Friday, April 28, 2006
Check this out: I got quoted on Dissoi Blogoi!
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Problem with the method employed at our school (as regards one's reputation): It's a lot easier to say when someone is wrong than to say what is right yourself.
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Sometimes I wonder if the preeminence of Aristotle and Aquinas is due simply to their understanding (and it seems only they do understand) act and potency.
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
There's a new link to "The Chinese Written Character as a Medium for Poetry" at right. It's better because it's HTML and not .pdf and it also has the chinese characters. Woo hoo!
Top-Ten: Reasons to Make a Top-Ten List
by MegstanP and Ryan
(This is a throw-back to when we were still publishing a hard-copy newspaper of the same name as this blog.)
10. The ignorance of the masses.
9. It's about time somebody did this.
8. It's good fodder for dinner conversations (as we have noticed they are sometimes lacking).
7. To act in accordance with an overbearing obsessive- compulsive disorder.
6. They’re fun to make.
5. It just, well I don’t know, but it just seemed like it was the right thing to do.
4. By nature, man desires to rank: movies, food, good looks, people you love.
3. We have opinions about everything and we’re pretty sure we’re right.
2. I think I’ve heard somewhere that every time a Top-Ten list is finished an angel gets its wings.
1. John Cusack in “High Fidelity”. Watch it, you’ll love it.
(This is a throw-back to when we were still publishing a hard-copy newspaper of the same name as this blog.)
10. The ignorance of the masses.
9. It's about time somebody did this.
8. It's good fodder for dinner conversations (as we have noticed they are sometimes lacking).
7. To act in accordance with an overbearing obsessive- compulsive disorder.
6. They’re fun to make.
5. It just, well I don’t know, but it just seemed like it was the right thing to do.
4. By nature, man desires to rank: movies, food, good looks, people you love.
3. We have opinions about everything and we’re pretty sure we’re right.
2. I think I’ve heard somewhere that every time a Top-Ten list is finished an angel gets its wings.
1. John Cusack in “High Fidelity”. Watch it, you’ll love it.
Sunday, April 23, 2006
This comment, "john, maybe we should really start that little commune with Ryan. c'mon, it'd be fun. woo! down with girls!" from the post below, reminded me of a funny anecdote.
It was in sixth grade. I was a precocious he-man-woman-hater of the wooing type. That is, I liked the ladies, but I did not let them tell me what to do. I did not let them tell me what to do. That and I was eminently rational (or so they say). Because of this--the brightness, not the chauvinism--they (and I really don't know who they are) elected me into P.E.A.K., which to the best of my memory stands for "people eager for advanced knowledge". No, that can't be right. Considering it was a public school, P must stand for POTENTIAL. E must stand for EVERYONE. A surely stands for ATTAIN or some variation thereof, and K in this context I'm guessing stands for (K)NOW. So, in public school parlance, I'm positive PEAK stands for "POTENTIAL EVERYONE ATTAINS (K)NOW!". So perhaps I wasn't that special after all. (If you went to public school you know what I'm talking about.)
Well, regardless, it was some program in which we did all types of wonderful stuff that the so-called "normal" students didn't get to do. Like, for instance, write and perform a re-enactment of a day in the life of a pilgrim in Massachusetts. Now we determined, bright kids that we were, that pilgrims must eat. And, knowing our history, that they probably ate a whole lot of turkey. And, knowing our zoology, that turkeys didn't grow like corn and that they must be hunted. And, knowing the nature of man, that the hunter was a man.
Wait. Stop. What was that? Did I say the hunter was a man? That might have been too hasty a decision. For next I knew, a girl in PEAK decided that she would play the hunter in our production.
"OK," she said. "I'm going to be the hunter."
"Umm," was my response. After a few seconds of silence, I slowly but surely said, "look, you're a girl."
I was confident this cool accusation would settle the case. But she persisted. And vehemently.
"So what? You think girls can't be hunters?"
Realizing that she had cornered me in the dark alley of--shh!--political correctness, I played it safe.
"You can be a hunter all you want," I said, "but not in the 1600's."
Then things got a little out of control. You see, she was the kind of girl that wore overalls and got dirty playing football with the guys on our paved play-park. She spat when she walked and swore when she talked. And her mom cheated in a school-sponsored dodge-ball game. (yes, I suffered at her hands. and yes, I'm still sore about it.) She was adament, and so was I. I wasn't about to let this hussy push me around (see above). People started yelling. I looked at my friend Kenneth, and he looked at me, and we knew what we had to do. This tom-cat was trying to ruin our honest intellectual work, and we weren't going to stand for that bull. No way, nope, no-siree-bob. And so we let loose.
"Down with the Women! Down with the Women! Down with the Women!"
And then there was silence, and we knew we were in the shit. (Apparently it's entirely uncouth to discriminate against girls. And this they expect U-12's to understand and appreciate. Who is in charge of our schools? And do they know anything about children?)
I was taken to the principal's office where there was a charade of chastisement. The principal loved my mother, and he had my back, so to speak. Once there was a little tussle after school in which I may or may not have hit someone in the face with a projectile. The vice-principal was giving me a verbal beating when the principal came and took me away. He said that they wanted to expel me. Then he said that I was good to go. He was a good man.
Back to the story. (It's almost over.) He couldn't let me off scot-free this time, because then, as I see now, he would have had to deal with the Women himself, which no man his age was really willing to have any more of. So I was removed from PEAK, the girl took over, and the PEAK re-enactment of a colonial pilgrim's day featured a woman-hunter and a man-mother and all the lefty educators went home pleasantly vindicated, telling the children, "you see, women can be hunters. you just have to put your mind to it. Achieve to your potential! Cooperate and Succeed!"
And I went home and told my parents about it and my dad laughingly said "down with the women!" and my mom said with a smile, "mr. shea is a good man."
A story for another time is Mr. Shea saving me from a shoot-out as I walked to school.
It was in sixth grade. I was a precocious he-man-woman-hater of the wooing type. That is, I liked the ladies, but I did not let them tell me what to do. I did not let them tell me what to do. That and I was eminently rational (or so they say). Because of this--the brightness, not the chauvinism--they (and I really don't know who they are) elected me into P.E.A.K., which to the best of my memory stands for "people eager for advanced knowledge". No, that can't be right. Considering it was a public school, P must stand for POTENTIAL. E must stand for EVERYONE. A surely stands for ATTAIN or some variation thereof, and K in this context I'm guessing stands for (K)NOW. So, in public school parlance, I'm positive PEAK stands for "POTENTIAL EVERYONE ATTAINS (K)NOW!". So perhaps I wasn't that special after all. (If you went to public school you know what I'm talking about.)
Well, regardless, it was some program in which we did all types of wonderful stuff that the so-called "normal" students didn't get to do. Like, for instance, write and perform a re-enactment of a day in the life of a pilgrim in Massachusetts. Now we determined, bright kids that we were, that pilgrims must eat. And, knowing our history, that they probably ate a whole lot of turkey. And, knowing our zoology, that turkeys didn't grow like corn and that they must be hunted. And, knowing the nature of man, that the hunter was a man.
Wait. Stop. What was that? Did I say the hunter was a man? That might have been too hasty a decision. For next I knew, a girl in PEAK decided that she would play the hunter in our production.
"OK," she said. "I'm going to be the hunter."
"Umm," was my response. After a few seconds of silence, I slowly but surely said, "look, you're a girl."
I was confident this cool accusation would settle the case. But she persisted. And vehemently.
"So what? You think girls can't be hunters?"
Realizing that she had cornered me in the dark alley of--shh!--political correctness, I played it safe.
"You can be a hunter all you want," I said, "but not in the 1600's."
Then things got a little out of control. You see, she was the kind of girl that wore overalls and got dirty playing football with the guys on our paved play-park. She spat when she walked and swore when she talked. And her mom cheated in a school-sponsored dodge-ball game. (yes, I suffered at her hands. and yes, I'm still sore about it.) She was adament, and so was I. I wasn't about to let this hussy push me around (see above). People started yelling. I looked at my friend Kenneth, and he looked at me, and we knew what we had to do. This tom-cat was trying to ruin our honest intellectual work, and we weren't going to stand for that bull. No way, nope, no-siree-bob. And so we let loose.
"Down with the Women! Down with the Women! Down with the Women!"
And then there was silence, and we knew we were in the shit. (Apparently it's entirely uncouth to discriminate against girls. And this they expect U-12's to understand and appreciate. Who is in charge of our schools? And do they know anything about children?)
I was taken to the principal's office where there was a charade of chastisement. The principal loved my mother, and he had my back, so to speak. Once there was a little tussle after school in which I may or may not have hit someone in the face with a projectile. The vice-principal was giving me a verbal beating when the principal came and took me away. He said that they wanted to expel me. Then he said that I was good to go. He was a good man.
Back to the story. (It's almost over.) He couldn't let me off scot-free this time, because then, as I see now, he would have had to deal with the Women himself, which no man his age was really willing to have any more of. So I was removed from PEAK, the girl took over, and the PEAK re-enactment of a colonial pilgrim's day featured a woman-hunter and a man-mother and all the lefty educators went home pleasantly vindicated, telling the children, "you see, women can be hunters. you just have to put your mind to it. Achieve to your potential! Cooperate and Succeed!"
And I went home and told my parents about it and my dad laughingly said "down with the women!" and my mom said with a smile, "mr. shea is a good man."
A story for another time is Mr. Shea saving me from a shoot-out as I walked to school.
simple economics
I've heard that in Massachusetts it is impossible to get insurance from the big, nation-wide providers (e.g. Geiko, Progressive). (I hope that's true, because I'm paying $2,700 a year to some company when I could be paying $700 to Progressive.) Now why is that?
The legislators' thinking is this: if John Doe spends $700 on Progressive insurance, that money will go out of state, because Progressive is an out of state company. If we force Mr. Doe to get his insurance from a Massachusetts company, then Massachusetts will be better off. (And not just $700 better off. The smaller companies have to charge higher premiums because they have higher risks. So, going by my estimate, Massachusetts is $2,700 better off.) Sounds good, doesn't it?
But look at this. Say I get my insurance from a Massachusetts provider. Now I've received the service of insurance and some Massachuetts company is $2,700 richer. But say I get my insurance from Progressive for $700. Now I have my insurance, but Massachusetts has nothing.
Massachusetts company: +Insurance, +$2,700
Progressive: +Insurance.
Except that I now have my insurance and $2,000 left over. But, they say, you now only have $2,000 to spend in Massachusetts when you would have spent $2,700.
I respond: I'm a citizen of Massachusetts. So look at it in terms of Massachusetts Money.
Massachusetts company: -$2,700 (my loss), +Insurance (my gain), +$2,700 (state gain) for a net gain of insurance in the state of Massachusetts (including my financial affairs, as a citizen).
Progressive: -$700 (my loss), +insurance (my gain), +$2,000 (state gain) for a net gain of insurance and $2,000 in the state of Massachusetts!
It comes down to this simple rule of economics: It is always best to get goods and services for as little as you can.
The legislators' thinking is this: if John Doe spends $700 on Progressive insurance, that money will go out of state, because Progressive is an out of state company. If we force Mr. Doe to get his insurance from a Massachusetts company, then Massachusetts will be better off. (And not just $700 better off. The smaller companies have to charge higher premiums because they have higher risks. So, going by my estimate, Massachusetts is $2,700 better off.) Sounds good, doesn't it?
But look at this. Say I get my insurance from a Massachusetts provider. Now I've received the service of insurance and some Massachuetts company is $2,700 richer. But say I get my insurance from Progressive for $700. Now I have my insurance, but Massachusetts has nothing.
Massachusetts company: +Insurance, +$2,700
Progressive: +Insurance.
Except that I now have my insurance and $2,000 left over. But, they say, you now only have $2,000 to spend in Massachusetts when you would have spent $2,700.
I respond: I'm a citizen of Massachusetts. So look at it in terms of Massachusetts Money.
Massachusetts company: -$2,700 (my loss), +Insurance (my gain), +$2,700 (state gain) for a net gain of insurance in the state of Massachusetts (including my financial affairs, as a citizen).
Progressive: -$700 (my loss), +insurance (my gain), +$2,000 (state gain) for a net gain of insurance and $2,000 in the state of Massachusetts!
It comes down to this simple rule of economics: It is always best to get goods and services for as little as you can.
Friday, April 21, 2006
a recent scientific study showed that 96% of american youth turned "emo" this year. put this on your blog if you're part of the 4% that stayed gangsta.
thanks to matt
thanks to matt
thoughts for the day
three things i've always withheld consent to:
man always chooses the good.
evil is simply a deficiency.
pride is the cause of all sin.
(maybe because "always", "simply", and "all" are such strong words.)
thank God we study so much math here. (never thought I'd say that.)
I think i've experienced something of what the artist must in painting. the other day I was terminally bored in class. i decided to spend my time learning how to draw. now I'm a terrible drawer. but, thinking about what i wanted to draw, particularly the lines, with my eyes closed, when i opened them i saw the lines on the page. as they faded i frantically tried to trace them. i did this again and again, and the image on the page lasted longer and longer. it was no longer a creation but an invention. finally i opened my eyes and the image was no longer there. try as i could, it wouldn't come back. perhaps the artist sees the lines like that.
ain't nothing like good friends.
and I can't convince myself that I like the bends. sorry.
man always chooses the good.
evil is simply a deficiency.
pride is the cause of all sin.
(maybe because "always", "simply", and "all" are such strong words.)
thank God we study so much math here. (never thought I'd say that.)
I think i've experienced something of what the artist must in painting. the other day I was terminally bored in class. i decided to spend my time learning how to draw. now I'm a terrible drawer. but, thinking about what i wanted to draw, particularly the lines, with my eyes closed, when i opened them i saw the lines on the page. as they faded i frantically tried to trace them. i did this again and again, and the image on the page lasted longer and longer. it was no longer a creation but an invention. finally i opened my eyes and the image was no longer there. try as i could, it wouldn't come back. perhaps the artist sees the lines like that.
ain't nothing like good friends.
and I can't convince myself that I like the bends. sorry.
Thursday, April 20, 2006
and check out Runaways and Crackpipes by Sage Francis.
"daily absurdity"
The local newspaper funeral notice telephone operator received a phone call. The woman on the other end asked, "How much do funeral notices cost?"
$2.00 per word, Madam," came the response.
"Good, do you have a paper and pencil handy?"
"Yes, Madam."
"OK, write down: 'McTavish died.'"
"I'm sorry, Madam; I forgot to tell you there's a five-word minimum."
There was a pause, then she said, "OK, print this: 'McTavish died. Car for sale.'"
thanks to t.turner
$2.00 per word, Madam," came the response.
"Good, do you have a paper and pencil handy?"
"Yes, Madam."
"OK, write down: 'McTavish died.'"
"I'm sorry, Madam; I forgot to tell you there's a five-word minimum."
There was a pause, then she said, "OK, print this: 'McTavish died. Car for sale.'"
thanks to t.turner
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
This combines some of the fondest memories of my childhood, and the haunting heartbreak of being a Sox fan: RBI baseball, NES, the Sox, and Billy Buckner.
Monday, April 17, 2006
ambitions
i made a playlist combining and comparing the 24 preludes and fugues of Bach and Shostakovich, which inspired me to learn and perform at a concert next year one of each. I'm looking at Bach's C minor and Shostakovich's G minor.
that, and I'd like to put together a christmas concert with my choir which is actually christmas music, and not some requiem, which has been the standard here at TAC for the last three years (maybe more).
radiohead will be touring n. america this summer. i'm looking at montreal.
figure out why the school gave me a w-2 form claiming that they paid me $1,600 this year, which is not true. but how do i explain that to the IRS?
wildly far-reaching (read impossible):
write a new Physics, an epic poem, a mass, and a novel...right.
that, and I'd like to put together a christmas concert with my choir which is actually christmas music, and not some requiem, which has been the standard here at TAC for the last three years (maybe more).
radiohead will be touring n. america this summer. i'm looking at montreal.
figure out why the school gave me a w-2 form claiming that they paid me $1,600 this year, which is not true. but how do i explain that to the IRS?
wildly far-reaching (read impossible):
write a new Physics, an epic poem, a mass, and a novel...right.
So Aristotle actually isn't painfully obscure?
While home for Easter break, I've been working a lot on my philosophy paper which is due this Sunday, a result not so much of procrastination as of deliberation (my Dad is professor of ancient philosophy.)Today, when asking for clarification on a simple point, my dad caught sight of our translation and was very much surprised at its obscurity.
I know the tutors want to keep clear of any interpretive translations so that we can read unadulterated Aristotle and make sense of it on our own, but isn't this, perhaps, a worse rendering of Aristotle's works? I have never been more frustrated with a text than with the wall of obscurity that is the Posterior Analytics we've been reading this semester. I been wondering why on earth Aristotle couldn't manage to find a more poetic way of expressing his philosophy, he who wrote with such clarity on Poetry and Rhetoric, when, to my relief, Dad told me today that, in fact, Aristotle is incredibly clear.
I obviously don't think I should be able to read a text of Aristotle and understand it immediately. Obviously his thoughts have great depths over which I would love to puzzle in class. But when the puzzles are over obscure language and odd wordings, my mind is not interested. And when every single class is my fellow students bringing to the table mere confusion and no comprehension of what the translator meant, and the ensuing hour and a half is spent by the tutor explaining it, do we not get as much an interpretation from the mouth of the tutor as we would from the translation of another?
I know the tutors want to keep clear of any interpretive translations so that we can read unadulterated Aristotle and make sense of it on our own, but isn't this, perhaps, a worse rendering of Aristotle's works? I have never been more frustrated with a text than with the wall of obscurity that is the Posterior Analytics we've been reading this semester. I been wondering why on earth Aristotle couldn't manage to find a more poetic way of expressing his philosophy, he who wrote with such clarity on Poetry and Rhetoric, when, to my relief, Dad told me today that, in fact, Aristotle is incredibly clear.
I obviously don't think I should be able to read a text of Aristotle and understand it immediately. Obviously his thoughts have great depths over which I would love to puzzle in class. But when the puzzles are over obscure language and odd wordings, my mind is not interested. And when every single class is my fellow students bringing to the table mere confusion and no comprehension of what the translator meant, and the ensuing hour and a half is spent by the tutor explaining it, do we not get as much an interpretation from the mouth of the tutor as we would from the translation of another?
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Trip to San Fran
Road Trip!!!

At the Golden Gate Park

Sweet Ride

More Park

SBC or AT&T or PacBell Park (home of the Giants and Barry Bonds!)

One of the strangest tourist experiences of my life: I was familiar with many of the places we went to already. I recognized them and knew my way around (a little) even though I had never been to San Fran before. Reason: video games. Very strange.

At the Golden Gate Park

Sweet Ride

More Park

SBC or AT&T or PacBell Park (home of the Giants and Barry Bonds!)

One of the strangest tourist experiences of my life: I was familiar with many of the places we went to already. I recognized them and knew my way around (a little) even though I had never been to San Fran before. Reason: video games. Very strange.
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
and this is especially worth reading: The Breaking Point
(why do seemingly intelligent people use such hackneyed titles? I'll never know.)
(why do seemingly intelligent people use such hackneyed titles? I'll never know.)
Monday, April 10, 2006
I encourage all to read this link: Striking the Mean-An Anecdote
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Help
I'm trying to find the text of Gorbachev's resignation speech. Frank Shakespeare told TAC that he said some interesting/controverisial stuff.
[more (up)] Chuck
If you ask Chuck Norris what time it is, he always says, "Two seconds till."
After you ask, "Two seconds to what?" he roundhouse kicks you in the face.
Since 1940, the year Chuck Norris was born, roundhouse kick related deaths have
increased 13,000 percent.
It was once believed that Chuck Norris actually lost a fight to a pirate, but
that is a lie, created by Chuck Norris himself to lure more pirates to him.
Pirates never were very smart.
A duck's quack does not echo. Chuck Norris is solely responsible for this
phenomenon. When asked why he will simply stare at you, grimly.
Chuck Norris does not use spell check. If he happens to misspell a word, Oxford
will simply change the actual spelling of it.
Before science was invented it was once believed that autumn occurred when Chuck
Norris roundhouse kicked every tree in existence.
After you ask, "Two seconds to what?" he roundhouse kicks you in the face.
Since 1940, the year Chuck Norris was born, roundhouse kick related deaths have
increased 13,000 percent.
It was once believed that Chuck Norris actually lost a fight to a pirate, but
that is a lie, created by Chuck Norris himself to lure more pirates to him.
Pirates never were very smart.
A duck's quack does not echo. Chuck Norris is solely responsible for this
phenomenon. When asked why he will simply stare at you, grimly.
Chuck Norris does not use spell check. If he happens to misspell a word, Oxford
will simply change the actual spelling of it.
Before science was invented it was once believed that autumn occurred when Chuck
Norris roundhouse kicked every tree in existence.
Monday, April 03, 2006
(up) Chuck
It takes Chuck Norris 20 minutes to watch 60 minutes
If you google search " Chuck Norris getting his ass kicked" you will generate
zero results. it just doesn't happen
Chuck Norris doesn't bowl strikes. He just knocks down one and the other nine
faint
The Bermuda Triangle used to be the Bermuda Square until Chuck Norris Round
house kicked to corner off
Chuck Norris once ate an entire bottle of sleeping pills, they made him blink
Some people wear superman pj's, superman wears Chuck Norris pj's
Chuck Norris once roundhouse kicked someone so hard that his foot broke the
speed of light, went back in time, and killed Amelia Earhart while she was
flying over the Pacific Ocean.
Chuck Norris doesn't read books. He stares them down until he gets the
information he wants.
If you google search " Chuck Norris getting his ass kicked" you will generate
zero results. it just doesn't happen
Chuck Norris doesn't bowl strikes. He just knocks down one and the other nine
faint
The Bermuda Triangle used to be the Bermuda Square until Chuck Norris Round
house kicked to corner off
Chuck Norris once ate an entire bottle of sleeping pills, they made him blink
Some people wear superman pj's, superman wears Chuck Norris pj's
Chuck Norris once roundhouse kicked someone so hard that his foot broke the
speed of light, went back in time, and killed Amelia Earhart while she was
flying over the Pacific Ocean.
Chuck Norris doesn't read books. He stares them down until he gets the
information he wants.
Sunday, April 02, 2006
Saturday, April 01, 2006
Musical depth
If music is one of the most fundamental expressions of the soul, then Bach's soul must've been very beautiful and ordered indeed.
Each piano sonata of Beethoven is a masterpiece, and not just technically. The man managed to write so profoundly, his music so universally intimate, that to call him a genius isn't quite right. Berlioz was a genius. So were Dvorak, Haydn, and the rest. But Beethoven exceeds them all. He has that intangible, ineffable something else that makes him one of the god-like elite.
