Why did the chicken cross the road?:
CAPTAIN JAMES T. KIRK: To boldly go where no chicken has gone before.
MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.: I envision a world where all chickens will be free to cross roads without having their motives called into question.
GRANDPA: In my day, we didn’t ask why the chicken crossed the road. Someone told us that the chicken crossed the road, and that was good enough for us.
ARISTOTLE: It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.
KARL MARX: It was a historical inevitability.
SADDAM HUSSEIN: This was an unprovoked act of rebellion and we were quite justified in dropping 50 tons of nerve gas on it.
RONALD REAGAN: What chicken?
DR. SEUSS: Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad? Yes! The chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed, I’ve not been told!
MACHIAVELLI: The point is that the chicken crossed the road. Who cares why? The end of crossing the road justifies whatever motive there was.
FREUD: The fact that you are at all concerned that the chicken crossed the road reveals your underlying sexual insecurity.
BILL GATES: I have just released eChicken 98, which will not only cross roads, but will lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your checkbook. Internet Explorer is an inextricable part of eChicken.
EINSTEIN: Did the chicken really cross the road or did the road move beneath the chicken?
BILL CLINTON: I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What do you mean by chicken? Could you define chicken please?
IMMANUEL KANT: The chicken was acting out of a sense of duty to cross the road, as chickens have traditionally crossed roads throughout history.
THE BIBLE: And God came down from the heavens, and He said unto the chicken, Thou shalt cross the road." And the chicken crossed the road, and there was much rejoicing.
RICHARD M. NIXON: The chicken did not cross the road. I repeat, the chicken did not cross the road. I don’t know any chickens. I have never known any chickens.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Thursday, January 18, 2007
The Good Earth 8
In the previous post, you may have noticed that my writing style was simplistic and choppy, without transitions. This was, of course, not an accident. It was my imitation of Pearl S. Buck's writing style, at least in The Good Earth. This novel was an interesting novel, in that it was written in a style that some Chinese readers objected to; it was a somewhat objective view of everyday life in Pre-Revolutionary China, as opposed to the dressed-up version that some Chinese would prefer. Some critics objected to it because it was not presented in the traditional Chinese manner.
However, these critics were few and far between. The way that Buck presents the facts and then allows the reader to conclude the obvious gave the novel a Pulitzer Prize and made it one of the most important novels about modern China.
However, these critics were few and far between. The way that Buck presents the facts and then allows the reader to conclude the obvious gave the novel a Pulitzer Prize and made it one of the most important novels about modern China.
The Good Earth 7
Wang Lung completes the buying of the great house in town and moves in after his eldest son has a baby. There are now three generations in the house.Wang Lung hears about the death of Ching, his close friend and trusted servant, who had worked on the farm for many, many years. He mourns Ching's death for a few days.
Wang Lung becomes very respected in the town, "And people who had said Wang The Farmer now said Wang The Big Man or Wang The Rich Man." His eldest son wanders around the house, complaining about one thing or another because it is not up to the standards he had seen while he was studying in the South. However, Wang Lung now has the money to fix these things. He buys carved furniture and installs indoor pools and fruit trees.
Wang Lung's second son gets married. "Wang Lung, then, in the space of five years had four grandsons and three grand-daughters."
Wang Lung's uncle dies and his wife is moved to the great house (they had been at the old farm house). The uncle's son has gone off to fight in a far-off war. However, when he comes back, he brings the whole army. The army stays in Wang Lung's house for many months, and there is nothing Wang Lung can do about it.
Wang Lung becomes very respected in the town, "And people who had said Wang The Farmer now said Wang The Big Man or Wang The Rich Man." His eldest son wanders around the house, complaining about one thing or another because it is not up to the standards he had seen while he was studying in the South. However, Wang Lung now has the money to fix these things. He buys carved furniture and installs indoor pools and fruit trees.
Wang Lung's second son gets married. "Wang Lung, then, in the space of five years had four grandsons and three grand-daughters."
Wang Lung's uncle dies and his wife is moved to the great house (they had been at the old farm house). The uncle's son has gone off to fight in a far-off war. However, when he comes back, he brings the whole army. The army stays in Wang Lung's house for many months, and there is nothing Wang Lung can do about it.
The Good Earth 6
Wang Lung suddenly notices that O-lan is ill and in pain. He calls a doctor, who tells him that O-lan is dying. O-lan "lay dying on her bed for many months" before she said that she wanted to see her son married before she died. Wang Lung sends a messenger south to get his son to come back. O-lan is pleased to see her son's wife perform the proper subordination rituals at the wedding, and dies shortly after. Wang Lung's father dies the next night, and Wang Lung properly honors both of them.
This year, there is a terrible flood, and even Wang Lung has to be very careful about wasting food, even though he is the richest of the villagers. He keeps his gates barred against people who would want food or money from him during the flood, but "Well did Wang Lung know that if it had not been for his uncle's power he would have been robbed and sacked... So he was courteous to his uncle." However, his uncle's greed would have ruined him, and he had to do something. So, consulting with his son, he decides to give his uncle opium, in order to keep him under control.
During this time, Wang Lung betroths his second daughter to the son of a merchant in town. He also buys a slave to take care of Lotus. He also begins to think about the betrothal of his second son.
The opium keeps Wang Lung's uncle under control, but the uncle's son cannot be controlled, and Wang Lung desperately needs to get away from him. He decides to buy the great house in town.
It is interesting as the reader gets farther and farther into the novel, how the author's writing style seems more and more simplistic. The author seems to just throw a bunch of events into some sort of cohesive order and then shows how they continue to affect the characters later on.
This year, there is a terrible flood, and even Wang Lung has to be very careful about wasting food, even though he is the richest of the villagers. He keeps his gates barred against people who would want food or money from him during the flood, but "Well did Wang Lung know that if it had not been for his uncle's power he would have been robbed and sacked... So he was courteous to his uncle." However, his uncle's greed would have ruined him, and he had to do something. So, consulting with his son, he decides to give his uncle opium, in order to keep him under control.
During this time, Wang Lung betroths his second daughter to the son of a merchant in town. He also buys a slave to take care of Lotus. He also begins to think about the betrothal of his second son.
The opium keeps Wang Lung's uncle under control, but the uncle's son cannot be controlled, and Wang Lung desperately needs to get away from him. He decides to buy the great house in town.
It is interesting as the reader gets farther and farther into the novel, how the author's writing style seems more and more simplistic. The author seems to just throw a bunch of events into some sort of cohesive order and then shows how they continue to affect the characters later on.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
the good Earth5
Wang Lung brings his concubine, Lotus, to his house, and his father, who is now very old, is angered and alarmed. "There is a harlot here! And I had one woman and my father had one woman and we farmed the land."
After many days, Wang Lung decides to go back to the land, which has dried up after the flood. The land is now very moist and fertile, and Wang Lung forgets about Lotus for a while; he recovers from his boredom. Wang Lung becomes even more rich and respected; villagers come to him for advice and council. His sons can read and help him when he is dealing in the market. His eldest son, however, becomes sullen and won't go to his lessons. Wang Lung decides to begin preparation for the son's betrothal.
Wang Lung tries to kick his father's brother, who had been staying at his house, out because he had been wasting food and resources, but he finds out that he is part of a major band of robbers. Wang Lung has to treat his uncle carefully to make sure that he is not robbed.
At one point, there is a very large plague of locusts. All the villagers despair for their fields, but Wang Lung decides to fight the locusts. He and his men set fire to a few of his fields and run after the locusts. Thousands of the locusts die, and they leave Wang Lung's best fields alone. Most of the other villagers' fields are devoured, so Wang Lung can fetch prime prices on the grain market.
O-lan despises Lotus, and will not deign to be in the same room with her. At one point, she tells Wang Lung that his eldest son often goes into Lotus' room when Wang Lung is gone. He decides to pretend to go away and then check on Lotus. He hears his son speaking with Lotus, and he grows very angry. He decides to allow his son to go south and study at the university there.
After many days, Wang Lung decides to go back to the land, which has dried up after the flood. The land is now very moist and fertile, and Wang Lung forgets about Lotus for a while; he recovers from his boredom. Wang Lung becomes even more rich and respected; villagers come to him for advice and council. His sons can read and help him when he is dealing in the market. His eldest son, however, becomes sullen and won't go to his lessons. Wang Lung decides to begin preparation for the son's betrothal.
Wang Lung tries to kick his father's brother, who had been staying at his house, out because he had been wasting food and resources, but he finds out that he is part of a major band of robbers. Wang Lung has to treat his uncle carefully to make sure that he is not robbed.
At one point, there is a very large plague of locusts. All the villagers despair for their fields, but Wang Lung decides to fight the locusts. He and his men set fire to a few of his fields and run after the locusts. Thousands of the locusts die, and they leave Wang Lung's best fields alone. Most of the other villagers' fields are devoured, so Wang Lung can fetch prime prices on the grain market.
O-lan despises Lotus, and will not deign to be in the same room with her. At one point, she tells Wang Lung that his eldest son often goes into Lotus' room when Wang Lung is gone. He decides to pretend to go away and then check on Lotus. He hears his son speaking with Lotus, and he grows very angry. He decides to allow his son to go south and study at the university there.
Sunday, December 17, 2006
The Good Earth4
The reason that Wang Lung manages to get land for such a low price was that the great house has been experiencing considerable hardships. The lady of the house has died, the young lords has squandered their wealth, almost all the slaves have run away, etc. There were only two people in the great house when Wang Lung returned from the great city: the Old Lord and an old slave called Cuckoo, who will do just about anything to get a little money. She was the one who managed the sale of the great house's remaining land.
Wang Lung becomes quite prosperous through his land, and even hires workers to help out. He becomes aware that he can't read or write, so he sends his sons to school so they can read and write for him when he makes business deals.
Then, one year the fields are flooded, and Wang Lung can't do anything. He gets bored easily, and he goes to the village, where he finds a brothel run by the slave Cuckoo. He succumbs to the temptations of good food and takes a concubine. Wang Lung starts to realize that O-lan is not attractive to him, and he gets angry at her for this. "He stood there silent for a while and then he said to her roughly, and he was rough because he was ashamed and would not acknowledge his shame in his heart"
It is interesting to note the author's views about boredom. The author brings up the interesting point that boredom should be considered a major historical factor. Up to this point, the major conflicts in this book are starvation, sexism, and boredom. Boredom is not normally considered a major plot device, but the author makes good use of it.
Wang Lung becomes quite prosperous through his land, and even hires workers to help out. He becomes aware that he can't read or write, so he sends his sons to school so they can read and write for him when he makes business deals.
Then, one year the fields are flooded, and Wang Lung can't do anything. He gets bored easily, and he goes to the village, where he finds a brothel run by the slave Cuckoo. He succumbs to the temptations of good food and takes a concubine. Wang Lung starts to realize that O-lan is not attractive to him, and he gets angry at her for this. "He stood there silent for a while and then he said to her roughly, and he was rough because he was ashamed and would not acknowledge his shame in his heart"
It is interesting to note the author's views about boredom. The author brings up the interesting point that boredom should be considered a major historical factor. Up to this point, the major conflicts in this book are starvation, sexism, and boredom. Boredom is not normally considered a major plot device, but the author makes good use of it.
The good earth3
In the great city, Wang Lung's wife, children, and father were forced to beg for money to live, while he himself pulled heavy "jinrickshas" around town for whoever would pay. Everyday, he came back to the hut exaughsted and weary and everyday, he had just enough money to buy the meager meals of rice for his family. Occasionally, he would pass revolutionaries telling onlookers that "You are poor and downtrodden and it is because the rich seize everything." Everywhere he looked, Wang Lung saw the squalor and filth of the street contrasting sharply with the lives of the rich, and even with the life he dreamed of when he got back to his farm, for he rarely stopped thinking about the land. He dreamed of a way to get back, but he had no money. At on point, he even considered selling his daughter into slavery, but he decided against it. He was so desperate for money that when the revolutionaries rioted in the city and destroyed the houses of the rich, he stole some money from the rich man whose house he had been living next to for the past several months. Wang Lung then moved with his family back to the village, but found their house torn apart. They had some money left over, however, so they began rebuilding. Then, one night O-lan revealed that she had stolen some gems from the rich man's house in the great city, so Wang Lung could buy some more land.
Saturday, December 16, 2006
The Good Earth 2
In the fifth and sixth chapters, Wang Lung makes a small profit from his small farm, so he decides to buy a little piece of land from the estate of the great house and life seems to be going well. However, the next year, things take a turn for the worse: "The rains, which should have come in early summer, withheld themselves, and day after day the skies shone with fresh and careless briliance."
From the preceding passage, we can infer two things: that the farmers in Wang Lung's village are in trouble, and that the author places an emphasis upon the land in her writing style.
The drought gets so bad that Wang Lung and his family are forced to migrate south, to a big city. Wang Lung, however, makes a point of not selling his land or his house, so he has something to return to. In the big city, the reader gets a glimpse into the author's view of the socioeconomic divisions that plauged the urban areas of pre-Revolutionary China. The poor of the city live in small huts made of mats along the side of some rich guy's large house, with several huts fitting along a single wall. The poor are forced to eat rice for almost all their meals, while the rich can eat anything they want.
From the preceding passage, we can infer two things: that the farmers in Wang Lung's village are in trouble, and that the author places an emphasis upon the land in her writing style.
The drought gets so bad that Wang Lung and his family are forced to migrate south, to a big city. Wang Lung, however, makes a point of not selling his land or his house, so he has something to return to. In the big city, the reader gets a glimpse into the author's view of the socioeconomic divisions that plauged the urban areas of pre-Revolutionary China. The poor of the city live in small huts made of mats along the side of some rich guy's large house, with several huts fitting along a single wall. The poor are forced to eat rice for almost all their meals, while the rich can eat anything they want.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
The Good Earth1
The book "The Good Earth," by Pearl S. Buck starts off with Wang Lung, a Chinese farmer before the revolution, about to get married. Note, however, that he has never actually met the woman who is to be his wife and his old father has insisted that she should be a slave, "Not a slave too young, and above all, not a pretty one"! Wang Lung's own father has insisted this because otherwise the wife would be too demanding.
Wang Lung goes to the great house to pick up his wife, and he comes out of the gate followed by O-lan. Within the first seven chapters, O-lan bears Wang Lung two sons, and then, much to Wang Lung's horror, a girl, or "only a slave".
In case one cannot tell, the first chapters lay out a setting of considerable sexism and similar discrimination.
Wang Lung goes to the great house to pick up his wife, and he comes out of the gate followed by O-lan. Within the first seven chapters, O-lan bears Wang Lung two sons, and then, much to Wang Lung's horror, a girl, or "only a slave".
In case one cannot tell, the first chapters lay out a setting of considerable sexism and similar discrimination.
Monday, December 04, 2006
Butterflies2
This book has continued to annoy me. The dance at the end of chapter 6 is a blatant attempt at symbolism. The whole rebellion can easily be viewed as a very careful dance to stay alive, to stay on Trujillo's good side. It is a very thinly veiled representation of life at that time. Symbolism shouldn’t be so obvious; the author is trying too hard. I expect better from my literature. (Actually, it’s a good book; it’s just that I need something to complain about.) The book takes a very complex concept and tries to make it simple, something that rarely leads to a good outcome. We can only wait and see. I have some hope that it will be at least tolerable.
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Butterflies1
The first seven chapters of this book have been mildly interesting at best. At worst, they have been boring or melodramatic, not to mention contradictory. For example, in the first chapter, the narrator mentioned her complaint that the sisters had been made into legends, yet the narrators in later chapters went on to fictionalize and hero-worship their lives. Admittedly, the book gives the sisters just enough flaws and quirks to seem to avoid this, but it is only at a superficial level. The book raises questions about the morality of each sister's actions, but generally defends it apparently unknowingly. Besides, the book seems to try to make the sisters seem superhuman in their responses to oppression. The book over-simplifies the sisters. We as readers can never know what the sisters were actually thinking, not to mention what they actually did, because the book is so fictionalized.
Saturday, November 25, 2006
Utopia2: Money
Money, as it is used today, is a very bad concept. The government uses money to control the citizens. The citizens have a debt to the government that they cannot repay. This is a very bad thing. There is nothing stopping the government from printing vast amounts of money, thereby devaluing the currency. Now for the real shocker: the US government already does this, through a little mechanism called the Federal Reserve. The government prints money and sends it to the banks. But wait, the process doesn't end there. The banks get to make up money. Most banks have very low reserve rates. The banks might only have perhaps 10% of the money that they owe at any given time. They do this remarkable magic trick by loaning money. The fractional-reserve banking system means that they only need to keep, say, 10% of the money they "have" in their reserves. The rest they can loan out. When those loans get paid back, however, the money gets put into the reserves, which means that the bank gets to loan out even more money. For example, if a bank "borrows" $100,000 from the Fed, the bank only needs to keep $10,000 in their reserves. They can loan the rest out. When that $90,000 get paid back, the bank can then loan out $81,000 (90% of $90,000). This process repeats itself many times, meaning that the bank actually got to loan out several time the amount they originally "borrowed" from the Fed. This means that a simple loan from the Fed leads to far, far larger amounts of money in circulation. This leads directly to inflation.
Now for another shocker: money is worthless. All that backs the currency of today is government fiat. This means that all that stops the government from printing more money and devaluing the overall economy is the goodwill of the government. This means that we have two choices: printing more and more money and causing terrible inflation, or not doing that. The latter would seem more preferable, but one must realize that the public would then have a debt to the government that can never be repaid. So in the end, both choices are bad. Money, as it is used today, is bad.
The question then arises: how can we achieve a monetary system that actually retains the benefits of both sides without the detriments? The benefit of the government printing more and more money is that the government gets to use a lot of money. The benefit of not doing this is that inflation is curbed. One possible solution is the government deciding the prices of every single object on the market, and keeping those prices. One problem with this is that it would difficult to figure out the logistics. Another problem is competition on the international market. Both of these problems could be solved by uniting the world into a single, global state.
Now for another shocker: money is worthless. All that backs the currency of today is government fiat. This means that all that stops the government from printing more money and devaluing the overall economy is the goodwill of the government. This means that we have two choices: printing more and more money and causing terrible inflation, or not doing that. The latter would seem more preferable, but one must realize that the public would then have a debt to the government that can never be repaid. So in the end, both choices are bad. Money, as it is used today, is bad.
The question then arises: how can we achieve a monetary system that actually retains the benefits of both sides without the detriments? The benefit of the government printing more and more money is that the government gets to use a lot of money. The benefit of not doing this is that inflation is curbed. One possible solution is the government deciding the prices of every single object on the market, and keeping those prices. One problem with this is that it would difficult to figure out the logistics. Another problem is competition on the international market. Both of these problems could be solved by uniting the world into a single, global state.
Sunday, November 19, 2006
Shakespeare#3
THIS PLAY IS FAR TOO PREDICTABLE! Benedick and Beatrice confess their love, and Benedick challenges Claudio to a duel. I doubt that Benedick is even going to follow through with his challenge, because Hero and Claudio are probably going to get married. I don't like plays that are predictable, because they are cheesy. CHEESY=BAD! Besides, Don John is a bad character because he has no motivation other than the fact that he is a bastard. We cannot possibly know what he truly wants out of life, because all he wants are bad thing that lead to him suffering along with the rest of the world. He loses wars. He has to run away after he frames Hero. What does he want from life?! DON JOHN NEEDS MOTIVATION!
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Shakespeare#2
In scene 3, Shakespeare used the word 'note' a lot again. For example Balthasar says, "Note this before my notes: There's not a note of mine that's worth the noting."(2.3.56-57). I find it hard to believe that a character such as Balthasar would use words like that, especially when Benedick and others have already placed so much emphasis on it. It must be a conspiracy! Either that or Shakespeare was just using words to make the play sound better. (Ok, obviously it's the latter, but conspiracy theories are more fun).
Also note in scene 2, when Borachio is outlining his plan, he includes in the list of hoped-for outcomes the death of Leonato (see 2.2.29). Why is this, I wonder?
It is also interesting to note how Shakespeare places a certain emphasis on the difference between military life and civilian life, without describing the military life. In the first scene of the play, the characters are returning from a military action, so Shakespeare emphasizes the change a little bit at that time. Now, at the beginning of scene 3, act 2, he states it again, through Benedick: "I have known when there was no music with him but the drum and the fife, and now had he rather hear the tabor and the pipe;..."(2.3.13-15). It is interesting that throughout (most of) the rest of the play, Shakespeare scrutinizes the frivolity of civilian life, particularly that of the upper class.
Also note in scene 2, when Borachio is outlining his plan, he includes in the list of hoped-for outcomes the death of Leonato (see 2.2.29). Why is this, I wonder?
It is also interesting to note how Shakespeare places a certain emphasis on the difference between military life and civilian life, without describing the military life. In the first scene of the play, the characters are returning from a military action, so Shakespeare emphasizes the change a little bit at that time. Now, at the beginning of scene 3, act 2, he states it again, through Benedick: "I have known when there was no music with him but the drum and the fife, and now had he rather hear the tabor and the pipe;..."(2.3.13-15). It is interesting that throughout (most of) the rest of the play, Shakespeare scrutinizes the frivolity of civilian life, particularly that of the upper class.
Proof of God
P: God
G: Reality
Assume there is no God. If there is no God, there can be no proof. If there is no proof, there can be no reality.
If there is no God, there can be no proof because you can’t prove anything without making claims. You can’t claim anything without making assumptions. Assumptions are not consistent with the nature of proof. Therefore, there can be no proof.
If there is no proof, there can be no reality. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity and the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics both show that reality is defined by perception. Since perception is defined by belief and belief is defined by proof, there can’t be adequate reality. Also, there can be no inadequate reality because reality is an absolute concept.
Since there is reality, God must exist. If there is a God, then you can make claims without making assumptions, which means there can be proof, and therefore reality. (The definition of God is Inherent Truth. This is a good definition of God because if you prove something using an inherent Truth, all of reality is derived from that Truth, which means that the Truth is omnipotent.)
G: Reality
Assume there is no God. If there is no God, there can be no proof. If there is no proof, there can be no reality.
If there is no God, there can be no proof because you can’t prove anything without making claims. You can’t claim anything without making assumptions. Assumptions are not consistent with the nature of proof. Therefore, there can be no proof.
If there is no proof, there can be no reality. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity and the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics both show that reality is defined by perception. Since perception is defined by belief and belief is defined by proof, there can’t be adequate reality. Also, there can be no inadequate reality because reality is an absolute concept.
Since there is reality, God must exist. If there is a God, then you can make claims without making assumptions, which means there can be proof, and therefore reality. (The definition of God is Inherent Truth. This is a good definition of God because if you prove something using an inherent Truth, all of reality is derived from that Truth, which means that the Truth is omnipotent.)
Monday, November 13, 2006
Utopia1: Intro+Forms of Government
Utopia is the one thing human governments have been striving for since before Thomas More. Utopia is, in essence, the ideal state. That is why I shall, over the course of several articles, expound upon a theory I have held for some time pertaining to the seeming truth that a Utopia can only be achieved if the world is united into a global state, because otherwise we can neither attain world peace nor reduce economic competition to a productive level.
After we develop this global state, we get to the important part: setting up the government, which I believe should be decided upon before we try to unite the world. Various forms of government have been tested and tried over the years, and four in particular have come forward as important ones: Communism, Capitalism, Democracy, and a Parliamentary system. Note that these are neither mutually exclusive nor inclusive. Each one has its pros and cons. The duty of a Utopian government is to attempt to achieve as many of the pros and as few of the cons as possible. So, let's discuss the pros and cons of each governmental system. Communism is a way for a government to gain control over the basic trade structure and potentially ensure that the basic needs of all the citizens are provided for. However, many problems have been found in the basic setup of Communism. The lack of culture and the lack of motivation to do well or not do evil are the major complaints. In other words, Communism leads to fascism. Capitalism, on the other hand, is a way for the free market to take control, and the consumer grabs the reins. There is considerably more room innovation and entrepreneurial growth. However, there is never a guarantee of anything. This means that we want some government involvement in the market, but not too much. This is called Socialism.
However, Socialism isn't necessarily good, either. There isn't a bright line standard for what is enough or what is too much government involvement. This means that policies can change. When this happens, the private companies cannot always cope. They are forced to adjust, and they may not be capable of it. And there still isn't a guarantee that those with less money or purchasing power will be able to get the things they need. The ideal system, therefore, would be one where the citizens hold direct control over the distribution process, with some interference by the state.
Democracy is a way for the people to voice their opinions and influence major (and/or all) political decisions. This seems like a good thing right off the bat, but we have to realize that it leads to majority rule and potentially to the disenfranchisement of the minority. A Parliamentary system is a way for a few people to hold a large amount of power and use that power to serve their country. On the other hand, there isn't necessarily a guarantee that those in power will do the right thing. Thus, it is fairly easy to see that we need, in addition to a Democracy, some sort of constitution to assure that the minority will get enough representation and/or will not be disenfranchised.
After we develop this global state, we get to the important part: setting up the government, which I believe should be decided upon before we try to unite the world. Various forms of government have been tested and tried over the years, and four in particular have come forward as important ones: Communism, Capitalism, Democracy, and a Parliamentary system. Note that these are neither mutually exclusive nor inclusive. Each one has its pros and cons. The duty of a Utopian government is to attempt to achieve as many of the pros and as few of the cons as possible. So, let's discuss the pros and cons of each governmental system. Communism is a way for a government to gain control over the basic trade structure and potentially ensure that the basic needs of all the citizens are provided for. However, many problems have been found in the basic setup of Communism. The lack of culture and the lack of motivation to do well or not do evil are the major complaints. In other words, Communism leads to fascism. Capitalism, on the other hand, is a way for the free market to take control, and the consumer grabs the reins. There is considerably more room innovation and entrepreneurial growth. However, there is never a guarantee of anything. This means that we want some government involvement in the market, but not too much. This is called Socialism.
However, Socialism isn't necessarily good, either. There isn't a bright line standard for what is enough or what is too much government involvement. This means that policies can change. When this happens, the private companies cannot always cope. They are forced to adjust, and they may not be capable of it. And there still isn't a guarantee that those with less money or purchasing power will be able to get the things they need. The ideal system, therefore, would be one where the citizens hold direct control over the distribution process, with some interference by the state.
Democracy is a way for the people to voice their opinions and influence major (and/or all) political decisions. This seems like a good thing right off the bat, but we have to realize that it leads to majority rule and potentially to the disenfranchisement of the minority. A Parliamentary system is a way for a few people to hold a large amount of power and use that power to serve their country. On the other hand, there isn't necessarily a guarantee that those in power will do the right thing. Thus, it is fairly easy to see that we need, in addition to a Democracy, some sort of constitution to assure that the minority will get enough representation and/or will not be disenfranchised.
Shakespeare's wordplay
Shakespeare used words to his advantage. For example, in his play, "Much Ado About Nothing," he uses the word 'note' quite frequently. It is interesting to note that in Shakespeare's time, the words 'noting' and 'nothing' were homophones. The play emphasizes the way the characters notice each other and how it shapes their relationships. For example, in response to Claudio's inquiry as to whether he had noted Hero, Benedick says, "I noted her not, but I looked on her." (1.1.160). In some of the later acts, Shakespeare uses the word 'note' is other contexts, including referring to music and messages.
Also, as Benedick and Beatrice spar, Shakespeare points out how the English language can be used in humorous ways. For example, when Beatrice is talking with the messenger about Benedick:
"Messenger: I see, lady, the gentleman is not in your books.
Beatrice: No. An he were, I would burn my study." (1.1.76-78)
Just a few of the ways Shakespeare emphasized the different meanings of words.
Also, as Benedick and Beatrice spar, Shakespeare points out how the English language can be used in humorous ways. For example, when Beatrice is talking with the messenger about Benedick:
"Messenger: I see, lady, the gentleman is not in your books.
Beatrice: No. An he were, I would burn my study." (1.1.76-78)
Just a few of the ways Shakespeare emphasized the different meanings of words.
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Joke Quiz
QUALIFYING EXAMINATION
Instructions: Read each question carefully. Answer all questions. Time limit: 4 hours. Begin immediately.
HISTORY: Describe the history of the papacy from its origins to the present day, concentrating especially but not exclusively on its social, political, economic, religious, and philosophical impact on Europe, Asia, America, and Africa. Be brief, concise, and specific.
MEDICINE: You have been provided with a razor blade, a piece of gauze, and a bottle of Scotch. Remove your appendix. Do not suture until your work has been inspected. You have fifteen minutes.
PUBLIC SPEAKING: 2,500 riot-crazed aborigines have stormed the classroom. Calm them. You may use any ancient language except Latin or Greek.
BIOLOGY: Create life. Estimate the differences in subsequent human culture if this form of life had developed 500 million years earlier, with special attention to its probable effect on the English parliamentary system. Prove your thesis.
MUSIC: Write a piano concerto. Orchestrate and perform it with flute and drum. You will find a piano under your seat.
PHYCHOLOGY: Based on your knowledge of their works, evaluate the emotional stability, degree of adjustment, and repressed frustrations of each of the following: Alexander of Aphrodisias, Ramses II, Gregory of Nicea, and Hammurabi. Support your evaluation with quotations from each man’s work, making appropriate references; it is not necessary to translate.
SOCIOLOGY: Estimate the sociological problems which might accompany the end of the world. Construct an experiment to test your theory.
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE: Define Management. Define Science. How do they relate? Why? Create a generalized algorithm to optimize all managerial decisions. Assume an 1130 CPU supporting 50 terminals, each terminal to activate your algorithm. Design the communications interface and all necessary control programs.
ENGINEERING: The disassembled parts of a high-powered rifle have been placed in a box on your desk. You will also find an instruction manual printed in Swahili. In ten minutes a hungry Bengal tiger will be admitted to the room. Take whatever action you feel appropriate. Be prepared to justify your decision.
ECONOMICS: Develop a realistic plan for refinancing the national debt. Trace the possible effects of your plan in the following areas: Cubism, the Donatist controversy, and the wave theory of light. Outline a method of preventing these effects. Criticize this method from all possible points of view. Point out the deficiencies in your point of view as demonstrated in your answer to the last question.
POLITICAL SCIENCE: There is a red telephone on the desk beside you. Start World War III. Report at length on the socio-political effects, if any.
EPISTEMOLOGY: Take a position for or against truth. Prove the validity of your position.
PHYSICS: Explain the nature of matter. Include in your answer an evaluation of the impact of the development of mathematics on science.
PHILOSOPHY: Sketch the developments of human thought. Estimate its significance. Compare with the development of any other kind of thought.
GENERAL KNOWLEDGE: Describe in detail. Be objective and specific.
EXTRA CREDIT: Define the universe. Give three examples.
Instructions: Read each question carefully. Answer all questions. Time limit: 4 hours. Begin immediately.
HISTORY: Describe the history of the papacy from its origins to the present day, concentrating especially but not exclusively on its social, political, economic, religious, and philosophical impact on Europe, Asia, America, and Africa. Be brief, concise, and specific.
MEDICINE: You have been provided with a razor blade, a piece of gauze, and a bottle of Scotch. Remove your appendix. Do not suture until your work has been inspected. You have fifteen minutes.
PUBLIC SPEAKING: 2,500 riot-crazed aborigines have stormed the classroom. Calm them. You may use any ancient language except Latin or Greek.
BIOLOGY: Create life. Estimate the differences in subsequent human culture if this form of life had developed 500 million years earlier, with special attention to its probable effect on the English parliamentary system. Prove your thesis.
MUSIC: Write a piano concerto. Orchestrate and perform it with flute and drum. You will find a piano under your seat.
PHYCHOLOGY: Based on your knowledge of their works, evaluate the emotional stability, degree of adjustment, and repressed frustrations of each of the following: Alexander of Aphrodisias, Ramses II, Gregory of Nicea, and Hammurabi. Support your evaluation with quotations from each man’s work, making appropriate references; it is not necessary to translate.
SOCIOLOGY: Estimate the sociological problems which might accompany the end of the world. Construct an experiment to test your theory.
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE: Define Management. Define Science. How do they relate? Why? Create a generalized algorithm to optimize all managerial decisions. Assume an 1130 CPU supporting 50 terminals, each terminal to activate your algorithm. Design the communications interface and all necessary control programs.
ENGINEERING: The disassembled parts of a high-powered rifle have been placed in a box on your desk. You will also find an instruction manual printed in Swahili. In ten minutes a hungry Bengal tiger will be admitted to the room. Take whatever action you feel appropriate. Be prepared to justify your decision.
ECONOMICS: Develop a realistic plan for refinancing the national debt. Trace the possible effects of your plan in the following areas: Cubism, the Donatist controversy, and the wave theory of light. Outline a method of preventing these effects. Criticize this method from all possible points of view. Point out the deficiencies in your point of view as demonstrated in your answer to the last question.
POLITICAL SCIENCE: There is a red telephone on the desk beside you. Start World War III. Report at length on the socio-political effects, if any.
EPISTEMOLOGY: Take a position for or against truth. Prove the validity of your position.
PHYSICS: Explain the nature of matter. Include in your answer an evaluation of the impact of the development of mathematics on science.
PHILOSOPHY: Sketch the developments of human thought. Estimate its significance. Compare with the development of any other kind of thought.
GENERAL KNOWLEDGE: Describe in detail. Be objective and specific.
EXTRA CREDIT: Define the universe. Give three examples.
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Why Wikipedia rocks
Wikipedia rocks because it is easy to edit. This is not a bad thing, as some people would claim. This is a good thing because it is very up to date, and it reflects the view points of the common people, not just the "experts." Some naysayers claim that it is anonymous, but every page has a history page tracking all the changes and what computer they were made at. Some of the more frequent participants even have virtual identities. Some of the naysayers claim that it is easy to vandalize Wikipedia, but this is not always true. Some of the more frequently vandalized pages will not allow changes from anonymous or new users. If that isn't enough, several reputable news providers, including CNN, have used Wikipedia for research because it is so up to date. That is why Wikipedia rocks.
Joke#11
Q: Why did the chicken cross the playground?
A: To get to the other slide.
Q: Why did the turkey cross the road?
A: To prove he wasn't chicken.
A: To get to the other slide.
Q: Why did the turkey cross the road?
A: To prove he wasn't chicken.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
A posteriori stinks
Click on the title of the article to see a funny argument. A posteriori stinks because you can't make (a posteriori) claims without making assumptions, so therefore you can't prove anything using those claims. Thus, there is no such thing as a posteriori knowledge. Thus, a priori is the closest one can come to proof. If a priori claims can't prove something, nothing can. Perhaps there is some a priori verity from which the whole of existence is derived.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
There Is No Reality
There is no reality because:
1. There is no Proof.
a. Any claim that you could use in a proof is based on assumptions.
b. You cannot prove anything without using claims.
c. Assumptions are not adequate for proof.
2. Reality is defined by Perception.
a. See Einstein's theory of Relativity.
3. There is no adequate Perception.
a. Perception is defined by belief.
b. There is no adequate belief.
i. Belief is defined by Proof.
ii. Proof is required for adequate belief.
4. Thus, because there can be no adequate Perception, there can be no adequate Reality.
a. There is no such thing as inadequate Reality.
i. Reality is an absolute concept.
Thus, there is no reality!
QED
1. There is no Proof.
a. Any claim that you could use in a proof is based on assumptions.
b. You cannot prove anything without using claims.
c. Assumptions are not adequate for proof.
2. Reality is defined by Perception.
a. See Einstein's theory of Relativity.
3. There is no adequate Perception.
a. Perception is defined by belief.
b. There is no adequate belief.
i. Belief is defined by Proof.
ii. Proof is required for adequate belief.
4. Thus, because there can be no adequate Perception, there can be no adequate Reality.
a. There is no such thing as inadequate Reality.
i. Reality is an absolute concept.
Thus, there is no reality!
QED
Joke#9
There's this guy walking down the street with two penguins on his shoulder. A policeman comes up to him and tells him, "Hey, you can't have those two penguins on your shoulder, take them to the zoo."
"Alright." the guy agrees.
The next day, the policeman sees the same guy walking down the street, with the same two penguins on his shoulder. "Hey, I thought I told you to take those penguins to the zoo!"
"I did. They loved it so much, tonght I'm taking them to the cinema."
"Alright." the guy agrees.
The next day, the policeman sees the same guy walking down the street, with the same two penguins on his shoulder. "Hey, I thought I told you to take those penguins to the zoo!"
"I did. They loved it so much, tonght I'm taking them to the cinema."
Monday, October 09, 2006
Joke#8
Anti Jokes
Q: What is the difference between a duck?
A: One of its legs are both the same.
Q: What's the difference between an apple?
A: The more you polish, it gets.
Q:What do you get when you cross a muffin with chocolate chips?
A:A chocolate chip muffin.
Q: What is the difference between a duck?
A: One of its legs are both the same.
Q: What's the difference between an apple?
A: The more you polish, it gets.
Q:What do you get when you cross a muffin with chocolate chips?
A:A chocolate chip muffin.
A priori vs. A posteriori
A priori and a posteriori are terms used in epistemology to describe how parts of knowledge are derived. A priori refers to that which is reached before experience. An example of that would be "1+1=2" You do not have to have experienced the material world to be able to say that. Another classic example would be Descartes' saying "I think therefore I am." A posteriori refers to that which comes after experience. Examples of that would be "The sky is blue," or, "I have hands, feet, and a head. Therefore I am human." You can combine these two schools of thought, and you get empiricism. An example of that would be deducing p->q using a priori evidence, then using a posteriori evidence to deduce p, thus proving q. To sum up the two concepts, for those who are confused, a priori means just using logic, a posteriori means using your senses.
Friday, October 06, 2006
Teleportation
Hey, cool. Scientists apparently have teleported something. They teleported a "a macroscopic atomic object containing thousands of billions of atoms over a distance of half a meter."
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleportation
whadaya know? ya learn something new every day.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleportation
whadaya know? ya learn something new every day.
Joke#8
There are 10 types of people in this world: Those who understand binary, those who don't, and those who only think they do.
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Joke#7
"Elvis is dead," said Tom expressly.
"I'll never sleep on the railroad tracks again!" Tom said, beside himself.
"I came, I saw," Tom concurred.
"I just love my job at the nuclear plant," Tom said glowingly.
"I'll never sleep on the railroad tracks again!" Tom said, beside himself.
"I came, I saw," Tom concurred.
"I just love my job at the nuclear plant," Tom said glowingly.
Victory Disease
There is an interesting idea being floated around called Victory Disease. In essence, Victory Disease means that what goes up must come down. Whenever an individual or group makes a major military victory, they can be so overcome by hubris that they consider all their adversaries to be inconsequential, which leads to some disastrous consequences. Some famous examples of this include Napoleon at Waterloo, or more recently the U.S. at 9/11. The U.S. was so full of itself after the “fall” of Communism, that it did not consider Islamic militants in the Middle East to be much of a threat.
What I will be talking about next is a concept of my own devising, and any and all comments are welcome. The U.S. used to be what one could consider “up.” However, now we are going “down.” The signs are unmistakable. China and Japan have both been making considerable leaps in the international market in recent decades, U.S. currency has less and less value when compared to other currencies, and our political structure is being weakened from within. I could expound on these topics for several more pages, but you get the idea.
So, how do we, as patriotic Americans, avoid this? Well, the only way to stop from going “down,” is to get rid of our enemies completely. The only way to do idea morally is to make them our friends. The only way to make such alliances permanent is to absorb the other nations into a single, conglomerate, world-wide nation. This step would involve many benefits to all of mankind. However, what I would like comments on is how we can do that. What can the president do to do this? What can the U.N. do to do this? etc. tell me your ideas
What I will be talking about next is a concept of my own devising, and any and all comments are welcome. The U.S. used to be what one could consider “up.” However, now we are going “down.” The signs are unmistakable. China and Japan have both been making considerable leaps in the international market in recent decades, U.S. currency has less and less value when compared to other currencies, and our political structure is being weakened from within. I could expound on these topics for several more pages, but you get the idea.
So, how do we, as patriotic Americans, avoid this? Well, the only way to stop from going “down,” is to get rid of our enemies completely. The only way to do idea morally is to make them our friends. The only way to make such alliances permanent is to absorb the other nations into a single, conglomerate, world-wide nation. This step would involve many benefits to all of mankind. However, what I would like comments on is how we can do that. What can the president do to do this? What can the U.N. do to do this? etc. tell me your ideas
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
Joke#6
Some Tom Swifties:
"Let's look for another Grail!" Tom requested.
"I unclogged the drain with a vacuum cleaner," Tom said succinctly.
"I manufacture tabletops" said Tom, counterproductively.
"I used to be a pilot," Tom explained.
"I dropped the toothpaste," said Tom, crestfallen.
"Let's look for another Grail!" Tom requested.
"I unclogged the drain with a vacuum cleaner," Tom said succinctly.
"I manufacture tabletops" said Tom, counterproductively.
"I used to be a pilot," Tom explained.
"I dropped the toothpaste," said Tom, crestfallen.
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Joke#5
Q: what do you get when you cross a parrot and a shark?
A: something that talks your head off.
A: something that talks your head off.
Monday, October 02, 2006
Saturday, September 30, 2006
Oogamagook on Organization
Oogamagook lived in ancient Hastings, and occasionally had dealings with the Picts. Most of it was just trade, but when the Picts thought they had been cheated out of something, they got extremely angry. They had been known to kill traders just because they got something teal when they had asked for it in blue-green. These guys were not particularly nice guys, and everyone who traded with them wanted protection. So, Oogamagook got together with a whole bunch of other neanderthals and put together a group to trade with the Picts. So, now the Picts didn't pick fights with the troglodytes, and they got all their trading done quickly, and everybody lived happily ever after, because they organized.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Joke#2
So, there's this string, and he walks into a bar. The barman, however, tells him, "Hey, we don't serve your kind here," and throws him out on the street. The string goes back into the bar, and immediately gets thrown out again. The string, being an emotional string, sits on the curb for a few moments and cries. Then he has an idea. He ties himself into a bow and unravels his ends. He marches back into the bar. The barman looks at him very closely and inquires, "Are you the string?" "No, I'm a frayed knot"
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Joke#1
New Feature: Occasional jokes. Today's is: Life is like a sewer. what you get out of it depends on what you put into it. -Tom Leher
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
The Guthrie
The summer before fifth grade, I decided to audition for A Christmas Carol at the Guthrie Theater. I went to the audition, and did rather well. I got called back, which was a good sign, however, I was still surprised when I actually got the part of Tiny Tim. It was a rather small role (I only had eight lines throughout the play), so it was easy for me to memorize my lines. I was onstage a lot, though, and it was an extremely good experience. It was a large cast (42 people) and there were twelve children. Everybody involved was extremely kind, which, in retrospect, isn't too surprising. There aren't any jerks in theater. They wouldn't survive. Actors spend several hours a day with each other, crowded in backstage, wearing sweaty costumes, for several months. Actors have to be able to get along with each other.
Later that year, I was in All My Sons. It was a smaller cast, and there were only two kids, and we had the same roll, alternating performances. I had more lines, but I wasn't onstage for very long.
The next year, I auditioned for Christmas Carol again, and got the part of Tiny Tim again. It was just as fun, except for the guy who played Scrooge. He kept (only half jokingly) complaining about how much I weighed, because he had to pick me up at the end of every show.
Monday, September 25, 2006
Kered The Manraf
Hello. I am Kered the Manraf. If you couldn't tell from the previous posts (and you probably couldn't) I am a self-described intellectual. That means that I live in the world of the mind, which means that I would rather trust the evidence of my Mind than the evidence presented to me by my material senses. It also means that I am always mulling over the big questions in my mind. I am always thinking about concepts beyond the edge of my little world, but often not paying attention to the things underneath my nose.
I have been this way for even longer than I can remember, which is quite a long time. When I was only one and a half, my parents tell me, I spoke my first word. Most people's first words are something simple and easy to pronounce, like dada or mama. Mine was "moon." It was late in the evening, and the moon was almost full. My grandparents were visiting, and they kept pointing out the moon to me. My dad come home, and I pulled him over towards the window, pointing at the moon. I was saying the whole time, "Moon! Moon!" It is interesting that my first word was the name of one of the furthest visible objects in this world.
I have also always been rather philosophical. One of my earliest memories, from when I was about two or three, is of feeding the geese at the lake. It was in the afternoon, and I had been having lots of fun that day. I had had ice cream (with sprinkles), I had played in the park, and now I got to feed the geese. What funny creatures these geese were. They were almost as large, if not larger than me! I was tossing bread crumbs, as happy as could be, when one of the larger geese walked right up to me and bit me on the nose! It didn't really hurt, so after I got over the initial amazement, I just went on tossing bread. Later, when we were getting in the car, I told Mom what happened, and she laughed.
P.S. For those who were wondering, Oogamagook may very well continue to be a feature in this blog, if he is needed to help explore any strange concepts.
I have been this way for even longer than I can remember, which is quite a long time. When I was only one and a half, my parents tell me, I spoke my first word. Most people's first words are something simple and easy to pronounce, like dada or mama. Mine was "moon." It was late in the evening, and the moon was almost full. My grandparents were visiting, and they kept pointing out the moon to me. My dad come home, and I pulled him over towards the window, pointing at the moon. I was saying the whole time, "Moon! Moon!" It is interesting that my first word was the name of one of the furthest visible objects in this world.
I have also always been rather philosophical. One of my earliest memories, from when I was about two or three, is of feeding the geese at the lake. It was in the afternoon, and I had been having lots of fun that day. I had had ice cream (with sprinkles), I had played in the park, and now I got to feed the geese. What funny creatures these geese were. They were almost as large, if not larger than me! I was tossing bread crumbs, as happy as could be, when one of the larger geese walked right up to me and bit me on the nose! It didn't really hurt, so after I got over the initial amazement, I just went on tossing bread. Later, when we were getting in the car, I told Mom what happened, and she laughed.
P.S. For those who were wondering, Oogamagook may very well continue to be a feature in this blog, if he is needed to help explore any strange concepts.
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Oogamagook on Class
Oogamagook is a barbarian. Thus, he has poor tastes in music. (See the logic there?) And he hates librarians. He can't understand why on earth anyone would want to stick something in his ear, just to have it yell at him. And he can't understand why anyone would want some old lady to tell him what kind of book he wants to read. He likes to listen to soft music like something by the Neanderthal equivalent of Paul Simon, or just the brook burbling outside his cave. And, heck, he can't even understand why anyone would want to read a book. Oogamagook is not a very cultured troglodyte, but then again, is anybody? And, just because he isn't classy doesn't mean that he isn't happy. In fact, he rather enjoys being rude, crude ,and socially unacceptable, thank you very much!
Saturday, September 23, 2006
Oogamagook on Innovation
Oogamagook, the Neanderthal had, hanging on his wall, a great big square thing made of solid stone, and in the middle of it was a hole. One day, he had to go from his cave in Hastings to his uncle's cave in Bath. That's quite a large distance for the modern troglodyte to take on foot, and he was dreading the trip, not to mention the fact that his uncle was an utter bore. As he was packing, he found himself lost in thought (a strange place for him), staring at the great big square thing. He suddenly lept up, exclaiming, "Eureka! All I have to do is round off those corners and buy a set of tires, and, hey, that's a wheel!" Oogamagook was a happy barbarian that day, as, not only did he not have to make the entire trip on foot, he had missed his appointment with his uncle because it's hard work to carve a wheel out of solid stone.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Oogamagook: Neanderthal, barbarian, and general, over-all Troglodyte
Sometimes, when exploring complex concepts, it helps to make them simple enough for a neanderthal such as Oogamagook to understand. One can do this through use of analagies, simple cause and effect, or humor, not to mention various other strategies. Many people throughout history have done this, including philosophers like Plato, religious personages like the man called Jesus, and even astrophysicists like Stephen Hawking. Perhaps the name Oogamagook is strange to the untrained eye, but one has to realize that he can be quite useful for exploring the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
