirit was up; but I need not tell you that the contest was unequal. The Atlantic Ocean beat Mrs. Partington. She was excellent at a slop or a puddle, but she should not have meddled with a tempest. Gentlemen, be at your ease — be quiet and steady. You will beat Mrs. Partington.

Sydney Smith on the Reform Bill, Taunton, Oct. 12, 1831

Training

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Frederich_August_Moritz_Retzsch.jpg

Suppose it were perfectly certain that the life and fortune of every one of us would, one day or other, depend upon his winning or losing a game at chess. …

The chess-board is the world, the pieces are the phenomena of the universe, the rules of the game are what we call the laws of Nature. The player on the other side is hidden from us. We know that his play is always fair, just, and patient. But also we know, to our cost, that he never overlooks a mistake, or makes the smallest allowance for ignorance. …

My metaphor will remind some of you of the famous picture in which Retzsch has depicted Satan playing at chess with man for his soul. Substitute for the mocking fiend in that picture, a calm, strong angel who is playing for love, as we say, and would rather lose than win — and I should accept it as an image of human life.

Well, what I mean by Education is learning the rules of this mighty game. In other words, education is the instruction of the intellect in the laws of Nature, under which name I include not merely things and their forces, but men and their ways; and the fashioning of the affections and of the will into an earnest and loving desire to move in harmony with those laws. For me, education means neither more nor less than this. Anything which professes to call itself education must be tried by this standard, and if it fails to stand the test, I will not call it education, whatever may be the force of authority, or of numbers, upon the other side.

— Thomas Huxley, “A Liberal Education and Where to Find It,” 1868