Discuss.

Eating a candy bar a day is a Lenten sacrifice that should be tried more often by females.

Naturally this gets down into the nuts and bolts of what a sacrifice is and whether or not God was onto anything when he made the Israelites fast as opposed to give up movies or worrying and clothes shopping (like me at points) or work on particular virtues (like most Protestants who give up things like gossiping, which isn't exactly really a sacrifice), but that's not really actually like the main point of the post.

The Wonders of Atomic Theory

jhp: so how do gases expand in volume when heated?
bob: they get farther apart.
jhp: what's between the atoms?
bob: nothing.
jhp: so you've added nothing to nothing, and you've now doubled your nothing?
bob: precisely.

Music Recommendation

Check out Bartok's "Concerto for Orchestra". It's goosebumps-good.

A Miniature of a Lady

The lady's specious beauty
Laid ('specially) bare her lover's booty.

Hippocrates G. Says...

"the common belief that Aristotle said that bodies of greater numerical weight fall faster is untrue because Aristotle said no such thing, for the term [greek word = "weight"], which has at least two meanings for Aristotle, means density (or specific gravity) in the passages in which he discusses falling bodies of different "weights", and the resistance of a medium through which bodies fall is always included (Aristotle denies the existence of void)."

from his commentary on the De Anima

and they tell us not to read secondary sources. psh!

Ideas Gone to Waste (or Never Attained Potential)

I would have posted many funny things from seminar, in keeping with my new plan, if I had gone. As it is, I've got nothing.

And a new idea (plus a plea): I intended to, over the course of this blog, write little character sketches of people on and around campus. So far I've done Mr. Pietta and Fr. Buckley, and I guess Crazy Hague. I suppose I'll get around to the rest, but, fellow contributors, please help.

(And I'm excited about a possible new member.)

Gould is Gold!

haha...anyway, I've been listening to Gould playing the Beethoven piano sonatas. Apparently, they received a mass of criticism when they came out for being so subjective, even to the point that he was even accused of "sabotaging" the Appassionata sonata. (He plays the first movement half as fast as usual.) Modern critics have been less harsh. (I suspect this is a reaction to everyone playing Beethoven's work--but poorly. Who hasn't heard the Moonlight? But who's heard it played well?) Perhaps Gould's interpretations are brilliant. Perhaps when he ignores Beethoven's explicit instructions, Gould is creating something new, someting fresh, something truly beautiful. The question remains, however. Is he playing Beethoven, or Gould?

I like his interpretions. And though I don't know enough to say that they "do justice" to Beethoven, I will say this: it may not be the way Beethoven ought to sound, but it's absolutely the way the piano ought to sound.

All of this equals a great birthday present. Thanks to those...

More on the WBC

Are people watching this? In this bubble, I don't know what the trends are, nor can I catch any of the games. But from what I've read, it sounds as exciting as the olympics or even the world cup.

On Anselm: Three Arguments

The "Ch. 2" Argument

1. "That-being-than-which-none-greater-can-be-thought" exists in the mind.
2. Assume that it exists in the mind alone.
3. One can think of it existing in reality.
4. One has thought, then, of a being greater than "that-which-none-greater-can-be-thought, which is absurd.
5. Therefore, "that-being, etc." exists in reality.

My Reduction

1. "That-being, etc." exists in the mind.
2. It is greater to exist necessarily than not.
3. "That-being, etc." exists necessarily.

Problem

1. "That-man-than-which-none-greater-can-be-thought" exists in the mind.
2. It is greater to necessarily exist than not.
3. Therefore, "that-man, etc." exists necessarily.

This is obviously not true. Why not? Because, one would say, it is beyond the nature of man to exist necessarily. That is, the terms are incompatible.

Problem With Anselm

In order for the "Ch. 2" argument to work, one must assume that there exists such a being whose nature is capable of admitting of necessary existence. That is, one is assuming what Anselm has set out to prove.

Resolution (the "ch. 3" argument)

1. God, if He exists, is a necessary being.
2. If God does not exist, it is impossible for Him to exist. (Defined as a necessary being, nothing could be different that would make Him exist, that is, possibility implies contingency.)
3. It is possible for God to exist.
4. Therefore, God does not not exist.
5. Therefore God exists.

Problem

Is the idea of a necessary being, i.e., one that has its existence per se, an impossibility? It's obviously not immediately self-contradictory, as in a round-square. But is it like "greatest prime number", which at first appears reasonable, but further study shows to be impossible?

Further study has not shown per se existence to be impossible.

At the least, then, we can say about Anselm's argument that, so long as God's existence remains possible, He exists, and must necessarily be thought to exist. However, I'd be so bold as to say that one is not merely putting words together when one says "to exist per se", but that these terms are understandable and reasonable when put together. If so, then the "ch. 3" argument works.

And Just For Fun...

Because I'm going to miss it--The Beard!

Wondrous Ideas From Seminar

I should have thought of this as a regular feature before...

1. Some said that there are two types of love: sex, simply and Christian charity. (I asked QuickStrike whether she thought any of them had had a girlfriend before. She responded, "I hope at least some of them haven't.")

2. Love affairs don't actually ever happen.

More Sports

Here's an insightful look into the Barry Bonds controversy, revealing an aspect of the debate that has not been talked about much: Barry Bonds was, without question, one of the greatest to play the game, even before he looked like a juicer. Then along came McGuire and Sosa, two above-average players for sure, but nowhere near as talented as Bonds. And they received all of the attention of the media and the American public, while everyone in the game knew they were on 'roids. Barry's words:

"You know what," he said. "I had a helluva season last year, and nobody gave a crap. Nobody. As much as I've complained about McGwire and Canseco and all of the bull with steroids, I'm tired of fighting it. I turn 35 this year. I've got three or four good seasons left, and I wanna get paid. I'm just gonna start using some hard-core stuff, and hopefully it won't hurt my body. Then I'll get out of the game and be done with it."

Read the rest

My Apologies...

if wanting. This might be the longest dry spell we've had. (Do I really have nothing to say?)

More Bill Simmons

I keep posting his columns hoping that people might realize the beauty in competitive sports.

The Supernatural and Art

All of Evelyn Waugh's works try in some way to express the ever-present call of man to be holy. “Do you agree…that the Supernatural Order is not something added to the natural order, like music or painting, to make everyday life more tolerable? It is everyday life. The supernatural is real; what we call 'real' is a mere shadow, a passing fancy.” (from Men at Arms)

What is more important for an author (or any artist, it seems) to concern himself with anything other than the Supernatural Order? Art, I believe, ought to be concerned with truth and beauty. If both of these are found most infinitely in God, why search elsewhere, except to remark on the glory of God?

Essential Listening - Symphonies

Mahler 2; Bruckner 8; Shostakovich 10; Sibelius 2; Schumann 3

"Embarrassing the Angels"

Peggy Noonan at Opinion Journal

If you don't read her, you probably should.

More Complaining

I realized this morning the incongruity of chest beating and long faces and sorrowful groans at the Consecration. God, if it is even imaginable, has just become manifestly present, body, soul, and divinity. Imagine beating your breast, tearing your hair, throwing ashes to the wind upon the return of a most beloved king!

My Job is Incredible (take 2)

Because no one got what I thought was very funny...


the below is a series of searches (mysql> select count...) with results (the box entitled count...), the first three for data greater than 2 (...>2), less than 2 (...<2), and equal to 2 (...=2), respectively. The last is a search of the entire data set. summarized, it looks like this:

search >2
= 0

search <2
= 0

search = 2
= 214

search
= 218

It's incredible!

---------------------------------------

Original Post

the following shows that <, >, and = are not the
only possibilities

> mysql> select count(*) from tmpmatchthese2john where
> length(state_code)
> > 2;
> +----------+
> | count(*) |
> +----------+
> | 0 |
> +----------+
> 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
>
> mysql> select count(*) from tmpmatchthese2john where
> length(state_code)
> < 2;
> +----------+
> | count(*) |
> +----------+
> | 0 |
> +----------+
> 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
>
> mysql> select count(*) from tmpmatchthese2john where
> length(state_code)
> = 2;
> +----------+
> | count(*) |
> +----------+
> | 214 |
> +----------+
> 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
>
> mysql> select count(*) from tmpmatchthese2john;
> +----------+
> | count(*) |
> +----------+
> | 218 |
> +----------+
> 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
>
> mysql>


t.turner

Time Management

Who would benefit if I organized our 200+ posts into categories with links or whatever as I've seen done, you the reader, or me the compulsive organizer?

Insights in Sports

Gladwell: This is actually a question I'm obsessed with: Why don't people work hard when it's in their best interest to do so? Why does Eddy Curry come to camp every year overweight?

The (short) answer is that it's really risky to work hard, because then if you fail you can no longer say that you failed because you didn't work hard. It's a form of self-protection. I swear that's why Mickelson has that almost absurdly calm demeanor. If he loses, he can always say: Well, I could have practiced more, and maybe next year I will and I'll win then. When Tiger loses, what does he tell himself? He worked as hard as he possibly could. He prepared like no one else in the game and he still lost. That has to be devastating, and dealing with that kind of conclusion takes a very special and rare kind of resilience. Most of the psychological research on this is focused on why some kids don't study for tests -- which is a much more serious version of the same problem. If you get drunk the night before an exam instead of studying and you fail, then the problem is that you got drunk. If you do study and you fail, the problem is that you're stupid -- and stupid, for a student, is a death sentence. The point is that it is far more psychologically dangerous and difficult to prepare for a task than not to prepare. People think that Tiger is tougher than Mickelson because he works harder. Wrong: Tiger is tougher than Mickelson and because of that he works harder.

To me, this is what Peyton Manning's problem is. He has the work habits and dedication and obsessiveness of Jordan and Tiger Woods. But he can't deal with the accompanying preparation anxiety. The Manning face is the look of someone who has just faced up to a sobering fact: I am in complete control of this offense. I prepare for games like no other quarterback in the NFL. I am in the best shape of my life. I have done everything I can to succeed -- and I'm losing. Ohmigod. I'm not that good. (Under the same circumstances, Ben Roethlisberger is thinking: maybe next time I stop after five beers). I don't know if I've ever felt sorrier for someone than I did for Manning at the end of that Pittsburgh playoff game.

from The Sports Guy

Congratulations to my Brother!

On his first article for National Review Online!

A Worthy Read

NY Times It's a review of "Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon" by Daniel Dennett.

thanks to Trent

My Job is Incredible

literally...here's something I ran into recently:


the following shows that <, >, and = are not the
only possibilities


> mysql> select count(*) from tmpmatchthese2john where
> length(state_code)
> > 2;
> +----------+
> | count(*) |
> +----------+
> | 0 |
> +----------+
> 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
>
> mysql> select count(*) from tmpmatchthese2john where
> length(state_code)
> < 2;
> +----------+
> | count(*) |
> +----------+
> | 0 |
> +----------+
> 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
>
> mysql> select count(*) from tmpmatchthese2john where
> length(state_code)
> = 2;
> +----------+
> | count(*) |
> +----------+
> | 214 |
> +----------+
> 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
>
> mysql> select count(*) from tmpmatchthese2john;
> +----------+
> | count(*) |
> +----------+
> | 218 |
> +----------+
> 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
>
> mysql>


t.turner