Text
Made some aceo gouache paintings of some large and small animals.
2.5x3.5 gouache on hot press paper
Text
Still love how the Hippos think they are the Smart Guy, when they’re actually The Big Guy.
Outside of combat they wax poetical about historical battles. Inside combat they For Honour and Today is a Good Day to Die.
Text
Text
I’m starting a collection of these Schleich toys, here’s the first one!
I’m calling him Tuggle!
Photo
Image 551 from the Bible Verse Art Gallery by John Bell
See now behemoth, which I made as well as you. He eats grass as an ox. Look now, his strength is in his thighs. His force is in the muscles of his belly. He moves his tail like a cedar. The sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are like tubes of bronze. His limbs are like bars of iron. He is a primary example of the ways of God.
Job 40:15-19a
Text
The Black Hole is attacking the ship (my hand) with deadly cosmic rays (knife beans) whenever I attempt to approach the system (laundry basket)
Text
The Person Of Integrity
Kant’s integrity begins the moment your rule stops bending to your mood.
What Immanuel Kant is outlining in Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals ends up looking very much like what people today call a person of integrity. But there is an important nuance: Kant is not describing a personality trait or a moral hero. He is describing a structure of decision-making.
Integrity in everyday language usually means consistency between what someone says and what they do. Kant goes deeper than that. For him, the key feature is that a person acts according to a rule they recognize as valid in itself, not because it is convenient, not because others approve, and not because of emotional inclination. The person holds the rule even when it conflicts with comfort, advantage, or instinct.
So the “man of integrity” in Kant’s sense is not defined by being admirable or strong-willed in a dramatic way. It is more austere. It is someone whose actions are guided by principles that could be shared by any rational agent in the same situation. That is why the examples in the text of telling the truth, keeping promises, fulfilling responsibilities tied to roles look ordinary rather than heroic.
Again the example of the young teacher that in case of emergency she is responsible for the lives of the children fits this model quite well. The rule is not about appearing brave. It is about recognizing that the role logically requires a certain priority structure. Once you accept the role, the rule follows. Integrity, in Kant’s framework, is basically the alignment between the rule you acknowledge and the action you actually take when pressure appears.
But Kant would still push one uncomfortable clarification. Many people think they have integrity simply because they follow their own code. Kant would say that is not enough. A private code can still be arbitrary or self-serving. What matters is whether the rule survives the universal test, whether it could function if anyone in that role followed it.
So integrity here is not just firmness. It is rational accountability. Seen this way, Kant is describing something slightly stricter than the modern idea of integrity. He is describing a person who governs themselves by principles that remain valid even when stripped of personal narrative, reputation, or emotional justification. Most people like the image of integrity, but fewer like the constraint that comes with it, once the rule is recognized as valid, you no longer get to renegotiate it every time it becomes inconvenient.
Integrity begins the moment your rule stops bending to your mood.
Text
Any particular reason we gave the random-ass dinosauresque name of hippopotamus to said particular animal?
