Premise 1: I am saddened by gun violanceMany of us cannot see the rationality of such arguments, but liberals see it quite clearly.
Premise 2: Gun violence is very upsetting to me
Conclusion: Therefore, we must ban guns
Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?Blanderson: We're going to cut away from God's remarks at this point and see if we can talk with Rolf Schlitzer who is standing in the pressroom. Rolf, what do see there among the press corp as the Deity is talking?
Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?
When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it,
And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,
And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?
Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to know his place;
That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?
It is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment.
And from the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken.
Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?
Have the gates of death been opened unto thee? or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death?
Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou knowest it all.
Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof,
That thou shouldest take it to the bound thereof, and that thou shouldest know the paths to the house thereof?
Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born? or because the number of thy days is great?
Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail,
Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?
By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth?
Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder;
To cause it to rain on the earth, where no man is; on the wilderness, wherein there is no man;
To satisfy the desolate and waste ground; and to cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth?
Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of dew?
Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it? ...
CHILD COUNSELOR: Now could you tell me how you're feeling right now? What do you think about the shooter who killed those people at the school?
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: I don't know. What do you think?
CHILD COUNSELOR: Look, cut the crap, buster. Just give me a straight answer.
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: Well, it's terribly complicated. I mean, there is still so much we don't know about the shooter: What he was thinking at the time, what his childhood was like, what kind of relationship he had with his parents.
CHILD COUNSELOR: At what point in your life did you start feeling like you had to complicate fairly simple situations like this one? Nevermind. I'm going to show you a series of pictures and I want you to tell me the first thing that comes into your mind:
[Child shows adult picture of doll]
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: Vulnerable.
[Child shows adult picture of monster]
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: Misunderstood.
[Child shows adult picture of children in classroom]
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: Dangerous place.
CHILD COUNSELOR: I said "word." That means one. Pay attention!
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: Sorry.
[child shows adult picture of Sigmund Freud]
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: [tearing up, lower lip quivering] ... Father!
CHILD COUNSELOR: I think I see the problem. [Child attaches electrodes to adult's wrists] Now, answer these questions please: What do good people do, and what do bad people do?
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: Well, it depends on what you mean by "good" and "bad" ...
[Child presses button, causing adult to seize up in electricity-induced convulsions]
CHILD COUNSELOR: Now let's try that again: What do good people do, and what do bad people do?
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: [Paying much more careful attention now] Uh, well, good people [He looks fearfully at the button near the child's hand] ... good people ... [He looks at child's lips, which are forming the words of the right answer] ... good people do ... Good people do good things!
CHILD COUNSELOR: And bad people?
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: Bad people ... bad people ... [Child mouths correct answer] ... Do bad things!
CHILD COUNSELOR: Very good. Now tell me this: How do we know good people from bad people?
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: Uh, well, its hard to divide people into neat categories ... [Sees child's finger moving toward button] I mean, I mean, we know good people because, [beads of sweat form on adult's brow] ... because, Because they do good things!
CHILD COUNSELOR: And how do we know bad people?
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: Because they do bad things!
CHILD COUNSELOR: Very good. [Child removes electrodes from adult's wrists, adult clearly relieved] So when someone walks into a school and shoots people, is that a good thing or a bad thing?
GRIEF PROFESSIONAL: Definitely a bad thing.
CHILD COUNSELOR: And so when someone ask us why the man did this, what is the first answer we should give?
GRIEF COUNSELOR: Uh, because ... because ... Because he was a bad man!
CHILD COUNSELOR: Very good. You've made excellent progress. And now our time's up.
GRIEF COUNSELOR: [stands up, nervously] Thank you so much. Can I go now?
CHILD COUNSELOR: Yes, you can go now. When would you like to schedule your next appointment?
GRIEF COUNSELOR: [Slowly backing toward the door as he talks] Um, how about if I just get back to you?
CHILD COUNSELOR: Okay.
[Adult turns around, grabs the door knob, and goes quickly out. Child hears several doors open and close, and then the sound of someone sprinting down the sidewalk outside]
CHILD COUNSELOR: Mom!
MOTHER: [voice coming from another room] Yes dear!
CHILD COUNSELOR: Can we go get some ice cream now?!
MOTHER: Yes dear. [she says, walking in the room] I'll go get my coat.
Our wills are simply not of our own making. Thoughts and intentions emerge from background causes of which we are unaware and over which we exert no conscious control. We do not have the freedom we thing we have.Harris himself draws the obvious conclusion: people cannot be held responsible for what they do, at least not in any sense in which we have traditionally thought such a thing.
A couple of thousand years ago, these islands were populated by wild men who painted themselves blue and read their fortunes in the entrails of birds. Then we were Celtic Christians, then Catholics, then Protestants, then a colourful mix of social gospels and now, today, a nation of agnostics who scoff at virgin births yet read horoscopes in vain search for a tall dark man ...Read more here.
All men are mortalTraditional logic has also been called “term logic,” since it deals primarily (but not exclusively) with the relation of terms in an argument (in this case, the terms man, mortal, and Socrates). Whether the reasoning is valid depends on the proper arrangement of these terms in an argument.
Socrates is a man
Therefore, Socrates is mortal
Logistics differs essentially from Logic … Logistics and logic remain separate disciplines, entirely foreign to one another. (emphasis in the original)Many traditional logicians, in fact, reject much of modern logic as mistaken. Maritain, in fact, goes so far as to argue that modern logic is not logic at all. This favor is returned by some modern logicians. Traditional logic, says Bertrand Russell, one of the founders of the modern system, “is as definitely antiquated as Ptolemaic astronomy.” [Bertrand Russell, A History of Western Philosophy (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1945), p. 195]. Anyone wanting to know Russell’s view of Aristotelian logic will find it at the end of his chapter on Aristotle in this book:
I conclude that the Aristotelian doctrines with which we have been concerned in this chapter are wholly false, with the exception of the formal theory of the syllogism, which is unimportant. Any person in the present day who wishes to learn logic will be wasting his time if he reads Aristotle or any of his disciples. [Russell, p. 202]So there.
The British journalist Malcolm Muggeridge saw all this coming. When he visited America in the 20th century, he noticed the "extraordinary efforts made, linguistically and in every other way, to keep death out of sight and mind." He spent a month in Florida at Sunshine Haven, a retirement home where the residents were expected to behave like teenagers, "perfectly capable of disporting ourselves on the dance floor, the beach, or even in bed."Read more here.
After we chatted for a while, we all crossed from the living room through a breezeway to his study, and there, with his wife, Alma, we celebrated a quiet Mass. Across from me were the bound volumes of his movie scripts, "The Birds," "Psycho," "North by Northwest" and others—a great distraction. Hitchcock had been away from the church for some time, and he answered the responses in Latin the old way. But the most remarkable sight was that after receiving communion, he silently cried, tears rolling down his huge cheeks.Read the rest here.
When I decided on a scientific career, one of the things that appealed to me about science was the modesty of its practitioners. The typical scientist seemed to be a person who knew one small corner of the natural world and knew it very well, better than most other human beings living and better even than most who had ever lived. But outside of their circumscribed areas of expertise, scientists would hesitate to express an authoritative opinion. This attitude was attractive precisely because it stood in sharp contrast to the arrogance of the philosophers of the positivist tradition, who claimed for science and its practitioners a broad authority with which many practicing scientists themselves were uncomfortable.
The temptation to overreach, however, seems increasingly indulged today in discussions about science. Both in the work of professional philosophers and in popular writings by natural scientists, it is frequently claimed that natural science does or soon will constitute the entire domain of truth. And this attitude is becoming more widespread among scientists themselves. All too many of my contemporaries in science have accepted without question the hype that suggests that an advanced degree in some area of natural science confers the ability to pontificate wisely on any and all subjects.Read the rest here.
The documents we have containing this testimony (empirical evidence) clearly indicate that the authors lived dozens of years after the death of Jesus and did not even speak his language. They were Greeks and certainly were not direct eye-witnesses to the events. It is highly doubtful they even had contact with any actual eye-witnesses.It would be interesting to apply this to all historical documents to see what we get. In fact, one wonders how many historical events we currently take for granted that we will now have to call into question, since many (if not most) are based on writings written by people who lived not only dozens of years after the events they relate, but hundreds--and didn't witness the events they relate and didn't even have contact with any witnesses--not to mention not speaking the language they speak.
Nature and nature's laws lay hid by night;Here, the word "nature" is used very much on its modern sense. The classical use of the word, however, can be illustrated from a nursery rhyme:
God said, "Let Newton be," and all was light.
Dogs delight to bark and bite ...Here the word "nature" is used in the classical sense, to mean the inner essence of a thing.
For 'tis their nature to.
Same-sex marriage will encourage fidelity and commitment, and foster family values? We can’t predict the future of culture, and I suppose Mehlman is entitled to his dreams. But a sober-minded observer sees that same-sex marriage puts an exclamation mark on the transformation of marriage and parenting from the basic norm for adult life into one life-style choice among many, one that we can enter and exit as our choices change. There’s nothing about same-sex marriage other than the now redefined word “marriage” that remotely suggests “family values.”
Even more ridiculous is the notion that redefining marriage makes government less intrusive. The notion of civil rights that fuels the push for “marriage equality” requires pumping up the power of the state to bulldoze older traditions and attitudes that stand in the way of the full acceptance and affirmation of homosexuality. It’s going to lead to litigation, regulation, mandated school programs and “inclusivity” seminars, and lots of other legislation. For good and for ill, the civil rights revolution of the 1960s created entire government bureaucracies, which in turn led to corporate diversity consultants and many other positions, all keyed to compliance.Read the rest here.
Note that the Trinity is not an explicit claim of the New Testament, but a doctrine (now ironclad) made up by Church fathers from some questionable references in the New Testament. And it’s not accepted by many Christians (e.g. “Unitarians”, Christian Scientists, and Mormons). Once again, theology has just made something up. But I digress ...No, the Trinity is not explicit, but nature doesn't exactly announce in explicit terms that operates on evolutionary principles, but Coyne believes that. In the case of the Trinity, the assertions are clear and the inference is straightforward: The person of the Father is God; the person of the Spirit is God; the person of the Son is God; there is only one God; therefore, there are three persons in the one God. You can disagree with it, but you can't coherently quibble with the claims or casually dismiss the inference.
But I don’t see the Virgin Birth as such an unequivocal truth. Nothing really depends on that tale except the notion that Jesus was an extraordinary (i.e., divine) being. And by holding fast to such a ludicrous doctrine, the Pope is making things tough for his Church, and harder for adherents to accept its doctrine in an age of science.Naw. Nothing depends on it. Except the central claim of Christianity. That's all.
STOCKHOLM — At an ocher-color preschool along a lane in Stockholm’s Old Town, the teachers avoid the pronouns “him” and “her,” instead calling their 115 toddlers simply “friends.” Masculine and feminine references are taboo, often replaced by the pronoun “hen,” an artificial and genderless word that most Swedes avoid but is popular in some gay and feminist circles.
In the little library, with its throw pillows where children sit to be read to, there are few classic fairy tales, like “Cinderella” or “Snow White,” with their heavy male and female stereotypes, but there are many stories that deal with single parents, adopted children or same-sex couples.
Girls are not urged to play with toy kitchens, and wooden or Lego blocks are not considered toys for boys. And when boys hurt themselves, teachers are taught to give them every bit as much comforting as they would girls. Everyone gets to play with dolls; most are anatomically correct, and some are also black.
Yes, it is unfortunate that we must forsake stories like Snow White and the ... Seven Longitudinally Challenged Persons. And one does wonder who Cinderella is now supposed to dance with at the ball. Perhaps we can add a black transvestite drag queen to the story to spice things up a bit.It is stories like this that hold out for me the hope that someday I too can successfully deny the manifold biological and psychological evidence and not be internally conflicted about it.
When one political party wins a national election and the other loses, the best thing for the losing party to do is take a lesson from what the winning party did. But moderates in the Republican Party seem to think it's a great idea to do exactly the opposite.
As soon as the election was over, moderates put the Republican Party on the political couch and began psychoanalyzing it to determine the problem. The advice they are now in the process of giving it is the same advice they have given the Party repeatedly over the last 40 years: Drop the social issues and nominate a moderate.
This, they say, is the key to realizing their electoral potential.
There must be something in the childhood of moderates' that prevents them from learning from their past mistakes--even those in the very recent past. What they should have noticed, but apparently haven't, is that this is exactly what the Republicans did this year and it didn't work.Read the rest here.
As if the loss of the presidential election was not enough, Republicans must now suffer the indignity of being given bad advice.
As soon as the results of the election were in, moderates within the party announced that the problem lay in the party’s conservative position on social issues. The reason the Republicans lost was because of their opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage.
The people who argue this must not have been watching the same election as the rest of us. They talk as if Mitt Romney ran for president as some sort of crazed socially-conservative radical who wanted gays locked up and women forced to give birth at gunpoint. In fact, the Republicans this year did everything moderates in the party always say they should do: They nominated the least socially conservative legitimate candidate, and they almost completely ignored social issues.
You would think that if the advice of moderates in the party was good, it would actually work. But it clearly didn’t ...Read the rest here.
Starting in the early afternoon, reports were coming in from across swing states that ORCA had crashed. That morning, when Shoshanna was on the phone with Boston, she was told the system was crashing, unable to withstand thousands of simultaneous log-ins. The system had never been stress tested and couldn’t handle the crush of traffic all at once. Thousands of man-hours went into designing and implementing a program that was useful on one day and one day only, and on that day, it crashed. My source familiar with the campaign described it this way, “It was a giant [mess] because a political operative sold a broken product with no support or backup plan. Just another arrogant piece of the arrogant Romney campaign.”It's a fascinating piece. Read the rest here.
