you all probably dont give a damn but does any of you know of a method to get back into an instagram account? I was stupid forgot my password. I would appreciate any tips you can give me

@Rowan Santiago instablaster ;)

@Carl Emory thanks so much for your reply. I found the site thru google and I'm trying it out now. I see it takes quite some time so I will get back to you later when my account password hopefully is recovered.

@Carl Emory it worked and I now got access to my account again. I'm so happy! Thanks so much you saved my ass!

@Rowan Santiago No problem :D

Please describe

Think congestive heart failure. Him doing that would have little to no effect.

ROFL

Chomsky has a similar voice.

+Arthur Montilla Don't worry, english speakers can't understand it either

Just enable captions

@@ryanseah2311 they arnt accurate

I don't see or read him as winded any longer than he needed to be to make his point. Among the things I really liked about his writings are that he tried to be so concrete and precise because he really didn't want his point to be lost on dolts. Unfortunately, dolts are easily bored and distracted (see the current POTUS, as one example - there are, of course, others). I gather from this that he doesn't so much enjoy talking about himself as, given what he did for a living, intellectually he sees why it's necessary - the author's POV is always vital to understand, and his books on Indonesian and NW African societies reflect that urgency. Anyway, because OTOH he sees the point in him doing it here, and in being precise and complete, while on the other he's really stretched his patience in thinking about things that he knows too well and doesn't enjoy thinking back on, he comes across as a little short-tempered, withdrawn in his sotto voce details, and reticent. Many decades ago I saw him at a lecture and later interviewed him for public access TV show. We didn't go anywhere near his life, because he'd come to the college to speak to a fascinating subject, the role of religious adherence in regional politics. So I never saw any of what we see on this video; he was thrilled at finding any audience for what believed was important and so many in society didn't want to hear discussed at all. But then also, I was a lot younger, and he too. Here we see him less than 2 years before death, and there are all sorts of signs of the congestive heart failure than claimed his, life. And that too, the trouble with tiring too easily, with grabbing oxygen, with clearing the tubes, causes a lot of annoyance.

@@crewsadist Much effortposting that day.

Ajajaja ja

The subject here was suffering from advanced congestive heart failure. It's in his throat being full of mucus, his nose constantly running, and in his mouth, which shows a lot of dental neglect. The interviewer isn't mic'd. When I interviewed Geertz, which would have been around 1972, it was in a TV studio - not a great one, it was public access, after all - but we were mic'd up from above. When I watched the interview a few weeks later, for editing, I found that mostly what I'd been doing is making up prompts, signals just to keep him going on a line that to me seemed interesting, or to move on if I thought otherwise. I remember he was very tolerant of this, but in very much the way shown here: Geertz has a very big, very quick mind, whereas mine goes along more or less a average speed and capacity. It was easy to hear what I was asking, but what I was asking was the least interesting parts and frankly I would have been happier to have been mic'd like this interviewer here, to keep the attention of the listener on the subject, rather than on me.

So you think you know better than he did about how to convey things he'd witnessed and how to interpret them? That seems to me revealingly egotistic of you.

That's one way of looking at it. And for most people I would agree. But I would say that Geertz, while long-winded, is eloquent and articulate in his long-windedness. Try to keep up!

You both mis-characterize what he stood for and over-credit his influence. He didn't 'crush' anyone. He wrote widely and well and as time went on more and more people in the field preferred his POV. You are silly to try to demonize him. I'm always surprised to encounter strong feelings against Geertz, until I remember how widely and enthusiastically he was attached on the basis of his writings on cultural belief systems, particularly religiocity. Religiots are notoriously vindictive and don't like to be seen as the animals they and we all are.

stupid and boorish is no way to go thru life, manilo

Ajajaja