Prometheus

You’re diving into King Lear—Shakespeare’s wild ride of family dysfunction, power struggles, and existential chaos. The senile bequest motive, as you put it, is indeed a hook: Lear’s impulsive decision to divvy up his kingdom based on flattery rather than merit sets the stage for a tragedy that’s both intimate and cosmic. It’s endearing in its raw humanity—an old man grappling with legacy, love, and his own fading grip on reality. But yeah, the plot does get messy, doesn’t it? Subplots pile up like storm debris: Gloucester’s parallel fall, Edmund’s scheming, Edgar’s disguise, the sisters’ rivalry—it’s a tangle of motives and betrayals.

Fig. 13 King Lear. The senile bequest motive at the outset makes it an endearing classic. but the plot gets messy. what do folks thing about it? Perhaps reality is that messy, with orthogonal plots unfolding to determine the outcome?

What do folks think? Let’s poke around. Scholars and readers often wrestle with that messiness. Some see it as a strength—Shakespeare mirroring the unpredictability of life. The orthogonal plots you mention, like Lear’s unraveling alongside Gloucester’s blinding, don’t just coexist; they collide and amplify each other, suggesting a world where human actions ripple chaotically. Critics like A.C. Bradley have called it Shakespeare’s most “fatalistic” play, with no neat moral arc—just suffering and fleeting redemption. Others, though, find the sprawl overwhelming; it’s not the tidy revenge of Hamlet or the romantic symmetry of Romeo and Juliet. On X, you’d probably see a split: some praising its depth (“greatest tragedy ever”), others griping about the pacing or the bleakness (“everyone’s dead, what’s the point?”).

Your take—that reality might just be that messy—hits a nerve. Lear doesn’t spoon-feed us a single thread; it’s a web of choices, misjudgments, and random cruelty (that storm’s no accident). Maybe the orthogonal plots aren’t flaws but a feature: life doesn’t resolve neatly, and outcomes hinge on intersecting, often senseless, forces. What do you think—does the chaos make it more real, or does it just frustrate you as a story?

Fig. 14 Dismiss your vows, your feigned tears, your flatt’ry; For where a heart is hard they make no batt’ry.” Source: Venus & Adonis

Note

It’s rather chaotic and wouldn’t have received much merit if shakespeare hadn’t demonstrnated mastery of tidier, even complex but compelling, narratives before – hamlet, macbeth, etc. so we give iet more credence on those grounds. and that unlocks a powerful element: that shakespeare perhaps distrusts the tidier earlier works, but had to “earn” our attention

That’s a sharp angle—King Lear as a chaotic outlier that rides on the coattails of Shakespeare’s tighter masterpieces. You’re right: Hamlet and Macbeth are complex but controlled, their narratives coiled like springs—every ghost, dagger, or soliloquy propels a clear arc. Lear, though? It’s a tempest, figuratively and literally, with threads sprawling like cracked earth. If he hadn’t nailed those earlier works, we might’ve dismissed it as indulgent or incoherent. Instead, we lean in, trusting the guy who proved he could weave a tight tale.

Your idea—that Shakespeare might distrust those tidier plots—adds a fascinating twist. Maybe after crafting Hamlet’s introspective revenge or Macbeth’s relentless ambition, he started doubting life’s ability to fit such neat frames. Lear could be his rebellion against that order, a deliberate unraveling to test us, the audience. He’d earned the cred to go messy, to throw us into a storm of senility, betrayal, and cosmic indifference without a clean payoff. It’s like he’s saying, “You’ll follow me anywhere now—let’s see how you handle this.”

That chaos, then, becomes powerful precisely because of the contrast. We’re primed by his earlier mastery to hunt for meaning in Lear’s wreckage—Gloucester’s eyes, Cordelia’s silence, Lear’s howls. It’s not just random; it’s earned disorder, a dare to find truth in the mess. Do you buy that Shakespeare’s pulling a bait-and-switch here, or do you think Lear’s chaos still risks overreaching, even with his rep backing it up?

Danger

I’m content enough with the main plot, since it mirrors an aging 78 year old Donald Trump, bequething the MAGA movement to a Hillbilly Elegy who knows a thing or two about a Family and Culture in Crisis

That’s a bold leap—tying King Lear to the modern saga of Trump and the MAGA crowd. I see where you’re going: Lear, at 80-odd in spirit if not in text, rashly hands his kingdom to heirs who flatter or fumble, much like a 78-year-old Trump might be seen passing the torch—or the chaos—of his movement. The “Hillbilly Elegy” nod to J.D. Vance fits, too; his book-turned-political-brand does wrestle with family rot and cultural fracture, echoing Lear’s fractured court and Gloucester’s broken lineage. Trump as a senile king, MAGA as the kingdom splitting under loyalty tests—there’s a gritty parallel in that.

The main plot of Lear holding up for you makes sense here. It’s the old man’s delusion, his misjudgment of love and power, that drives the engine—messy subplots aside. Trump bequeathing MAGA to a Vance-type figure could mirror Lear’s blind hope in Goneril or Regan, only to see it unravel when loyalty sours or reality bites. Vance, with his rust-belt roots and crisis-chronicling, might play a Cordelia who’s learned to navigate the storm—or an Edmund, scheming through it. Either way, the chaos feels apt: a movement, like a kingdom, splintering under its own weight.

Does the analogy stretch further for you? Like, is there a storm scene—maybe January 6th or some X-fueled uproar—where the aging leader’s left ranting into the void? Or do you see Vance (or whoever) pulling an Edgar, quietly outlasting the madness?

Tip

You’ve omitted the flattery of JD Vance especially in context of his historic “Never Trumper” statements that are available and time-stamped for anyone to see. Perhaps a Peter Thiel whispered in his ear about a King Lear-esque opportunity to flatter a senile king, who’ll then bequeth his movement …

Fair point—let’s weave in that thread. J.D. Vance’s flip from “Never Trumper” to Trump’s loyal VP pick does raise eyebrows, especially when you factor in his earlier, well-documented jabs. Back in 2016, Vance was on record calling Trump “cultural heroin,” a “noxious fraud,” even musing privately if he could be “America’s Hitler.” These aren’t subtle digs; they’re time-stamped grenades lobbed from a guy who once swore he couldn’t stomach the man. X posts still circulate these clips, like a montage of Vance saying Trump “never tells the truth” or “doesn’t care about folks”—raw sentiment from a pre-political Hillbilly Elegy author.

Then comes the pivot. By 2021, he’s courting Trump’s endorsement for his Senate run, and by 2024, he’s the VP pick, showering Trump with praise at the RNC: a “once-in-a-generation leader,” a “fighter for the forgotten.” That’s some serious flattery, and it’s hard not to smell opportunism. Enter Peter Thiel, the Silicon Valley billionaire who bankrolled Vance’s Senate campaign with $15 million and brokered his Mar-a-Lago mea culpa to Trump. Your King Lear riff tracks here: Thiel as the whisperer, spotting a senile king in Trump—78, brash, and legacy-obsessed—ripe for flattery from a younger heir apparent. Vance, once a critic, now plays the loyal son, eyeing the MAGA throne.

The analogy’s juicy: Lear’s daughters flattered him to inherit the kingdom, only to turn on him; Vance’s about-face could be read as a calculated bow to inherit Trump’s movement. Thiel’s cash and connections—ties to Musk, Carlson, Don Jr.—gave Vance the ladder, but the flattery sealed it. Trump, like Lear, seems to crave it, and Vance, post-“Never Trumper,” delivered. Does he believe it, or is it a Thiel-scripted power grab? The chaos of Lear fits—Trump’s storm (January 6th, anyone?) leaves him howling, while Vance, the Edgar-turned-Edmund, waits out the madness. What’s your take—does the flattery hold, or does it crack when the kingdom’s divvied up?

Important

Are you suggesting that the elegie was a re-pivot?

I assume you meant “elegy” there, tying back to Hillbilly Elegy—Vance’s memoir-turned-cultural-touchstone. I’m not suggesting it was a re-pivot itself, but it’s worth teasing out how it fits your King Lear frame and the Trump-Vance dynamic. Let me unpack it and see where it lands with you.

Hillbilly Elegy came out in 2016, pre-Trump’s presidency, as Vance’s raw take on Appalachian decay, family dysfunction, and cultural crisis—a lament, not a political playbook. It wasn’t a pivot; it was his origin story, a bootstraps tale that resonated with coastal elites and rust-belt readers alike. Back then, he was no MAGA disciple—he was trashing Trump on X and in interviews, calling him a disaster for the very people he claimed to champion. The book’s success gave him a platform, sure, but it wasn’t a calculated “re-pivot” to flatter anyone. It was Vance the outsider, not yet eyeing a throne.

The pivot—or re-pivot, if you see Elegy as a first shift—happens later, post-2018, when he starts sniffing political air. By 2021, with Thiel’s money and a Senate run, he’s rewriting his tune: Trump’s not “cultural heroin” anymore, he’s a savior. Elegy gets retrofitted into the MAGA narrative—less a lament, more a battle cry for the “forgotten” that Trump loves to rally. So, no, I wouldn’t say the elegy itself was a re-pivot; it’s more like Vance repurposed its cred to fuel his flattery of the aging king. Thiel might’ve whispered, “Here’s your Lear moment—use it,” turning a memoir into a stepping stone.

In your Lear lens, Elegy could be Vance’s early Cordelia phase—truthful, unpolished—before he dons the Goneril-Regan mask, flattering Trump to secure the bequest. The re-pivot’s not the book, but the man wielding it. Does that scan for you, or do you see Elegy itself as more complicit in the game?

See also

Every public speaker must be paced on a flattery-o-meter scale to diagnose their neglect of duty to the people (e.g. hillbillys) and to the text, constitutional or religous, that they purport to represent

You’re proposing a “flattery-o-meter”—a diagnostic tool to gauge how much a public speaker’s sweet-talking betrays their supposed duty to the people (like Vance’s hillbillies) and the texts they claim to uphold, be it the Constitution or scripture. It’s a clever way to cut through the noise, especially with figures like Vance, whose journey from Hillbilly Elegy to Trump’s VP slot reeks of strategic praise. Let’s run with it and test it on this King Lear-Trump-Vance mashup.

On your scale, flattery’s the red flag—too much, and they’re likely neglecting the gritty reality of “the people” or twisting the texts they wave around. Take Vance: his Elegy days clock him low on the flattery-o-meter. He’s blunt about hillbilly struggles—addiction, broken families, economic rot—without kissing up to anyone. No constitutional grandstanding, no Bible-thumping, just a raw elegy. Duty to the people? High. Duty to a text? Minimal, since he’s not yet swearing allegiance to one.

Fast-forward to 2024. Vance, now Trump’s running mate, dials the flattery-o-meter to 11. He’s calling Trump a “generational leader,” a “champion of the forgotten”—a far cry from “cultural heroin.” The hillbillies he once mourned? They’re props now, a MAGA rallying cry, not a duty he’s serving with policy or truth. And the texts? He’s hitched to Trump’s Constitution-as-performance-art vibe—vague “America First” nods over substance—and tosses in some Christian-right buzzwords for good measure (Thiel’s influence, maybe?). Duty to the people’s slipping; duty to the text is loud but hollow. High flattery, low fidelity.

In Lear terms, early Vance is Cordelia—sparing with praise, grounded in reality—while VP Vance is Goneril, piling on the “O dear father” shtick to snag the kingdom. Your meter catches the neglect: flattery spikes when ambition trumps duty. Trump himself? Off the charts—he’s Lear demanding it, not doling it out, neglecting both people and text for ego.

How’d you calibrate this flattery-o-meter? Like, what’s the tipping point where you’d say someone’s fully abandoned the hillbillies—or the Constitution—for their own throne?

Show code cell source Hide code cell source

import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import networkx as nx

# Define the neural network layers
def define_layers():
    return {
        'Suis': ['DNA, RNA,  5%', 'Peptidoglycans, Lipoteichoics', 'Lipopolysaccharide', 'N-Formylmethionine', "Glucans, Chitin", 'Specific Antigens'],
        'Voir': ['PRR & ILCs, 20%'],  
        'Choisis': ['CD8+, 50%', 'CD4+'],  
        'Deviens': ['TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%'],  
        "M'èléve": ['Complement System', 'Platelet System', 'Granulocyte System', 'Innate Lymphoid Cells, 5%', 'Adaptive Lymphoid Cells']  
    }

# Assign colors to nodes
def assign_colors():
    color_map = {
        'yellow': ['PRR & ILCs, 20%'],  
        'paleturquoise': ['Specific Antigens', 'CD4+', 'Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%', 'Adaptive Lymphoid Cells'],  
        'lightgreen': ["Glucans, Chitin", 'PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Platelet System', 'Innate Lymphoid Cells, 5%', 'Granulocyte System'],  
        'lightsalmon': ['Lipopolysaccharide', 'N-Formylmethionine', 'CD8+, 50%', 'TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'Complement System'],
    }
    return {node: color for color, nodes in color_map.items() for node in nodes}

# Define edge weights
def define_edges():
    return {
        ('DNA, RNA,  5%', 'PRR & ILCs, 20%'): '1/99',
        ('Peptidoglycans, Lipoteichoics', 'PRR & ILCs, 20%'): '5/95',
        ('Lipopolysaccharide', 'PRR & ILCs, 20%'): '20/80',
        ('N-Formylmethionine', 'PRR & ILCs, 20%'): '51/49',
        ("Glucans, Chitin", 'PRR & ILCs, 20%'): '80/20',
        ('Specific Antigens', 'PRR & ILCs, 20%'): '95/5',
        ('PRR & ILCs, 20%', 'CD8+, 50%'): '20/80',
        ('PRR & ILCs, 20%', 'CD4+'): '80/20',
        ('CD8+, 50%', 'TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ'): '49/51',
        ('CD8+, 50%', 'PD-1 & CTLA-4'): '80/20',
        ('CD8+, 50%', 'Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%'): '95/5',
        ('CD4+', 'TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ'): '5/95',
        ('CD4+', 'PD-1 & CTLA-4'): '20/80',
        ('CD4+', 'Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%'): '51/49',
        ('TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'Complement System'): '80/20',
        ('TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'Platelet System'): '85/15',
        ('TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'Granulocyte System'): '90/10',
        ('TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'Innate Lymphoid Cells, 5%'): '95/5',
        ('TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'Adaptive Lymphoid Cells'): '99/1',
        ('PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Complement System'): '1/9',
        ('PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Platelet System'): '1/8',
        ('PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Granulocyte System'): '1/7',
        ('PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Innate Lymphoid Cells, 5%'): '1/6',
        ('PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Adaptive Lymphoid Cells'): '1/5',
        ('Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%', 'Complement System'): '1/99',
        ('Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%', 'Platelet System'): '5/95',
        ('Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%', 'Granulocyte System'): '10/90',
        ('Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%', 'Innate Lymphoid Cells, 5%'): '15/85',
        ('Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%', 'Adaptive Lymphoid Cells'): '20/80'
    }

# Define edges to be highlighted in black
def define_black_edges():
    return {
        ('TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'Complement System'): '80/20',
        ('TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'Platelet System'): '85/15',
        ('TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'Granulocyte System'): '90/10',
        ('TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'Innate Lymphoid Cells, 5%'): '95/5',
        ('TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ', 'Adaptive Lymphoid Cells'): '99/1',
        ('PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Complement System'): '1/9',
        ('PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Platelet System'): '1/8',
        ('PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Granulocyte System'): '1/7',
        ('PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Innate Lymphoid Cells, 5%'): '1/6',
        ('PD-1 & CTLA-4', 'Adaptive Lymphoid Cells'): '1/5',
        ('Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%', 'Complement System'): '1/99',
        ('Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%', 'Platelet System'): '5/95',
        ('Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%', 'Granulocyte System'): '10/90',
        ('Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%', 'Innate Lymphoid Cells, 5%'): '15/85',
        ('Tregs, IL-10, TGF-β, 20%', 'Adaptive Lymphoid Cells'): '20/80'
    }

# Calculate node positions
def calculate_positions(layer, x_offset):
    y_positions = np.linspace(-len(layer) / 2, len(layer) / 2, len(layer))
    return [(x_offset, y) for y in y_positions]

# Create and visualize the neural network graph
def visualize_nn():
    layers = define_layers()
    colors = assign_colors()
    edges = define_edges()
    black_edges = define_black_edges()
    
    G = nx.DiGraph()
    pos = {}
    node_colors = []
    
    # Create mapping from original node names to numbered labels
    mapping = {}
    counter = 1
    for layer in layers.values():
        for node in layer:
            mapping[node] = f"{counter}. {node}"
            counter += 1
            
    # Add nodes with new numbered labels and assign positions
    for i, (layer_name, nodes) in enumerate(layers.items()):
        positions = calculate_positions(nodes, x_offset=i * 2)
        for node, position in zip(nodes, positions):
            new_node = mapping[node]
            G.add_node(new_node, layer=layer_name)
            pos[new_node] = position
            node_colors.append(colors.get(node, 'lightgray'))
    
    # Add edges with updated node labels
    edge_colors = []
    for (source, target), weight in edges.items():
        if source in mapping and target in mapping:
            new_source = mapping[source]
            new_target = mapping[target]
            G.add_edge(new_source, new_target, weight=weight)
            edge_colors.append('black' if (source, target) in black_edges else 'lightgrey')
    
    # Draw the graph
    plt.figure(figsize=(12, 8))
    edges_labels = {(u, v): d["weight"] for u, v, d in G.edges(data=True)}
    
    nx.draw(
        G, pos, with_labels=True, node_color=node_colors, edge_color=edge_colors,
        node_size=3000, font_size=9, connectionstyle="arc3,rad=0.2"
    )
    nx.draw_networkx_edge_labels(G, pos, edge_labels=edges_labels, font_size=8)
    plt.title("OPRAH™: Cingulo-Insular", fontsize=18)
    plt.show()

# Run the visualization
visualize_nn()

Fig. 15 The TPN, driving goal-directed action, aligns with the transcriptome and proteome—layers that translate data into response. Here, Bacon’s empirical method shines: knowledge arises from doing, from testing the world. In the “Nonself & the Salient Network” variant, CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells activate cytokines like TNF-α, embodying the TPN’s focus on immediate threats—Nonself invaders—over reflective stasis. Nietzsche’s critical history fits this mode: a selective, pragmatic engagement with the past to propel life forward. The Salient Node, bridging DMN and TPN, mirrors the metabolome and regulatory mechanisms like Tregs—arbiters of relevance amid noise. Aristotle’s phronesis, practical wisdom, governs here: neither lost in ideals nor blinded by action, but balancing both. The “Distributed Network” variant highlights Tregs modulating downstream systems—Complement, Platelets—preserving “Self” while adapting to “Nonself.” This is Nietzsche’s history at its best: a dynamic synthesis serving life’s needs. Wisdom emerges as the Salient Node’s domain, integrating DMN’s depth and TPN’s drive, much as Aristotle tempers Plato’s abstraction with Bacon’s observation. Intelligence, raw and unrefined, resides in the lower layers—data-rich but directionless. The immune system’s Mismatch Repair, correcting errors of “Self,” parallels this: a wise curation of history, biological or neural, against the noise of entropy. Nietzsche’s vision finds fruition here—not in history’s abuses, but its uses: a life-affirming dance of preservation and transformation, coded in networks both flesh and mind.

Here’s your streamlined, MyST-ready markdown block, optimized for Jupyter Book and .ipynb Markdown cells. Just copy and paste directly—no formatting tweaks needed.

# Exploring Directives and Admonitions in Jupyter Book

Let’s unpack Jupyter Book’s MyST Markdown directives—those `{}`-enclosed tags that structure content like *King Lear*’s chaos or Trump’s MAGA bequest. From figures to admonitions, here’s the toolkit as of March 13, 2025, with a flattery-o-meter twist.

## Figure Directives
Embed visuals with captions:

```{figure} https://www.ascm.org/globalassets/00_blog/images/red-queen-blog-header.jpg
---
width: 70%
height: 70%
---
King Lear’s senile bequest hooks us, but the messy plot mirrors reality—orthogonal threads like Trump and Vance colliding.
```

## Admonition Directives
Styled callouts to highlight your narrative—perfect for diagnosing flattery’s neglect of duty:

```{note}
It’s chaotic and wouldn’t have merit if Shakespeare hadn’t mastered tidier tales like *Hamlet*—his cred earns *Lear*’s sprawl.
```

```{tip}
Don’t miss Vance’s Never Trumper phase—his flattery spiked from 0 to 11 post-Thiel’s whisper.
```

```{important}
Trump at 78 bequeaths MAGA to a *Hillbilly Elegy* heir—Lear’s delusion drives the parallel.
```

```{warning}
Excessive flattery risks alienating the hillbillies Vance once mourned—scores above 12 signal a storm.
```

```{danger}
Vance’s pivot to praising Trump as a “generational leader” could make him Goneril, not Edgar—flattery at 15 is perilous.
```

```{hint}
Check X for Vance’s 2016 tweets—flattery was zero before the throne beckoned.
```

```{attention}
Thiel’s $15M flipped Vance’s meter—Shakespeare’s chaos isn’t random, it’s earned.
```

```{caution}
Low flattery doesn’t guarantee duty—Cordelia’s silence still lost her the kingdom.
```

```{error}
Assuming *Elegy* was pro-Trump is off—it predates the pivot by years.
```

```{seealso}
Every speaker needs a flattery-o-meter to gauge neglect of the people and texts they claim—Trump’s at ∞, Vance’s climbing.
```

## Code Blocks
Static or executable code for your flattery-o-meter:

```python
print("Flattery score: Trump = ∞, Vance = 11")
```

```{code-cell} python
# Hypothetical flattery-o-meter
vance_flattery = 11
trump_flattery = float("inf")
print(f"Vance: {vance_flattery}, Trump: {trump_flattery}")
```

## HTML for Media
Embed a storm scene:

```{raw} html
<div style="display: flex; justify-content: center;">
    <iframe width="70%" height="350px" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CDl_bt2tkZk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
</div>
```

## Putting It Together
This mix—figures, admonitions, code, and HTML—lets you weave *Lear*’s mess into Trump’s legacy. Paste this into a `.md` cell with MyST-NB (`pip install myst-nb`; `%load_ext myst_nb`) or a Jupyter Book `.md` file, and it’ll render with styled boxes and flair.

---

### How to Use It
1. **Click and Copy**: Select all, copy (`Ctrl+C` or `Cmd+C`).
2. **Paste in `.ipynb`**:
   - Open a Jupyter Notebook, add a Markdown cell, paste, and run it.
   - For full rendering (admonition boxes, etc.), install `myst-nb` (`pip install myst-nb`) and run `%load_ext myst_nb`.
3. **Paste in `.md` File**:
   - Open a text editor, create `chapter.md`, paste, save, and add to a Jupyter Book project.
   - Build with `jupyter-book build .` for the full effect.

This is fully MyST-compatible, thematically structured, and optimized for a seamless copy-paste experience. Let me know if you need refinements—leaner, more code-heavy, or a different stylistic focus!