Saturday, March 31, 2007

9AM They Don't Tell Me What They're Storing, and I Don't Ask

Deputy: That guy told the judge that the crack they found up his ass wasn't his.

Police station
Indianapolis, Indiana

Overheard by: more information than anyone needed


via Overheard in the Office, Mar 30, 2007

Friday, March 23, 2007

So it always bugs me when people talk like this...

There are, of course, objections to theism that are, well, I don't want to say valid, of course, but worth discussing. Not silly, I mean. But some are definitely just silly. When re-reading Mere Christianity, I came across Lewis's response to one of the sillier, and thought I'd post it here.

There is no need to be worried by facetious people who try to make the Christian hope of 'Heaven' ridiculous by saying they do not want 'to spend eternity playing harps.' The answer to such people is that if they cannot undersand books written for grown-ups, they should not talk about them. All the scriptural imagery is, of course, a merely symbolical attempt to express the inexpressible. Musical instruments are mentioned because for many people (not all) music is the thing kown in the present life which most strongly suggests ecstasy and infinity. . . . People who take these symbols literally might as well think that when Christ told us to be like doves, He meant that we were to lay eggs.

Thursday, March 22, 2007

Overheard on Law and Order

Jack: Res ipsa loquitur, your honor
Sleazy defense lawyer: That's latin for they've got nothing.

Saturday, March 03, 2007

Full House

Recently I read a book by Stephen Jay Gould entitled Full House. It was a very interesting book, explaining evolution, statistics, and the extinction of .400 hitting in baseball. If you are interested in any of these things, I heartily recommend it. I probably most enjoyed how he punctured the myth of evolution as progress, since I'm generally opposed to any theory that things are getting better. For that reason I was particularly annoyed when he began espousing a theory of cultural progress towards the end of the book.

He argues that, because of various features of cultural change, it may in fact be 'Lamarckian' rather than 'Mendelian'. That is, traits gained during a lifetime which have a cultural advantage can be passed on, where physical traits which are acquired cannot be. To be fair, Gould hedges his bets. But I still want to complain, because that's what I do best.

There are two serious problems with any theory of cultural progress. One is the problem of incommensurability. It is at the very least difficult to compare the values of two different cultures; it may be impossible. (But see Charles Taylor's arguments, republished in Philosophical Arguments.) But to know that there was cultural progress, we'd have to be able to compare, say, American culture of the early 21st century with American culture of the early 19th century. That is, there can be no empirical evidence of this progress. The second, and related problem is one of interconnectivity. Due to the pervasive nature of culture, it is impossible to make gains in some one area (say, individual rights) without changing some other area (say, community relations). And generally speaking, these changes are going to be for the worse, not for the better. I like individual rights; in fact, I prefer them to some strong notion of communality. But I do think that our communities have suffered for our emphasis on individual rights.

Another side of this second problem is the two-sided (one could even say two-faced) nature of culture. Say a culture emphasizes community. This may create certain goods, such as extensive care for the elderly. But it also creates certain harms, such as a supression of difference (and, by extension, supression of different people, often violently). And I suspect that any cultural trait is going to show such duality.

Friday, March 02, 2007

Platonism still exists!

"True" polyhedral dice are based on Platonic solids, beautiful three-dimensional objects incorporating geometric perfection in their shapes. The d10 isn't such shape. It's a pentagonal trapezohedron, which is fancy math talk for an ugly, corrupted shape that has no business existing in the real world.

(from an article on wizards.com)

Thursday, March 01, 2007

More Overheard

From Overheard in Law School:

Legislation Prof: What is it more than anything else that keeps Justice O'Connor up at night? Bright line rules. They make her break out in cold sweats.


I promise a real post soon.