Chrono Compendium
Zenan Plains - Site Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Ramsus on April 05, 2009, 02:57:54 am
-
Often times I'd like to share an interesting link or resource with the Compendium where the content just doesn't seem to be suitable for The "WTF? Check this link out!" thread! (http://www.chronocompendium.com/Forums/index.php/topic,3151.0.html). That's because the other thread implies links to meaningless or shockingly absurd content, whereas much of what I've wanted to post links to over the years has been interesting and informative, if not educational and helpful. At the same time, I'd rather not create new topics just to share something that probably won't generate a lot of discussion.
As a result, I've created this thread. Feel free to share your favorite links and resources here too, but don't bother making it a sticky thread. I think we have enough of those.
Anyway, today I'm reading Almost Perfect (http://www.wordplace.com/ap/index.shtml) - by W. E. Pete Peterson. It was originally published in dead tree format and covers the rise and fall of the once wildly successful WordPerfect software product and the company built around it. I suggest reading it if you like biographies and histories concerning business startups (e.g. iCon or Pirates of Silicon Valley).
I think, Z in particular might like this. After all, a lot of what attracted us to work on the Compendium all these years is the same sort of thing that makes the idea of creating and running a new business so alluring.
-
Bookmarked.
-
Yay! I don't have to make seperate threads if I find an intresting website to see other people's opinions about the pros and cons! (phew that's a mouthfull)
Can someone pin this thread at the top?
-
http://soundfonts.darkesword.com/ This person has ripped the instruments out of many SNES games and made them into .sf2 format for your Sound Blaster listening pleasure.
Unfortunatly the author has dissapeared since December and doesn't respond to email so my question is does anyone know of other game-soundfonts?
I'd love a banjo-kazooie soundfon't as I love that xylophone and banjo.
-
Spin - by Brian Springer (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7344181953466797353) is an amazing documentary that takes you through the looking glass to the hidden side of the modern media. The sad thing is that our situation with the media today has only gotten worse.
Can someone pin this thread at the top?
Sorry, but I wanted this thread to go unpinned for a while, so that it may live or die by the merit of how much it gets used. But then, I'm expecting it to slowly die and disappear into obscurity out of a lack of popularity.
-
A couple of links with a common theme: Design -- in particular, design for the future. I've seen some very cool things on both of these websites.
http://www.ted.com/ - TED, or Technology, Entertainment, and Design. This site has several (read 'a whole whole lot of') talks given by some pretty smart (and respected) cookies. You can browse by subject to get to the videos that are of most interest to you.
http://www.gliving.com/ - G Living. I find some of the things that they do here kitschy, and they can seem a little obsessive over raw food, but their design articles are great! They feature a lot of artists and designers on the cutting edge of green building, green vehicles, and any number of other things. Also, their "Room 101" series is worth watching.
-
The most interesting and informative site I know of would have to be http://www.damninteresting.com (http://www.damninteresting.com). Sadly they haven't been able to publish anything new recently, but there is a ton of great material up there. Basically, they write articles about interesting phenomena in nature, historical mysteries, diseases, disasters, technology, and so on.
-
Whoops I got confused. I meant THIS link here. http://www.shakal.net/lunar/misc/soundfonts/ Please ignore or delete the first one if you wish.
Good night.
-
TrifoceofEternally odd links.
Well, I can't directly link to these right now, but they are interesting watches. All are on google video.
The Corporation, Money as Debt, Manufacturing Consent, The Power of Nightmares, The Century of the Self and Outfoxed are all interesting documentaries.
From wikipedia (except money as debt):
The Corporation
critical of the modern-day corporation, considering it as a class of person and evaluating its behaviour towards society and the world at large as a psychologist might evaluate an ordinary person. This is explored through specific examples.
Manufacturing Consent
The film presents and illustrates Chomsky's and Herman's propaganda model, the thesis that corporate media, as profit-driven institutions, tend to serve and further the agendas of the interests of dominant, elite groups in the society.
The Power of Nightmares
The films compare the rise of the Neo-Conservative movement in the United States and the radical Islamist movement, making comparisons on their origins and claiming similarities between the two.
Outfoxed
criticises the Fox News Channel, and its owner, Rupert Murdoch, claiming that the channel is used to promote and advocate right-wing views.
The Century of the Self
"This series is about how those in power have used Freud's theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy." - Adam Curtis
Money as Debt
47 minute film that uses animation in an attempt to explain some monetary concepts.
edit: added century of the self
-
Through Ze Frank's blog I found a really great audio-visual flash toy.
http://lab.andre-michelle.com/tonematrix
-
http://nathanbransford.blogspot.com/
An amazing little blog of a literary agent. On his blog there are all sorts of tidbits about the life of a literary agent, how to format query letters, etc.. Awesome stuff, if you ask me. Great for authors and the like.
-
TV on the internet. Some of these sites have massive collections of either videos or links to videos streaming online. No downloads.
Hulu (http://www.hulu.com/) - this one's legal, it's owned by nbc and fox and has fx and comedy central shows and universal movies. It has the highest resolution available other than Netflix, but you don't have to pay.
Surf The Channel (http://www.surfthechannel.com) - illegal but fun. i used this one before hulu came out and before i got a netflix subscription. it has youtube quality videos, but a LOT of them. especially stuff that just came out.
All U C Dot Org (http://s12.alluc.org/) - just as good as surf the channel, and maybe even better, but with a less attractive layout.
Share TV Dot Org (http://"http://www.sharetv.org) - used to be great. even offered downloads of episodes within two hours of airtime. not anymore, since the big one went down. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Links) but they DO stream full episodes of popular tv shows. they probably don't have anything the other ones haven't covered.
if you google tv links, some sites pop up, but tv-links.co.uk was the biggest and best and it's gone now. i can't vouch for the new ones cause the one's i've listed have kept me very entertained when i've needed it. Comedy Central, Fox, Nbc, Adult Swim, FX, and i'm sure some other network websites offer streaming full episodes as well, but if you want a collection or you want to find something you haven't heard of before, my list is for you.
-
TV on the internet. Some of these sites have massive collections of either videos or links to videos streaming online. No downloads.
With the FireFox Add-On Tool Video DownloadHelper (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3006), streaming IS downloadable! I'm sure there are other progs of similar workings available as well (in fact, I think there's a thread somewhere that ZeaLitY made about them for the purpose of collecting random Chrono gunk)...
It's funny, initially when I first saw this lonely topic kind of low on the first page with just Ramsus' first post I was gonna post something along the lines of, "Life doesn't always work out how we want, eh? lol", but hey! It's growing! And I even added a link to the pile! Although idk how interesting or informative it was now that I think about it...
-
I was a little shy to post tv-links type pages, but since it seems to be kosher here I'll add one of my favorite sites:
http://www.quicksilverscreen.com/
-
I tend to forget we live in a new generation where the new kids know squat about good ol MIDI. :(
A good way to understand soundfonts is to use XM midi player as you can download a plugin that lets it play midi and karokee files. Then it has the ability to load soundfonts without hogging your computer rescources.
Soundfon'ts are like word fonts where you can change the way midi sounds without big expensive equipment. You use 128 instruments in bank 001 and can extend into other banks as well.
Once Creative's idea went off people made home-made soundfonts while some sounded crappy and bled your ears others were very well done and are worth a try.
-
For the crazy lefties on here:
http://rachel.msnbc.com/
You can watch The Rachel Maddow Show online!
-
This site is a complete hypocrite.
It's a site that has video-game music and soundfonts. http://www.vgmusic.com/~lunar/ but all the links are now broken. :shock:
Be sure to contact me if you find any broken links. Always useful. :)
- Dave
http://www.vgmusic.com/lunar/contact/ (Doesn't work) How stupid!
What the friggin h--- is a soundfont you ask?
Like you can change the font of your text which I would show you but there isn't any word fonting on here.
So like you can also do that with MIDI instead of relying on your crappy slapped together built-in sound board. You can also make midis sound 8-bit if you want by getting FM soundfonts and sound like "Ye old Days".
-
Vgmusic.com 27,401 game midis though the "requests" section of the forums are a complete joke but you can check the new file section everyday as there is always something going on.
Check out all the Schala Theme renderations and The Kingdom of Zeal remixes AKA Corridors of Time
-
A few interesting and informative links (for me at least):
The Museum of Hoaxes is a website devoted to cataloguing and researching the various hoaxes of the world, past and present: http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/
While I wouldn't classify everything on that website as a hoax, deception is certainly a central theme of the materials included. It can be quite interesting (and sometimes downright depressing) to see what people get away with.
Now hopefully someone won't discover that the entire website is a hoax ;)
Along similar lines is the Worth 1000 website (www.worth1000.com). This is a website dedicated to photo-manipulation. Merely observing what individuals are capable of with photo-editing software is a sobering experience, but if it were just interesting I wouldn't have posted a link. The website also nicely enough includes a great many tutorials for various aspects of the activities the website is related to. I have found it useful for touching up my own personal photographs and restoring damaged and faded images.
-
http://www.vbs.tv/
Interesting shows.
-
What do people think of VGmuisc.com and it's community? I notice they don't seem friendly towards newbies and consider people "fresh meat"
-
http://www.magnatune.com/
http://www.magnatune.com/
http://www.magnatune.com/
http://www.magnatune.com/
http://www.magnatune.com/
http://www.magnatune.com/
http://www.magnatune.com/
and...
http://www.magnatune.com/
Excellent, dare I say ethical? MP3 site. You can listen to an entire album before you buy it, apparently, and it seems that way for all music on the site. I'm new to it -- just found out about it!
Also, for web programmers, an easy captcha method:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10217682-1.html?tag=mncol;posts
-
Ethnic music, but no country? WTH?
/rant
-
They're a little limited in their selection compared to big labels. Still a fantastic idea imho. Hope to see more companies like them.
-
They're a little limited in their selection compared to big labels. Still a fantastic idea imho. Hope to see more companies like them.
Oh, I understand the reason for a small selection, and in general, I think the industry is moving that way. (I'm graduating with a degree in Music Business in 2 weeks.) I just looked at the list and saw everything but what I listen to most of the time.
-
http://youhaventlived.com/qblog/index.html
That's one of my favorite blogs, containing the personal writings of noted MUD creator and virtual world designer Richard Bartle. A fascinating confluence of attractions, as the intellectual and dry-witted Bartle expatiates upon his everyday life in all its ordinariness, with the occasional foray into one of the most exciting subjects in the world today, and stopovers at other points of interest along the way...for fullness of measure.
-
Elon Musk talking about Tesla Motors on Letterman:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiJJKBbg4TA&feature=related
-
Best website I've ever come acros and it helped me today. http://johnplaceonline.com/achieve-balance/11-causes-and-cures-of-hostile-online-communication/
I feel my weaknesses are number 2 and 4 on the list. :shock:
This one is for if you are doing a presentation such as at school/work and you have known/unknown bullies present in your meeting. http://www.ljlseminars.com/hostile.htm
Now just to kick off and relax here is a website that lets you play "abandonware" games on your browser with no downloads to make classic games a museum piece for future generations.
http://retrouprising.com/ that is r-e-t-r-o-u-p-r-i-s-i-n-g without the dashes.
It only goes up to the SNES section which sadly doesn't work and you cannot save your game on the Sega section either but most of the games are playable and I enjoyed it.
You also cannot contact the website to give praise/criticism so I could not report the problem. :picardno
Nightio.
-
www.getdropbox.com (http://www.getdropbox.com) Its just 2GB of space online with a very clean upload download client. It works quite well, I just got it but its working for I need (http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1180530/3749051222318908596.jpg).
FW Edit: Just an FYI, the image is merely mildly suggestive, but dear reader, don't open this when you suspect your boss at work might be staring over your shoulder from afar or anything. 8)
EDIT2: I guess it is a little...it was just the first thing I uploaded :/
-
The Cartographer's Guild: http://www.cartographersguild.com/
It is terribly fascinating to watch skilled, professional map makers at work and see their visually appealing products. Additionally, the site is a useful resource for elements pertinent to fantastical mapmaking, from how water moves from land to sea to how many acres of land a medieval family needed to sustain itself.
-
Good lord, it's like a freakin' Compendium for the Suikoden series:
http://gensopedia.duefiumi.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
Some Suiko fansites have spotty info on characters, game world history, etc. There's a few spelling errors floating about (I suspect English-as-Second-Language fans did some of the articles) but it's seriously be the best thing to happen to Suikoden fandom, and I can't believe I was missing it this long.
-
The Phrase Finder:
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/index.html
As a wordsmith, not only do I love etymologies but sometimes I need to check into them. With specific words, it's fairly easy. With phrases, it's not--or at least it wasn't until I found this website. It's a real trove.
-
There's a few spelling errors floating about (I suspect English-as-Second-Language fans did some of the articles) but it's seriously be the best thing to happen to Suikoden fandom, and I can't believe I was missing it this long.
:lol:
-
:picardno
I'll leave my post up there uncorrected for the sheer comedic value.
-
I obviously missed an obvious error in your previous post.
would someone mind being a captain obvious for me? =D
-
I don't understand the first bolded segment, myself, but the second should be fairly obvious, Captain or no...I wish I had played some of the Suikoden series as all I've ever heard about it is how great it is...>_>
-
I don't understand the first bolded segment, myself
It's just funny because he was suspiscious. Then he made the error. Which was suspiscious.
-
http://www.genocidewatch.org/aboutgenocide/unindicators.htm
A list of the UN-Established indicators that may signal that a state is moving towards genocide. It has been years since I had seen the list and it was a bit surprising how common some of them are, particularly in places where I normally don't think of as being potential sites of genocide.
-
I really like watching Discovery Health Channel these days. Most of the stories they feature are either about obese people, or families with sextuplets(thanks, Jon & Kate....).
But last night they showed a program I'd never seen before. A mother had her hands full because she had a set of triplets who were deafblind. 2 of the girls are completely blind, and one is only legally. They really lucked out with that one because she actually is doing much better than her sisters.
The 2 completely deafblind girls have a variety of problems, and the family really can't afford to find an Anne Sullivan for both girls. I hear now they're getting one "Intervenor", as they call it, for one of the girls for 2 years. Otherwise it's just been small sessions with random specialists. As I was watching the program, they had a specialist from Canada stay with them for 2 weeks.
I dunno, a lot of people on websites have been complaining that the parents aren't doing enough, but why don't they try raising 3 deafblind girls at the same time? They're doing what they can, though I do think they could have tried to do more early on. The retardation of the girls is in question. Since they didn't start to develop speech until very late, no one is really sure if they're capable of some day functionally communicating.
Here is an article about them: http://deafness.about.com/od/deafblind/a/dbtriplets.htm
-
Vgmusic.com has TONS and Tons OF CT and CC midis with remixes galore and it actually sounds good if you got the [b]right soundboard[/b] installed or otherwise it will make your ears bleed and gush blood.
If you get an 8-bit player called GSCXX then it makes the midis even more retro if you are into 8-bit music and it's as close to a NES sound as you'll get.
Unfortunately the fan base is pretty weak and mediocre. Even more so in the "song request' section which is like hardly ever answered or acknowledge thus being a wast of forum memory storage.
It has a decent music Q & A section for music 'geeks' as they are called who wish to study and learn music making but that's pretty much the uses the site has.
-
For MIDI playback, you can also use real-time MIDI software synthesizers on Linux that can load most soundfont formats. That way, you can pick and choose soundfonts to match the MIDI, even if you just have a cheap soundcard with not MIDI playback or soundfont support built-in.
-
http://www.jamesgunn.com/evolution-fucked-your-shit-up-the-worlds-50-freakiest-animals
I think this deserves more interesting than WTF, simply because it makes you realize just how much biodiversity there is on our planet.
-
Likewise, this article is worthy of more than WTF:
Large Hadron Collider Struggles, Adding to the Mysteries of Life (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/04/science/space/04collide.html?ref=science)
Particularly for this part:
The collider’s own prodigious energies are in some way its worst enemy. At full strength, the energy stored in its superconducting magnets would equal that of an Airbus A380 flying at 450 miles an hour, and the proton beam itself could pierce 100 feet of solid copper.
In order to carry enough current, the collider’s magnets are cooled by liquid helium to a temperature of 1.9 degrees above absolute zero, at which point the niobium-titanium cables in them lose all electrical resistance and become superconducting.
Any perturbation, however, such as a bad soldering job on a splice, can cause resistance and heat the cable and cause it to lose its superconductivity in what physicists call a “quench.” Which is what happened on Sept. 19, when the junction between two magnets vaporized in a shower of sparks, soot and liberated helium.
Wow.
-
I'm getting lucky with finding good independent music sellers offering mp3 downloads. (I found
two three so far. I consider that lucky!)
http://www.magnatune.com/
http://www.soulseduction.com/
http://www.cdfreedom.com/
If I find more I'll update this list. (Double post because I felt like this deserved its own reply.)
Edited -- forgot one.
-
http://atlasobscura.com/
The Atlas Obscura is a user-created website devoted to... well, obscure elements of the world, from natural wonders to man-made oddities. To help illustrate the nature of the Atlas, I propose for your viewing pleasure:
The Monticello Dam Spillway (http://atlasobscura.com/places/monticello-dam) and the Waitomo Glowworm Caves (http://atlasobscura.com/places/waitomo-glowworm-caves)
-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/streets-ahead-does-john-lewis-offer-a-revolutionary-way-forward-for-big-business-1774510.html
-
I've long been an opponent of the relentless fat-bashing in our culture, and I've tried to point out the falseness of much of the conventional wisdom about the effects of fatness. Thus, I've known better than most people that "fat is unhealthy" is an oversimplification at best and entirely wrong at worst. But this latest news took even me by surprise: One claim that I had accepted as credible (mea culpa) is that visceral fat--the kind that gives a person a potbelly--really is inherently unhealthy. Apparently, that conclusion is premature at best, definitely an oversimplification, and, once again, possibly entirely wrong:
http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2009/08/myth-of-unhealthy-belly-fat.html
-
It’s not science itself that we can’t trust, it’s the stuff that often becomes pop science and cults masquerading as science.
"As a scientist you are taught not to answer questions, but to question answers." — Anonymous
I pulled those from the article Lord J linked. Great stuff.
The article also reminded me of a semi-hot-blodded debate I had with someone about the Atkins diet. This person was making the argument that if a person loses a significant amount of body fat on Atkins (i.e. by eating pork rinds and sausage all day and inducing ketosis) they're automatically less likely to develop heart disease. But, I had to wonder how that was true, because it isn't visceral body fat that causes heart disease, it's accumulated fatty deposits and arterial decline in the very, very tiny vessels which feed the heart muscle itself. Are people who are being told to lose body fat in any way possible being put at risk if they go this route?
More food for thought, so to speak. Thank you J for bringing this back to my attention.
Edit: I just finished reading the last bit of the article, and it was still good, until:
How long will people continue to be frightened that their belly or having bad numbers or not eating "healthy" means they’re at risk for type 2 diabetes, heart disease and premature death?
Actually, diet change has so far been the only successful means of preventing and reversing type 2 diabetes and heart disease. It's unfortunate that she wanes toward the defeatist genetic view in the article, and ultimately neglects the substantial body of research into very low fat diets in this conclusion.
-
I present for your reading pleasure, The God Checker: http://www.godchecker.com
It is an interesting website that presents information regarding various gods from a whole bunch of traditions in an amusing-yet-valid format that makes it a great place to start searching for something along those lines. While Wikipedia at almost every turn offers better information (at least, when it offers any information), the format of this website makes it easier to just generally browse a mythological pantheon (which, I suppose, some might claim is a repetitive phrase ). I've found it particularly useful for finding gods that I've happened to forget the name of but have a vague recollection of some defining aspect (Khnum, in particular, which all I remembered was that he was an Egyptian god with a ram's head, identified by Herodotus as Zeus).
Be warned, however, wordplays and humorous takes on mythological events do abound.
-
I found this to be very interesting, being legally blind myself. While I'm not color blind, any breakthroughs in the medical or scientific field on vision gain my full attention.
Scientists Cured Color-Blindness in Monkeys. (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/09/090916-color-blind-gene-monkeys.html)
-
I myself am color blind with grey/green and blue/purple, which is more then most people suffer from when color blind. It was more then a hassle it made many school lessons a bitch and made complement peoples eyes very embarrassing, that I couldn't go to the US Air Force Academy.
-
Keb, that sounds an awful lot like Little Miss Sunshine.
-
Wow. Check out this recent image of Saturn. It's absolutely enormous, but if your computer can handle the size you might spend all morning looking at it.
http://ciclops.org/view/5773/The_Rite_of_Spring
I'd recommend the PNG version; it's larger in size but performs better. Don't bother with the half- and quarter-size versions; the downsizing spoils the image. This is really special stuff!
-
Let's hear it for free books on the internet!
I haven't yet read The Age of Reason, but I probably will at some point now that I've found it for free here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/thomas_paine/age_of_reason/
They have plenty of others at this "Secular Web", it looks like. I'll have to check out their Ingersoll selection as well. I'm already working on The Way of the Human Being and In Cold Blood, in addition to coding my butt off. So, this will have to wait.
Here's the rest of their selection:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/
http://www.infidels.org/library/
-
I saw a guy named Ken Burns the other night on The Colbert Report. He's just finished a documentary about America's national parks. The first episode (of six total) aired last night, and is now available to watch online:
http://video.pbs.org/video/1258704633/program/1072181584
You can also catch them each night this week on PBS.
I hope you'll watch this. I watched it myself, first, to be sure that I could confidently make a recommendation, and I am very enthusiastic about recommending this. I spent much of the first episode on the verge of tears. Burns' documentary is filled with that strange language that, on the surface, is trite and kitschy, but, upon further contemplation, is very meaningful and, usually, deeply true.
This episode (as the others that will follow) is two hours. Make the time!
And if your name is ZeaLitY: Try not to let the various religious references spoil your enjoyment. =)
-
J, thanks! I'm looking forward to watching this. The personal histories and relations entwined in the national parks have been of great interest to me for several years now. That places like the national parks are preserved and kept wild to greatest extent possible is invaluable to us, and sadly many do not have the opportunity to see and understand why this is so. Fortunately, I've seen many documentaries that have been capable of expanding this understanding, and I'm always glad to see more. It'd be better that everybody got to experience these and other natural wonders firsthand, but good documentaries also offer insight beyond what the immediate experience fosters.
Edit: I just finished watching the first episode, and this has to be, by far, the most informative documentary about the national parks I've ever seen. My favorite aspect of this episode was the depth with which they explored John Muir's passion and influence. I'd learned some about him in a couple of courses in college, but the course material neglected to mention that he would climb trees with the intent of riding out storms in them, among other things! Also, the fact that his thoughtfulness and deep connection with what empowered him was able to override the forces of rampant commercialism is so inspiring, and holds great significance for those who need such empowering forces to counter the overwhelmingly obtuse commercial culture which prevails today.
This leads me to think again about the Dubai article which Maggie posted, and J's response to it. I feel like the story of Yosemite and the story of Dubai are both a corollary a sad tendency of ours which is played out again and again. With the promise of money people will cast most basic human decency aside, save nothing for the most consummate human ideals and activities. The people who sought to exploit Yosemite were unable to grasp, or even to respect the sublime wonder which the park inspired in Muir. They would have entirely written off the prospect of that profound relationship as a joke, and if their way had prevailed the image of the park would have been forever cheapened. Muir's cathedral would have been lost to greed, and sad as that prospect is, in the face of a disaster like Dubai it would have constituted a mere blemish. Because of the good sense of so many who agreed with Muir that Yosemite has a greater worth than money can ever measure, at least one tragedy was prevented.
The outcome of the story of Yosemite made me reflect on my desire to see humanity's destination as illumination, as Z put it. I want to believe that we all have the capacity to recognize the profound good in ourselves, and in humanity. I want to believe that if we can see this goodness echoed in a relationship with a place like Yosemite, or in relationships with friends, or relationships with hobbies, the arts, or sciences, then we can use this to ground ourselves in a sense of goodness. I also want to believe that we all have the capacity to know that the cruel exploitation of human beings is evil, and that the senseless and rampant exploitation of nature is evil in the harm that it causes to our planet's inhabitants. I want to believe these things, because if we all have those capacities, then we also have the capacity to do as Muir and to see clearly the mess that our most base desires are making of our collective cathedral, so to speak, and to want to do something about it. The images and stories of Muir in his cathedral and of Jesus in the temple are so paramount right now, because these are the kinds of stories that people should be able to relate to and, I hope, feel empowered by.
I do, to some extent, believe that every human being has the capacities I mentioned above. Unfortunately, the actual ability to understand, on a personal level, the workings good and evil in the world is often obfuscated by the very forces which people desperately need grounding and clarity to counter. The more I think about these kinds of things, the more I realize just how gradual and arduous the overturning of such treacherous forces and institutions will likely be, and the more I realize that I agree with a very important point which J made in the Dubai thread. "'Life as we know it' is much more tenuous than it seems." With the wrong ideologies in power, much of the vast potential for human goodness that exists today could be gone in as little as a generation. That is a frightening though that I've had to contend with on most days of my life, just as a result of living in this simultaneously foreboding and auspicious epoch. I don't doubt that many others here have had to contend with it as well. It can be excruciatingly hard to face, and I understand the overwhelming temptation to write it off, but I'm learning more and more that to do so is a critical, and perhaps a deadly mistake.
I'm also learning that those who choose to accept this reality, to accept the horrendous human ability to throw away the invaluable in this world, and to accept that this ability has brought us yet again to a point where much good in the world could be lost forever -- those people are not alone. Perhaps we're alone in that the peril we face today is unimaginable, but we're not alone in spirit. The story of John Muir has reminded me that fact, and has reminded me of the great potential impact of anyone who is capable, as he was, of seeing the vast potential for goodness, and indeed the goodness, in this world. Indeed, this world needs as many people as possible, people with such heart and fervor. They may be all that saves us from going over the edge.
2nd Edit: I realized that unless you've watched the entire first episode, the particular story of John Muir and Yosemite to which I am referring will probably not be familiar. For a very brief overview of his connection to Yosemite, here is this Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Muir#California
Granted, that section of article probably sounds less than inspiring, but take the bit about his running out to greet the earthquake and expand upon that in your mind. Muir's connection with Yosemite was so deep that he would talk to its rocks, listen to its rivers, and make daring climbs up steep rock faces without proper climbing gear just to see its waterfalls from the other side. As I mentioned earlier, he would ride out storms in trees just to understand the "feeling" of a tree in a storm. All of this was his purposeful exploration into the wonder of nature which most of us will never understand on a level even half as deep. This was also how he came to know the great potential for beauty in nature, and in the connection between nature and human beings. I can barely imagine how alive he must have felt on any given day while he lived in Yosemite. That place was his life blood while he lived there, and perhaps it would make sense to more people here to say that Yosemite, to him, was akin to a soul mate.
He left the place eventually to write and to try to make others more aware of the importance of such natural wonders. I think I remember correctly in saying that it was at least 2, maybe 3 decades later that he went back to Yosemite. When he went back, he found that his life blood had been turned into a side show. Those who ran the tourist industry in the park would regularly send dynamite over the mountainside, and had carved enormous archways into some of the oldest trees on earth, just to encourage people to take certain walkways. In addition, profuse livestock and ranching was damaging the landscape greatly. The potential for profound connection with which he was familiar was all but gone, so he set out to save his "cathedral" (as he referred to it) by engaging the public. The public, apparently, petitioned congress enough so that Yosemite became a protected national park.
-
Thank you, Uboa. That was well-said, and if I have any discipline I shall craft a fitting response eventually.
For now, to all of you, the second episode of the documentary is out:
http://www.pbs.org/nationalparks/watch-video/#873
These will only be online for scarcely more than a week. I urge you to see them while you can! And, if your name is ZeaLitY, this is the "Teddy Roosevelt" episode. I dare say you would enjoy it.
-
(http://chronofan.com/Zeality/presidentbadass.png)
His name was President Badass.
-
Scientists unveil what is currently the oldest human ancestor, predating Australopithecus (http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_13461419?source=yahooNewsML&nclick_check=1)
-
I've been caught up in quite a bit, but I had to get on here for just a second to post this. It's a "remix" of Cosmos and Stephen Hawking's Universe, and simple as it may be it touches on deep appreciation for the human potential which Sagan envisioned, and a deep appreciation for these two scientists.
A Glorious Dawn (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSgiXGELjbc)
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Elliott
-
I am thrilled to have found an amazing, free language learning resource on the web.
http://www.livemocha.com/
I've as of yet only browsed some review lessons for Spanish, but even those lessons were surprisingly well streamlined for a free service! Also, the real powerhouse of this site, and something that I really look forward to exploring, is the social networking capability. Writing and speaking exercises that you complete on this site are actually critiqued by native speakers, and in turn you critique exercises for students who want to learn English, or any other language in which you are fluent. The site also offers other social networking services, such as the ability to "friend" users, the ability to maintain a basic profile, and I am guessing something similar to a Facebook or MySpace wall, or at least a messaging service. Within that kind of social networking setting I imagine the incentive to learn a language will be much greater. I can't wait to try it out!
The free content is excellent, but the site also does offer more for a $20/month subscription to courses. Paying the subscription fee apparently allows you to see more "in-depth" content such as overviews of lesson-related nuances, and also allows you to download audio lessons for MP3 players. Once I become comfortable with the site I will probably pay the $20/month subscription for intermediate Spanish to see if it is worth it.
-
http://www.slideshare.net/danroam/healthcare-napkins-all
An amazingly good explanation of health care reform... for being written on four napkins.
-
More of a useful link than a specifically "interesting" or "informative," though it certainly can open up those avenues.
http://scholar.google.com/
-
Whoa, Thought. I didn't quite know what that was, but then I ran a search on "Faust," and I got a bunch of Doctor Faust's.
Kickass.
-
http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20091116/sc_space/strongleonidmeteorshowerpeaksearlytuesdaymorning (http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20091116/sc_space/strongleonidmeteorshowerpeaksearlytuesdaymorning)
Meteor shower meteor shower! Finally! The last one I saw was right after BlizzCon 07, and we only got to see one good meteor. Oh well, at least I got to spend some time with my grandparents that night. Anyway everyone has to get up really early to watch this. UTunnels probably has the best seat!
-
Unless you're out of town, you're not going to get to see it. Tomorrow morning is supposed to be cloudy, windy, and raining. =/
On the plus side, these meteor showers occur annually. You can see the Leonids every year around mid-November as the Earth passes through the tail of a comet. There are also other significant, predictable meteor showers throughout the year, although the Leonids happen to be my favorite ever since I watched them on a (clear!) Seattle night some years ago from the Arboretum. Cold, though! Any clear night in Seattle in mid-November is guaranteed to be cold.
-
Now THIS one's important: http://www.heapsofhandbags.vpweb.com/ (http://www.heapsofhandbags.vpweb.com/)
For those in Washington, the home office is 12333 251st Ave SE, Monroe. Much better than shopping online.
That company is called Heaps of Handbags, which sells used purses, handbags and backpacks for pretty good prices. The best part? 50% of profits gets donated to various organizations working to fight human trafficking. Considering the amount of feminists here, I figured this would be the best place to pick up holiday gifts.
-
Last night watching an old TV show from the '70s, part of the episode's plot turned on the Bureau of Indian Affairs, whose function is probably what you would imagine from the name. I'd no recollection of ever having heard of it, so this afternoon I went to see when it had been dissolved or merged into some other governmental organ. To my surprise, it still exists (http://www.bia.gov/)! Sure, it went through as many leaders in the Bush years as it had in the previous 25 years combined, but it's still alive and kicking. Hrm.
Native Americans never integrated into the American mainstream like most minorities did. Partly, they were not allowed to do so. Partly, the special relationship between the U.S. federal government and the various tribes has disserved integration. The bottom line is that Native Americans are still some of the poorest people in the country, and are afflicted by crimes of poverty at a disproportionate rate. Other than the wiseguy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5xVRXLgLxw), and various local stories regarding to Native American issues here in Washington State, the whole area of Native American welfare seems to have fallen dormant as a national concern.
-
In regard to the Spirit rover comic in photo in WTF, have a news article: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/MRO/news/mro20100120.html (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/MRO/news/mro20100120.html)
The HiRISE team surveying Mars has a website up for the public to suggest locations on Mars for the telescope to survey. The general populace will finally get to have a hand in space exploration, and it'll be a great opportunity for everyone to study and learn more about our favourite red planet!
(hopefully one of the actual scientists or astronomers here will have a better time figuring out their website than I did)
EDIT: And for the more casual sky watchers, have the moon: http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20100129/sc_space/biggestandbrightestfullmoonof2010tonight (http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20100129/sc_space/biggestandbrightestfullmoonof2010tonight). It might be a bit hard for those of us in Washington to catch sight of it, but it will definitely present some great photo opportunities. If only I had a better camera!
-
Ah, I think this belongs here. I was just looking around the net on ways to integrate 3D elements into 2D animation, and I stumbled across this.
http://www.bspcn.com/2010/02/08/6-shockingly-evil-things-babies-are-capable-of/
XD It seems that we learn to lie BEFORE we learn to speak! And that "lying" seems to assist out development of creativity and intellect. It's "speaking the truth" that we are taught usually.
There's more, so check it out.
-
http://quicksilverscreen.com/
...
http://ipb.quicksilverscreen.com/lofiversion/index.php/t150010.html
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y32/dtey/nosebleed.gif)
-
http://vimeo.com/11075261
I have been tying shoes incorrectly all my life. Beginning at 8:15 in the video, you may see that you have been doing the same.
Also, the remaining eight minutes about shoe care is somewhat interesting . . . if I had shoes such as those to care for.
-
Very interesting!
-
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/25/sunday/main6430448.shtml?tag=stack
One of the interesting things about recent advances in neuroscience is that it seems to be slowly eroding the old division of "mind" and "body;" our "reason" is beginning to appear as something that is not always hampered by our emotions but on occasion aided by (though plenty of hoodwinking still goes on).
-
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100506/ts_afp/astronomyspaceherschelsatelliteeuropestars
The rate of star-birth has significantly slowed... but, on the up side, due to new tech we are able to discover this and gain a better understanding of life, the universe, and everything.
-
Migrating birds clog the weather radar!
http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2010/05/there-is-bird-in-my-radar.html
This is interesting, and I didn't know a thing about it until now. The idea is that migrating birds can show up on weather radar during clear weather; they show up so well that their migrations can be tracked.
-
Is the British Banger Dangerous? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8697122.stm)
Besiders learning that a "banger" means sausage, that article is particularly interesting for it discussion on statistics. And the crazy thing is that even 42% might not be statistically significant, depending on the margin of error.
-
It doesn't sound like the claim about supposed health effects of eating the extra sausage has been separated out from the underlying statistics. Some of the population already eats sausage; obviously whatever health effects do exist, if any, will already manifest in the current rates! For these raw numbers to apply, the entire population would have to start eating an extra sausage a day on top of whatever they already have--and the claims about sausage would have to be correct (and you can expect I have my reservations).
-
A rather pleasurable article on the pleasures of the imagination: http://chronicle.com/article/The-Pleasures-of-Imagination/65678
I'd highly recommend this for anyone who fancies themselves an entertainer of some description.
-
Ah, you had me excited for a minute, there, Thought! But it turns out that they lumped together abstract imagination with things like watching television and playing video games--which ruined the conclusions. But, for a minute there, I had cause to wonder whether my observations all these years had been incorrect, whether the kind of daydreaming I do is in fact a commonplace activity among people from all walks of life. Most people seem to go out of their way to avoid having to spend time with their own minds; it was gratifying to consider, for a minute, that that might not actually be true.
-
This is the latest ranking of the U.S. presidents:
http://www.siena.edu/uploadedfiles/home/parents_and_community/community_page/sri/independent_research/Presidents%202010%20Rank%20by%20Category.pdf
What do you all think? I, personally, would keep FDR at number one, move Washington up to number two, keep Lincoln at number three, have Teddy Roosevelt trade places with Washington at number four, and keep Jefferson and number five to round out the top five.
Elsewhere on the list, I'd move Nixon up considerably higher than 30th place due to Vietnam and all the institution-building he approved. Reagan needs to come down a few notches, probably to the mid-twenties, owing to his incredible destructiveness toward our social fabric. Truman deserves his high ranking. Wilson should come down a couple of notches, but is in the right neighborhood. Clinton should drop a number of notches, as history is beginning to reflect that he was more of a placeholder president than anything else; his only key accomplishment was eliminating the deficit, but that only happened because the dotcom boom came along at exactly the right moment.
Dubya deserves his place in the bottom five. Time will tell if he can keep his spot as fifth worst, or if he'll need to be downgraded to an even worser president. I'm pretty confident that he was a worse president than Buchanan (who failed to stop the Civil War, which by that point was probably unstoppable anyway). He's probably on par with Harding. Johnson and Pierce, I think, were worse. If Dubya had come along during a period of tremendous national instability (a la the Civil War or the Great Depression), I think he could easily have destroyed the nation.
It's too early to rank Obama coherently. He's ranked fifteenth, no doubt because of the major legislation he has passed through Congress and the economic depression he has thus far averted. We'll see what comes.
The crosstabs are interesting too. I agree that Jefferson deserves the spot for top intelligence. Buchanan should probably get 42 on luck (and keeping Hoover at 43 is a good call). I doubt that Lincoln deserves second place for imagination. Clinton's court appointments were pretty good; only my lack of knowledge of past court appointments makes it infeasible for me to say if he deserves the number 11 spot. Kennedy deserves his high communication rating. Obama does not deserve nearly so high a risk-taking rating.
-
It seems like on almost every point I'd argue them over that list. For example, William Harrison is clearly more unlucky than Hoover (though both are phenomenally more unlucky than almost any other presidents). Hoover at least had a full term; Harrison died right quick. Hoover was unlucky to be blamed as he is, but Harrison was more unlucky to have no even had the chance to be blamed for the problems of the nation.
It looks like this was a public opinion survey; is that right, Josh?
-
It was a survey of 238 presidential scholars at universities around the country.
-
Gel can help reduce the infection rate of HIV (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-10691353)
-
This article on Israel vs. Iran is very interesting, and the author hits many key points and presents what appears to be an informative summary of the situation. I'm skeptical of its accuracy, after being burned one too many times by seemingly knowledgeable news reports and features, but it is a comprehensive enough article that it's worth reading even without taking away its prediction for the coming year. Be sure to read all six pages of the article.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/09/the-point-of-no-return/8186/1/
I myself took away two urgent ideas from this article.
First, the global supremacy of the United States is in rapid decline and the West as a whole continues to be caught in a devastating mindset of appeasement and denial. The key quote of the entire article is "Bad things tend to get worse if they’re not challenged early." We're in a very dangerous situation now, with regard to the emergence of the Islamic world. Western conservatism is sucking all of the oxygen out of Western liberalism's ability to recognize and oppose religious fundamentalism outside of the Christian version.
Second, we had better become the best friends in the world to the Chinese. We're either going to be their partners or their antagonists, and it's gonna become their world if it doesn't become theirs and ours together. If we're with the Chinese against Islam, secular humanism wins. If we're against Islam sanctioned (even tacitly) by the Chinese, all bets are off. And the Chinese don't care; they're in it for themselves...like we used to be.
I think the smart thing for America to do would be to grant China the respect it craves, by essentially allowing it self-determination in its area of the world, in exchange for increased cooperation and partnership on every front possible and imaginable.
As for Iran, this is a difficult situation. The best outcome would be for the Iranian people to overthrow their government. Giving them the opportunity should be Israel's goal and America's. The second best outcome, amazingly, would seem to be an American military attack on Iran's nuclear program. I am astonished that that would be the second best outcome, but such is the reality of an intractable enemy. The problem here is that an American preemptive military attack would poison the Obama administration in the eyes of the American left. Despite what Obama's people said in the article, I don't think he's got the brass to carry it out. If only the American public were less shortsighted.
-
Interesting!
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/twisted-physics-top-findings-100401.html
-
"Zelda Reorchestrated," or ZREO, is a group which has showered love and relevance upon the incredible soundtracks of the Zelda series by arranging them for orchestra. Though nearly all of these orchestrations are synthesizer compositions rather than live performances, with the usual commensurate reductions in quality and liveliness, there are enough gems in this collection that it becomes prohibitive for me to name them all--although I can't help but mention "The Great Sea Is Cursed," "Dark World Palace" (which has redeemed the piece in my eyes), and "Opening Demo" in the Majora's Mask volume. Check ZREO out for yourself:
http://www.zreomusic.com/listen
By indications on YouTube, some of ZREO's music has made the rounds, but anonymously, with ZREO's official page garnering far fewer views and relatively few of the third party postings giving credit to ZREO. You're likely to hear many orchestrations of the Zelda series that you've never heard before, and that's reason enough to set aside some time. =)
-
If you want to see James Horner talk about the score to Star Trek II, you can see that here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-8D6j5LPho
If you want to see a (much larger) documentary on the music of The Empire Strikes Back, and the work of John Williams generally, you can see the ultra-rare special here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGsbKZnaT8E
If you want to hear the isolated score of the Star Wars films, you may do so here:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=FilmTracks#p/u
If you want to hear the isolated score of the Star Trek films, that's here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/SeanMaccaUK#p/u
And if you want to hear William Shatner reprise his famous "KHAAAAAN!!" you can find it here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUrCB31SPv0
-
There's some interesting tidbits in this economy-themed article (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/No-Jobs-Young-Graduates-Make-nytimes-217264902.html?x=0) that could be useful to folks here. In particular, I wanted to point out the Young Entrepreneur Council (http://www.nevergetarealjob.com/council/) and the Gen Y Fund. (http://www.thegenyfund.com/) That latter isn't active yet, but it'll be interesting to follow in 2011 and see where it goes.
-
Subnormality did it again (http://www.viruscomix.com/page532.html) recently with a great allegory of individual maturation. I especially love that goat far off on the side of the mountain: "Is built for climbing."
That says it all.
-
The two that touch me deeply are "Died Happy: Won the War," and "Is Afraid... But Does it Anyway."
-
Some computer science students introduce kids to Computer Science... without any computers.
[youtube]VpDDPWVn5-Q[/youtube]
-
Nice. Very accessible.
-
XDDD I kinda enjoyed that video! At the "Super fun mat" thingy I couldn't help noticing the unintentional philosophy there; competitions are healthy, but if you want to know where you're going and go forward fast make sure nobody is left behind. We often compare ourselves to others, after all. We're a society.
-
XDDD I kinda enjoyed that video! At the "Super fun mat" thingy I couldn't help noticing the unintentional philosophy there; competitions are healthy, but if you want to know where you're going and go forward fast make sure nobody is left behind. We often compare ourselves to others, after all. We're a society.
With that mindset, you're sure to win any reality show contest you ever decide to join. Please don't though, those shows are horrible.
-
Another planet found! Possibility to be in hospitable zone! :D And it's WAY NEARER than Gliese!
http://www.sify.com/news/nasa-discovers-first-rocky-planet-outside-solar-system-news-national-lblmAlideag.html?ref=consumers
Yup! It's Kepler-10b.
-
Nice to see some scientific confirmation on something most everyone takes as a given. It seems unlikely in the extreme that there wouldn't be rocky planets outside our star-system.
But I would be more impressed if we would, you know, actually take some steps to send men and women to other planets. No one has so much as set foot on the moon since the year I was born, and that is sad!
-
Liquid Lens? Did somebody say Lenses made of Liquid?
http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/13/researchers-develop-liquid-pistons-for-cameras-medical-use/
-
Scientists trying to clone, resurrect extinct mammoth
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/17/scientists-trying-to-clone-resurrect-extinct-mammoth/?hpt=T2
Pretty interestin'.
-
Wow! There has been debates or practices of cloning of a Mammoth for ages now, but I wonder if they've got the technology today to fulfill this task.
Psst! Did you know that James Cameron was thinking of making a Spiderman movie? Here's the script! (http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/s/spider-man-scriptment.html)
-
Pretty sure that script is over ten years old. Wikipedia has the full story. They are making a new spider man, though, with the "best friend" from the social network/the young guy from dr parnassus.
-
http://www.gizmag.com/book-saver-scanner-from-ion-unveiled/17532/
This would be really neat to have, as well as being more efficient than a scanner. But the comments on that page interest me. Would this machine really mess up publishers that badly?
-
Haha yeah I saw that one on my RSS. Quite fascinating! Unfortunately not many people are happy with it, especially for the price and the "look". OCR is still a complicated process regarding formatting.
-
Yeah, so you don't have to disassemble a book to get better scan quality. >_>
-
Heard something on the news about a car detecting whether or not you're drunk to prevent drunk drivers from driving. In other words, the car wont function if you're drunk. (someone stole my idea! )
-
Liberalism is at its most pathetic when it declares that conservatism isn't doing well enough (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/science/08tier.html). But that is exactly what a group of psychologists at the Society for Personality and Social Psychology declared at the organization's recent convention. They are upset because most psychologists are liberal, and most of the rest are either moderate or nonpolitical. Only a few are conservative. The group's complaint, as chronicled in the New York Times, is that psychology has a double standard:
“Anywhere in the world that social psychologists see women or minorities underrepresented by a factor of two or three, our minds jump to discrimination as the explanation,” said Dr. Haidt, who called himself a longtime liberal turned centrist. “But when we find out that conservatives are underrepresented among us by a factor of more than 100, suddenly everyone finds it quite easy to generate alternate explanations.”
Dr. Haidt thinks the reason for this disparity is indeed discrimination:
Dr. Haidt (pronounced height) told the audience that he had been corresponding with a couple of non-liberal graduate students in social psychology whose experiences reminded him of closeted gay students in the 1980s. He quoted — anonymously — from their e-mails describing how they hid their feelings when colleagues made political small talk and jokes predicated on the assumption that everyone was a liberal.
“I consider myself very middle-of-the-road politically: a social liberal but fiscal conservative. Nonetheless, I avoid the topic of politics around work,” one student wrote. “Given what I’ve read of the literature, I am certain any research I conducted in political psychology would provide contrary findings and, therefore, go unpublished. Although I think I could make a substantial contribution to the knowledge base, and would be excited to do so, I will not.”
Dr. Haidt, himself an ex-liberal who nevertheless clings to one of liberalism's worst qualities—the conviction that nobody is wrong—can be commended for pointing out that conservatives are underrepresented in psychology, and hypothesizing that discrimination is to blame. That's a valid observation and a legitimate hypothesis. But his approach is grossly unscientific. If he thinks he's proving his case by quoting a couple of anonymous e-mails from conservative students who claim they will not pursue a career in psychology because they have preemptively declared what the conclusions of their research would be and believe that their results would be ignored because of political bias (oh, irony!), then he's not fit to be called a “doctor.”
What's even more outlandish is the elaborate theory he has constructed on the basis of his flimsy data:
“The fight for civil rights and against racism became the sacred cause unifying the left throughout American society, and within the academy,” he said, arguing that this shared morality both “binds and blinds.”
“If a group circles around sacred values, they will evolve into a tribal-moral community,” he said. “They’ll embrace science whenever it supports their sacred values, but they’ll ditch it or distort it as soon as it threatens a sacred value.”
What he's saying is that conservatives have been excluded from the psychology community because liberals have transformed the culture from scientific to moralistic, and the operative morals are liberal-oriented.
It's true that methodological rigor isn't nearly as sharp in the social sciences as in the physical sciences. I remember that back from my college days, and have observed it in the years since when I read in the news about social science research studies. And, given that the social sciences are indeed overwhelmingly liberal at the professional level, it's not unreasonable to suspect that mores and folkways have contributed to the dilution of scientific value in the research output of these fields. So, Haidt's theory isn't completely unreasonable. But is this really a problem of liberalism shutting out conservatism?
That's much harder to say. Haidt's theory, reasonable or not, doesn't follow from his anecdotal data. He's trying to make the case that conservatives are underrepresented in psychology as the result of liberal narrow-mindedness. To prove something like that would require far more than a few disgruntled conservatives who claim they chose not to pursue a career in psychology because of all those damn liberals—claims which have to be taken skeptically because they carry a preexisting political bias of their own. Nay, to prove such a thing would require consistent documentation of explicitly pejorative anti-conservative bias in areas of the field such as hiring and tenure, research grants, and journal publication. That's a very difficult burden of proof, but warranted: It's a very broad accusation.
In his rush to vilify the culture of the psychology community, Haidt does not seem to have accounted for one very important distinction which can explain the whole thing uncontroversially: Conservative ideas make you stupid. These ideas self-select individuals away from careers whose physical work challenges the conservative worldview. This is especially noticeable in the realm of science, where conservatives are underrepresented just about everywhere, which tells you something about the intellectual illegitimacy of the modern conservative movement.
To the extent there is establishment-liberal involvement in the underrepresentation of conservatives in psychology, only some of it can be the result of the kind of malicious discrimination Haidt bemoans. Conservatism is an ideological construct. That means it can be discriminated against in two ways: discrimination against conservative people and organizations, and discrimination against conservative ideas. The former mode of discrimination is pejorative (although not always unfounded, when the discrimination is evaluative rather than assumptive), but the latter mode is judicious (and rarely inappropriate). Suppose that Haidt's anonymous student had chosen to pursue a career in psychology. With statements like “Given what I’ve read of the literature, I am certain any research I conducted in political psychology would provide contrary findings and, therefore, go unpublished,” how far do you think the student would have gotten before being pulled aside by an authority figure and told that that is not a scientific mindset? The conservatives who can learn this lesson before it spoils their career prospects, may go on to have careers in that field. The conservatives who won't learn that lesson, don't generally advance. This holds true for non-conservatives as well, to the extent any ideology can corrupt a scientist's scientific mindset, itself to the extent that the scientific community hierarchy is merit-based.
Now, I do have to discuss a couple of points. First, it isn't to be taken for granted at “the scientific community hierarchy is merit-based.” Haidt's whole point is that it isn't merit-based, because it's scrunching conservatives. Even though he is almost certainly wrong in his specific conclusion, his wrongness doesn't prove that the meritocracy is firmly in control. In the nooks and crannies where meritocracy is weak, the dominant culture will push out the rest, and this leaves room for isolated climates of malicious anti-conservative discrimination to occur, simply because conservatives are so outnumbered. The same applies to all minority groups, such as those who adhere to fringe (but not discredited) schools of psychological thinking. This kind of unjustifiable discrimination ought to be stamped out so that conservatives who do ethical work can build a career in the field like anyone else.
Second, we also have to consider that “conservatism” is a valid source of what I might call “minority malaise.” Being raised conservative will greatly disadvantage a person in many ways, and that often includes intellectual starvation. Some conservatives are too bull-headed to get into psychology, which is what I've discussed so far, but others are so thoroughly disenfranchised in life that they get to the point where they don't have the brains, the aspiration, the money, or the circumstances to pursue a professional career. In this way, conservatives in science are like blacks generally: Many are held back by their own circumstances. (Incidentally, the cause of those circumstances is usually conservatism itself, and the religion that goes with it, which is where the analogy with blacks ends.)
Haidt, in broaching the issue of conservative underrepresentation in psychology, could have taken the opportunity to truly explore the reality of it. Instead, he seemed interested only in pursuing a political agenda. If you read on in that NY Times article, you'll find that Haidt's views suggest he is a bigot of some stripe. I've seen his type before: the dogmatist who has a change of philosophy and becomes an evangelist.
There's something else to be said about the specter of conservative affirmative action in science. If we bring more conservatives into the field, without regard to their fitness as scientists, we're going to do unto the “Ivory Tower” what has already come to pass for “Main Street”: Science will be hopelessly and endlessly distracted into meaningless wars of conservative aggression. Not only will this slow the pace of scientific progress. It will threaten the institution of science itself. Conservatives don't buy into all of this “nobody is wrong” malarkey. They fight to win. Give them an opening in the scientific community, and they will pollute it with their crap just like they have done with society in general. Modern conservatism asserts that science is only valid when it is a tool of conservatism. Conservatism could care less that science is actually a means to discovery.
Do you think I am exaggerating? The sweet and sour finish to this story is that, when I got to the bottom of the article, the NY Times' automatic article suggestion box recommended a story about how only 28 percent of biology teachers teach evolution in a scientifically disinterested way (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/science/08creationism.html).
-
As a side note, there is no indication in the linked article that Haidt was giving a presentation on research. It is quite common for science conferences to have two types of presentations: those based on actual research and those based on random musings. Given the context, it seems that Haidt was giving the latte. Oddly enough, these sort of speeches are often the biggest single draw for such conferences.
Conservative ideas make you stupid.
I am curious as to if you are aware of any research into this matter, apart from Satoshi Kanazawa's 2010 article in Social Psychology Quarterly?
Additionally, given Geraint Rees's December 2010 article on differences within the Conservative and Liberal brain, is it that Conservatives are stupider than if they were Liberals, or might it be that they are less successful in academia for the simple reason that the portions of the brain associated with assessing risk and danger are enhanced (resulting in a decreased likelihood of putting forward new and original ideas, which are the bread and butter of the academic world)?
-
As a side note, there is no indication in the linked article that Haidt was giving a presentation on research. It is quite common for science conferences to have two types of presentations: those based on actual research and those based on random musings.
I didn't mean to imply the contrary. I assumed it was a policy presentation rather than a research presentation. His sloppy justification in support of his position is not just a work of bad methodology; it's the makings of bad policy.
Conservative ideas make you stupid.
I am curious as to if you are aware of any research into this matter, apart from Satoshi Kanazawa's 2010 article in Social Psychology Quarterly?
I'd be curious to see such research, too. My pithy assessment about the effect of conservative ideas is an observational given, demonstrable through any number of specific examples (including the story about biology teachers I linked), but a rigorous inquiry and an impartial data set would be far preferable, as these would remove the audience from any onus of having to trust in my judgment.
Additionally, given Geraint Rees's December 2010 article on differences within the Conservative and Liberal brain, is it that Conservatives are stupider than if they were Liberals, or might it be that they are less successful in academia for the simple reason that the portions of the brain associated with assessing risk and danger are enhanced (resulting in a decreased likelihood of putting forward new and original ideas, which are the bread and butter of the academic world)?
I remember reading about that. I am skeptical that this correlation is as meaningful a source of political disparity as it might seem, if only because such straight lines between large-scale brain structure and cognitive behavior are as-yet uncommon. To answer your question, I don't think that conservatives would necessarily be smarter if they were liberals. I deal with no end of liberals who are good on the issues but are as apparently stupid and petty as their right-wing counterparts. It seems more a matter of circumstance that a stupid person will be more liberal or conservative--a point explained nicely by the glaring flaws of any model which supposes that liberalism and conservatism are necessarily poles on the same axis, or that said axis is equally descriptive of all individuals' philosophical orientation. (In other words, it doesn't necessarily make sense to evaluate a conservative as a non-liberal and vice versa.)
What does happen is that conservative political views, at least by contemporary American conventions, have a way of discouraging inquiry. If two identical people are respectively given a liberal and a conservative notion, the liberal one being representative of reality and the conservative one not--but I repeat myself--the second person will be stupider than the first. This illustrates that intelligence is not only a product of cognitive ability, but of the knowledge base as well.
Your "or" option is not exclusive with regard to the first one, and again I'm skeptical of making the kind of generalization you suggest, especially since I am not competent to say whether the possibility is accurate or not. Indeed, my intuitive reaction is to disagree with a broad characterization of conservatives as more risk-averse than liberals.
It merits mention that I don't equate liberalism with "correct" and conservatism with "incorrect." The present alignment of those two sets of variables is, in my view, mainly circumstantial.
-
Ah, sorry. Since you noted that his stance was grossly unscientific, I thought you had been under the impression that he was attempting to be scientific.
Regarding conservative risk aversion, my suggestion wasn't based entirely on that study (the study just fit nicely in with it). Perhaps it might be my own bias, but it seems that "untried," "untested," and other such words or phrases pepper conservative attacks against liberal ideas. In the mouth of a conservative, "social experiment" is essentially a slander. This is added to my observation that in order for an ideology to be palpable to conservatives, it must be presented as not a new idea but rather one from time immemorial (the Tea Party, for example, has the motto of taking back America, despite that as far as I can tell, America never was where they want to take it and thus can't be taken back there; likewise with strong concordists/young earth creationists). And then there are my own experiences of being more conservative (with my move towards the center coinciding with personal changes making me more willing to take risks). Anywho, this isn't meant as a definitive argument but hopefully it is interesting enough to keep in mind.
I had edited something into my previous post mere seconds before you replied, so I thought I would move it here instead:
A little fun something that was pointed out to me, Daniel Moynihan, though listed in that article as someone who has suffered under academic oppression (despite being a Democrat), had a rather distinguished academic career: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Patrick_Moynihan#Career_as_scholar
-
A fascinating view. I can't say it fits with my own, and that's interesting since you're closer to conservatism and conservative culture than I am (present geopositions notwithstanding). I do see conservatives claim the mantle of traditionalism--it's how many like to identify themselves--but I don't connect that to risk-aversion.
Perhaps I owe the matter some further thought. :twisted:
-
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/documentary-minecraft/710788?type=flv
It's a fascinating documentary on Minecraft, or more specifally the growth of an independent gaming company. These guys are in the Springtime of Youth. I think we can learn from this.
-
"Printing" skin and possibly eventually printing human organs: http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/02/hot-off-the-presses-new-skin-for.html?ref=hp
The problem with the development with homegrown replacement organs has so far been getting the cells to grow in the proper structures. It sounds like this printing process might have a way to overcome those limitations. I suppose it could also be used to "print" edible meat: currently the single-cell sheets of lab-meat aren't very appealing. Of course, currently it requires taking embryonic fluid from cows in order to stimulate cells to grow, so there is a ways to go before we get cattle-less meat.
-
Ah, so before we can get to the replicator stage, food will come out of printers. Works for me!
I just hope research into these advances are getting needed funding. Really worried about what the recession's done on that front...
Say, I wonder if there's any site that aggregates funding status of social and scientific projects, and lets donors contribute via a Paypal-like system? Sort of a one-stop shop for donations toward human progress. That would be mighty informative and useful, I reckon.
-
While that would be an interesting idea (to have donations for science), I am not aware of anything like that for biomedical science.
While this isn't an aggregate site, you might be interested to see this chart: http://www.chronocompendium.com/Forums/index.php/topic,7247.msg201815.html#msg201815
-
Your link is probably not correct!
-
You are probably correct!
Here is the real link: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1305
-
Here is the real link: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1305
Ah, yes, I've turned to that chart on several occasions. However, its accuracy leaves something to be desired. For instance, recalling a recent discussion about government spending, I invite you to find the more than $100 billion in annual federal student financial aid anywhere on that chart. (My guess is that it falls under "Stuff.") For the purposes of demonstrating federal spending on research, I am hesitant to accept its figures, although I would be very surprised if it is not qualitatively accurate in highlighting the grossly small share of research spending with regard to overall spending.
It would be fascinating if, say, every tenth dollar was spent on research and development. Suppose every citizen were connected to some kind of system to tell them if their questions have already been investigated somewhere, and if so where, and if not, or if to an unsatisfactory extent, then to afford them an opportunity to win a research grant (possibly to be conducted with the assistance of specialized research teams, as necessary).
-
@Faust: I had forgotten about RePORTER: http://projectreporter.nih.gov/reporter.cfm
While still not an aggregate site, it does allow you to search for various biomedical research projects, both active and past, provided that they are being funded through the NIH. Thus, it can give you an idea how how much funding it being devoted to, say, anemia (assuming you don't mind wading through all that information).
@J, Fair enough, but like any presentation of information, one needs to consider who created it and what it was for. In this case, it was created by a former researcher to illustrate the funding for research. As far as the legibility of the requested information, that still seems best. While it might be nice if financial aid was included in that, in this context that is unnecessary.
Regarding its information, insofar as I am familiar with the numbers, it looks generally correct (though it is clear that rounding is involved). Look at the NIH funding information it presents (which is from 2009) with this chart for 2010 (http://www.report.nih.gov/nihdatabook/charts/Default.aspx?chartId=5&catId=1&showm=Y). There is about a one billion dollar difference total, but individual figures (such as research centers) match up well enough.
-
Thanks for the heads-up on the NIH site Thought! I guess what I'd consider ideal is something filled with those donation goal bars that gradually fill up, like Wikipedia runs for its fundraising, or what the Howard Dean campaign did back in 2004. But I can use this to satisfy a bit of my curiosity, once I figure out how to use the form, hoh hoh!
-
Planned Solar Thermal Power Plant Projects Besieged by Environmentalists and Native Americans (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/business/energy-environment/24solar.html?hpw=&pagewanted=all)
Solar thermal power plants use parabolic mirrors to focus incredible amounts of solar energy on narrow tubes of liquid. The liquid becomes superheated and is used to boil water, creating steam that turns generator turbines and produces electricity. This is in contrast to solar photovoltaic power plants (and solar "panels" as you know them), which uses special materials to generate electricity directly from sunlight.
The New York Times article highlights a growing trend of environmentalist opposition to solar power, with Native American opposition thrown in for good measure. That raises an important question: Where the hell are we supposed to get our electrical power from?
Ten years ago, market dynamics were such, and the composition of the government was such, that the nascent solar thermal power plant industry had been stagnated for decades, with no new construction and only limited existing plants. Coal and especially natural gas were more profitable at the time, and the technologies for those kinds of power plants were mature and cost effective.
That changed over the decade, and suddenly the industry revived. Huge new solar power plants were going to be built, lending critical new generating capacity to California and the Western Power Grid generally. Vast tracts of open desert land were ripe for development, and it is already technologically plausible that we could achieve all of our power needs in the west through the construction solar power plant stations. I don't even mean all new needs; I mean we could shut down every other power generating plant and machine in the West and run only on solar power. It would be expensive, but the technology to do it already exists, an would become cheaper with maturation and economies of scale. The land and resources are also available. Water would be the limiting factor, and we could fix that with minor reductions to the agricultural water supply, or new waterworks projects.
Solar power is as green as energy production can get. The makeup of a solar power plant is stuff like glass and metal. There is no fossil fuel required except that to carry out the mining and refining operations to build the plant. Greenhouse gas emissions would be limited to the water steam that escapes the plant, and that could be recaptured if desired.
Also, the amount of empty land there is hard to appreciate unless you have seen it in person. Can you spot the solar power plants in this picture (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=35.003003,-117.230988&spn=0.605191,1.875916&t=k&z=10)? The complaints about threats to wildlife are almost completely bogus. The most sensitive areas can be avoided for development. Solar power stations can be interspersed with areas of empty land. There's plenty of it.
This is a clear case of calcification in the environmentalist lobby; these people know nothing else than to oppose construction projects. Given the alternatives of more fossil fuel power plants, and their beloved nuclear fission power plants, I am aghast that environmentalists are suing to prevent these solar plants from being built. And, so far, they're winning. That, I think, is an artifact of environmentalist excess in the State of California.
The Native American opposition is one of opportunism. Money and land is at stake, and the tribes want their cut. They could be afforded their fair share. They could even be invited into the development process. In any case, this opposition is less significant than the environmentalist opposition.
I grew up in the Mojave Desert and have seen one of these power plants from the inside. This, along with nuclear fission power and to a lesser extent hydroelectric power, is the primary baseload answer to our power generation needs in the aftermath of the coal era. These plants are more efficient in both land and cost than solar photovoltaic plants, and they can be any size. They can be built to produce electricity with the cycle of the sun, thus paralleling the peak afternoon electrical demand which is a big deal in California. Or they can be built to produce electricity around the clock, through the use of heat reservoirs that introduce inefficiencies but are reliable enough to be practical.
I am aghast that environmentalists are not the number one supporters of these projects. As an environmentalist myself, I condemn, reject, and denounce their narrow-mindedness.
-
Planned Solar Thermal Power Plant Projects Besieged by Environmentalists and Native Americans (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/business/energy-environment/24solar.html?hpw=&pagewanted=all)
Solar thermal power plants use parabolic mirrors to focus incredible amounts of solar energy on narrow tubes of liquid. The liquid becomes superheated and is used to boil water, creating steam that turns generator turbines and produces electricity. This is in contrast to solar photovoltaic power plants (and solar "panels" as you know them), which uses special materials to generate electricity directly from sunlight.
The New York Times article highlights a growing trend of environmentalist opposition to solar power, with Native American opposition thrown in for good measure. That raises an important question: Where the hell are we supposed to get our electrical power from?
Ten years ago, market dynamics were such, and the composition of the government was such, that the nascent solar thermal power plant industry had been stagnated for decades, with no new construction and only limited existing plants. Coal and especially natural gas were more profitable at the time, and the technologies for those kinds of power plants were mature and cost effective.
That changed over the decade, and suddenly the industry revived. Huge new solar power plants were going to be built, lending critical new generating capacity to California and the Western Power Grid generally. Vast tracts of open desert land were ripe for development, and it is already technologically plausible that we could achieve all of our power needs in the west through the construction solar power plant stations. I don't even mean all new needs; I mean we could shut down every other power generating plant and machine in the West and run only on solar power. It would be expensive, but the technology to do it already exists, an would become cheaper with maturation and economies of scale. The land and resources are also available. Water would be the limiting factor, and we could fix that with minor reductions to the agricultural water supply, or new waterworks projects.
Solar power is as green as energy production can get. The makeup of a solar power plant is stuff like glass and metal. There is no fossil fuel required except that to carry out the mining and refining operations to build the plant. Greenhouse gas emissions would be limited to the water steam that escapes the plant, and that could be recaptured if desired.
Also, the amount of empty land there is hard to appreciate unless you have seen it in person. Can you spot the solar power plants in this picture (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=35.003003,-117.230988&spn=0.605191,1.875916&t=k&z=10)? The complaints about threats to wildlife are almost completely bogus. The most sensitive areas can be avoided for development. Solar power stations can be interspersed with areas of empty land. There's plenty of it.
This is a clear case of calcification in the environmentalist lobby; these people know nothing else than to oppose construction projects. Given the alternatives of more fossil fuel power plants, and their beloved nuclear fission power plants, I am aghast that environmentalists are suing to prevent these solar plants from being built. And, so far, they're winning. That, I think, is an artifact of environmentalist excess in the State of California.
The Native American opposition is one of opportunism. Money and land is at stake, and the tribes want their cut. They could be afforded their fair share. They could even be invited into the development process. In any case, this opposition is less significant than the environmentalist opposition.
I grew up in the Mojave Desert and have seen one of these power plants from the inside. This, along with nuclear fission power and to a lesser extent hydroelectric power, is the primary baseload answer to our power generation needs in the aftermath of the coal era. These plants are more efficient in both land and cost than solar photovoltaic plants, and they can be any size. They can be built to produce electricity with the cycle of the sun, thus paralleling the peak afternoon electrical demand which is a big deal in California. Or they can be built to produce electricity around the clock, through the use of heat reservoirs that introduce inefficiencies but are reliable enough to be practical.
I am aghast that environmentalists are not the number one supporters of these projects. As an environmentalist myself, I condemn, reject, and denounce their narrow-mindedness.
This is pretty shocking. You just can't win with some people. It's like they can't see the big picture.
At this rate, we'll be engulfed in a world-wide nuclear conflict over the remaining fossil fuel resources before we ever reach any sort of energy independence through nuclear power or renewable energy sources, especially since our food production mostly relies on heavy fossil fuel usage.
-
Supermoon, folks! Supermoon! (http://in.news.yahoo.com/blogs/geewhiz/supermoon-may-cause-natural-disasters-next-week-20110309-020911-225.html)
Also, Dalai Lama steps down. China thinks its a trick. (http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/Dalai-Lama-to-Step-Down-as-Tibetan-Political-Leader-117724594.html)
Another useful thing (for me, anywhos). Spending time at the Compendium has taught me a lot (and I really mean A LOT!!), which most forums often don't, I guess. Recently I learned a phrase called "One-Up you" exists on the internet.
-
http://www.cracked.com/blog/chrono-trigger-2-benders-time-trippers-balls/ (http://www.cracked.com/blog/chrono-trigger-2-benders-time-trippers-balls/)
I thought it was interesting, albeit not informative. Maybe this thread needs to be changed to "The interesting and/or informative links and resources thread." :lol:
Yep. I got a laugh out of it.
-
I found this study on gendered responses to offers of casual sex, and it's just awesome.
http://www.miller-mccune.com/culture-society/casual-sex-men-women-not-so-different-after-all-28451/ (http://www.miller-mccune.com/culture-society/casual-sex-men-women-not-so-different-after-all-28451/)
I love this link for two reasons:
1. It supports the Pleasure Theory, which proposes that human beings are motivated by pleasure and biology tends to take care of itself in the process --- opposed to the "just so" stories of evolutionary psychology, which try to codify human behavior according to abstract motivations based on natural selection. (Full Disclosure: I really loathe evolutionary psychology. I think it is sloppy science and more often than not used to justify personal bias. It is a raving leviathan of a pet peeve, however, so I may be overlooking something in my zeal to KILL IT DEAD.)
2. It demolishes long-held stereotypes based on gender. Always fun to see that happen! And it demolishes these stereotypes by pointing out the very obvious fact that we are still dealing with plenty of entrenched sexism. The conclusions of this study, if correct, put a lot of the problems of sexuality in a hopeful light: they are largely cultural, and as such fixable.
-
That is a fascinating development, Syna. It undermines an almost universally held belief in this society that males want attractive bodies while females want powerful providers--a maddening dichotomy that I have always met with suspicion. On the other hand, I find myself so enthusiastic to support these new study findings that I think some skepticism in that direction is warranted too. I would like to see more research into the matter. And the end of the article provides some good caveats for starters.
-
Yeah, we definitely need to treat those overjoyed/outraged reactions with some wariness, to say nothing of such controversial subject matter. Case in point: I'm amazed at how many people in the comments were bending over backwards to support the Sexual Strategies Theory, but I'm always amazed at how certain people cling to evo-psych for dear life.
Here's a link that breaks down the study in even more detail, with some good commentary: http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/gender-differences-and-casual-sex-the-new-research/ (http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/gender-differences-and-casual-sex-the-new-research/)
-
In some ways, this might equally have gone in the sexism thread. I found it simultaneously interesting and hopeful (and was a bit disgusted at the idiot who set the whole thing off, but you can't have everything): http://www.nomorelost.org/2011/03/25/straight-male-gamer-told-to-get-over-it-by-bioware/ (http://www.nomorelost.org/2011/03/25/straight-male-gamer-told-to-get-over-it-by-bioware/)
-
That is 96 kinds of awesome.
-
Yes, David Gaider is all kinds of sheer awesome. It helps that he is also a good writer and can execute his socially conscious ideas artfully in his stories!
-
http://theoatmeal.com/ (http://theoatmeal.com/)
Interesting? Oh, yes.
Informative? Depends on what information you seek after.
I personally recommend How to tell if your cat if plotting to kill you (http://www.catswhothrowupgrass.com/kill.php) for all the Compendiumites who own cats.
-
I personally recommend How to tell if your cat if plotting to kill you (http://www.catswhothrowupgrass.com/kill.php) for all the Compendiumites who own cats.
I knew it! Cats are evil! Now I'm happy I'm a dog person :lol:
-
I personally recommend How to tell if your cat if plotting to kill you (http://www.catswhothrowupgrass.com/kill.php) for all the Compendiumites who own cats.
Well that explains a lot about my cats.
-
http://theoatmeal.com/ (http://theoatmeal.com/)
Interesting? Oh, yes.
Informative? Depends on what information you seek after.
I personally recommend How to tell if your cat if plotting to kill you (http://www.catswhothrowupgrass.com/kill.php) for all the Compendiumites who own cats.
Ah, The Oat Meal! It's been a long time since I checked the site out.
To most people who are confused: don't worry, it's comical, not factual.
-
A bunch (http://fav.me/dz1mlg)
of oekaki (http://fav.me/dz2ufw)
tutorials (http://fav.me/dzaquk)
I found (http://fav.me/d1688us)
useful. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEj_xckmWKg)
Also, because (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDjmQ0ft6_w)
I think (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hSSQL3ZMqg)
it would be (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBc4LsZ9cGw)
nice to (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-BCXDCHvbE)
see new (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VlI_0ENYCQ)
people posting (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6xy7H0SRuk)
at the oekaki (http://browse.deviantart.com/?qh=§ion=&global=1&q=oekaki+tutoriAL#/d1j9pxz)
:3
-
Religious belief is a fundamental part of human nature (http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/12/religious-belief-is-human-nature-huge-new-study-claims/)
You can also find the study's webpage here: http://www.cam.ox.ac.uk/research/cognition-religion-and-theology/
The general thrust isn't, of course, if religion is right or wrong, but rather that religious belief comes naturally enough to humans that it is highly unlikely to disappear from society short of major evolutionary changes.
-
I see the best solution, prior to genetic engineering, as substitution. I do take it as a given that people are predisposed to divine thinking. The impetus behind that must be accommodated, but the expression need not necessarily be divine.
-
I think "higher power" is the best (most acceptable, most vague, most freely interpretable) term. Aliens, god(s), spirits, nature itself, gravity, the "force", the man, etc. could each be considered higher power in their own right. And most people believe at least one of those things is real and important.
-
I think "higher power" is the best (most acceptable, most vague, most freely interpretable) term. Aliens, god(s), spirits, nature itself, gravity, the "force", the man, etc. could each be considered higher power in their own right. And most people believe at least one of those things is real and important.
Because the "higher power" concept is not a theory, but an axiom. XDDD Humans are not infallible, are still in line with evolution and are also insignificant in universal scale. The very first records of anthropomorphic personifications of Higher Power for now are considered to be from Ancient Egypt and Bharata, where aspects of nature were given humanoid characteristics based on how they worked, or simply for general/philosophical understanding.
Whether you believe that this power is sentient or not, the Something-Is-Out-There assumption is logical.
P.S.: Thanks for the intriguing article, Thought!
-
Humans are not infallible, are still in line with evolution and are also insignificant in universal scale.
Do you mean that you believe that humans are insignificant on a universal scale, or that some unidentified people out there believe this?
I ask, because if you believe this, then I can ask you why you would say that humans are insignificant on a universal scale?
-
Good question, Thought, I'll get back to you on that (still need a bit of sleep).
For now, I'd like to show you guys THIS! http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/05/a-trip-around-our-solar-system/100075/
A whole photo album of our explorations in space. :D Isn't it beautiful?
(http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/infocus/solar0511/s_s16_025E9808.jpg)
-
Wow! :shock: They're amazing, thank you for sharing that, tush . I'm in awe of how perfect Venus looks...
-
Humans are not infallible, are still in line with evolution and are also insignificant in universal scale.
Do you mean that you believe that humans are insignificant on a universal scale, or that some unidentified people out there believe this?
I ask, because if you believe this, then I can ask you why you would say that humans are insignificant on a universal scale?
Sorry for the late reply. It was today that I got the time to get about this.
Now, before I answer these questions it would be awesome to ask the right questions from ourselves (or others, for that matter). The questions are:
What is the significance of a human life from the eyes and mindset of those inferior, such as a bee, if it were sentient?
What is the significance of human life from the your very own eyes? What makes you or humanity special?
With the current Libyan / Al Qaeda wars on our necks, whose side are you on? Why? What makes one side's motive any better than the other? What is the significance of those wars? Would it make any difference?
Looking from a universal aspect, what is the significance of a human life in a galactic equation? What difference would our strife make to this?
I'm not saying that these are the right questions, but whatever questions do arise in the mind it never hurts to ask. But it is important to look from different views before you consider a good answer. Truth is never absolute, and there is always a small detail which changes it. Now then, I'll answer your question in brief (I don't wanna bore anyone).
Humans have come far in regards to evolution, mastering the art of tools and weaponry, speech and free thinking, etc. and dominating the planet with their sheer cleverness, so naturally one is inclined to consider them important and special. But just because we're great doesn't mean we're perfect, and thus we still have a long way to go. The survival of the human race is important in the long run as rarely does a species achieve this level of intelligence and broad sentience, which in turn would help in at least one species taking in the task of exploiting the mysteries of the universe. There is no purpose, but it is interesting to see a species evolve in this major scale, and at the same time we find other species insignificant if they make no difference to the absolute scale. Take Lord J's reply to my encounter with a bee, for instance. A bee cannot understand sympathy at a human level, and certainly cannot share similar sentiments. To the bee, we're an obstruction to their line of evolution. We're the pests who prey on their hives and destroy their species. From the eyes of a man, however, it's the bees that might be annoying, especially when he's working on (let's say, for instance) a marvelous architecture that might either house or inspire the rebels, or might be a memorial to someone great. To the architecture, this is a significant achievement. But a bee cannot help, only hinder, thus whether it lives or dies would make no difference to the overall scale.
Again, the majority of strength in humanity comes from sheer numbers. Humanity often makes enemies within its own species based on their views, discrimination, etc. Think of the wars between Christianity and Satanism, Islamic and Crusades, Country against Country, Red Shirts vs Black Shirts, Left Wing against Right Wing, or even Allied Forces against Al Qaeda. Within the battlefield, these battles are significant and would define the world on the outcome. Beyond the battlefield, they are viewed as pointless, childish strife. Whichever side you're on you are willing to support it to the very end, either on the losing or winning side, it does not matter. It is easy to say that the opposite side is evil or wrong by default, just because every person feels he is always at the right side of things, and this brings the very foundation of tribalism. In the end, the system will be defined by the winning side, perhaps due to sheer numbers or strategies, which the majority of humanity support. But is it the perfect system?
Thinking from within one's own mind, a person beliefs defines the his/her character, where the person chooses his decisions rationally and decides the fate of the world and himself/herself. Many take pride in being free thinkers, enjoying the evolved sentience, and celebrating Free Will. There is one slight problem, however: Free Will does not exist, and is merely illusion. Despite what Lord J and ZeaLitY would love to think, Free Will counts as magical thinking because what comes to mind at the mention is the "sudden decision" that comes out of nowhere, as if having some kind of omnipresent power to control things (i'm having a difficult time explaining this). It doesn't work like that in reality. A mind is a complex system that uses genetic system to be affected by experience, be influenced and adapt to a system of though. That is how consciousness works, and because we have a gigantic number of genetic behavior types and experiences, the combination is endless, which gives the illusion of free will as it also gives us a unique identity: a soul. Experience nurtures and influences a human mind to follow a path, and human decisions can easily be manipulated, no matter how earthbound and narrow minded, with sheer words or experiences. NLP is one such technique. And it rings true to an old Chinese saying: A child's life is like a piece of paper on which every person leaves a mark. This again brings another question: have we really evolved to perfection?
Now this is the final analyses, and answer to your question. I believe that humans are insignificant on a universal scale, regardless if we're superior to aliens out there or not. If we take our account to our own significance in an entire galaxy full of unknown hospitable planets housing aliens, then chances are we could doubt the significance of our own existence. Yes, we can travel. Yes, it might take time. But how much? And more importantly, would it make a difference?
Go back to the Bee analogy for a bit: they consider humans as a threat, and if the last of their kinds are destroyed it is the end of the world for them, but for it doesn't make a difference. Back to the universal view, as noted before, humanity isn't perfect and still evolving, and thus can still be considered animals who haven't matured to the level required universally. It doesn't matter what is out there. It doesn't matter when the Rapture takes place. At any given moment a rogue Black Hole might sneak into our Solar System and devour us, or a Magnatar might cause explosions fucking us up, or perhaps a Comet comes straight for us, or maybe our own planet just starts farting Carbon Dioxide everywhere, killing us all. At any rate, we will consider this as the end of the world. The religious will pray and ask for forgiveness, the scientists will panic do their best to help everyone survive, the businessmen will run amok leaving their money behind, etc. and it would make a big difference to us because as we watch our own brethren dying before us.
But look at it from the universal scale. Would it make the slightest difference to our galaxy? Our planet is the size of a dust particle in the entire cosmos, and removing that from the equation would hardly affect the universe. It's just one planet destroyed, and there are millions opportunities to have another hospitable planet with equally intelligent species, perhaps better. Not that they'll be useful in any way to the universe as whole. We are insignificant germs trying to expand our territories by finding hospitable environments and infecting them, just doing our best to survive and evolve, like any parasitic diseases you find in street foods or Taco Bell. The Universe has lots of time, but we don't.
And finally we begin to wonder. Our wars and strife are meaningless after all. We may as well work together and evolve quickly, as our goal.
-
Despite what Lord J...would love to think, Free Will counts as magical thinking because what comes to mind at the mention is the "sudden decision" that comes out of nowhere, as if having some kind of omnipresent power to control things...
What's this nonsense all about? Please enlighten us and explain what I think, since this is the first I've heard about it.
-
The fact that I asked the question in the first place probably shows my own bias, but Tush, it seems that you are making some fallacious assumptions.
You ask, for example, if the fact that we could, in a hypothetical situation, travel between planets could make a difference. The simplest answer is that yes, it would make a difference, because there would be humans where previously there were no humans. However, from your tone, I think you are not getting at a factual difference but a "moral" difference. You seem to be assuming a particular moral scale of significance, but at least in that post you didn't define what that scale actually is.
To use your bee analogy, it seems that you are saying a bee's life is insignificant because it doesn't make a difference if it dies. Yet this is contrary to simple fact: if the bee dies, the universe is less one bee. The state of the universe after the event is different than the state of the universe before it. Thus, different. You are getting at a moral difference, but you are presupposing significance in that. The bee's death is insignificant because it does not match your moral definition of significance. But what is that moral definition of significance?
You seem to imply that your moral definition of significance is based on size. To offer some ridiculousness, would you say that a short woman is less significant than a tall woman, all other factors being equal, because her size is less? Or should we say that Beijing is less significant than the rest of China? Is President Obama less significant than a fraternity party consisted of several dozen people? Or rather, is it what someone does, and not their size, that makes them significant? If so, then isn't earth, with all its activity, more significant than hundreds of lifeless planets? Indeed, if there is no other life in the milky way, then doesn't the activity on earth make it the most significant planet.
Now, you might add the qualifier that be that as it may, earth isn't significant to the planet SR 388, halfway across the universe because they don't current interact. Let us return to our big-woman/little-woman dichotomy. If the two never meet, can we say that the smaller woman is less significant? Or perhaps they are equally non-significant? If that is the case, then, can we kill one, the other, or both? Or is it that despite their relationship to each other, we still make the claim that there is some significance to their lives, at least to us? Thus, if Earth or SR388 has to be destroyed, which should it be? Indeed, if either earth or the entire solar system that SR388 inhabits has to be destroyed, which should it be? If nothing is happening there, regardless of the interactions, isn't earth's activities more "significant."
It seems that fine humans insignificant because we are comparatively small creatures and a comparatively small planet on the comparative fringes of a comparatively common galaxy. But hopefully as I have shown, size doesn't grant significance. But what is it to you that does grant significance?
As you might have noticed, I define significance not by size but rather by action. A bee is significant because it does so very much. If we say that a human is more significant, then it is because a human does so much more (or, at least, is capable of doing so much more).
Or, to put it another way, significance isn't something that is granted to us, it is something we make ourselves.
-
@Thought: Moral significance doesn't matter her, nor does "right or wrong" view count, but by harsh reality of value. I'm not talking about significance granted by size either. What I'm talking about is significance earned by individual organism that causes a lasting impact, more in evolutionary lines, or most likely what you already mentioned here:
I define significance not by size but rather by action. A bee is significant because it does so very much. If we say that a human is more significant, then it is because a human does so much more (or, at least, is capable of doing so much more).
Or, to put it another way, significance isn't something that is granted to us, it is something we make ourselves.
Just a brief clarification here: if a Bee manages to help an architect in some way its life suddenly gains importance and value, but when it simply hinders one would rather let it die. Similarly in business, the life of a clever architect is much more valuable than one among hundreds of labor workers whose lives are expendable to those folks. I'm not talking about Universal Significance. No, rather significance valued from several mindsets.
Similarly, if a short woman was more influential than a taller one, it is the shorter one who is valued most. We've seen this in historical records too, think about it from our default mindsets this time: who stepped on the moon first? You remember. Who stepped second? Most don't even bother to know.
Sorry for any misunderstandings.
@Lord J: I didn't mean to offend you. It was long back when we were debating about religion and whether it should be defended (I remember, but vaguely) that ZeaLitY and/or you praised the existence of Free Will and how it defined the foundations of Atheism. I could be mistaken here, but if it wasn't you who said it, I humbly apologize. I'll edit that out from my previous post.
-
@Thought: Moral significance doesn't matter her, nor does "right or wrong" view count, but by harsh reality of value. I'm not talking about significance granted by size either. What I'm talking about is significance earned by individual organism that causes a lasting impact, more in evolutionary lines, or most likely what you already mentioned...
"Value" just begs the question: it isn't actually a harsh reality but a rather soft and fluffy subjectivity since value is determined by consumer perception.
The lasting impact in evolutionary lines is more useful, but then we can replace our small and large women with fertile and sterile ones. The same basic objection applies.
Not for your bee-architect corollary, again you seem to be using a definition of importance that you aren't defining. Why is a building an important goal? It seems that you would say this is because of perceived value: humans like buildings, so we find them important and in turn hindering bees unimportant. In turn, bees like living and find buildings important. While this can be valid information, this still doesn't get to actual significance or value. There seems to be a slight of hand in which "significant to me" is being put in place of "significant." The problem with that, of course, is that these are not the same concept: the "to me" (or, indeed, "to entity x") qualifier places the emphasis on the individual, not the thing. Thus, if I find a bee insignificant, is that because it is insignificant or is that because I mis-perceive the matter? Until you define an objective scale of significance, value, or importance, the best that one can say about the significance of humanity is "it is insignificant to me."
Now you might wonder why it is I am pursuing this line of questioning: the reason is that the sort of perspective attributes an internal state to the external world. It seems that the reason for claiming that humans are insignificant is that you have chosen a definition of significance that they do not match. However, it is possible for you to have a definition of significance that would match humans, so the question comes down to why do you believe as you believe?
For other topics:
Since you brought up historical context, you are making the mistake that the most significant element in an event is the event we focus on. Which was more significant, for example, Augustus Caesar or the Roman Empire that followed him? Well, which one could history do the best without? Remove the people of the Roman Empire and Augustus Caesar was a guy with fun ideas. Remove Augustus Caesar, and we have the Roman Republic still. Not too shabby. Similarly, who is more important, the architect or the workers who build the building? Again, who is the most expendable? Remove the architect and the workers can still build. Remove the workers, and you are just left with a guy with a fun idea. The reason why singular historical figures tend to play the most important role in histories is because they are the ones we know stuff about, not because they were the most significant actor in an event.
And finally, since you mentioned Free Will, it does of course depend on how one defines it, but it does essentially exist. At least, it does if we define Free Will as the opposite of determinism on a human scale. Strict determinism would mean that we should be able to predict any given human's actions before they take those actions by extrapolating the inevitable outcome of the state of the universe at present. However, by obtaining that information we alter the prae hoc conditions and thus negate the validity of our equations. A person's actions cannot be known before they take those actions, which within this limited definition would count as Free Will. This tends to be the reasons why neurobiologists, even as they argue that all our behaviors are controlled by understandable functions of the brain, deal in percentages and likelihoods rather than absolutes.
-
A lengthy article about trafficking in the US. (http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2011/05/sex-trafficking-201105?currentPage=all) It's long, very disturbing, and an absolute necessity to read.
-
It honestly baffles me that fighting trafficking is not one of our top national priorities. It's a huge and growing problem, with ethical and emotional appeal that transcends most partisan lines. I can't think of any flattering reasons as to why this isn't in the forefront of our political agenda as a society. I can only think of deplorable or disgusting reasons. This is one of those "doesn't quite fit" realities that serves to illustrate just how much of what we perceive our society to encompass is an illusion or an outright lie, masking a much more barbaric and primitive truth.
-
Ignorance must lie at the root of this evil. CNN's done a pretty good job studying sex trafficking in the US with a few investigative reports over the last couple years, and they bring Demi Moore & Ashton Kutcher on to talk about the issue every once in a while. Problem is, how many of us actually watch TV anymore? The campaign to end this has to take the fight to the Internet, which is why passing along the few news articles about it is so important.
Honestly, I didn't pay much attention to the massage houses in the city nearest to me until Sajainta brought up the subject of human trafficking in the US right here at the Compendium. A quick Internet search confirms that these establishments offer sex (not just in general -- these exact ones that I drive past every time I go out and get groceries, and a block away from the city police station no less). And given how utterly creepy these places look to me, my suspicion is piqued. One of the best volunteers who served with me during the Obama Campaign has actually started an educational campaign on this issue, which I hope will encourage greater vigilance. Then again, I only learned about his campaign in the local news, and who in our generation actually watches the local news on TV anymore?
Role confusion also contributes. Whose responsibility is it to investigate and flush out these operations? The citizens of this city I live by probably assume everything's hunky-dory because the aforementioned massage parlors operate near a police station, and of course the police would take care of it if anything nasty's going on, right...? Ultimately the most important people to reach are the customers of sex services -- they need to be educated to watch for signs of abuse, and they need to have the compassion to keep this issue at the forefront of their minds rather than their hard-ons. That's probably the hardest part of all. Longtime johns are probably too hardened, but maybe a major educational campaign could catch first-timers and help turn this thing around.
Finally, and perhaps most powerfully, the dark side of both liberal and conservative values must have a role to play. Conservative values push sex into the deepest recesses of society, and then liberal values defend whatever results, because hey -- isn't it just sex/art/people-doing-what-they-want-with-their-bodies? Not everyone who labels themselves a liberal or conservative conforms to what I've just described of course, but if the debate about pornography is any indication, I think there's something to this bullshit theory of mine. It might help explain why human trafficking has settled very snugly in the midwest; our highly valued, bellweather moderatism can be a schizophrenic thing, because we're essentially trying to be conservatives and liberals at the same time. In any case, perhaps the tangled cultural mess that may surround human trafficking in the US would unravel with education and information. I agree that this is something both liberals and conservatives have a great stake in, and should be able to agree on easily.
This is what I believe, at least for now.
-
That's... horrible... Still need to read up the entire thing. But if you guys don't mind, I'd like to break up the negative atmosphere:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/04/scientist-cooks-up-adjustable-strength-metals/
Whazza! Nanotechnology. :)
"Value" just begs the question: it isn't actually a harsh reality but a rather soft and fluffy subjectivity since value is determined by consumer perception.
The lasting impact in evolutionary lines is more useful, but then we can replace our small and large women with fertile and sterile ones. The same basic objection applies.
That... kinda freaked me out (sorry, I'm not accusing or anything) right after I read Saj's human trafficking post. Let me explain why.
I don't blame you for how you think of this. You think that reality is like an arena in which two fighters duke it out and the survivor, which is the strongest and stealthiest, gets his rewards. Well, let me tell you about the harsh part of it. Reality is actually like an arena with no rules, where broken limbs count for no disqualification and there's no age limits. Once you're in the ring, anything goes. It's not just about two capable fighters trying to see who's the best, but sometimes a strong fighter picks an eight year old boy who has potential to be the best and strongest in the future, but because it isn't yet. The time is ripe, the strong will bury the boy before he gets the chance to gain strength and take his throne. This way there are plenty of chances to destroy the best of species before they are even capable to adapt, destroying any potential a mere life could bloom with. This is just an example, but reality is even more grotesque than that, and I (and I trust Saj too) have seen it.
Sorry for the incomplete post. I'll read, and subsequently write, more when I get back on.
-
Really interesting stuff: (http://www.cracked.com/article_19224_6-wuss-behaviors-that-were-once-badass-survival-instincts.html)
Blushing, after all, signals remorse. Since it can't be faked or hidden, researchers think that our ancestors evolved the function as a display of appeasement towards those that we've wronged. Or who could kick our ass. The walk back to the cave might have been shameful, but it was accomplished with fully intact sexual organs -- the only victory that matters when it comes to the gene pool.
The part of the species that averted their eyes and turned beet red no matter how much they wanted to stand up to the big aggressive guy taking their lunch lived to see another day, and breed with the (presumably underwhelmed, but realistic) females of the species. The big guy eating our lunch might have won that battle, but that same unwavering belief in himself was what sent him out in a blaze of monkey fisted Neanderthal asswhoop. The meek end up inheriting the Earth by default.
-
Sorry for the triple post, but I found something even more interesting:
To me at least, it was common knowledge that as an individual becomes more fluent in a language his/her brain becomes bound by it, i.e., their thought patterns shape depending on the language and dialect they are surrounded by. Thus subtle changes in speech would undoubtedly invoke certain reactions from individuals, all depending where they come from. Yes, when someone has complete control over a certain tool that very tool can be used against them. This was concluded thanks to certain experiments I prepared beforehand just to practice them in social situations. No, I'm no master of languages thus it took me plenty of time to prepare them. Still, these experiments even so conclude how fallible a human mind can be, and how easy it is to trick them.
This was reminded to me by a Cracked article I just read today. (http://www.cracked.com/article_18823_5-insane-ways-words-can-control-your-mind.html) For more information at wordsmithing psychology, NLP and the like, check out Darren Brown and similar folks.
-
This sounds like a good place to post this:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/10/smug-alert-google-says-it-has-largest-ev-charging-network-in-th/
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/06/googles-search-for-future-profit-targets-the-sun-not-just-the/
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/04/nissan-nv200-van-named-nycs-taxi-of-tomorrow-travis-bickle-c/
Also... http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/09/nox-audio-admiral-touch-prototype-preview-redux-now-with-more-c/
...the biggest change to be found in the only Android-equipped wireless noise-canceling virtual surround sound gaming headset the world has seen is this: vastly different audio quality.
-
tushantin that was incredibly revealing, thanks!
-
tushantin that was incredibly revealing, thanks!
Any time! 8)
-
Perhaps you have heard of "chem trails"? These are the things that are left, or so some claim, after the government "secretly" sprays chemicals in the atmosphere. It is one of the many conspiracy theories floating around.
However, I have been pointed to the excellent "Contrail Science (http://contrailscience.com/)" webpage. Did I mention that it is excellent? Because yes, it is excellent.
This site is a comprehensive database of aviation science that nicely debunks nearly everything imaginable about chemtrails (and what it doesn't yet debunk, it will as soon as it can). However, if you were ever interested in airplanes and weather, then there is plenty there to keep you interested as well.
Of more questionable value are the comments left by chem-trail believers. It is quite interesting to see how their minds work (or don't), but it is also quite disheartening. At first I thought people were posting satire, given how outlandish some of their responses were. But alas, no.
-
Ever perplexing, people's penchant for believing simultaneously that our government is the most ruthlessly efficient and diabolical clandestine enterprise on the globe in human history, yet also this pathetic, bumbling band of epically incompetent losers who can't even pick their own noses without losing a billion dollars and getting a nosebleed in the process. Never mind what the government actually does; some people just seem to need to be long-suffering victims of an unjust society beyond their control. I guess it distracts them from their own screw-ups and let-downs in life.
On the other hand, the second Bush administration really was half House Dimir and half Animal House.
-
Watch it goddammit! WATCH IT BEFORE 3 AM!! (http://www.youtube.com/google)
Holy God, it's fucking red!! :shock:
Update: It's 1:45 am. Eclipse has reached maximum.
More Update: Man, that was beautiful! *sheds tears of joy* :cry: It's finally over. Can't believe you guys missed it. :roll:
-
Wait wait wait... what...?
There was an Eclipse? :?
Well, not like I'd have been able to see it, since apparently it happened while over here was early afternoon... :roll:
-
It was not visible in North America due to our continent being on the other side of the planet at the time the eclipse occurred.
-
A very interesting read:
What Not to Say (and What to Say) to the Seriously Ill (http://health-ontd.livejournal.com/20501.html)
-
Choking at mental processes? (http://news.uchicago.edu/article/2010/09/21/psychologist-shows-why-we-choke-under-pressure-and-how-avoid-it) Yeah, I get that a lot.
-
A very interesting read:
What Not to Say (and What to Say) to the Seriously Ill (http://health-ontd.livejournal.com/20501.html)
Thank you for sharing that. I can't tell you how many times I want to punch someone in the face when they say "Everything will be okay". You don't know jack shit. Are you a cardiologist? Are you MY cardiologist? No? Then shut the fuck up.
-
So, apparently... No. I ain't gonna spoil it for ya.
[youtube]KCADH3x56eE[/youtube]
-
Cosmic Journeys, huh? I shall have to bookmark this.
-
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6411/designing_better_levels_through_.php
This is an interesting read.
-
Okay, I might be the last one to know this (knowing from the Compendium members' massive brains and knowledge), but in case I wasn't here's something... unsettling. (http://www.cracked.com/article_19283_7-ancient-forms-mysticism-that-are-recent-inventions_p2.html#ixzz1RSdFatBs)
...Snorri's collections also contained elements that seem to be cribbed from the hot new religion, like Odin sacrificing himself by hanging on a tree and getting pierced by a spear. In fact, some buzzkill scholars have even suggested that Ragnarok itself is no more than a retelling of the end of paganism under Christianity, or even a co-opted version of the Biblical book of Revelation.
...So... Baldur was based on Jesus after all...
-
Not exactly, tush. It's possible, but we just don't know. Baldur does match the profile of a so-called Dying God, affiliated as he is with the sun, and plenty of gods fit that profile; Jesus is but one example. (Of course how closely he resembles those figures and whether that matters are different thoughts entirely.)
On the "it could be true" side, there is a very different version of Baldur's death in Anglo-Saxon mythology. The Anglo-Saxon myths lack Loki, and that's part of it, no doubt, but it's also completely devoid of the martyrdom aspect of the Edda version. And it is suspect that Ragnarok is apocalyptic when systems similar to the Norse ones tend to be cyclic (Persephone, Dionysos etc. come back again every spring, the death and rebirth of Osiris is ritually re-enacted as the year goes on, etc. etc.). Snorri was definitely a Christian re-telling indigenous stories and one must certainly read the Eddas with that in mind.
-
Don't worry Tush, Cracked is spouting gibberish. For one, Snorri didn't write both Eddas (this was an old mis-attribution that has been corrected for ages, so it is always surprising to see still see it). While the surviving copy of the older Edda (called the Proetic Edda or Elder Edda) is indeed from the 13th century, that text is a copy of other texts which were in turn written versions of oral traditions. Aspects of both Eddas have been confirmed as predating the 13th century through early sagas, other texts, other histories, and folklore. This isn't to say that there were no influences from Christianity on Norse mythology, but there is no actual evidence of this beyond similarities (but that would be like saying that Norse mythology is just dressed up Roman mythology because again, there are similarities). Odin hanging from Yggdrasil is almost certainly original Norse. In all likelihood, so was Ragnarok (Odin is well attested to be untrustworthy because he often gave victory to the lesser military force so that he could take the better soldiers back to Valhalla so as to prepare for war with the ettins). These probably took on additional layers and meaning, but events were probably not created where there were none already.
-
Not exactly, tush. It's possible, but we just don't know. Baldur does match the profile of a so-called Dying God, affiliated as he is with the sun, and plenty of gods fit that profile; Jesus is but one example. (Of course how closely he resembles those figures and whether that matters are different thoughts entirely.)
XD I'm not just talking about their deaths, but also their second coming! If I'm not mistaken (and I might be wrong, because I forgotten where I've read it) after the apocalypse is through Baldur would rise from his grave, meet up with Thor's children and recreate paradise.
On the "it could be true" side, there is a very different version of Baldur's death in Anglo-Saxon mythology. The Anglo-Saxon myths lack Loki, and that's part of it, no doubt, but it's also completely devoid of the martyrdom aspect of the Edda version. And it is suspect that Ragnarok is apocalyptic when systems similar to the Norse ones tend to be cyclic (Persephone, Dionysos etc. come back again every spring, the death and rebirth of Osiris is ritually re-enacted as the year goes on, etc. etc.). Snorri was definitely a Christian re-telling indigenous stories and one must certainly read the Eddas with that in mind.
With the spread of Christianity it wouldn't be surprising if the Scandinavian myths simply morphed overtime or even wiped out, clouding the actual tales, just as they happened with the Irish/Welsh folktales. I wonder, which are the most ancient texts from Scandinavian history?
Don't worry Tush, Cracked is spouting gibberish. For one, Snorri didn't write both Eddas (this was an old mis-attribution that has been corrected for ages, so it is always surprising to see still see it). While the surviving copy of the older Edda (called the Proetic Edda or Elder Edda) is indeed from the 13th century, that text is a copy of other texts which were in turn written versions of oral traditions. Aspects of both Eddas have been confirmed as predating the 13th century through early sagas, other texts, other histories, and folklore. This isn't to say that there were no influences from Christianity on Norse mythology, but there is no actual evidence of this beyond similarities (but that would be like saying that Norse mythology is just dressed up Roman mythology because again, there are similarities). Odin hanging from Yggdrasil is almost certainly original Norse. In all likelihood, so was Ragnarok (Odin is well attested to be untrustworthy because he often gave victory to the lesser military force so that he could take the better soldiers back to Valhalla so as to prepare for war with the ettins). These probably took on additional layers and meaning, but events were probably not created where there were none already.
Hah, that was exactly the thing I was looking for. Thanks, Thought!
-
Ohh. Maybe my version of the Poetic Edda overstates how revised the poems potentially are-- it even suggests that Lokasenna may be a Christian invention, which strikes me as really speculative given what you said, Thought.
And tush, they do have a second coming. Perhaps you're defining that by more rigid terms than I am, but Dionysos and Osiris, for instance, do return in some form (Dionysos through his forms Bromios and Iacchus, and Osiris through Horus). The whole schtick with the Dying Gods is that they come back when the land is fertile again (or to redeem it, or something along those lines).
-
Really? The Lokasenna? I hadn't heard that one. Nothing about the Lokasenna seems particularly seems particularly Christian, but it is certainly possible that it was late and/or Christian in origin. Again, I am not claiming that there weren't influences: mostly, I am just claiming that such influences don't dominate the work like the Cracked article claims (and that generally we don't know where those influences actually were).
That is more or less what I mean about aspects of it being confirmed. We know that magical use of runes were quite old (from Tacitus's Germania), so the runic section of the Havamal probably at least had a real basis. Likewise, we know that hanging was a legitimate means of sacrifice, and it seems to be that hanging was a means of dedicating a sacrifice to Odin, and it seems that one way to sacrifice was through sympathetic actions (driving a nail through the forehead for Thor because Thor was injured there, ripping off an arm for Tyr because Tyr lost his hand), so Odin hanging himself fits well enough that one doesn't need to invoke Christianity to explain it (particularly considering that this isn't the first time Odin sacrificed part of himself to gain knowledge and no one tries to claim him drinking from Mimir's well is a Christ analogy).
-
Want to improve your cognitive capabilities and master your own procrastination? Make like a Buddhist and meditate. (http://www.physorg.com/news10312.html)
And I do mean 'Meditate like a Buddhist', because meditation itself has various types. Each type has its own benefits.
-
Nothing about the Lokasenna seems particularly seems particularly Christian, but it is certainly possible that it was late and/or Christian in origin.
The poem's introduction bases this mostly on the fact that it rampantly makes fun of the gods, but hmm, I guess I wouldn't put it past the Norse to think of their deities in humorous terms. Loki making fun of all of them is certainly not any graver than his bearing Odin's horse, or Thor dressing up as a lady. It seems too widespread to be a general Christian insertion.
Again, I am not claiming that there weren't influences: mostly, I am just claiming that such influences don't dominate the work like the Cracked article claims (and that generally we don't know where those influences actually were).
Ahh, this makes sense, and the Cracked article was definitely misleading in this respect. So it is hard to tell; we just know that most of it is "genuinely" Norse.
-
http://www.engadget.com/2011/07/23/giant-body-of-water-found-in-space-black-hole-claims-it-was-jus/
XDDD This is truly divine.*
*(What the religious consider divine and what I consider divine are two identical but different things, so don't troll meh)
-
http://www.cracked.com/article_18649_5-ridiculous-ancient-beliefs-that-turned-out-to-be-true.html?wa_user1=1&wa_user2=History&wa_user3=article&wa_user4=flashback
-
Do you wanna
a) be immortal
b) live in a Ghost in the Shell like universe?
http://www.cracked.com/article_18964_5-ways-science-could-make-us-immortal.html
Here ya go!
-
I love the references in Cracked articles. This one comes from tushantin's link above, when the author claims "no one reliable has ever cloned a human" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%C3%ABlism
They almost had me until the swastika. :lol:
-
At the same time, most of those Cracked articles and some of the other links and resources in this thread are a distraction from the intention of this thread. Consider using the "WTF? Check this link Out!" thread instead.
-
At the same time, most of those Cracked articles and some of the other links and resources in this thread are a distraction from the intention of this thread. Consider using the "WTF? Check this link Out!" thread instead.
xDDD It was for info's sake! I collect science articles, blogs and papers for my personal database and also for inspiration for fiction writing. When I find some useful I post them here.
Besides the comedy, Cracked really does pass some genuine info regarding stuff, and I did look into telomerase and genetic modifications in some papers that dictate humans can live 400+ years and above.
-
Of course, it's up to your discretion. These are community threads, after all. We each have our own judgment. I am content simply to have registered my point of view.
-
I almost never post in the two threads, becase I'm never sure that a link I enjoy is either informative or "wtf"ish, that link is to a briefing on a not very well known religion which does happen to be strange, but definitely not "wtf". I do think before I post and chose to put it in this thread. Sorry if it bugged ya J.
-
Nah, we ought to bug J even more, if only to be smacked by his vivid grammar in that "Brats, get off my lawn" kinda way. :D
To make this post more useful, here's some pictures from NASA. (http://in.news.yahoo.com/photos/nasa-finds-evidence-of-flowing-water-on-mars-1312526451-slideshow/) Why? They friggin found water on Mars!
-
http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/06/rice-university-chemists-bake-graphene-out-of-girl-scout-cookies/
Now this is what I call turning Grub to Gold. Ya know, Magic/Alchemy! :)
-
http://www.spring.org.uk/2008/01/experiences-beat-possessions-why.php
I've said this before and I'll say this again: subjective development of value and character far outweighs material quality of life. Go for the former, and the letter would simply follow you like dog. I know Lord J did try to convince me otherwise, but this is one thing I'm pretty confident about.
So let us take an oath, my brethren, that we shall be a better person today than we were yesterday!
UPDATE! Another fantastic article. Follow these steps, understand them, and don't do it!
http://www.spring.org.uk/2011/07/6-ways-to-kill-creativity.php
Damn, I'm loving this blog!
-
Okay, double post, but I just had to.
Here is something ironic:
http://www.rxpgnews.com/suicide/Countries_with_high_happiness_levels_also_have_high_suicide_rates_487889.shtml
Now here's a linguistic trivia:
The term Suicide, if translated in Hindi, turns into Khud-Khushi, which if taken into literal terms also means Self-Happiness.
So basically... India's been right in a lotta ways... *dies*
-
That's an insightful article.
I can't help but be reminded of how unemployment is recorded here in the US: the people who are completely disattached from the work force aren't even factored into the numbers. Likewise, the people who are completely disattached from life aren't even factored into the happiness numbers. To the cynic, it might feel like an accounting trick so the well-to-do can sleep soundly at nights.
I firmly believe that nobody really wants to die. They just want their suffering to end. The latter would not require the former in a world where everyone had Agency.
-
Warren Buffet asked to be taxed more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=2&src=tp&smid=fb-share
-
Ooh, Japan seems dedicated in its race to defy nature. And it tastes pretty sweet! (http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/17/researchers-grow-crops-on-super-thin-film-do-away-with-that-pes/)
-
More along the lines of just interesting: the Tea-Party's not that popular. (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/survey-surprising-finding-tea-party-less-popular-atheists-160220531.html)
-
I finally read Girl Genius, at least up to its current point. I enthusiastically recommend it to all! Personal opinions of course will vary, but it's not trivial for me that this is the new "best webcomic I've ever read."
Here's a link to the beginning. If you want to avoid spoilers, I'd just go straight to the comic and avoid checking out the rest of the site.
http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20021104
Adventure, Romance, MAD SCIENCE!!!
-
The jig is up, Lord J. You can't escape forever.
I KNOW YOUR SECRET! (http://scrabble.wonderhowto.com/blog/news-alert-scrabble-makes-you-smarter-0129553/)
-
It's true, I've got a decent score on Literati, and I frequently play Shuffled Row before bed. These are practice exercises for world domination!
-
Video Editing with Blender (http://www.filmsbykris.com/blender_seq.php), in case anyone's interested (I'm looking at you, Bekkler).
Also for many Game Developers out here, How To Make A 3rd Person Shooter (http://www.filmsbykris.com/blender3ps.php)!
Oh, and did I mention PyGames (http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=518B55961A79AB7E)?
You're welcome!
-
I have a "reverse" interesting and informative links request. I appeal to you, Dear Compendiumites, to share with me any websites or books you have which list, comprehensively, the subjects and topics in philosophy. What I'm looking for is a full-sized catalogue, an index if you will. I am not interested in seeing the links from Wikipedia, but anything else goes.
If you know of resources that have comprehensive lists of partial segments of philosophy, that's fine too.
-
How is philosophy not interesting? XD
Many are at the top of my head right now, but I can recommend the following:
1) Plato's The Republic (http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1497)
2) Goethe's Faust (http://en.goethe-faust.org/), and Deathnote (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhzikdFMv7Y) (I know the latter is an anime, but both deal with moral philosophy intriguingly)
3) Kino's Journey (yeah, another anime, but this is more like a philosophic fairytale and art; I showed you one ep last time, so you know what I'm talkin about) -- Almost every moral thought I follow today was based on this.
4) Principia Mathematica (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/principia-mathematica/)
There were various books I collected about regarding Philosophy of Logic (most of them barely touched), but I'll get back to you on that later. XD
-
Let me just clarify that I am not looking for actual philosophical writings, but for a comprehensive list of the areas of philosophy. Not just the major branches, but rather a catalogue of as many as possible of the various areas and sub-areas.
-
Unfortunately, that's something even I'm looking for. :oops:
Well, there are various catalogues in Wikipedia I can point you to, but... you don't seem interested in em. :(
-
In philosophy sorting ideas by genre's isn't the best way since individual writers often have such extensive systems of thinking that no one else follows up on their ideas or worse yet they label a particular philosopher something that they are not i.e. Nietzche as a nihilist. The most accurate organizing tool would simply be time since as time passes philosophers have more opportunity to read the increasing number of works from the past, or claim they have done so.
-
:picardno
I don't want to be told what works to read or why my request isn't "best." I am looking for a list of topics, a very comprehensive, particularly thorough list. That is what I request.
-
It seems unlikely that you haven't found this on your own, but the Oxford Scholarship Online System is often a decent enough place to find lists on topics: http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/oso/public/philosophy/subject_home.html
-
This one has all of the subjects I'm aware of in the drop-down menus: http://philpapers.org/ (http://philpapers.org/)
More specifically, this page breaks it down into many subcategories: http://philpapers.org/browse/all (http://philpapers.org/browse/all)
Do bear in mind that this is all based on modern philosophy's cataloging for purposes of publication, but I think it's pretty comprehensive. The history of philosophy section would indicate how subjects were broken down in the past. I'm not sure how good it is at doing so, but historians of philosophy would know better than I :p
Hope that helps!
-
Thank you both for those links. This one:
http://philpapers.org/browse/all
...is along the lines of what I am looking for. Any further resources in that vein are most welcome!
-
Thus the quality of education in this already neglected discipline continues to decline further, its too bad higher education assignments nowadays are more indoctrinating than anything else. http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html this website contains some categories the others may not include but you will have to wade through the entries since they are not sorted by content.
-
Well, an alphabetized list can still be useful. Thank you.
Now give me a bit of an introduction to yourself.
-
The bit: I work at Princeton university New Jersey, the place can at times be likened to Arris dome: it has mysterious machines that attack the unwitting pedestrian with spouts of diesel exhaust, vermin littering the hidden corridors, a veritable postmodern mess of people whose behavior resemble that of the R series robots. At any rate I have access to a metaphorical database of advanced knowledge that I plan to share in some degree through my various posts, although my true purpose here is, to put it crudely, to explore the full implications of the game Chrono Trigger for our times and future works.
-
...although my true purpose here is, to put it crudely, to explore the full implications of the game Chrono Trigger for our times and future works.
We'll look forward to it.
-
Video Editing with Blender (http://www.filmsbykris.com/blender_seq.php), in case anyone's interested (I'm looking at you, Bekkler).
Also for many Game Developers out here, How To Make A 3rd Person Shooter (http://www.filmsbykris.com/blender3ps.php)!
Oh, and did I mention PyGames (http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=518B55961A79AB7E)?
You're welcome!
Awesome, thanks tush!
-
Religious people often insist, in this modern world where factual validation of divine premises has never been achieved, that their deity is beyond paltry physical measure, even beyond logic. Faith, they insist, is a direct conduit directly into the supernatural, the divine.
Even so, when you put people under a brain scanner and measure their neural activity while they practice their faith, there's plenty of activity to see. They may claim that their faith goes someplace deeper--a claim which, of course, is as untestable as the divine premise which precedes it--but clearly there is a reality-based component to all that activity.
And it's identical to the brain activity of people engaged in acts of intense product loyalty. (http://partialobjects.com/2011/05/brains-of-apple-fanboys-respond-to-brand-like-religion-says-neuroscience/)
That's right. Apple fanatics experience the same mental stimulation at being shown pictures of Apple products that believers do at being shown images of their religious fixtures. Assuming that this isn't more of Satan's distractions, clearly there is only one reasonable explanation: Steve Jobs is our newest GOD! And so is every other corporate personality behind a famous brand. And every religion is the one true religion.
In completely unrelated news: Does anybody know what the word "cult" means?
-
Haha, now you can't say that no mental activity goes on in the brains of religious people!
But more seriously, while that specific documentary is new, the topic itself is old hat. It has been known for quite some time, for example, that orgasm and child birth produce very similar forms of mental activity thanks to our good friend, oxytocin. However, conflating the two experiences is more than a little improper and unsavory.
-
Hmm. It seems likely there are measurable correlations, but color me very skeptical. It sounds as though this was a staged scene in a documentary, not a study, and that only one person was scanned; a comment under the article states that only one area of the brain was analogous as well.
I _certainly_ don't trust most journalists to convey the findings with any of the required care and subtlety.
I have a strong interest in the psychology of branding, so I'm going to do some investigation on it when I get the chance.
-
Yeah, I smell something fishy too. I can easily see the discriminatory tactic applied here -- the kind of tactic that a lot of politician, lawyer, extremist (both Religious and Atheist), Thomas Fucking Edison, etc. use to achieve their selfish ends. The research may be bullshit, but knowing a good bit of neuroscience I realize that there is correlated resemblance between neural activities of Apple fanboys and religion people. But the tactic used here is simple: Use the information that can help them achieve their selfish ends, but hide crucial bits that actually contradict it. This tactic has been effective for generations to turn people to either side of tribes, be it between races, trust, parties or beliefs.
So if some factors in this article are correct, what are they trying to hide? It's that these exact same correlation in neural activities stretch to as far as Athiesm, and especially the Anti-Theist sectors. Which means that it's not just Apple Lovers and Religious Folks who have an angry-mob/fan-club/trolling-spree but also the Atheist groups. Which also means...
...No, I vowed to not to be a part of confrontation in this forums again, so excuse me.
As such, I'll investigate this further. Despite the differences in belief there are strong lines and curves that define individuality, most of which are capable of transcending stereotypes.
(Disclaimer: This post is purely a rational conclusion based from the facts at hand, and contains a very minute amount of personal opinion, belief or bias. If you don't believe me, go pick your nose at a corner coz I don't give a s***t.)
However, I have two things to point out:
1) Apple's "teasing but not delivering" bit is sort of true.
2) Lord J makes a big mistake by trying to "measure" or "detect" a person's faith, sincerity, Shraddha, respect, humility, admiration, philosophy, and other emotions. Tell me: how in the hell can you scientifically measure in units how much your girlfriend/boyfriend loves you?
-
Hmm. It seems likely there are measurable correlations, but color me very skeptical. It sounds as though this was a staged scene in a documentary, not a study, and that only one person was scanned; a comment under the article states that only one area of the brain was analogous as well.
I had posted in my journal and somebody else pointed out the same lack of scientific basis. So, it remains merely an anecdotal reality rather than necessarily a human fact. Nevertheless, it's highly testable and I'd like to see that study done.
2) Lord J makes a big mistake by trying to "measure" or "detect" a person's faith, sincerity, Shraddha, respect, humility, admiration, philosophy, and other emotions. Tell me: how in the hell can you scientifically measure in units how much your girlfriend/boyfriend loves you?
The sad part is that I think you're serious rather than just trying to take a personal jab at me.
The question of valuation is certainly not an easy one. We can look, for instance, at how our economic medium of value, the dollar, falls so woefully short of capturing the evident worth of so many things, while overvaluing others. I give you full credit in appreciating the difficulty of the challenge of accurate and consistent valuation. But all of the things you mentioned are valuable. All one needs to do is apply a set of pertinent criteria. Indeed, humanists are obliged to cultivate these systems of valuation within themselves, so that they will not be left adrift in the world like so many a spiritualist. It is immensely empowering to be able to address things like "respect" and "love" without having to throw up one's hands and say that it's beyond the human brain to fathom. Stupidity. Where do you think those things come from?
-
:D
I think you're finally in your right mind-frame, so allow me to take this as an opportunity to clarify and put an end to our dispute.
The sad part is that I think you're serious rather than just trying to take a personal jab at me.
I was serious. And that was a jab, but with a difference. The jab was at the shimmer of discriminatory attitude you showed in that statement, but not you in person. That attitude emerges from basic tribalistic instincts, hard-wired into genetic structure and neural foundation, that helps species survive but also weakens species from within by introducing racism and sexism, and often a new level of racism such as the one you portrayed recently. You were right to point that article with your opinion, but I could sense how a certain addiction to tribal attitude began to corrupt your judgement. It was also the score of misinformation you were relying on just to get your opinion enforced; no, you're better than this. Seek the absolute truth, because that's the essence of the Springtime of Youth. Sexism is more deeply ingrained than you think, and there are subtle methods to fix them, though not all perfect.
I know you are wise and rational, but so am I (by a fraction, if not as much as you), and I'd hate to watch someone like you fall into the same depth of corruption as Fundamentalists, Radical Anti-Theists, Sexists, etc. and for that I'd gladly become a punching bag for you, or punch you for that matter. I'd gladly stand in your way and make you wait enough to give you some thought, so you could simply have another perception to look at, then step on my shoulder and jump to a better direction.
In short, you helped me learn plenty, so at times even I ought to repay the debt.
It is immensely empowering to be able to address things like "respect" and "love" without having to throw up one's hands and say that it's beyond the human brain to fathom. Stupidity. Where do you think those things come from?
Well, some people take that as literally true, but several others know what it exactly means. See what I mean here: See truth beyond truth, and try not to fall in the traps of your own prejudice. I'll just specify a starting point towards this philosophy, then you're on your own (because the SoY don't like being spoon-fed, and the best of philosophies should be realized on your own; also, I don't have much time on my hands), thus: Emotions are retained within our mind, but despite the rational axiom we still are unable to comprehend the mysterious seas that swell within our mind.
...Yeah, for a full-fledged linguist like you, it's gonna be difficult to figure out what it means. But here's a hint: Are you aware of the Law of Form (in Linguistic Psychology and Philosophy of Reason)? Also, another hint: These emotions are not necessarily Divine, but are simply labelled as such since Divine is usually a broader term in many languages, often meaning somewhere along the lines of "Unearthly" or "Beyond Comprehension", and the philosophy isn't necessarily stupid -- just intangible (yet).
-
Some excellent psychological research. (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/careers/career-advice/on-the-job/why-we-shun-creativity-in-the-work-place/article2157848/)
You come up with a great new idea at work, or at home. Or a political leader actually tries something “new and different” when faced with a previously intractable problem. But then, rather than grateful acceptance, or even a fair hearing, the idea is squashed, ridiculed, or otherwise ignored.
Sound familiar? It should. As anyone who has ever suggested a creative solution knows, people often avoid the uncomfortable uncertainty of novel solutions regardless of potential benefit. Creativity, no matter how much we say we like it, frequently elicits what my grandmother used to warn about: “Too smart is half stupid” (for a current illustration, look no further than the Obama administration).
Now, new research, soon to appear in Psychological Science, titled “The Bias Against Creativity: Why People Desire But Reject Creative Ideas,” empirically documents how our resistance to uncertainty makes the “old ways” far stickier than they should be given the practical benefits of creative, new solutions. Once again, the biases built into our minds leave us simultaneously moving in opposite directions; we like creativity but avoid creative ideas because creative ideas are too, in a word, creative.
Also, 9/11 Psychology: Just How Resilient Were We? (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2092130,00.html)
9/11 was devastating in terms of lives lost — nearly 3,000 people were killed in the attacks — but it was not physically destructive (with the obvious exception of Ground Zero) on the same massive scale. Since most of New York City remained structurally intact, an intense focus was placed on the psychological needs of its residents (and, to a lesser extent, on residents of Washington, D.C.) One month after 9/11, the National Institute for Mental Health gathered together a group of international experts to figure out how to best help a traumatized population, but as a new report in American Psychologist explains, there was no clear model of what to expect and how to proceed.
“After reviewing the extant literature on postdisaster and posttraumatic interventions, panelists acknowledged that given inconsistencies and gaps in the literature base, a clearer framework for disaster behavioral response was needed,” write Patricia J. Watson and Melissa J. Brymer, both of the National Center for Child Traumatic Stress at UCLA, and George Bonanno of Columbia University in a special issue titled “9/11: Ten Years Later.”
At the time, the mental health community was flying blind, but the events unfolding before them have since taught us much about the long-term, psychological impact of mass violence. “In a way, 9/11 put trauma on the map and Americans psychologists started paying more attention to it and could actually study what was happening,” says George Bonanno, one of the authors who contributed to the special issue. “Before that, we really didn’t know how people would be affected on a population level.”
And just for the heck of it... Windows 8! (http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/09/windows-8-boot-time-to-be-drastically-reduced-shown-off-in-vide/)
-
I had posted in my journal and somebody else pointed out the same lack of scientific basis. So, it remains merely an anecdotal reality rather than necessarily a human fact. Nevertheless, it's highly testable and I'd like to see that study done.
Oh, certainly. I'd be interested to see how the findings would match up to the (mostly monotheistic) religious rhetoric involving idolatry, myself. It's a good talking point, if nothing else!
-
Fantastic site (http://gayhomophobe.com/).
The level of hypocrisy in the religious right community is astounding.
-
Confronting Meaninglessness, (http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/confronting-meaninglessness.html) one of life's mid-high level dilemma.
-
And just for the heck of it... Windows 8! (http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/09/windows-8-boot-time-to-be-drastically-reduced-shown-off-in-vide/)
Windows 8 already?! I just got my Windows 7 box this year! :o
-
I dunno, they claimed Windows 7 had a five second boot time. Then they released it. And I really dislike how Windows 8 looks EXACTLY like Windows Mobile 7. I'll stick with Win7 and WinXP (through VMWare)
-
And I'll stick to my Ubuntu desktop. XD (Well, dual-boot, anyway)
Here's another UI presentation in Windows 8. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxJQotodEVQ)
Considering the fact that ever second release of Windows sucks (95, 2000, Vista) but what comes next is often great, there's a good chance that 8 won't be received positively especially with the huge risk in system overhaul Microsoft is taking -- though it's a good thing they do, and it shows that they care about innovation (despite stealing ideas from KDE and other Linux platforms). The fast boot itself is what might make us take a peek, and also the curious design.
But I do know this: consumers may find this new interface extremely pretty and attractive, but power-users like me are going to lag behind. People who constantly multitask or merely care about getting work done may find themselves switching to either Mac or Linux entirely, or stay in the refuge of Windows 7 until the support expires.
Of course, I could be wrong. :wink:
-
No I think you're totally right, Windows dominates the corporate world, but not for long if it starts looking more like a gamebox than a workstation.
-
I really hope you're right, guys. (Note: I am totally fine with people using Windows, if that's what floats their boat. I am not fine with them assuming that I have Windows, and then complaining because I can't read [document in closed-source Windows-only format]. A little more variety in deployed OSs in business environments might help to torpedo that assumption.)
-
Seen planets with multiple moons? How about planets with multiple Suns? (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/16/science/space/16planet.html?_r=1)
Yeah, Namek is real. :D Let's go get those Dragonballs!
-
I really hope you're right, guys. (Note: I am totally fine with people using Windows, if that's what floats their boat. I am not fine with them assuming that I have Windows, and then complaining because I can't read [document in closed-source Windows-only format]. A little more variety in deployed OSs in business environments might help to torpedo that assumption.)
It would be good to get more variety. I think most corporations are satisfied with their Windows XP boxes though.
-
And I'll stick to my Ubuntu desktop. XD (Well, dual-boot, anyway)
Here's another UI presentation in Windows 8. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxJQotodEVQ)
Considering the fact that ever second release of Windows sucks (95, 2000, Vista) but what comes next is often great, there's a good chance that 8 won't be received positively especially with the huge risk in system overhaul Microsoft is taking -- though it's a good thing they do, and it shows that they care about innovation (despite stealing ideas from KDE and other Linux platforms). The fast boot itself is what might make us take a peek, and also the curious design.
But I do know this: consumers may find this new interface extremely pretty and attractive, but power-users like me are going to lag behind. People who constantly multitask or merely care about getting work done may find themselves switching to either Mac or Linux entirely, or stay in the refuge of Windows 7 until the support expires.
Of course, I could be wrong. :wink:
Quite the contrary, I think this is exactly the direction user interfaces should be going. Current user interface design is cluttered, relies on learning lots of abstract concepts for managing windows, files, and applications along with confusing and inconsistent mouse click conventions, and encourages the kind of multi-taskng that distracts you instead of helping you get things done.
I think businesses have a lot to gain from these newer, tablet-influenced user interfaces. In particular, form and workflow based applications and database frontends would benefit a lot from less user interface clutter, especially for businesses wanting to employ lots of generally unskilled labor.
-
You're right on that; the current design is inconvenient (hence my preference of Ubuntu with Unity or Gnome3 over Windows). The new, imaginative concept on tile-based interface is pretty intriguing and simpler to use, but I'm actually worried about speed of use and multi-tasking. I'm sure there will be ways to do this, but at the time I'm not sure if I can imagine myself satisfied with switching to and fro Metro-mode or sweeping past countless tiles just to find my app.
On the plus point, Windows 8 will have an App Store! :D Just like Ubuntu Software Center.
-
Noel, you sly dog, you! As much as your "Meaning of Life" idea (or at least the way you describe it) is absolutely bullshit catered to grab public attention (http://www.spring.org.uk/2011/08/the-meaning-of-life-in-under-300-words.php), you still place positive insights on what a human being actually requires in a long run to have a satisfactory and worthy life! Kudos! :D
Also, a message Anti-Theists (but not Atheists; Atheists are cool): Hah! In your face! Religion actually does play a major role in establishing a balanced moral compass, even if people aren't really religious or believers themselves; this moral judgement helps individuals greatly in a long run.
Oh, and here's a gift to all us SoY spirits: http://www.spring.org.uk/2011/09/4-life-savouring-strategies-which-ones-work-best.php
Also, as much as I kept telling people that decisiveness and judgement are carried well by human emotions and not logic, all I got was criticism and horrid beatings. But now the jokes' on you, because the heart knows it. Anyone who disagrees can go screw themselves: http://www.spring.org.uk/2011/09/quick-decisions-go-with-your-gut.php
ART AND SCIENCE UNITEEEEEEEEEEE!
-
Heads up.
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/uars/status.html
I think this is rather informative for those unfortunate enough to be in this thing's path of destruction. Hopefully it lands in an ocean.
-
I'd prefer it didn't happen for a hundred years or so, but being taken out by a satellite somewhat appeals to my inner geek.
-
http://www.livescience.com/16194-crime-eyewitnesses-mistakes.html
We need a proper change in our current judicial systems. Vidoq, Holmes, Wright... where are you guys?
-
http://www.nbi.ku.dk/english/news/news11/light_from_galaxy_clusters_confirm_theory_of_relativity_/
Einstein is unstoppable. His spirit continues to reveal the mysteries and wonders of the universe even after his death.
-
To give without expecting any returns. To love without expecting them to love you in return. Sounds foolish? After all, everyone looks out for themselves, and people don't see why others could be this generous beyond their selfish purpose.
But for those who are that emotionally generous, they know the true value beyond such empathetic acts. I've often stumbled in explaining precisely how good it feels, or what paradise it helps create, but I think Celestine Chua (and Charles Dickens) can describe this better than anyone else can.
Read on: http://celestinechua.com/blog/are-you-emotionally-generous/
So tell me, forum: What makes you happy?
-
On studying Psychology, the effects of language, and also emotions and instincts, I came upon something called Regression (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_(psychology)), an impulsive escape of an ego to its primitive developmental form in terms of defensive. Theory states that when your chain of thought strikes a cord, whether a realization or consequence, a person would push the idea away from his thoughts but keep its resentment (or similar) at an instinctive, defensive mode so as to recognize and "purge" it.
Upon analyzing my own behaviors since the past few days I realize that I was also affected by compulsive regressions: I was a silent and reserved fellow, you see, but Mary somehow "convinced" me to open my heart and belong to the world, even if I have to blabber like a fool for it. Somehow, finding myself hurting a few Compendiumites unintentionally (and emotionally hurting my ex-girlfriend over... things) my overwhelming regret and worry almost forced me to revert back to the primitive, reserved poet I once was. Regressions also tend to shut off all (or most) logic, and I temporarily became a helpless child.
Well, almost. While careful Adaptive Regressions are beneficial for egoistic development, there are also some benefits to actually fighting it. Of course, actually fighting regressions might require you to seek help from family, friends or therapists to process things over because when an individual is compelled by the impulse it's an incredibly difficult battle.
-
Here's an interesting read:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2016527774_medical19.html
-
A bit light on actual substance, but interesting nonetheless. There is an ongoing trend, it seems, to admit that animals are more human than we've given them by admitting that they have emotions (or more complex emotions) than has previously been indicated. Here's the article: http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2011/10/20/141452847/do-animals-grieve?sc=fb&cc=fp
-
Maybe I am just weird, but good lord, felting is an interesting topic. Unlike other cloth, it isn't twisted into thread and then woven into fabric, no. It is pounded, aggressively, until the fibers stick together. And the process that goes into making a hat with it?! Ho ho! (curses, I totally picked that "ho ho" up from Josh) There's twisting, and rubbing, and rolling, and pounding, and malleting. The entire thing can start at three times or more the size of the final product, since the cloth is made as the hat itself it being made. For more information: http://www.felthats.com/hats_info/making_felt.html
-
Hey, that is interesting!
And I also "Ho ho hoh!" in real life. =)
-
"Ho ho hoh!"
And a Happy New Year!
-
Resource for women's halloween costumes that aren't all about "sexy". (http://takebackhalloween.org/) (And it's informative, too—check out the "notable women" section. Count me among the people who had never even heard of Lise Meitner before. It's clear she deserves to be better-known than she is.)
-
Interesting link, Alfy! Agreed, I've never really experienced cosplays (though I have watched em on TV and Internet), I've never really seen a woman play as the heroic Boudicca, the Shaman Queen Himiko, or the goddess Xi Wang Mu.
And of course, Rani of Jhansi, Lakshmi Bai (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_aXa8RiPWIPo/S-Gv1sgMdTI/AAAAAAAADIs/kzAR8wmt5-g/s1600/RaniJhansi.jpg). You don't just cosplay her -- no, you have to be as badass as her! Your every word should be law, your glare should strike fear in the hearts of your enemies. Yup! She'd send a chill down Magus' spine.
-
:? Oh, I wish there's halloween here too.
-
Google Plus wants you to add writers: http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/24/google-wants-you-to-add-writers-on-google-so-do-writers/
And...
Scientists create logic gates out of gut bacteria! http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/24/scientists-build-logic-gates-out-of-gut-bacteria-then-hopefully/
... *pukes*
So Lavos was a biological robot spaceship after all!
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8862275/Meditation-improves-the-immune-system-research-shows.html
And here, Josh can begin trolling about "Science vs Religious Traditions". That'll be amusing.
-
The Viking may not be Zealean, but they still used the Sunstone! (http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/11/the-viking-sunstone-revealed.html?ref=hp)
-
NASA-sponsored study finds lengthy spaceflight can impair astronauts' vision (http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/05/nasa-sponsored-study-finds-lengthy-spaceflight-can-impair-astron/)
NASA has of course long been monitoring the affects of spaceflight on astronauts' health, but a recent study sponsored by the space agency is now shedding some new light on one potentially significant problem: their eyesight. While the study only involved seven astronauts, all reported that they suffered some degree of blurry vision while on the space station for more than six months, and some reported that the effects persisted for months after they returned to Earth. The study also found specific abnormalities in all of the astronauts affected, including changes in tissue, fluids, nerves and other structures in the back of the eye. Those problems are all relatively minor and correctable, but researchers are now also taking the findings and working on ways to determine who might be most resistant to any such changes, which could be critical on something as long as a three-year mission to Mars. Additional details of the study are in the press release after the break, and the full report is published in the latest issue of Ophthalmology.
-
The Alternatives to Marriage Project:
http://www.unmarried.org/ (http://www.unmarried.org/)
I can't believe I haven't encountered this resource before..! It has a great deal of useful information for people who are not interested in marriage or traditional family life in general, be they childfree, LGBTQ, polyamorous, or simply involved in unmarried domestic partnerships. The site is not opposed to marriage, but these groups need plenty of support in a society that generally buys into conservative rhetoric about "traditional values," and I'm glad there are organizations advocating and educating on their (our) behalf.
-
...be they childfree, LGBTQ, polyamorous, or simply involved in unmarried domestic partnerships...
Umm... I'm Polymorous. :oops:
Although, at least for folks who don't prefer to marry, that's actually a fantastic info there!
-
Why the embarrassment? I'm poly myself. =D
-
Why the embarrassment? I'm poly myself. =D
I'll tell you why eventually. XD Now just isn't the right moment. But despite what the world thinks, why am I not surprised with you too being poly?
-
Wikipedia Article on Mary Wollstonecraft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Wollstonecraft[/url)
An interesting figure whose work I have never read. She was the mother of Mary Shelley, the author who wrote Frankenstein. Her work occurred at the dawn of the feminist movement. I am continually impressed by just how new some ideas are. From merely the year 1798:
Female friendships are central to both of Wollstonecraft's novels, but it is the friendship between Maria and Jemima, the servant charged with watching over her in the insane asylum, that is the most historically significant. This friendship, based on a sympathetic bond of motherhood, between an upper-class woman and a lower-class woman is one of the first moments in the history of feminist literature that hints at a cross-class argument, that is, that women of different economic positions have the same interests because they are women.
Today it is trivially uncontroversial that people would have strong relationships between economic classes, and, moreover, that people between classes would be united into other subcultures and movements. But it wasn't until the United States was already a country that this idea was applied to what would become the feminist movement.
-
The Future Under Glass (http://worrydream.com/ABriefRantOnTheFutureOfInteractionDesign/)
I was reading this earlier this evening and it occurred to me that this would be a good article for me to pass along here for those of you who might be wondering why I care so much about handedness, and why right-handers (and many left-handers!) tend to be totally oblivious to the costs imposed upon left-handed people by a society which generally ignores them.
The article doesn't have anything to do with handedness, though. It's a rant about how many fictional mock-ups of "the interfaces of the future" essentially ignore the functional capabilities of the human hands.
-
That was fascinating. Thank you for sharing.
This reminds me of some arguments I've gotten into with friends who read from Kindles and Nooks. I refuse to buy a Kindle. If they want to, go ahead, but I won't. I love the feeling of a book in my hands and the sensation of turning a page. My friends will dismiss these reasons as ridiculous, but they just don't get it. I want to physically interact with my books. I don't want them to be sterile and flat on a screen, lacking any of that wonderful book smell. My hands yearn to turn pages and pull books off of shelves and dog-ear pages that make me cry. My hands were not meant to flip a page with a swipe of my finger or the click of a button.
Edit:: Post number 1758, the year Robespierre was born!
/happy dance
-
Hah! Happy...er...Robespierre's Birthday Post Count Day!
-
NPR article on birth-control and abortion (http://www.npr.org/2011/11/09/142097521/how-birth-control-and-abortion-became-politicized?sc=fb&cc=fp)
-
I love the feeling of a book in my hands and the sensation of turning a page. My friends will dismiss these reasons as ridiculous, but they just don't get it. I want to physically interact with my books. I don't want them to be sterile and flat on a screen, lacking any of that wonderful book smell. My hands yearn to turn pages and pull books off of shelves and dog-ear pages that make me cry. My hands were not meant to flip a page with a swipe of my finger or the click of a button.
Hah! That's what Karen told me too once, and I concur. Holding a traditional book is irresistible and less distracting or stressful for the eyes compared to a Kindle or Nook, and hence I buy my books via Flipkart or local bookstores. But I wouldn't mind an Android phone (which I can't afford) which can save me from lugging my books around especially when these digital books cannot be damaged. I still await Qualcomm's "flexible paper" display that make screens bend like paper and even look like paper (aka, no glare), but are screens nonetheless.
Still, I have an irresistible pang to quote you, Saj. XD
-
Did you know that you can wash away your troubles with soap? (http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/you-can-wash-away-your-troubles-with-soap.html) Religious Baptism suddenly makes sense.
Also, Fetus are "sort of" alive. (http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/a-fetus-can-sense-moms-psychological-state.html)
Also, interesting musing on Religion. (http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/were-only-human/why-do-we-have-religion-anyway.html)
Also, lair of Kraken discovered! (http://www.livescience.com/16470-kraken-sea-monster-lair-discovered.html)
-
This reminds me of some arguments I've gotten into with friends who read from Kindles and Nooks. I refuse to buy a Kindle. If they want to, go ahead, but I won't. I love the feeling of a book in my hands and the sensation of turning a page. My friends will dismiss these reasons as ridiculous, but they just don't get it. I want to physically interact with my books. I don't want them to be sterile and flat on a screen, lacking any of that wonderful book smell. My hands yearn to turn pages and pull books off of shelves and dog-ear pages that make me cry. My hands were not meant to flip a page with a swipe of my finger or the click of a button.
I received a Kindle as a gift prior to my last international trip, and having an e-book while touring a foreign land for a couple weeks is grand. As much as I love physical books, when packing for travel, size and weight matter. Having an arbitrarily large library at my fingertips in a device that was lighter and thinner than a paperback was a great boon.
That said, my present pattern is that I tend to only use if for public domain works, while picking up newer books physically.
-
I own a Nook for a few reasons:
- It allows me to read material from the internet - my blogroll, academic articles, PDFs, literary magazines -- without staring at a computer.
- When I travel it's really nice not to have to carry five or seven books around with me, which has been my habit since I was small. (I don't read all those books while I travel-- I rarely have time to finish more than two-- yet I seem find it impossible to do without them! It annoys the hell out of my family...)
- Fuck Amazon, they're ruining publishing :)
But I totally understand that "nothing feels like a book" line of reasoning. My Nook doesn't feel like a friend, and I firmly believe that Books are Friends.
-
When I travel it's really nice not to have to carry five or seven books around with me, which has been my habit since I was small. (I don't read all those books while I travel-- I rarely have time to finish more than two...
(http://a.deviantart.net/avatars/p/e/petrifiedplz.gif?1)
But I totally understand that "nothing feels like a book" line of reasoning. My Nook doesn't feel like a friend, and I firmly believe that Books are Friends.
Unfortunately, books probably see me as their sworn enemy. Everytime I pick a book, bookmarks at hand, and approach midway without taking notice of the page number, suddenly the wind blows and the books shuts, dropping the bookmark and mocking me with their big, scary contour-teeth, "You'll never know!"
CURSE YOU, GOETHE'S FAUSTUS! CURSE YOU!!!
Mind if I ask you what blogroll and literary magazines, BTW?
-
Use a paperclip as a bookmark, the wind can't touch it
-
I use sticky tabs or tape as bookmarks.
word @ the book smell, especially for older books.
-
No link; just my views on Veterans Day.
Veterans Day is a day to honor the service and sacrifices of our uniformed personnel—our fellow citizens and near-citizens. It is a day to show our appreciation to small people who took part in a big ordeal. This human element too easily gets lost in the endless tug between those who glorify our military and those who demonize it.
Conservatives and others with a martial bent often use the military as a cudgel to blunt their opponents’ ideological opinions. Consider the common refrain, “The troops fought and died for your right to criticize them!” That sentiment exploits and demeans the service of veterans by using them as a stage prop to make an ideological point, and it deceives people into believing that our empathy for the hardships of military servicemembers requires that we never speak ill of the wars those troops are sent off to fight, and never question the integrity of the people who wear those uniforms. This is wrong.
To every fool who says that without the military we would have no free speech, no American way of life, it is easy to point out that, without the broader American population, military and civilian, there would be no American way of life to defend. The work of a soldier is not inherently greater than the work of someone among general public—the trash collectors, the office assistants, the retail clerks. No one’s work is noble to the exclusion of all other occupations, for it is the work of all Americans that contributes to the unified character of the nation. There are many other jobs that are grueling, dangerous, and unappreciated. Nor, for that matter, is it sufficient to characterize the nation solely by the jobs we all hold, and, in that spirit, our members of the armed service are not ethically superior, or our intellectual betters, simply because they have served in uniform. Indeed, many who serve in the military are vile creatures, as are many in the general public, and both the military and the wider public also have their paragons of everything fine in our human nature.
Also importantly, the military does not exist to philosophically defend our national convictions like free speech. It exists to physically defend our borders—and, if you like, to project our physical power across the world. Soldiers don’t go to war to defend our free speech. They go to war to defend Cleveland. That’s the ideal, anyhow. The reality is that they also go to war sometimes to defend nothing but the interests of overprivileged rich people.
Veterans Day is not a day to hash out all of these things. To our national shame, military veterans get a day of their own—two, in fact, when you count Memorial Day—whereas all other workers just get Labor Day, and no singular recognition. However, I think this is a failing that should be corrected not by eliminating Veterans Day (or Memorial Day), but by putting more emphasis on the celebration and thanks of other people’s hard work.
In the meantime, Veterans Day is an occasion to acknowledge and thank people who have served in uniform for their service. It is that simple.
-
A History of the World in 100 Objects (http://www.bbc.co.uk/ahistoryoftheworld/programme)
I'm not usually gung-ho about list-format philosophy (i.e., that people will digest more information more readily if it is partitioned into lists), but this fascinating documentary collaboration between the British Museum (pip pip!) and the BBC (cheerio!) seems worth some attention. I have only made it a couple of episodes through, however, so I can't vouch for the whole thing.
It's also available in book format, by the same title, for those who prefer to read than listen.
-
NY Times Magazine: Teaching Good Sex (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/20/magazine/teaching-good-sex.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all)
This magazine feature on a private school's sex education program has a lot to say. Most importantly, it suggests what sex education should be like in America today, a beautiful proposal which starkly illustrates how Christian fundamentalists have essentially betrayed the next generations. Sexuality is a core component of human identity, yet in our schools we are teaching almost nothing about healthy sexual maturity. Instead, the author of the story ventures to suggest that most kids are teaching themselves about sex through pornography, which is horrifying.
Here's the Christian Policy on Sex, best as I understand it:
1. No abortions for anyone. Goal: Forced births, ruined lives, and more Christians!
2. No welfare for the needy. Goal: Children and their parents will not escape from their plight.
3. No sex education for children. Goal: Total sexual ignorance for young adults.
Then:
4A. Ignorant youths commit sex crimes because their parents probably hated, neglected, or abused them, and they had nothing better than pornography to teach them about sexuality.
5A. Death penalty. (Praise Jesus!)
OR:
4B. Ignorant youths get themselves or their partners pregnant unintentionally because they didn't know any better.
5B. See Point 1.
Argh!!
In a bit of irony, the school in the feature is a private school with a religious grounding (in an affluent liberal community), whereas secular public schools aren't allowed to teach such classes themselves due to interference from Christian extremists, who have power over the public education system. Also ironically, the teacher himself, who seems to be good at his job, is a practicing Catholic, yet one of those professionals who puts aside his beliefs in the divine to accept the facts of reality when it comes to carrying out his livelihood and teaching adolescents.
Why don't the reasonable people in this country raise such a fuss as the fundamentalist fanatics do? Things would change so quickly, and so much for the better.
-
NY Times Magazine: Teaching Good Sex (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/20/magazine/teaching-good-sex.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all)
Here's the Christian Policy on Sex, best as I understand it:
1. No abortions for anyone. Goal: Forced births, ruined lives, and more Christians!
2. No welfare for the needy. Goal: Children and their parents will not escape from their plight.
3. No sex education for children. Goal: Total sexual ignorance for young adults.
Then:
4A. Ignorant youths commit sex crimes because their parents probably hated, neglected, or abused them, and they had nothing better than pornography to teach them about sexuality.
5A. Death penalty. (Praise Jesus!)
OR:
4B. Ignorant youths get themselves or their partners pregnant unintentionally because they didn't know any better.
5B. See Point 1.
That's a damn good article. And now I know there's a snazzy "list" command! 8D
Sex-ed didn't exist in my middle school--I changed schools for high school, so I'm not sure if it would have been covered later in the curriculum, but knowing that place, prolly not.
As for my general experience with Christians at my schools (Private fundamental Christian, and then Private Lutheran):
1. No abortions for anyone. Yup, pretty much. I disagree with your goals, because those are not so much goals as inevitable results of flawed reasoning. The goal is really just 'killing babies is bad, stop it.' The effects are pretty much forced births, ruined lives, though. Not necessarily more Christians, but probably.
2. No welfare for the needy. Um...no? Not in my experience, at least, though the Christians I was around were not extremely militant, at least. Nothing was said either favoring or condemning welfare for the needy.
3. No sex education for children. (Well, we had some sex-ed, but it was mostly about the dangers, of course.) Goal: If they don't know about it, they won't want it! Nothing could possibly go wrong! Honestly, it's a ridiculous taboo to try to keep people abstinent...it doesn't work. However, most Christians feel that if they told people how to have safe sex, then they'd take that initiative to go out and have it, and of course we can't have that! No sex before marriage! (ptooie!)
Then:
4A. Ignorant youths commit sex crimes because their parents probably hated, neglected, or abused them, and they had nothing better than pornography to teach them about sexuality. Wait, is this Christian OPINION, or are you saying that this is actually what happens?
5A. Death penalty. Uh...no, that was never condoned where I was from. Even if I was from Texas, almost everyone in authority (the students are another matter) disagreed with the death penalty.
OR:
4B. Ignorant youths get themselves or their partners pregnant unintentionally because they didn't know any better. Yeah, that happens.
5B. See Point 1. Yep![/list]
If it's not obvious, I don't agree with the 'no sex before marriage' nonsense. And as for my own sex-ed...well, it was never a big deal. I didn't look into it much until I actually felt like I might want to do it myself, and at that point I went to credible sources--including my mom, who was completely chill about the whole thing--to find out about it. The way I see it, pornography is sort of a reference for interesting things that could be done, but it's not anything to base your sex life on.
-
As for my general experience with Christians at my schools (Private fundamental Christian, and then Private Lutheran):
(...)
2. No welfare for the needy. Um...no? Not in my experience, at least, though the Christians I was around were not extremely militant, at least. Nothing was said either favoring or condemning welfare for the needy.
Some Christians are good about offering aid to the needy, but it usually comes with strings attached and thus is not true charity. A smaller nucleus are genuinely charitable, and I do appreciate their efforts if not their perspective. But for the most part, my experiences and studies have led to the conclusion that most Christians don't care at all, and most of those who do use welfare as a hook to win converts.
The "welfare state" is essentially a modern contrivance. The idea of free libraries, free education, food stamps, disability payments, and other forms of welfare to the entire population (rather than the privileged class) is essentially new. This taxpayer-funded welfare system or "social charity," if you will, supplants the traditional charity system. It attracts huge opposition from many segments of society, especially the religious quarter. The premise typically goes "It should be my choice to spend my money to help others." Such a mindset is not charitable. Charity is wishing tushantin to feel better after nearly being killed in a motor vehicle wreck even though I find him a detestable person. Charity is giving a friend a breathing mask because there is mold in her house that's been sending her to the hospital, when that mask took essentially everything in my bank account at the time. And charity is paying my taxes with the full knowledge and support of the reality that the government will spend that money helping out not just decent people but all people, including the religiously fundamentalist and the grossly sexist, because anyone who deserves to live deserves not to go hungry.
I just don't see that sentiment often enough, and certainly not from the Christian quarter. When you think about how pro-religion lobbyists have strangled our public education system so that we do not teach children about one of the most important things they need to learn, that is an assault on our welfare system. It is an assault on the premise that people need to be educated in the ways of the world, so that they can become scientifically literate and thus be much likelier to succeed as individuals. It is an assault on reason, and it's very much more common than it ought to be from people who claim to be the most virtuous in the land. More often, their Christian clubs are just social vehicles to make them feel more important than they've earned.
I can see that perhaps the Lutherans might be less egregious in their offenses than the fundamentalists, but even so you lucked out if you didn't land in an environment that discourages the public welfare system.
3. No sex education for children. (Well, we had some sex-ed, but it was mostly about the dangers, of course.) Goal: If they don't know about it, they won't want it! Nothing could possibly go wrong! Honestly, it's a ridiculous taboo to try to keep people abstinent...it doesn't work. However, most Christians feel that if they told people how to have safe sex, then they'd take that initiative to go out and have it, and of course we can't have that! No sex before marriage! (ptooie!)
Exactly. (Lest you think all I ever do is disagree with people.)
Then:
4A. Ignorant youths commit sex crimes because their parents probably hated, neglected, or abused them, and they had nothing better than pornography to teach them about sexuality. Wait, is this Christian OPINION, or are you saying that this is actually what happens?
This is actually what happens. Not 100 percent of the time, but way more than 0 percent. When I went on my backpacking trip last year, one of the reasons I went all over the South was to test some of my prejudices and stereotypes about Southerners. Imagine my disappointment to learn that I had been mostly correct.
Here's how it works: Parents raise their children poorly--often with a measure of abuse added in. Sometimes the parents are well-meaning, but are just too ignorant to set a good example. Other times the parents are rotten individuals. (I include family arrangements involving single parents, stepparents, guardians, etc.) The children of these parents thus do not have access to good answers from the most important people in the world (from their point of view) from whom to get answers. Meanwhile, they are developing their sexuality. Then, due to religious interference in the system, the public schools--and most religious private ones--don't teach the children anything about sex education other than to abstain from it until marriage, and perhaps a few words about STDs and unwanted pregnancies. These children are set up to fail.
I remember my sex-ed unit. It lasted a single class period, I think. All I remember is that the book described various sexual activities and listed them as "green light," "yellow light," or "red light." That was pretty much it.
A bully who used to give me trouble in eighth grade, had a kid by twelfth. Who wins in that?
5A. Death penalty. Uh...no, that was never condoned where I was from. Even if I was from Texas, almost everyone in authority (the students are another matter) disagreed with the death penalty.
I'll take you at your word, but your experience is exceptional. Christians are some of the most blunt death penalty supporters there are. In my never-ending quest to stay informed, I frequently come across their comments on news articles. They call for people to be put to death at the drop of a hat. It's not just Christians, of course, but usually Christians give themselves away through their language and cultural tropes. A hateful, hateful, fearful bunch of losers.
4B. Ignorant youths get themselves or their partners pregnant unintentionally because they didn't know any better. Yeah, that happens.
It happens less with positive, comprehensive sex education.
The way I see it, pornography is sort of a reference for interesting things that could be done, but it's not anything to base your sex life on.
I never even thought of pornography as a model for adolescents to develop their sexual identity. The NY Times article opened my eyes to that. It's a disgrace that any percentage of our nation's children is learning about sexuality from porn.
-
Sometimes, believing that everything’s the worst can ultimately be for the best. Well, that's what the docs say:
http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/18/8884169-anti-thanksgiving-complaining-can-be-a-good-thing
-
Double post: Thought this might go into the Violence thread, but meh:
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/halloween-horror-movies-love-afraid/story?id=14803728
-
And here's a fascinating experiment proving the usefulness of human perspective ratio and switch:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/art-markman-phd/psychology-response-obstacles_b_1079567.html
-
Stephen Colbert Interviews Neil deGrasse Tyson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXh9RQCvxmg)
This 90-minute interview is the best interview I have watched in at least a couple of years. It is absolutely worth your time. It isn't necessarily educational, but it's very stirring. I think I would have to say that, among prominent living figures, Neil deGrasse Tyson comes closer to my own view of the world than anybody else of whom I am aware.
-
I'm looking forward to that video. I've been giving serious thought to writing in Dr. Tyson for president in the coming (and in all likelihood, all following) presidential election.
-
While translating of poetry is common, Aesthetic Rewrites of those translations are not, since it takes an incredibly capable poet to not only understand both languages but also effectively transfer emotions, beauty and art, the truer meaning of it. When I tried my hand at rewriting Javed Akhtar's Urdu poems I was worried it may not be a 100% literal in definition and verse, but it did indeed carry a 100% aesthetic feel.
Here's a couple of useful links:
http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/7087.html
http://books.google.co.in/books?id=jXQ5lS7PawMC&pg=PA97&lpg=PA97&dq=aesthetic+rewriting+in+the+translation+of+poetry&source=bl&ots=AtK2nYzBwK&sig=NXurfpT_StQ53m82qQBIF0Fbja4&hl=en&ei=hezUTvqRBcfrrQfPtpCtDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&sqi=2&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=aesthetic%20rewriting%20in%20the%20translation%20of%20poetry&f=false
-
http://www.npr.org/2011/11/25/142780599/why-we-give-not-why-you-think
No comments. Just listen / read, and judge for yourselves.
-
http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/
-
I watched the interview of Dr. Tyson. What an amazing individual! The world needs more people like him, and in positions of power. I cannot praise the man enough; seek out interviews with him, talks he's given, and listen for yourself.
-
Neil deGrasse Tyson is awesome. I, too, wish we had an army of people like him. The world could be a better place!
-
Neil deGrasse Tyson is awesome. I, too, wish we had an army of people like him. The world could be a better place!
If the world was a better place, why would you need an army? XD
-
Gargantuan mountains buried beneath the ice in Antarctica (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15749757). This is fascinating. That's some H.P. Lovecraft shit right there!
/insert Mountains of Madness fangirl squee
-
Gargantuan mountains buried beneath the ice in Antarctica (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15749757). This is fascinating. That's some H.P. Lovecraft shit right there!
/insert Mountains of Madness fangirl squee
Weeeeeee neeed Indiana Jones!
Hah, this research quite coincides with the experiments I conducted upon myself and a few friends few years ago, by analyzing and keeping notes of a person's emotional state and hence the probability of certain actions and moods. My experiments were based, out of sheer curiosity, on the effects of vegetarianism and certain meets on a person's mind. This one is more elaborate:
http://www.shape.com/blogs/shape-your-life/does-having-sweet-tooth-make-you-sweeter-person
-
A Message to Women from a Man: You Are Not "Crazy". (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/yashar-hedayat/a-message-to-women-from-a_1_b_958859.html)
I'm not good at summing up articles, but it's an interesting read, especially for those of you who are feminists (so about 90% of the board).
Edit:: Yay post number
1789!
_________
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v716/bittersunday/frprincesses.png)
-
Did you make that yourself or are there actually other people who have superimposed the faces of the leaders of the French Revolution on the bodies of Disney's Princesses?!
-
Did you make that yourself or are there actually other people who have superimposed the faces of the leaders of the French Revolution on the bodies of Disney's Princesses?!
Other people, good sir, other people.
That alone gives me faith in humanity.
Edit:: Random pictures for the next few posts or so. No regrets.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v716/bittersunday/generalsecurity.gif)
-
Do you like it hot? (http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/anthropology-in-practice/2011/12/02/why-do-some-like-it-hot/)
-
unbelievable.
http://newsvoice.se/2011/12/02/us-senate-declares-the-entire-usa-to-be-a-battleground/
:picardno
-
Hey! That means I can call myself up from the Selective Service, commission myself as my own war battalion, and legally arrest Karl Rove for crimes against humanity!
Right? Right?
-
I believe this is a highly informative picture.
-
Aside with the American government trying to corrupt America, this is even worrisome.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8936797/Irans-Revolutionary-Guards-prepare-for-war.html
-
Aside with the American government trying to corrupt America, this is even worrisome.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8936797/Irans-Revolutionary-Guards-prepare-for-war.html
And a related link:
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/03/world/corruption-perceptions-index/index.html
-
http://venturebeat.com/2011/12/08/google-nabs-square-enix-and-other-game-developers-to-do-native-chrome-games/
Square Enix has agreed to develop games for the Chrome Web Store using Google's new Native Client architecture.
-
Wow. Awesome. It's going to take me a little bit of work to adapt my conception of what a web browser is to imagine myself playing those kinds of games on it. Sounds dumb, but I think of browser environments as "open," and large-scale games environments as "closed." I guess the closest demonstration of what I mean is that I use a browser to do multiple things simultaneously and often run other applications along with it, but with hardcore games I shut down everything else on the computer and focus purely on that.
Speaking of which, I may have trouble using Chrome to play high-end games if I don't shut down 70 or 80 tabs...
-
I'd heard about that program. I know that the Moai game engine supports the native client plugin. It's kind of brilliant on Google's part, in that it turns around and makes the Chromebook make sense for more than a few fringe users.
-
in case you're worried about the internet at stake, december 15th is the deadline whether or not the bill is passed in the senate.
http://americancensorship.org/
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-3261
http://www.chronocompendium.com/Forums/index.php/topic,9620.0.html
-
http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/family/articles/2011/12/11/led_by_the_child_who_simply_knew/?page=full
-
Kodokami, this is definitely not a snipe at your link. You just happen to be the most recent contributor to the thread. Of all the threads on General Discussion, this one is perhaps the most under-utilized and even misused in terms of potential and scope. I hope everyone who uses it will hold themselves to a higher standard moving forward.
-
http://www.bakadesuyo.com/how-to-quickly-and-easily-improve-performance
Hmm...
Four experiments explored whether 2 uniquely human characteristics—counterfactual thinking (imagining alternatives to the past) and the fundamental drive to create meaning in life—are causally related. Rather than implying a random quality to life, the authors hypothesized and found that counterfactual thinking heightens the meaningfulness of key life experiences. Reflecting on alternative pathways to pivotal turning points even produced greater meaning than directly reflecting on the meaning of the event itself. Fate perceptions (“it was meant to be”) and benefit-finding (recognition of positive consequences) were identified as independent causal links between counterfactual thinking and the construction of meaning. Through counterfactual reflection, the upsides to reality are identified, a belief in fate emerges, and ultimately more meaning is derived from important life events.
Source: "From what might have been to what must have been: Counterfactual thinking creates meaning." from Journal of Personality and Social Psychology - Vol 97, Iss 5
I believe storytelling is part of our minds. We like order, not randomness. It's why we believe in lucky numbers and "hot hands." It's why we balk at believing how much power context has over us. Knowing your own story is key.
Related link: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1438509480?ie=UTF8&tag=spacforrent-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1438509480
Marcus Aurelius was Emperor of Rome from 121 to 180. Marcus Aurelius believed that human happiness arises in part from man's acceptance of his duties and responsibilities. He believed that one should accept calmly what cannot be avoided and perform one's duties as well as possible. From the introduction " By the irony of fate this man, so gentle and good, so desirous of quiet joys and a mind free from care, was set at the head of the Roman Empire when great dangers threatened from east and west. For several years he himself commanded his armies in chief. In camp before the Quadi he dates the first book of his Meditations, and shows how he could retire within himself amid the coarse clangour of arms. The pomps and glories which he despised were all his; what to most men is an ambition or a dream, to him was a round of weary tasks which nothing but the stern sense of duty could carry him through. And he did his work well. His wars were slow and tedious, but successful. With a statesman's wisdom he foresaw the danger to Rome of the barbarian hordes from the north, and took measures to meet it. As it was, his settlement gave two centuries of respite to the Roman Empire; had he fulfilled the plan of pushing the imperial frontiers to the Elbe, which seems to have been in his mind, much more might have been accomplished. But death cut short his designs."
-
Source: "Think of Capable Others and You Can Make It! Self-Efficacy Mediates the Effect of Stereotype Activation on Behavior" from the journal "Social Cognition"
Previous research has shown that activating a stereotype can influence subsequent behavior in a stereotype-consistent way. The present research investigates the role of self-efficacy beliefs in this effect. Specifically, we demonstrate that being primed with the stereotype of professors increases knowledge confidence compared to being primed with a less educated profession (Experiments 1 and 2), and that these higher self-efficacy beliefs result in higher performance at a general knowledge test (Experiment 2). These findings are corroborated in Experiment 3 that shows that participants primed with the stereotype of athletes show higher persistence in a physical exercise than participants primed with a stereotype less associated with persistence. Again, behavior was mediated by self-efficacy beliefs. The findings are in line with the active-self account (Wheeler & Petty, 2001; Wheeler, DeMarree, & Petty, 2007) that proposes that priming with a stereotype influences a person's behavior through altered self-representations.
-
Large Hadron Collider discovers 'particle':
http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/22/lhc-discovers-particle-starts-repaying-back-that-five-billion/
http://www.newser.com/story/135966/large-hadron-collider-observes-first-new-particle.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16301908
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iFRCZYEwaYwmqHAAGFxYMUPWDqLQ?docId=CNG.78c73682b558419552bd2994ad74b935.741
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2011/12/20111222144841704162.html
The $5 billion project has finally found something previously unseen, according to the BBC. ATLAS has picked up Chi-b 3P: a Boson (building block of nature) comprised of a "beauty quark" and a "beauty anti-quark," bound together with a strong nuclear force -- believed to exist in nature, but never seen until now.
-
http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2011/12/tsa-insanity-201112
Security researchers point out the uselessness of the TSA. These people are lying to the American people in order to justify robbing people, giving people cancer and molesting children. It's time to end this naked wickedness.
-
The Overjustification Effect (http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/12/14/the-overjustification-effect/): Or, Why You're Not Happy With Your Job.
Also, Why Same-Sex Couples Make Good Parents (http://news.yahoo.com/why-gay-parents-may-best-parents-131902676.html).
I've been waiting for research along the lines of the second one for a while. It's really great that there's actual research now to use when people claim that same sex couples make horrible parents. I do find some of the metrics they use dubious (such as self-reporting for how accepting a person is), but its a good step in the right direction.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photic_sneeze_reflex
I just thought that was how sneezes worked! If you felt a sneeze coming on and you looked at a light, it would make you sneeze! And I sneeze every time I go out in sunlight, too...
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_language
Various forms of gender-neutral language became a common feature in written and spoken versions of many languages in the late twentieth century. Feminists argue that previously the practice of assigning masculine gender to generic antecedents stemmed from language reflecting "the prejudices of the society in which it evolved, and English evolved through most of its history in a male-centered, patriarchal society.
Here, we've always had problems of interpretations: when I exclaim the terms "Manly" or "Be a man", often people understand that I'm talking about Masculinity (by gender), undermining the female gender, or even encouraging people to be gay (seriously; one person did say that last one), even though I actually mean Masculinity (by human trait in both genders) and "Human". While the person saying it may have good intentions, the one listening will react due to the term's patriarchal origins.
In that case, I think the Old English terms of Wer-Man and Wyf-Man were better at describing genders, determining their egalitarian origins, especially since "Man" never really was a gender, but originally stood for "Human".
I say, as writers, we go the similar route! Change the language, and we change the world*. Should there be alternative spellings to "Man" and "Women" (Women)? If nothing else, I'm switching to (and updating) Esperanto (as if it were that easy...)
*I remember Karen once shared a book with me about these fellows destroying the English language. I forget the name...
-
Today I learned a little about the "M-word" and the damage it's done to the dwarf community. There was a really poignant exchange (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050501/COMMENTARY/50429001) on this subject between film critic Roger Ebert and a dwarf.
Please don't laugh. Seriously, this is important, and not to be dismissed under the much-maligned umbrella of "political correctness." Language that privileged people consider everyday jargon can have profoundly hurtful history attached to it. Besides the really obvious ones, I wonder what other terminology is floating about that has this kind of thing attached to it. Probably way more than I realize. And that's just in one language!
-
well I cracked up at the bottom, when he called ebert his midga.
-
Interesting. I wasn't aware that "midget" was considered offensive, but the truth is I haven't spent enough time with Little People to have asked. But that being the case, I'll use it no further. Good on Ebert for amending his ways when present with the hurtfulness they cause, and with helping to spread the word, and good on Woodburn for bringing the issue up, and allowing the exchange to be made public.