A Pocket Full of Posies
Welcome one and all to anouther edition of the Stomin' Ground. I'm going to complain a bit today about Carl Saga and his book The Demon-haunted World. Whether you like Sagan or think he is a total twinkie [speaking of twinkies you should all consider looking up The TWINKIES Project for a good laugh] is irrelevant. Why? Well because this is my page so I'm going to share my opinion. Hehe.
I'm a little more than halfway through this book we're reading for Future Studies. So far the first half has dealt a lot with the UFO paranoia that seems to be gripping the world, most especially the USA and disproving it. Along with all of that, Sagan suggest we can disprove and debunk a lot of other myths and beliefs along the way, including religion [big surprise there coming from Sagan *snort*].
What I find particular disturbing is one of Sagan's primary arguments: Because there is no actual, physical evidence it must not be true. How logical is that? Using the lack of evidence as evidence to the contrary. Yeah, good idea. After making this argument, he ridcules the opposing side's counter argument: because you can't disprove it, it must be so. Both arguments are a bit idiotic and very circular against one another.
One chapter deals with the idea, in a hypothetical sense, of an invisible, floating dragon with a firey breath that leaves no mark and radiates no heat living in your garage. Sagan argues that because this dragon leaves behind no actual evidence it's not real. Any evidence it does leave behind could be faked. What if you put flour on the floor and the next day a claw mark was in the flour? Well that could easily be faked and since no skeptic was ther to see it happen, it very likely was. While I myself am not a proponent of invisble, floating dragons and would be more inclined to accept the physical evidence of one as a fraud, I wouldn't say just because I wasn't there to see it that such was the case.
How many of you have been so Madagascar? How many of you believe it's really there? Hang on, let's take someplace perhaps more common. Ever been to Japan? Do you believe it's there? You've seen photographs of it, right? That's some evidence? Ahh, but photos can be easily doctored, especially in today's world of digital magic. What if you have been there, are you sure you were there? You got on a plane and flew somewhere, most likely. How do you know it was really Japan? You don't. You accept that where you landed was Japan. Reason tells you that if everyone there is speaking Japanese and all the signs are in the same language you are probably in that place, but what's the actual proof? Did you watch the flight-path of the plane from it's take off point to it's landing point? The point I am trying to make is there are all kinds of things we accept on a daily basis as being actually so when we don't have loads of experimental evidence to back them up every time we do them and some of them could be faked. We trust to things time and time again without needing or requiring proof.
Mind you I am not trying to say I am anti-science. I am not. I think science has done some wonderful things. I think there are innumerable things science does not understand and many more they do not fully understand. Many people seem to believe that science and religion are incompatible. I just don't understand this attitude. The more I learn of and about science the more it backs up my religious beliefs. The more I learn about my Heavenly Father and His plan for the world, the more I can see how science has grown so much, but still has so far to go.
It is okay, gang, to accept things on faith -- especially when that faith is backed up by an experiment anyone can conduct. The Lord does expect us to have faith, very few will have a perfect knowledge in this lifetime, but He has promised us he will tell us what is right if we will ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ. But it does require that first step, having faith. If you can't start with that, ye even no more than a desire to believe, then I suppose it won't do you any good because even if you are touched by the spirit you woudn't believe it anyway.
Because you can't prove it isn't, it must be.
Because you can't prove it is, it mustn't be.
We all have to choose what we will believe and what we won't be it pure science and only phyiscal evidence which "proves" things to the equal but opposite pole of believing anything and everything without any reason. I somehow suspect that truth falls somewhere in between. Heck, maybe Sagan is right -- but what if he's right to the point of being wrong? What if science just isn't (and won't ever be in this temporal world) advanced enough to measure, record or *prove* things we just don't understand?
Okay, there's my off the cuff treatise for the time being. Any errors in logic are caused by little green men who ride invisible floating dragons. Blame them. *rolls eyes*
HAHAHAHAHA! *cackle-cackle* Wouldn't ya know it -- within 5 pages of where I had stopped reading Sagan writes, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" (p223). So for half the book he's raved about a lack of evidence and when there is evidence it's not very reliable. Apparently he realized that. Alas, one sentence after 200 pages isn't a very good defense. Anyhow I couldn't help but burst out laughing that the very thing I was complaining about he chose to note himself within just a few pages.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
So aside from my diatrbe, what's new? Well, with tests next week in Japanese the work is done, it's all study now. Though I do have that paper in English. I think I menioned I was going to do the Songs of Innocence and Experience comparison and contrast and how it fits in with the Romantic ideas in general. I should be able to do that much. I wrote out a couple of tentative outlines (very, very rough) yesterday while thinking about it and I think I can squeeze 4 pages out of it.
Future studies today. I wonder what we'll talk about this time? I didn't menion it from before but we had another one of those strange ideas presented last time. The concept that the best way to get rid of something is by ignoring it. The arguer in his article used the Greek and Norse pantheon of dieties as evicende. How many people actually worship them any more? While that's accurate I don't see how ignoring things makes anything go away. Afterall, we still know about the Greek gods and the Norse gods (that's be Odin, Thor, Loki, et al. for those of you who don't know - those of you who I know read this I suspect knew that, but what if someone doesn't?) don't we? What if we just ignore Israeli and Palestinian problems in the Middle-East? I don't think they're just going to go away. What if we'd ignored some highjacked airplanes, thousands of deaths and a couple of demolised skyskapers? Would the issue just go away? Ignoring things neither makes them always disappar over time, nor is it anywhere near close to always the proper course of action. Will it work sometimes? Sure. But don't count on it being the only or primary solution to a host of problems.
Alright I almost went off on a whole new topic. *whew* Enough. One other small bit of news then off to do more reading.
Sony finally annouced the PSP (Playstation Portable) release date and pricing scheme. It's coming in a bundle here for $250, Thursday, 24 March 2005. With all the extra stuff thrown in there I am not upset about the $50 more than I thought it would be. I had some saved up for it but now have to come up with some extra cashola. Good thing EB's got a deal goin to get some extra trade in credit right now. So I've been culling my collection of things I haven't played in a long, long time and am not likely to ever touch again. It has become financially impossible to be a collector of video games. Not that it's a bad thing. I know someone who would be very happy if I gave them up entirely, though that's not very likely to happen.
I don't know when I'll see you next. Until I do, keep rebuilding so I have something to stomp!
～ゴジラで
～ゴジラ
I'm a little more than halfway through this book we're reading for Future Studies. So far the first half has dealt a lot with the UFO paranoia that seems to be gripping the world, most especially the USA and disproving it. Along with all of that, Sagan suggest we can disprove and debunk a lot of other myths and beliefs along the way, including religion [big surprise there coming from Sagan *snort*].
What I find particular disturbing is one of Sagan's primary arguments: Because there is no actual, physical evidence it must not be true. How logical is that? Using the lack of evidence as evidence to the contrary. Yeah, good idea. After making this argument, he ridcules the opposing side's counter argument: because you can't disprove it, it must be so. Both arguments are a bit idiotic and very circular against one another.
One chapter deals with the idea, in a hypothetical sense, of an invisible, floating dragon with a firey breath that leaves no mark and radiates no heat living in your garage. Sagan argues that because this dragon leaves behind no actual evidence it's not real. Any evidence it does leave behind could be faked. What if you put flour on the floor and the next day a claw mark was in the flour? Well that could easily be faked and since no skeptic was ther to see it happen, it very likely was. While I myself am not a proponent of invisble, floating dragons and would be more inclined to accept the physical evidence of one as a fraud, I wouldn't say just because I wasn't there to see it that such was the case.
How many of you have been so Madagascar? How many of you believe it's really there? Hang on, let's take someplace perhaps more common. Ever been to Japan? Do you believe it's there? You've seen photographs of it, right? That's some evidence? Ahh, but photos can be easily doctored, especially in today's world of digital magic. What if you have been there, are you sure you were there? You got on a plane and flew somewhere, most likely. How do you know it was really Japan? You don't. You accept that where you landed was Japan. Reason tells you that if everyone there is speaking Japanese and all the signs are in the same language you are probably in that place, but what's the actual proof? Did you watch the flight-path of the plane from it's take off point to it's landing point? The point I am trying to make is there are all kinds of things we accept on a daily basis as being actually so when we don't have loads of experimental evidence to back them up every time we do them and some of them could be faked. We trust to things time and time again without needing or requiring proof.
Mind you I am not trying to say I am anti-science. I am not. I think science has done some wonderful things. I think there are innumerable things science does not understand and many more they do not fully understand. Many people seem to believe that science and religion are incompatible. I just don't understand this attitude. The more I learn of and about science the more it backs up my religious beliefs. The more I learn about my Heavenly Father and His plan for the world, the more I can see how science has grown so much, but still has so far to go.
It is okay, gang, to accept things on faith -- especially when that faith is backed up by an experiment anyone can conduct. The Lord does expect us to have faith, very few will have a perfect knowledge in this lifetime, but He has promised us he will tell us what is right if we will ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ. But it does require that first step, having faith. If you can't start with that, ye even no more than a desire to believe, then I suppose it won't do you any good because even if you are touched by the spirit you woudn't believe it anyway.
Because you can't prove it isn't, it must be.
Because you can't prove it is, it mustn't be.
We all have to choose what we will believe and what we won't be it pure science and only phyiscal evidence which "proves" things to the equal but opposite pole of believing anything and everything without any reason. I somehow suspect that truth falls somewhere in between. Heck, maybe Sagan is right -- but what if he's right to the point of being wrong? What if science just isn't (and won't ever be in this temporal world) advanced enough to measure, record or *prove* things we just don't understand?
Okay, there's my off the cuff treatise for the time being. Any errors in logic are caused by little green men who ride invisible floating dragons. Blame them. *rolls eyes*
HAHAHAHAHA! *cackle-cackle* Wouldn't ya know it -- within 5 pages of where I had stopped reading Sagan writes, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" (p223). So for half the book he's raved about a lack of evidence and when there is evidence it's not very reliable. Apparently he realized that. Alas, one sentence after 200 pages isn't a very good defense. Anyhow I couldn't help but burst out laughing that the very thing I was complaining about he chose to note himself within just a few pages.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
So aside from my diatrbe, what's new? Well, with tests next week in Japanese the work is done, it's all study now. Though I do have that paper in English. I think I menioned I was going to do the Songs of Innocence and Experience comparison and contrast and how it fits in with the Romantic ideas in general. I should be able to do that much. I wrote out a couple of tentative outlines (very, very rough) yesterday while thinking about it and I think I can squeeze 4 pages out of it.
Future studies today. I wonder what we'll talk about this time? I didn't menion it from before but we had another one of those strange ideas presented last time. The concept that the best way to get rid of something is by ignoring it. The arguer in his article used the Greek and Norse pantheon of dieties as evicende. How many people actually worship them any more? While that's accurate I don't see how ignoring things makes anything go away. Afterall, we still know about the Greek gods and the Norse gods (that's be Odin, Thor, Loki, et al. for those of you who don't know - those of you who I know read this I suspect knew that, but what if someone doesn't?) don't we? What if we just ignore Israeli and Palestinian problems in the Middle-East? I don't think they're just going to go away. What if we'd ignored some highjacked airplanes, thousands of deaths and a couple of demolised skyskapers? Would the issue just go away? Ignoring things neither makes them always disappar over time, nor is it anywhere near close to always the proper course of action. Will it work sometimes? Sure. But don't count on it being the only or primary solution to a host of problems.
Alright I almost went off on a whole new topic. *whew* Enough. One other small bit of news then off to do more reading.
Sony finally annouced the PSP (Playstation Portable) release date and pricing scheme. It's coming in a bundle here for $250, Thursday, 24 March 2005. With all the extra stuff thrown in there I am not upset about the $50 more than I thought it would be. I had some saved up for it but now have to come up with some extra cashola. Good thing EB's got a deal goin to get some extra trade in credit right now. So I've been culling my collection of things I haven't played in a long, long time and am not likely to ever touch again. It has become financially impossible to be a collector of video games. Not that it's a bad thing. I know someone who would be very happy if I gave them up entirely, though that's not very likely to happen.
I don't know when I'll see you next. Until I do, keep rebuilding so I have something to stomp!
～ゴジラで
～ゴジラ
posted by Godzilla at 8:25 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home