Listen to the speech, and give.
Anyone who has a net worth over US$500,000, which means most American homeowners, is in the top 1% of the worlds wealth. They are responsible, they are those capabe and those who owe everyone else, because they have enough money to live off the interest on their capital wealth. They have been given the free pass on life, they don't have to work, they don't have anything to do but make something meaningful out of their lives.
Bill Clinton said something terrifying at the end of his speech. By 2050 there will be 9 Billion people on this planet. The only way to stem the tide is to educate every woman on the planet for as long as they are willing to stay in school. Because empowering women will extend the time that it takes to reproduce, decrease the number of children, and give them the intellectual resources to raise the next generation well.
http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Hero with a Thousand Faces - Joseph Campbell
To know a Hero when you see one is a gift.
I see Joseph Campbell, and I know a hero's journey.
I see Joseph Campbell, and I know a hero's journey.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Judgement Day - NOVA, PBS
There are forces in this world that will stop at nothing to try and enslave the minds of young people.
Do not let them fool with your kids minds, stop the evil by exposing it to the light of reason.
Watch Judgement Day, a discussion of the newest attack on Evolution by American Christian Evangelicals.
This NOVA documentary follows the case of the Dover School District in Pennsylvania, and the trial that arose from their decision to read their science students a statement mistakenly putting the belief in Intelligent Design on par with the facts of the scientific theory of Evolution.
Judge John Jones issued a 139-page ruling on the case, stating that it is unconstitutional to teach Intelligent Design as an alternative to Evolution in a public school classroom.
Listening to the best, learning with the rest.
Do not let them fool with your kids minds, stop the evil by exposing it to the light of reason.
Watch Judgement Day, a discussion of the newest attack on Evolution by American Christian Evangelicals.
This NOVA documentary follows the case of the Dover School District in Pennsylvania, and the trial that arose from their decision to read their science students a statement mistakenly putting the belief in Intelligent Design on par with the facts of the scientific theory of Evolution.
Judge John Jones issued a 139-page ruling on the case, stating that it is unconstitutional to teach Intelligent Design as an alternative to Evolution in a public school classroom.
Listening to the best, learning with the rest.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Novels by Dan Brown
Novels by Dan Brown
The Da Vinci Code
Angels and Demons
Deception Point
Digital Fortress
The Da Vinci Code
Angels and Demons
Deception Point
Digital Fortress
The Rachel L. CARSON
The Sense of Wonder - by Rachel Carson
The Edge of the Sea - Rachel Carson
The Sea Around Us - by Rachel Carson
Silent Spring - By Rachel Carson
Under the Sea - Wind, By Rachel Carson
The Edge of the Sea - Rachel Carson
The Sea Around Us - by Rachel Carson
Silent Spring - By Rachel Carson
Under the Sea - Wind, By Rachel Carson
Monday, October 22, 2007
Paradoxes, R. M. Sainsbury
The deep and penetrating analysis of reason can only be successful if you first understand the nature of paradox.
Monday, October 01, 2007
"The Unreality of Time" (1908) - McTaggart
John McTaggart Ellis McTaggart (September 3, 1866 – January 18, 1925) was an Idealist metaphysician. For most of his life McTaggart was a lecturer at Trinity College, Cambridge. He was considered one of England's leading Hegel scholars at the beginning of the 20th century and among the most notable of the British Idealists.
"The Unreality of Time" (1908) - McTaggart
In The Unreality of Time (1908), the work for which he is best known today, McTaggart argued that our perception of time is an illusion, and that time itself is merely ideal. He introduced the notions of the "A series" and "B series" interpretations of time, representing two different ways that events in time can be arranged. The A series corresponds to our everyday notions of past, present, and future. The A series is "the series of positions running from the far past through the near past to the present, and then from the present to the near future and the far future" (p. 458). This is contrasted with the B series, in which positions are ordered from earlier to later, i.e. the series running from earlier to later moments.
McTaggart argued that the A series was a necessary component of any full theory of time, but that it was also self-contradictory and that our perception of time was therefore an ultimately incoherent illusion.
The Necessity of the A series
The first, and longer, part of McTaggart's argument is his affirmative answer to the question "whether it is essential to the reality of time that its events should form an A series as well as a B series" (p. 458). Broadly, McTaggart argues that if events are not ordered by an A as well as a B series then there cannot be said to be change. At the centre of his argument is the example of the death of Queen Anne. This event is a death, it has certain causes and certain effects, it is later than the death of Queen Elizabeth etc., but none of these properties change over time. Only in one respect does the event change:
"It began by being a future event. It became every moment an event in the nearer future. At last it was a present event. Then it became past, and will always remain so, though every moment it becomes further and further past. Thus we seem forced to the conclusion that all change is only a change in the characteristics imparted at to events by their presence in the A series" (p. 460).
Despite its power and originality this half of McTaggart's argument has, historically, received less attention than the second half.
[edit]
The Incoherence of the A series
What is most often presented as McTaggart's attempted incoherence of the A series (the argument of pages 468-9) appears in the original paper only as a single part of a broader argument for this conclusion, but it can be extended to have general application. According to the argument, the contradiction in our perception of time is that all events exemplify all three of the properties of the A-series, viz. being past, present and future. The obvious response is that while exemplifying all three properties at some time, no event exemplifies all three at once, no event is past, present, and future. A single event is present, has been future, will be past, and here there is, it seems, no contradiction.
McTaggart's great insight is that this ascent will apparently give rise to a 'vicious circle' or 'vicious infinite series'. On the one hand, the response depends upon the A-series to make sense. To distinguish the properties of being present, having been future and going to be past requires a conception of time divided into past, present and future, and hence of the A-series.
"Accordingly the A series has to be pre-supposed in order to account for the A series. And this is clearly a vicious circle" (p. 468).
The same difficulty can be represented as a 'vicious infinite series'. One can construe the response above as "constructing a second A series, within which the first falls, in the same way in which events fall within the first" (p. 469). But even if the idea of a second A series within which the first falls makes sense (and McTaggart doubts it does, p. 469), it will face the same contradiction. And so, we must construct a third A series within which the second falls. And this will require the construction of a fourth A series and so on ad infinitum. At any given stage the contradiction will appear; however far we go in constructing A series, each A series will be, without reference to a further A series containing it, contradictory. One ought to conclude, therefore, that the A series is indeed contradictory and, therefore, does not exist.
"The Unreality of Time" (1908) - McTaggart
In The Unreality of Time (1908), the work for which he is best known today, McTaggart argued that our perception of time is an illusion, and that time itself is merely ideal. He introduced the notions of the "A series" and "B series" interpretations of time, representing two different ways that events in time can be arranged. The A series corresponds to our everyday notions of past, present, and future. The A series is "the series of positions running from the far past through the near past to the present, and then from the present to the near future and the far future" (p. 458). This is contrasted with the B series, in which positions are ordered from earlier to later, i.e. the series running from earlier to later moments.
McTaggart argued that the A series was a necessary component of any full theory of time, but that it was also self-contradictory and that our perception of time was therefore an ultimately incoherent illusion.
The Necessity of the A series
The first, and longer, part of McTaggart's argument is his affirmative answer to the question "whether it is essential to the reality of time that its events should form an A series as well as a B series" (p. 458). Broadly, McTaggart argues that if events are not ordered by an A as well as a B series then there cannot be said to be change. At the centre of his argument is the example of the death of Queen Anne. This event is a death, it has certain causes and certain effects, it is later than the death of Queen Elizabeth etc., but none of these properties change over time. Only in one respect does the event change:
"It began by being a future event. It became every moment an event in the nearer future. At last it was a present event. Then it became past, and will always remain so, though every moment it becomes further and further past. Thus we seem forced to the conclusion that all change is only a change in the characteristics imparted at to events by their presence in the A series" (p. 460).
Despite its power and originality this half of McTaggart's argument has, historically, received less attention than the second half.
[edit]
The Incoherence of the A series
What is most often presented as McTaggart's attempted incoherence of the A series (the argument of pages 468-9) appears in the original paper only as a single part of a broader argument for this conclusion, but it can be extended to have general application. According to the argument, the contradiction in our perception of time is that all events exemplify all three of the properties of the A-series, viz. being past, present and future. The obvious response is that while exemplifying all three properties at some time, no event exemplifies all three at once, no event is past, present, and future. A single event is present, has been future, will be past, and here there is, it seems, no contradiction.
McTaggart's great insight is that this ascent will apparently give rise to a 'vicious circle' or 'vicious infinite series'. On the one hand, the response depends upon the A-series to make sense. To distinguish the properties of being present, having been future and going to be past requires a conception of time divided into past, present and future, and hence of the A-series.
"Accordingly the A series has to be pre-supposed in order to account for the A series. And this is clearly a vicious circle" (p. 468).
The same difficulty can be represented as a 'vicious infinite series'. One can construe the response above as "constructing a second A series, within which the first falls, in the same way in which events fall within the first" (p. 469). But even if the idea of a second A series within which the first falls makes sense (and McTaggart doubts it does, p. 469), it will face the same contradiction. And so, we must construct a third A series within which the second falls. And this will require the construction of a fourth A series and so on ad infinitum. At any given stage the contradiction will appear; however far we go in constructing A series, each A series will be, without reference to a further A series containing it, contradictory. One ought to conclude, therefore, that the A series is indeed contradictory and, therefore, does not exist.
Thursday, February 08, 2007
I Believe Thus
I Believe thus
After careful examination of all the knowable facts, and deep debate upon the nature of knowledge, I came to the conclusion that in-spite of all experience, almost everything is doubtable. At its very foundation the only logical premise is that there is some thing that thinks these thoughts, something exists.
I believe I exist.
Presuming, as a self evident fact, that I exist, it follows that my experiences, although they may be generated through the fallible senses of an imperfect body, must be more than random signals in the void. My experience of the otherness, of space and the sequence of time, which forms the myriad repeating patterns of life, must therefore come from some objective existence, independent of the mind I call my self.
I believe the universe exists.
Beginning without understanding, we subconsciously assume the existence of others, like ourselves, as our experience is dominated by forms who's patterns mimic and inform our since of identity. The independent being of these caregivers is grafted into our emotional instinct and welded into our very lives by the necessity of evolution, but their actual existence is not directly knowable, and must be inferred based upon uncountable assumptions and events that correspond to our developing understanding. Thus it is ultimately unprovable weather any other intelligence exists in the universe, but I believe they do.
I believe you exist.
So, on the foundation of existence and experience, I leap to the conclusion that we exist in a shared, objective universe, and that our experience is similar enough that we may communicate, and exchange meaningful ideas about it, thus gathering greater and greater knowledge and wisdom from our shared existence.
I believe we communicate.
Finally, we come to the crux of the matter, for without first being, one could not believe. The first step must be to gather data, and in measuring these beings, like me but somehow unlike me, with whom I share experience, I grew a model of the world with the maximum perspective across space and time. Our beings are imperfect, and without first realizing it, we adopted standards of evidence that constituted proof of the truth, or fact, of things. Over time we analyzed this, communicated, and reanalyzed the process of our thoughts, our ideas, our knowing. Our logic developed and we compared it to other ways of knowing, of finding truth, and wisdom, and for me at least, it came down to this. Thus far, the most reliable way of predicting the future of things within this space-time universe is the mathematical perfection of reason. Reason is the best path to truth.
I believe in reason.
Exploring the universe with reason as my guide, I soon came to find paradoxes and absurdities. The imperfect knowledge of human beings creates gaps in understanding that we do not yet have evidence enough to bridge. And there are limits to reason, which are often found within the finite context of our human being. Each life seems to be an anomaly, capable not only of modeling the universe, but also of modeling the self, and that self reflection, when combined with rational self-awareness gives rise to the infinitely strange and beautiful freedom of will. It is something I covet, perhaps unreasonably, but without it all existence seems meaningless.
I believe in free will.
This examination of belief is never ending, our minds must be open to new information. Belief in reason is rational only as long as it remains consistent within the testable evidence of our shared existence, but there are those who would argue that it does not. Some claim they experience levels of reality that are beyond any evidence or rational understanding, thus they can provide no direct or inferred proof of its existence in fact or in truth, yet they would impose their beliefs in these experiences upon others, and this causes conflict. It is clear that the freedom of the will is limited only by the accuracy of one's understanding of the world, yet the most infinitely unfathomable aspect of reality is not nature itself, but the vagaries of the human mind. All the needless suffering imposed by unnecessary conflicts and the limits they set upon our potential enrages me. To date, the best humanity can do is set up adaptive social systems and governments to try and limit the violence and destruction our ignorance imposes as a tax upon our survival. The best of these systems have codified the wisdom gleaned by endless conflict, and I have adopted them as my own.
I believe in the Constitution of the United States of America.
I hold these truths to be self evident: That all people are created equal, and each has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That among others, people have the freedoms of speech, of thought, and of belief, and the right to express and communicate their beliefs to any who will listen. I believe these rights can not be given away, that each individual must earn them for themselves, and fight for them when necessary. Beyond the rational beliefs I have stated here, I have theories about the nature of things and ideas. I have philosophies of ethics, and science, and law which define right action, and help guide me through the conflicts of life, and I will share them with you if you wish, but I would not force you to live by my rules. May reason and experience be your guide.
After careful examination of all the knowable facts, and deep debate upon the nature of knowledge, I came to the conclusion that in-spite of all experience, almost everything is doubtable. At its very foundation the only logical premise is that there is some thing that thinks these thoughts, something exists.
I believe I exist.
Presuming, as a self evident fact, that I exist, it follows that my experiences, although they may be generated through the fallible senses of an imperfect body, must be more than random signals in the void. My experience of the otherness, of space and the sequence of time, which forms the myriad repeating patterns of life, must therefore come from some objective existence, independent of the mind I call my self.
I believe the universe exists.
Beginning without understanding, we subconsciously assume the existence of others, like ourselves, as our experience is dominated by forms who's patterns mimic and inform our since of identity. The independent being of these caregivers is grafted into our emotional instinct and welded into our very lives by the necessity of evolution, but their actual existence is not directly knowable, and must be inferred based upon uncountable assumptions and events that correspond to our developing understanding. Thus it is ultimately unprovable weather any other intelligence exists in the universe, but I believe they do.
I believe you exist.
So, on the foundation of existence and experience, I leap to the conclusion that we exist in a shared, objective universe, and that our experience is similar enough that we may communicate, and exchange meaningful ideas about it, thus gathering greater and greater knowledge and wisdom from our shared existence.
I believe we communicate.
Finally, we come to the crux of the matter, for without first being, one could not believe. The first step must be to gather data, and in measuring these beings, like me but somehow unlike me, with whom I share experience, I grew a model of the world with the maximum perspective across space and time. Our beings are imperfect, and without first realizing it, we adopted standards of evidence that constituted proof of the truth, or fact, of things. Over time we analyzed this, communicated, and reanalyzed the process of our thoughts, our ideas, our knowing. Our logic developed and we compared it to other ways of knowing, of finding truth, and wisdom, and for me at least, it came down to this. Thus far, the most reliable way of predicting the future of things within this space-time universe is the mathematical perfection of reason. Reason is the best path to truth.
I believe in reason.
Exploring the universe with reason as my guide, I soon came to find paradoxes and absurdities. The imperfect knowledge of human beings creates gaps in understanding that we do not yet have evidence enough to bridge. And there are limits to reason, which are often found within the finite context of our human being. Each life seems to be an anomaly, capable not only of modeling the universe, but also of modeling the self, and that self reflection, when combined with rational self-awareness gives rise to the infinitely strange and beautiful freedom of will. It is something I covet, perhaps unreasonably, but without it all existence seems meaningless.
I believe in free will.
This examination of belief is never ending, our minds must be open to new information. Belief in reason is rational only as long as it remains consistent within the testable evidence of our shared existence, but there are those who would argue that it does not. Some claim they experience levels of reality that are beyond any evidence or rational understanding, thus they can provide no direct or inferred proof of its existence in fact or in truth, yet they would impose their beliefs in these experiences upon others, and this causes conflict. It is clear that the freedom of the will is limited only by the accuracy of one's understanding of the world, yet the most infinitely unfathomable aspect of reality is not nature itself, but the vagaries of the human mind. All the needless suffering imposed by unnecessary conflicts and the limits they set upon our potential enrages me. To date, the best humanity can do is set up adaptive social systems and governments to try and limit the violence and destruction our ignorance imposes as a tax upon our survival. The best of these systems have codified the wisdom gleaned by endless conflict, and I have adopted them as my own.
I believe in the Constitution of the United States of America.
I hold these truths to be self evident: That all people are created equal, and each has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That among others, people have the freedoms of speech, of thought, and of belief, and the right to express and communicate their beliefs to any who will listen. I believe these rights can not be given away, that each individual must earn them for themselves, and fight for them when necessary. Beyond the rational beliefs I have stated here, I have theories about the nature of things and ideas. I have philosophies of ethics, and science, and law which define right action, and help guide me through the conflicts of life, and I will share them with you if you wish, but I would not force you to live by my rules. May reason and experience be your guide.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)