Wednesday, May 19, 2004

Bodies and Souls

Are individuals bodies or souls, or a duality?  This is a question that has been contemplated for some time.  Though I believe individuals have souls, I know that I cannot prove, meaning provide a thinking proof, that this is the case.  I think I shall not know the truth of this issue until my physical life is over, but I have no way of knowing for certain, and I doubt I’ll be able to share what I find out after I physically die.

The Edge has an interesting piece posted wherein Paul Bloom, a professor of psychology at Yale, casts his eye on the subject and shares his thoughts on his interest in common sense dualism.  The piece is titled “Natural-Born Dualists."

Posted by John Venlet on 05/19 at 07:26 AM
(5) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

First Thoughts

“Deadly weapons cache seized."

Quick, what do you think the headline to this article is referring to?  WMD’s in Iraq?  Nope.  Homemade bombs and lots of firearms in some blogger’s backyard?  Nope?  The headline refers to,

"A FRIGHTENING, multi-bladed knife..."

Personally, I think the knife is pretty cool looking, though I think it would only be useful in very close combat.

Via The Picket Line.

Posted by John Venlet on 05/19 at 06:07 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Are You Scared?

Do you recall the phrase “Shit Happens?” It was popular both as a phrase and a bumper sticker for awhile, but I haven’t heard it said, recently.  Maybe it’s because the government is preventing shit from happening, but I doubt it.

Gene Callahan pens some thoughts on the government preventing shit from happening in a piece titled “We Need the State… Otherwise, Something Bad Might Happen!"

Gene’s concluding statement.

"The fact that otherwise intelligent people put forward such nonsense demonstrates just how thoroughly the State has done its job of brainwashing – oops, I mean educating – its subjects as to the dire consequences they will face should they try getting along without it."

Via Mike Tennant at Strike the Root.

Posted by John Venlet on 05/19 at 05:50 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Which is It? Both?

“Sivits Found Guilty in Iraq Abuse Case."

The first paragraph from the above Reuters article.

"U.S. soldier Specialist Jeremy Sivits was found guilty on Wednesday of three charges he faced in a court martial over the abuse of Iraqi prisoners, CNN reported. Sivits, the first U.S. soldier court-martialed over the abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib jail, had pleaded guilty on all four counts he faced, with a reservation related to the taking of a photograph of naked prisoners."

The same story, but as reported at The New York Times.

“U.S. Soldier Pleads Guilty in Iraq Abuse Trial."

The first two paragraphs from the NYT.

"Spc. Jeremy C. Sivits pleaded guilty Wednesday to three counts of abuse in the first court-martial stemming from mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison.

The court-martial then found Spc. Jeremy C. Sivits guilty of all charges. In a quirk of military law, if the defendant pleads guilty, they have to prove to the court they are guilty and the court then formally renders a finding."

So, though Sivits plead guilty, he still had to be found guilty, but I think it is more accurate to report Sivits pleading guilty, rather than being found guilty.

Posted by John Venlet on 05/19 at 05:22 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

"Dark Art of Opposition Research"

If you would stop a voter on the street, much like a pollster does, and inquired of the voter why he voted for such and such a candidate, I’d wager that the voter would mumble some words to the effect that such and such a candidate seemed like the best choice.  Bah.  More than likely, if you asked the voter to expand on why such and such a candidate seemed to be the best choice, the voter would respond with some sound bite taken from those who practice the dark art of opposition research.

The Atlantic has an interesting piece of the dark art mentioned above.  It is titled “Playing Dirty." An excerpt.

"Maligning an opponent, even with his own words and deeds, is a tricky business; voters take a dim view of “negative” politics, and are liable to punish the campaign carrying out the attacks rather than the intended target. Digging the Dirt provides a rare glimpse of how political operatives have learned to use the media to get around this problem, by creating a journalistic black market for damaging stories. During the first debate between Gore and Bush, in October of 2000, the BBC crew stationed itself inside the RNC’s war room, filming researchers as they operated with the manic intensity of day traders, combing through every one of Gore’s statements for possible misstatements or exaggerations. The researchers discovered two (Gore erroneously claimed never to have questioned Bush’s experience, and to have accompanied a federal official to the site of a Texas disaster), and immediately Tim Griffin tipped off the Associated Press. Soon the filmmakers would catch the team exulting as the AP took the story."

Also via Arts & Letters Daily.

Posted by John Venlet on 05/19 at 05:05 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

How Much is That Doggie in the Window?, Realistically

I love dogs.  They’re great animals, but they are animals none-the-less.  My dog Iz, an Australian Shepherd, is a great dog, but she didn’t come that way.  What I mean is, Iz needed a bit of direction, like a small child does, to assist her in becoming the friendly, obedient, and intelligent animal she is.

Slate has an interesting piece up titled “Finding the Perfect Dog - There is no such animal. So, stop looking." Written by John Katz, the piece looks at some of the unrealistic expectations of individuals who purchase a dog, or what they feel is the perfect dog, and then realize that perfect dogs don’t just take up residence with their new masters as perfect dogs.  It takes some work.

A friend of mine states, “Raising a dog takes about the same commitment as raising a child.” He’s right.

Via Arts & Letters Daily.

Posted by John Venlet on 05/19 at 04:48 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Tuesday, May 18, 2004

Animal House

Rufus, an Airedale residing in Alaska, is pleased with his Master’s morals, since his Master does not have a proclivity for wokking dogs.  Neither do I, though I must admit to having eaten dog, both in the Philippines and on the outskirts of Hong Kong, and suffered no ill effects.  Don’t take it as a personal affront, Rufus, Iz didn’t.

Rufus’ expression of pleasure at his Master’s morals was was brought on by reading a paper, written by Harlan B. Miller, titled “Science, Ethics, and Moral Status." Rufus rates Miller’s paper as a “worthwhile read,” and I tend to agree, though I do not agree with all of Miller’s suppositions.  One specific example, is a statement that Miller makes in regards to human superiority.

"Nor is it possible to arrange animals on a single scala natura with humans clearly and safely at the top."

A statement I think is simply incorrect.  Does this then mean I would willingly and callously cause harm to another sentient animal.  No way.  I even let bugs out of my house, when they have arrived uninvited, rather than simply squashing them with a rolled up newspaper.  But when it comes eating sentient animals, I suffer no compunction what-so-ever.

Miller’s paper is an interesting, philosophical read.  The copy I printed has many passages underlined, emphatic “No’s” penned, and questions written to consider further.  Enjoy it yourself, if you so desire.

Posted by John Venlet on 05/18 at 11:33 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

After Hours Movie Channel and Stuff

Vox Day has a column up at World Net Daily titled “G.I. Jane Does Baghdad," a title he may want to copyright before Vivid Video does.  Anyway, Vox casts his eye on the events at Abu Ghraib, in search of causes or fault, via a humorous path.  He concludes by encouraging women military members to work for an honorable discharge.  From the piece.

"One wonders what the Islamists are going to make of all this. One minute, they’re shaking their fists about the danger of Britney Spears and pierced belly buttons, and then they learn that Britney might as well still be a Mousketeer compared to what else we have on offer. This isn’t enlightened democracy taking on benighted medievalism, it’s pornocracy vs. theocracy. But at least they should be clear on the fact that it’s not a Christian crusade."

Via Gary Cruse who titled his comments to the link “Wrong goat scaped?"

Posted by John Venlet on 05/18 at 07:25 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

It's Not as Bad as People Make Out

Buying a home has been said to be one of the top five stressful events in individuals lives.  Some of the other top five are death in the family, divorce, and marriage.  Daniel Drezner points us to Laura of Apt. 11D, who is purchasing her first home, and she’s nervous, stomach in knots nervous.  I can sympathize with Laura’s nervousness, but qualify that sympathy with the statement that Laura’s nervousness is caused only by ignorance of how simple the process can be.

Brad DeLong, noted Laura’s purchasing a home, also, and comments,

"I have one piece of advice: fixed-rate mortgage."

Though I’m fairly certain that Brad is offering that advice as a helpful guide, he is not necessarily correct.  With that in mind, I point Laura to a post I wrote on March 7th of this yearr titled “Adjustable Rate Mortgages Erroneously Dissed," as a means of educating herself, rather than just accepting Brad DeLong’s advice.  I’ll go one step further, and offer my review of the mortgage options Laura receives, to determine which mortgage program will best suit Laura in the coming years, free of charge.  I think my thirteen plus years in the mortgage business could be beneficial to her.

Posted by John Venlet on 05/18 at 06:05 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Is that A Vitamin?

Have you ever heard of the B612 Foundation?  I haven’t, until today that is.  And no, it has nothing to do with vitamins.  The B612 Foundation is in the business of lobbying Congress for monies.  Your money and my money, to move asteroids.  The piece is titled “Why Move an Asteroid?”, and it contains information on the why as presented to the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space dealing with defense against asteroid impacts.  Here’s the answer to why.

"There is a 10 percent chance that during our lifetimes there will be a 70 meter asteroid that impacts Earth with energy 10 megatons (roughly equivalent to 700 simultaneous Hiroshima sized bombs). There is even a very remote one in 50,000 chance that you and I and everyone we know, along with most of humanity and human civilization, will perish together with the impact of a much larger kilometer or more sized asteroid. We now have the potential to change these odds."

The piece presents the B612 Foundation’s vision for developing “the potential,” no estimate on costs.

Via J. Orlin Grabbe.

Posted by John Venlet on 05/18 at 05:42 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

An Epic Length Review

Andy Duncan, exercising his pen in the guise of a Guild of Film Reviewers reviewer, or as an exercise in Homer length musings, shares his thoughts on the recently released film Troy. I cannot tell how frequently he referred to his Penquin books edition of The Illiad in writing the reivew.  The piece is titled “Troy: The film that launched a thousand trips to the bathroom." You should be able to read it through in one sitting.

Posted by John Venlet on 05/18 at 05:08 AM
(3) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Turning Two Positives into a Negative

Read an interesting report on liquor sales in the state of Michigan.  The title of the piece is “Liquor sales jump by a third in Michigan since 1998."

The article informs us that the state of Michigan has moved up to the number six spot in the nation, in regards to liquor sales, when comparing sales in 1998 to sales in 2003.  Accompanying this bit of retailing good news, is this surprising good news.

"Accompanying the jump in liquor sales has been a 10 percent decline in the number of arrests for operating under the influence and a 30 percent decline the number of cases of alcohol treatment, to 55,227 in 2003, according to figures from the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration."

How will the statist statisticians twist that accompanying data into a negative, that can then be used to brow beat the masses into accepting more control over their lives?  With the help of people such as Kellie A. Puro, I’d wager.

”...But the increased sales worry some health officials like Kellie A. Puro.

“With all the financial troubles, people are drinking more and that’s not good,” said Puro, president of the Horizons Treatment Center in Livonia. “People are out of work. There’s no structure. There’s no support. There’s nothing to do but drink. It fills the void."

Puro, the eternal pessimist, I guess.

I did glean one other tidbit of information from the article.  Northern Michigan residents are leading the way in Michigan’s climb up the liquor sales charts, while residents around my neck of the woods have been slacking off.  Though I’ve done my share to boost sales.

"Liquor Control Commission figures indicate that more liquor is purchased per capita in northern Michigan counties like Mackinac and Emmet than anywhere else, while the lowest per capita sales are in counties near Indiana, like Cass and Hillsdale, and those around Grand Rapids, like Barry and Ionia."

Posted by John Venlet on 05/18 at 04:46 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Monday, May 17, 2004

Legit?

Homosexual marriage in Massachusetts seemed to be the big news story of the day, both on the internet and in newspapers.  Lots of huzzahs and shouts of triumph, mostly.  A few comments were made that the world hasn’t ended because of this turn of events, directed at, of course, the conservatives, i.e. the anti-homosexual marriage folk, and Christians, who too literally interpret the Bible.

Ally, at Who Moved My Truth, has a few thoughts to share, preceded by an analogy, that are worth considering.  The post is titled “Can You Be Gay & Happy?" Two excerpts that I particularly enjoyed.

"2. You are crazy. Why do you want to be married anyway? Have you noticed how well it works out for heterosexuals? Ever hear of a pre-nup? That’s right, we get married while planning our divorce. We have attorneys advertising to keep them on retainer while you’re married, just in case. It is a broken toy, and you are demanding your right to it. We do have legal benefits that are handy, but you have to decide what they are worth. Many people discover that while they are nice, they are not worth the hassle. Welcome to the divorce world."

And this, for a solid conclusion.

"And stop looking to the government to legitimize your relationships. Your love, your attachments, and your obligations should not have to be defined by a government office. “This is the most important day of my life,” claimed one gay man who recently got married to another gay man in Massachusetts. Why? Because you went before a legal authority in order to prove you had a commitment to someone? What does that prove? That you needed the guilt inspired from a legal proceeding to maintain your commitment?

Yes, I am speaking from the stand point of someone who can go off and get married at whim. I neither take it likely, nor do I care to participate in it. I would like to think that someone could commit to me without the need of a legal document demanding it. That is my idea of true commitment."

Update: This post, titled “Sullilvan’s Misfortune," by Keith Burgess-Jackson, ties in nicely with Ally’s post.  From Burgess-Jackson’s post.

"Law cannot change attitudes. Law cannot mandate respect, esteem, or admiration. Law can enforce tolerance, but it cannot mandate acceptance. Does Sullivan really think that someone who believes that homosexual “marriage” is an abomination will change his or her mind about it simply because the law has changed? Sullivan says the “marriages” about to be effected in Massachusetts are not “gay marriages.” They are, he says, “marriages."

Posted by John Venlet on 05/17 at 05:29 PM
(1) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Seems Fair to Me

Obfuscation.  I enjoy that word, though I don’t enjoy it when newspaper editors employ it as a means of confusing readers.  For example, My Way News utilizes this headline today.

“Hotel Charges $1,000 for Omelet."

For many individuals, reading that headline may lead them to feel that some hotel is charging exhorbitant prices for scrambled eggs with ham, cheese, and onion tucked away inside.  But, if I could afford spending $1,000.00 on an omelet, and I enjoyed caviar, and could sit down and eat an omelet bigger than my head, I’d gladly pay a thousand bucks for this omelet.

"It’s not made of gold - just eggs, lobster, caviar and a few trimmings. But an omelet on the menu of a swanky Manhattan hotel will set you back $1,000, plus tip.

“I couldn’t believe it was the price when I first saw ‘1,000’ on the menu. I thought it was the calorie count,” Virginia Marnell, a customer at Norma’s restaurant in Le Parker Meridien hotel on West 57th Street, told the Daily News for Monday editions.

The omelet, which debuted May 5 and is billed as the “Zillion Dollar Frittata,” has six eggs, a lobster and - here’s the kicker - 10 ounces of sevruga caviar. The restaurant pays $65 an ounce for the caviar, according to Norma’s general manager, Steven Pipes.

“Since we knew it was going to be a very expensive dish, we decided to have some fun with it,” Pipes told the News. “It’s not just a gimmick, though. It tastes good.”

Beside the omelet’s entry in the menu is the following message: “Norma dares you to expense this.”

No one has ordered it yet.

A “budget” version of the omelet, containing only one ounce of caviar, sells for $100."

Via Drudge.

Posted by John Venlet on 05/17 at 12:43 PM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Where There's Smoke, There's Fire

""There’s cleavage, but when you’re as big as Dannielle, there’s going to be cleavage,” Meyer said. “There’s nothing I can do about that."

That’s Kathy Meyer, the mother of the 13 year old girl sent home from graduation because, “Teen Sent Home From Ceremony For ‘Revealing’ Dress."

The story includes a video link on the story also.  Judge for yourself.

Posted by John Venlet on 05/17 at 08:02 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Page 6 of 14 pages « First  <  4 5 6 7 8 >  Last »