Is the grass always greener on the other side of the fence? –Gigi Reece, Chicago
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
First let’s clear up the ecological angle. The professor writes: “The ecological optics of the viewing conditions shown in figure 1 provide a simple explanation” of the proverb. Figure 1 depicts a man looking at the grass. Parsing things out as best I can, I’m guessing that the grass is ecological, whereas looking at it involves optics. One presumes this is the professor’s GAG reflex in action. However, the academic jungle (and academic writing) being what it is, we can’t rule out the possibility that he wanted the tenure committee to think: Whoa, this guy’s deep. (And it may have worked–Pomerantz got tenure the year this article appeared.)
Makes sense, no? But some will cavil: The paper you’re citing is (partly) a joke! Look, when Stephen Hawking publishes his take on the subject I’ll quote Stephen Hawking. In the meantime, let’s not lose sight of an axiom I have long lived by: Just because it’s bullshit doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
While walking your buddy around may be informative (and reassuring), it’s not really therapeutic–drugs metabolize at roughly the same rate whether the affected party is conscious or not. I’ve heard of one scenario that might count as an exception: The drug is alcohol and a medical professional has given the victim an emetic so he’ll heave whatever he hasn’t digested. In that case having the guy walk around might have some impact on his condition, since if he’s awake and upright, gravity and an active digestive system will help the emetic do its thing. I should stress, however, that doctors (specifically Patrick Murray, a kidney specialist at the University of Chicago Hospitals, whom I consulted on this subject) shudder at the thought of amateurs trying to make a drugged person throw up, lest he choke to death on his own vomit a la Jimi Hendrix. Better you should get the guy help from people who know what they’re doing.
