November 24, 2002
Photos Online
I haven't updated my photo gallery in a while, so I shared my entire photo directory:
http://rationalmind.net/mypics
New SuperFans!
A new SuperFan series is in progress....updates coming soon!
Update: Check out the latest issue!
November 20, 2002
Here is the rant of the day -- by me!
The following post was inspired by the fine folks at the Atheist & Agnostic listserv:
It seems that everyone who has replied to my recent posts so far is stuck in the racist mindset. Black's must obviously favor taking all the government's money and steal...err, "redistributing" it to themselves and letting al the black criminals out of jail, and unenlightened whites who do not realize that they are racist (and just don't know it) are only interested in keeping their "superior social status" and perpetuating "structural" racism. "Enlightened" whites like the fine young gentlemen debating with me however, have become wise to the situation and engaged in trying to get all the white people to loathe themselves and blame themselves for their ancestors mistakes.
I don't suppose it has ever crossed your mind that it's possible to look at people by what they believe in and how they act rather than judging them by factors outside their control. I don't suppose you would realize that to a color-blind person, (of any race or creed) it doesn't matter what the race of the criminals in prisons is, as long as they are guilty, and it doesn't matter what color a college student is, as long as they are qualified.
To a person who views other people as fellow human being, rather than rival racial factions, it is completely irrelevant what the ratios of blacks and whites and Asians in the prison and universities is. To a non-racist, it's really completely irrelevant what the racial proportions are in any category. Where there are social problems, you address them as social problems, irrelevant of whether they are "black" or "white" problems.
Not being racist yourself is not going to make other's stop being racist, but it WILL end it on your part. Trying to "compensate" for white racism by encouraging black racism is only going to prove that you still see people as tribes and collectives rather than individuals. Joining the NAACP is only going to show that just like the clansmen of the KKK, you only see colors, not people.
Let me re-emphasize something very important: if you view people as individuals, not races, it is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT whether "structural" unequalities exist. The entire notion that all institutions should mirror society in their racial proportions is based on the racist idea that race is the primary defining factor of people, not their own identity. Eventually, by teaching others and being an individual yourself, racial divisions in society will disappear. However when or if they do is completely irrelevant, because the whole notion of "getting back" for past discrimination is inherently racist itself. You CANNOT make up for slavery by giving a black man now a job he doesn't deserve, and you share NO RESPONSIBILITY for past discrimination, EVEN IF you benefit from starting off in a higher position. Two wrongs don't make a right, especially when you are not "righting" anything by being a bigot yourself.
Art
My art gallery is coming along at http://rationalmind.net/art -- not many images are present yet becuase I am working on the technical side...
November 17, 2002
More Updates...
There's a few more essays on my essay page, including one on Divine Inspiration and Religious Guilt
Oh, and check out this list of 451 (and growing) proofs for God.
November 16, 2002
November 15, 2002
Memorizing vs. Learning [from a listserv post]
Being inspired by other people's ideas and not having any of your own are two very different things. I have many heroes and sources from which I gain inspiration and material to further my own ideas and actions, and there's nothing wrong with that.
The key difference between the copy-cat and the independent thinker is that the copy-cat is capable of merely reading and memorizing words and phrases. He never develops the critical thinking skills needed to analyze other's ideas and compare them to personal experience and the rest on his knowledge. Rather, he merely memorizes them, stuffing them into an ever-larger closet full of contradictions and inconsistencies.
The errors of such a process becomes obvious when such a person attempts to apply his knowledge to answer a question which involves arranging the ideas he already holds in a new way: because he never learns to relate ideas and concepts together, he is unable to do anything but spit out the same old lines he has memorized word by word.
For example, a student may take a programming class and memorize all the commands of a language and all the functions needed to accomplish certain tasks, but ask him to write a program using the most basic of these commands, and he will be completely helpless unless he has learned the relationships and meanings of the commands and functions. Likewise, many students study arithmetic, geometry, algebra, calculus in their education, but without integrating and learning the meaning and inter-relationships of these subjects, they will be unable to solve the most basic mathematical problems in real life. They will study history not as a chain of causally-linked events and trends, but as unrelated dates and actions, and science not as integrated and related fields, but as abstract, trivial, and independent areas.
It is not surprising then, that such people will view philosophy not as an integrated, and hierarchical structure, but a series of abstract questions, to be solved by logical calculus or left open with a big question mark.
The person who actually learns, rather than merely memorizing is not only able to relate existing knowledge and apply it to new situations, but more importantly, he can critically judge the ideas of his teachers, no matter how well-regarded they may be. Most students take their professor's ideas at their word, either neutrally memorizing material and spiting it back out, or finding something instinctively wrong with ideas (perhaps because their parents, peers, or preacher told them otherwise) but being unable to say just why because the professor's words are just as un-integrated as their previous knowledge. So, they put a question mark on the whole thing, and adopt a general apathy and equivocate all ideas as just "opinions."
This, then is the general stupor in which most we find most people today, and it is the direct result of an educational system that fails to provide students with the critical thinking skills (despite a superficial dedication to it) needed to integrate and evaluate knowledge.
November 13, 2002
Reports BusinessWeek:In April, 2002, hackers
Reports BusinessWeek:
In April, 2002, hackers broke into the payroll database for the state of California. For more than a month, cybercriminals rooted around in the personal information of 265,000 Golden State employees, ranging from Governor Gray Davis to maintenance workers and clerks.
Worse, the California Controller's Office, which ran the database, failed to notify state employees for more than two weeks after the breach was discovered. Although officials with the Controller's office insisted the break-in probably hadn't resulted in any significant harm, the incident enraged Golden State pols and employees, whose Social Security numbers, bank account information, and home addresses were fair game for the hackers.
This lapse sparked what may mark a dramatic shift in legal policy toward cybersecurity. Over strenuous objections from the business lobby, on Sept. 26 California enacted a sweeping measure that mandates public disclosure of computer-security breaches in which confidential information may have been compromised. The law covers not just state agencies but private enterprises doing business in California. Come July 1, 2003, those who fail to disclose that a breach has occurred could be liable for civil damages or face class actions.
Here is Slashdot's very perceptive take on the new law:
" IMHO Big companies will have the resources to set up investigations even when they know it is unlikely to get anywhere, and business will go on as usual for them. Small businesses that don't have the resources to maintain an investigation will have their reputations ruined. Also, the article doesn't mention the contingency where a break-in occurs because of a software/hardware issue for which there is no released technical solution (i.e. anyone else who has software X would be susceptible to the same type of break-in). This is not good."
Another Slashot comment on the story:
"Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) filed documents with the SEC today relating to a breach of network security.
According to the filings, at 5:23 AM last Tuesday, Microsoft's network was "owned" by a hacker calling himself "Z3r0 kew10r". While the hacker refered to himself as "1337" in his defacement of Microsoft's webpage, Microsoft CEO Bill Gates indicated that the security breach was very minor.
In a press release accompanying the filing, Gates said: "t#1s punk th1nks h3's 1337 but h3's just a littl3 scr1p7 k1dd13 and i'm g0nna sh0w h1m what 1337 is when m3 and the M$ haxx0r cr3w crak his b0xx0r!" "
November 10, 2002
SuperFans Special: Halloween Edition
Rest assured that the large number of empty beer bottles does NOT belong to me.
November 08, 2002
New Domain!
I got a new domain today:rationalmind.net and a new email: [email protected]
Hopefully, this will be my home on the web for the next few years!
November 05, 2002
Damn Voting!
So I tried to go vote yesterday and today but the whole world seems to be determined not to let me. First, I found out that early voting ends four days before the elections, so a trip in the rain to the MSC was wasted. Today, I went to the MSC to have the officials tell me that all off-campus voters must go elsewhere, so I look at the precinct map and go to the City Hall (3 miles away) on my skates. I finally get there to find out that they do not have my name on the roll, and my precinct is actually right next to where I live. So I go 3 miles back, find the other voting location, and they tell me that they do not have my name either, so I get them to call election headquarters, which is finally able to tell me that I am supposed to vote at the MSC!
I have class, so I run home to get my books, and since I am running late, I take my bike. After class, I head to the MSC, but as I am riding by Beutel (the infirmary), I slip and fly headfirst into a metal pole. A very sweet girl half-carries my bloodied, limp body into Beutel, where eight stitches, lots of antibiotic, and a big credit card bill later, I hop on one foot (no kidding) to the MSC. FINALLY, I get there and do my thing for democracy. Then, I hobble back the mile it takes me to get home.
What a day! (The stitches come out in 10-14 days, and no, I did not get the girl's number, though I could have sworn she would have given it to me if my hands weren't all bloody.)
November 03, 2002
In response to *Recapturing the Lost Art of Gracious Victorian Living*, by Linda S. Lichter
Ms. Lichter makes several good points in her nostalgic ode to Victorian morality as she shreds the "chaotic muddle" which goes for morality these days. However, before jumping on the "traditional family values" bandwagon, it is worthwhile to examine the particular differences between Victorian morality and what passes for morality today.
Victorian ideals stressed a rigid code of values that came from God himself. Being Good was the sole purpose of these values, regardless of whether they brought happiness and success or required the sacrifice of one's dreams and desires to preserve an image of "true nobility and god deeds."
Unfortunately, Queen Victoria's morality died with her. Men who had been enjoying sex with whores suddenly felt free to enjoy sex with their own wives. They concluded that the Victorian morality was too "idealistic" and adopted a pragmatic approach to life. If morality is a set of rules to govern one's actions, the first rule of today's morality is that there are no rules!
For example, take sex. Where Victorian ethics preached sexual decency (no sex until marriage, and then only on the Sabbath.and don't even think about enjoying it!) today's moralists tell us to "Have sex whenever you want...with two or more people/sexes at a time.in public!" Consequences of actions are divorced from their causes: "If you get AIDS, take some protease inhibitors and lobby the government for more research to "solve the AIDS crisis." If you find yourself unable to have meaningful relationships with the strangers you wake up next to, take Prozac!
Clearly, Victorian morality is just as "impractical" as today's anti-morality -- if living successful, happy lives is our goal. Victorian ethics divorce morals from their fundamental purpose (to serve as a guide for a happy and productive life) and today's anti-morals divorce actions from their consequences by claiming that following whims and urges is sufficient guidance for achieving all of one's goals without suffering the consequences of self-destructive and contradictory actions.
Ms. Lichter is correct in arguing that society has abandoned the very idea of morality as a principled guide to one's actions. However, the foundation of morality is not to discard individual happiness and pursue self-sacrifice, but on the contrary, to seek individual happiness by means of a moral code. While the Victorian era's morality may be an improvement over the modern-day wholesale rejection of morals, it lacks the logical foundation of morality, based not on an idealized concept of God, but on the idealized concept of principled man.