Saturday, April 30, 2005

the holy girl

The Holy Girl

a k a La Niña Santa
2004 - Argentina - Drama
Reviewed by A. O. Scott

Critic's Pick

REVIEW SUMMARY
Lucrecia Martel's elusive, feverish and altogether amazing second feature takes place at a provincial Argentine hotel during a conference of otolaryngologists. Amalia (María Alché), a moody teenager whose divorced mother and sad-sack uncle both work at the hotel, is in the throes of adolescent self-discovery. In Amalia's mind and body, spiritual and sexual impulses seem to mingle like molecules forming a volatile compound. The object of her own vocation is Dr. Jano (Carlos Belloso), a participant in the conference. One day, in the midst of a crowd, the doctor rubs up against her, a creepy violation made more so by his morose flirtation with Amalia's mother. Amalia's story is partly about an adolescent girl's simultaneous discovery of her sexual vulnerability and her sexual power, and the themes of power, shame and longing, inflected according to the temperaments and relationships of the characters, ripple quietly through the whole of the film. "The Holy Girl" may occasionally frustrate your desire for clarity and order, but in the end it will reward your patience, and you leave the theater in a state of quiet awe. It is a film that defies categorization, but I'm tempted to call it a miracle. — A. O. Scott, The New York Times

Thursday, April 28, 2005

justice

"Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise cannot see all ends. " JR Tolkein

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

teaching methods

1. Natural Approach by Tracy D. Terrell

Terrell′s Natural Approach (NA) is an attempt to build a more generalizable teaching method on the foundation of Total Physical Response (TPR) and communicative competency (Terrell, 1986). Terrell adopted Asher′s TPR techniques because he found them effective, particularly in the early stages of language learning. NA describes three stages of language acquisition:

comprehension (preproduction),
early speech (one-word responses)
and speech emergence (sentence production).

Thus, NA, like TPR recognizes the need for a "silent period" of delayed oral practice, where students absorb language without the stress of audio-lingual-type listen and repeat drills. The proposed merit of a silent period is supported by other researchers (Mangubhai, 1991; Atherton, 1993; Gary, 1975; Winitz & Reeds, 1973).

Terrell′s approach is a comprehensive curriculum of communicative games, such as role plays or solving puzzles, which inspire students to communicate in the new language. Speech is motivated by the task and the environment, as opposed to the listen-repeat drills of audio-lingual teaching. Communicative activities in NA are designed to help students develop concrete associations between experience-based meaning and linguistic forms (Terrell, 1986). Terrell explicitly intended that NA should reduce the psychological tension and anxiety experienced by beginning language learners. He stressed the need to make language learning enjoyable in order to diminish the stress.

Approaches which emphasize communicative competency such as TPR and the NA have attracted significant criticism for their dismissal of explicit grammar instruction. Higgs and Clifford′s (1982) article warning about the danger of "fossilized language" among students in competency programs is still widely cited. Higgs and Clifford claim that programs which overly stress communication do so at the cost of linguistic proficiency. The result is that many students emerge with large vocabularies but poor grammar execution. They assert that after about four semesters of instruction these grammatical errors fossilize and actually become incurable, no matter how much subsequent instruction the student receives. Higgs and Clifford refer to this as the "2/2+ syndrome", because the students will never surpass level 2 competency. It is important to remember, however, that Higgs and Clifford present absolutely no data to substantiate their claims.

In summary, communicative competency approaches, such as TPR and the NA, seem to be effective alternatives to the grammar-translation method. TPR and NA derive both their strengths and limitations from a common reliance on physical activity and demonstration. While the physical rehearsal does seem to help students both understand and recall language, the severe restrictions on what can be demonstrated and experienced within a typical language classroom have greatly limited the proliferation of these methods, particularly TPR. The restrictions of what can be demonstrated, experienced and responded to in the confines of the typical language classroom seem to limit the applicability of communicative methods such as TPR and NA.

Reference
Rose, Howard (n.d): Alternative Methods of Language Instruction. In: Review of the Literature on Language Learning (http://www.imprintit.com/Publications/HRPubs/hrthesis/ch2.html)

2. The Direct Approach

This approach was developed initially as a reaction to the grammar-translation approach in an attempt to integrate more use of the target language in instruction.

Lessons begin with a dialogue using a modern conversational style in the target language. Material is first presented orally with actions or pictures. The mother tongue is NEVER, NEVER used. There is no translation. The preferred type of exercise is a series of questions in the target language based on the dialogue or an anecdotal narrative. Questions are answered in the target language. Grammar is taught inductively -- rules are generalized from the practice and experience with the target language. Verbs are used first and systematically conjugated only much later after some oral mastery of the target language. Advanced students read literature for comprehension and pleasure. Literary texts are not analyzed grammatically. The culture associated with the target language is also taught inductively. Culture is considered an important aspect of learning the language.

2.1 The Audiolingual Method

This method is based on the principles of behaviour psychology. It adapted many of the principles and procedures of the Direct Method, in part as a reaction to the lack of speaking skills of the Reading Approach.

New material is presented in the form of a dialogue. Based on the principle that language learning is habit formation, the method fosters dependence on mimicry, memorization of set phrases and over-learning. Structures are sequenced and taught one at a time. Structural patterns are taught using repetitive drills. Little or no grammatical explanations are provided; grammar is taught inductively. Skills are sequenced: Listening, speaking, reading and writing are developed in order. Vocabulary is strictly limited and learned in context. Teaching points are determined by contrastive analysis between L1 and L2. There is abundant use of language laboratories, tapes and visual aids. There is an extended pre-reading period at the beginning of the course. Great importance is given to precise native-like pronunciation. Use of the mother tongue by the teacher is permitted, but discouraged among and by the students. Successful responses are reinforced; great care is taken to prevent learner errors. There is a tendency to focus on manipulation of the target language and to disregard content and meaning.

Hints for Using Audio-lingual Drills in L2 Teaching

1. The teacher must be careful to insure that all of the utterances which students will make are actually within the practiced pattern. For example, the use of the AUX verb have should not suddenly switch to have as a main verb.
2. Drills should be conducted as rapidly as possibly so as to insure automaticity and to establish a system.
3. Ignore all but gross errors of pronunciation when drilling for grammar practice.
4. Use of shortcuts to keep the pace o drills at a maximum. Use hand motions, signal cards, notes, etc. to cue response. You are a choir director.
5. Use normal English stress, intonation, and juncture patterns conscientiously.
6. Drill material should always be meaningful. If the content words are not known, teach their meanings.
7. Intersperse short periods of drill (about 10 minutes) with very brief alternative activities to avoid fatigue and boredom.
8. Introduce the drill in this way:
a. Focus (by writing on the board, for example)
b. Exemplify (by speaking model sentences)
c. Explain (if a simple grammatical explanation is needed)
d. Drill
9. Don′t stand in one place; move about the room standing next to as many different students as possible to spot check their production. Thus you will know who to give more practice to during individual drilling.
10. Use the "backward buildup" technique for long and/or difficult patterns.
-- tomorrow
-- in the cafeteria tomorrow
-- will be eating in the cafeteria tomorrow
-- Those boys will be eating in the cafeteria tomorrow.
11. Arrange to present drills in the order of increasing complexity of student response. The question is: How much internal organization or decision making must the student do in order to make a response in this drill. Thus: imitation first, single-slot substitution next, then free response last.

2.2 The Berlitz Method by Maximilian D. Berlitz

The organization now known as Berlitz International, Inc. was founded in 1878 by Maximilian D. Berlitz in Providence, Rhode Island. Descended from a long line of teachers and mathematicians, Maximilian Berlitz grew up in the Black Forest region of Germany. He emigrated to the United States in 1872 and arrived prepared to teach Greek, Latin, and six other European languages according to the strict traditionalist grammar-translation approach. After building a successful career as a private teacher, Berlitz joined the Warner Polytechnic College as a professor of French and German language instruction. The college, however, was less imposing than its name, and Berlitz found himself at once owner, dean, principal, and only faculty member.

Needing an assistant to teach French, Berlitz hired a young Frenchman who appeared to be the most promising candidate, possibly because of the impeccable French in his letter of application. Invited to Providence, Nicholas Joly arrived to find his new employer ill and feverish from overwork, a condition that was not improved when Berlitz learned his new assistant spoke no English. Casting about desperately for a way of using Joly, Berlitz told him to try pointing at objects and naming them and to act out verbs as best he could. He thereupon took to his bed, emerging anxiously six weeks later prepared to face the wrath of his neglected students.

Instead, Berlitz found the students engaging in lively question and answer exchanges with their teacher, in elegantly accented French. The characteristic solemnity of the formal classroom had vanished. More important, the students had progressed further than any ever had under six weeks of his own tutelage.

Berlitz quickly concluded that his emergency measure held the seed of an innovative teaching technique. By replacing rote learning with a discovery process that kept students active and interested, it solved many of the problems that had plagued language instruction in the past.

After experimenting with the new technique and finding it consistently effective, Berlitz developed a system of language teaching which today is still the basis for the world-famous Berlitz courses.

The principles he laid down were deceptively simple. Only the target language would be spoken in class, starting with the first greeting by the teacher. Emphasis would be on the spoken word, with students learning to read and write only what they had already learned to say and understand. There would be no formal grammar instruction; instead, students would absorb a grammatical system naturally, by using it. Above all, to develop fluency, students would have to learn to think in the new language, not translate - to associate new words with objects and ideas, rather than with the distractingly familiar words of their mother tongue. Teachers would have to constantly encourage students to speak the language being taught, employing a barrage of questions to be answered and a quickly expanding vocabulary. And, most importantly, each Berlitz teacher would have to have a native command of the language being taught.

Reference
Ronald Hilton: http://www.stanford.edu/group/wais/language_berlitz.html

3. Community Language Learning by Charles A. Curran

This methodology is not based on the usual methods by which languages are taught. Rather the approach is patterned upon counseling techniques and adapted to the peculiar anxiety and threat as well as the personal and language problems a person encounters in the learning of foreign languages. Consequently, the learner is not thought of as a student but as a client. The native instructors of the language are not considered teachers but, rather are trained in counseling skills adapted to their roles as language counselors.

The language-counseling relationship begins with the client′s linguistic confusion and conflict. The aim of the language counselor′s skill is first to communicate an empathy for the client′s threatened inadequate state and to aid him linguistically. Then slowly the teacher-counselor strives to enable him to arrive at his own increasingly independent language adequacy. This process is furthered by the language counselor′s ability to establish a warm, understanding, and accepting relationship, thus becoming an "other-language self" for the client. The process involves five stages of adaptation:

STAGE 1
The client is completely dependent on the language counselor.

1. First, he expresses only to the counselor and in English what he wishes to say to the group. Each group member overhears this English exchange but no other members of the group are involved in the interaction.
2. The counselor then reflects these ideas back to the client in the foreign language in a warm, accepting tone, in simple language in phrases of five or six words.
3. The client turns to the group and presents his ideas in the foreign language. He has the counselor′s aid if he mispronounces or hesitates on a word or phrase. This is the client′s maximum security stage.

STAGE 2
1. Same as above.
2. The client turns and begins to speak the foreign language directly to the group.
3. The counselor aids only as the client hesitates or turns for help. These small independent steps are signs of positive confidence and hope.

STAGE 3
1. The client speaks directly to the group in the foreign language. This presumes that the group has now acquired the ability to understand his simple phrases.
2. Same as 3 above. This presumes the client′s greater confidence, independence, and proportionate insight into the relationship of phrases, grammar, and ideas. Translation is given only when a group member desires it.

STAGE 4
1. The client is now speaking freely and complexly in the foreign language. Presumes group′s understanding.
2. The counselor directly intervenes in grammatical error, mispronunciation, or where aid in complex expression is needed. The client is sufficiently secure to take correction.

STAGE 5
1. Same as stage 4.
2. The counselor intervenes not only to offer correction but to add idioms and more elegant constructions.
3. At this stage the client can become counselor to the group in stages 1, 2, and 3.

Reference
Curran, Charles A. (1976): Counseling-Learning in Second Languages. Apple River, Illinois: Apple River Press.

3.1 Functional-notional Approach by Mary Finocchiaro

This method of language teaching is categorized along with others under the rubric of a communicative approach. The method stresses a means of organizing a language syllabus. The emphasis is on breaking down the global concept of language into units of analysis in terms of communicative situations in which they are used.

Notions are meaning elements that may be expressed through nouns, pronouns, verbs, prepositions, conjunctions, adjectives or adverbs. The use of particular notions depends on three major factors: a. the functions b. the elements in the situation, and c. the topic being discussed.

A situation may affect variations of language such as the use of dialects, the formality or informality of the language and the mode of expression. Situation includes the following elements:
A. The persons taking part in the speech act

B. The place where the conversation occurs

C. The time the speech act is taking place

D. The topic or activity that is being discussed

Exponents are the language utterances or statements that stem from the function, the situation and the topic.

Code is the shared language of a community of speakers.

Code-switching is a change or switch in code during the speech act, which many theorists believe is purposeful behavior to convey bonding, language prestige or other elements of interpersonal relations between the speakers.

Functional Categories of Language

Mary Finocchiaro (1983, p. 65-66) has placed the functional categories under five headings as noted below: personal, interpersonal, directive, referential, and imaginative.

Personal = Clarifying or arranging one′s ideas; expressing one′s thoughts or feelings: love, joy, pleasure, happiness, surprise, likes, satisfaction, dislikes, disappointment, distress, pain, anger, anguish, fear, anxiety, sorrow, frustration, annoyance at missed opportunities, moral, intellectual and social concerns; and the everyday feelings of hunger, thirst, fatigue, sleepiness, cold, or warmth

Interpersonal = Enabling us to establish and maintain desirable social and working relationships: Enabling us to establish and maintain desirable social and working relationships:

Greetings and leave takings; introducing people to others; identifying oneself to others; expressing joy at another′s success; expressing concern for other people′s welfare; extending and accepting invitations; refusing invitations politely or making alternative arrangements; making appointments for meetings; breaking appointments politely and arranging another mutually convenient time; apologizing; excusing oneself and accepting excuses for not meeting commitments; indicating agreement or disagreement; interrupting another speaker politely; changing an embarrassing subject; receiving visitors and paying visits to others; offering food or drinks and accepting or declining politely; sharing wishes, hopes, desires, problems; making promises and committing oneself to some action; complimenting someone; making excuses; expressing and acknowledging gratitude

Directive = Attempting to influence the actions of others; accepting or refusing direction:

Making suggestions in which the speaker is included; making requests; making suggestions; refusing to accept a suggestion or a request but offering an alternative; persuading someone to change his point of view; requesting and granting permission; asking for help and responding to a plea for help; forbidding someone to do something; issuing a command: giving and responding to instructions; warning someone; discouraging someone from pursuing a course of action; establishing guidelines and deadlines for the completion of actions; asking for directions or instructions

Referential = talking or reporting about things, actions, events, or people in the environment in the past or in the future; talking about language (what is termed the metalinguistic function: = talking or reporting about things, actions, events, or people in the environment in the past or in the future; talking about language (what is termed the metalinguistic function:

Identifying items or people in the classroom, the school the home, the community; asking for a description of someone or something; defining something or a language item or asking for a definition; paraphrasing, summarizing, or translating (L1 to L2 or vice versa); explaining or asking for explanations of how something works; comparing or contrasting things; discussing possibilities, probabilities, or capabilities of doing something; requesting or reporting facts about events or actions; evaluating the results of an action or event

Imaginative = Discussions involving elements of creativity and artistic expression

Discussing a poem, a story, a piece of music, a play, a painting, a film, a TV program, etc.; expanding ideas suggested by other or by a piece of literature or reading material; creating rhymes, poetry, stories or plays; recombining familiar dialogs or passages creatively; suggesting original beginnings or endings to dialogs or stories; solving problems or mysteries

Reference
Finocchiaro, M. / Brumfit, C. (1983): The Functional-Notional Approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

4. The Silent Way by Caleb Gattegno

If the Silent Way is a method for teaching foreign languages, it is a most unusual one, for its inventor, Dr. Caleb Gattegno of Alexandria, Egypt, repeatedly insisted that "the Silent Way is not a method at all."

Gattegno, in fact, dedicated his life to a much broader field which he called The Subordination of Teaching to Learning. He held that good teaching must always conform to the demands of learning and he spent most of his life investigating what those demands might be. Gattegno dismissed traditional teaching as being too concerned with filling memories rather than educating students′ awareness, which, he declared, is the only thing in us that is educable. Over the years he applied his discoveries about awareness and learning to ordinary school subjects such as mathematics, reading and language teaching, in every case transforming a traditional discipline into something the world had never seen before.

In the Silent Way, Gattegno developed a number of highly adaptable "tools" that can be used to make students aware, for example, of the intricacies of a language′s grammar or the pitfalls of its pronunciation. Typically, these tools permit such clear insights into complicated subjects that no explanation by the teacher is necessary. In an effort to show teachers that repetition and explanation were of far less importance in language teaching than educating awareness, Gattegno would teach Arabic, Hindi, English or Spanish "the Silent Way," without ever uttering a single word. Whether he was teaching languages, algebra or adult literacy, Gattegno′s classes were so dramatically successful that he was frequently referred to as "The World′s Greatest Teacher."

Procedures
This method begins by using a set of colored rods and verbal commands in order to achieve the following:

To avoid the use of the vernacular. To create simple linguistic situations that remain under the complete control of the teacher To pass on to the learners the responsibility for the utterances of the descriptions of the objects shown or the actions performed. To let the teacher concentrate on what the students say and how they are saying it, drawing their attention to the differences in pronunciation and the flow of words. To generate a serious game-like situation in which the rules are implicitly agreed upon by giving meaning to the gestures of the teacher and his mime. To permit almost from the start a switch from the lone voice of the teacher using the foreign language to a number of voices using it. This introduces components of pitch, timbre and intensity that will constantly reduce the impact of one voice and hence reduce imitation and encourage personal production of one′s own brand of the sounds.

To provide the support of perception and action to the intellectual guess of what the noises mean, thus bring in the arsenal of the usual criteria of experience already developed and automatic in one′s use of the mother tongue. To provide a duration of spontaneous speech upon which the teacher and the students can work to obtain a similarity of melody to the one heard, thus providing melodic integrative schemata from the start.

Materials: The complete set of materials utilized as the language learning progresses include:
A set of colored wooden rods A set of wall charts containing words of a "functional" vocabulary and some additional ones; a pointer for use with the charts in Visual Dictation A color coded phonic chart(s) Tapes or discs, as required; films Drawings and pictures, and a set of accompanying worksheets Transparencies, three texts, a Book of Stories, worksheets

Reference
Caleb Gattegno (1972): Teaching Foreign Languages in Schools: The Silent Way. New York City: Educational Solutions.

5. Total Physical Response by James J. Asher

James J. Asher defines the Total Physical Response (TPR) method as one that combines information and skills through the use of the kinesthetic sensory system. This combination of skills allows the student to assimilate information and skills at a rapid rate. As a result, this success leads to a high degree of motivation. The basic tenets are:

Understanding the spoken language before developing the skills of speaking. Imperatives are the main structures to transfer or communicate information. The student is not forced to speak, but is allowed an individual readiness period and allowed to spontaneously begin to speak when the student feels comfortable and confident in understanding and producing the utterances.

TECHNIQUE
Step I: The teacher says the commands as he himself performs the action.
Step 2: The teacher says the command as both the teacher and the students then perform the action.
Step 3: The teacher says the command but only students perform the action
Step 4: The teacher tells one student at a time to do commands
Step 5: The roles of teacher and student are reversed. Students give commands to teacher and to other students.
Step 6: The teacher and student allow for command expansion or produces new sentences.

Reference
James J. Asher (1979): Learning Another Language Through Actions. San Jose, California: AccuPrint.

6. Suggestopedia by Georgi Lozanov

based on the science of impact approach invented by the Bulgarian psychiatrist G. L. Originally this method has been used as an ordinary teaching method at Bulgarian primary schools. Meanwhile it has been implemented in many other countries as a method for teaching foreign languages to adults. This method is based on the presumption that our brain - particularly the right half - the hemisphere - disposes of a considerably unused potential that can be made available through the so-called power of suggestion. Thus the acquiring of foreign languages can be improved by using the reserves of the unconscious mind. Inhibitions or barriers can be abolished through desuggestion prompting a positive attitude towards language learning, called resuggestion. In the first lesson, the so-called concert, the learners are confronted with long passages in the foreign language. After that the text will be translated into the learners′ mother tongue - that happens in a kind of theatrical performance while there is classical music played in the background. The aim is to produce a completely relaxed atmosphere - and by establishing this you are to learn a foreign language. After the lesson you should feel a kind of enthusiastic as if you had attended a real concert. By using several patterns in the foreign language the learners should get the impression of being able to acquire the language in an easy and natural way. Later during another lesson the learners use the language material for interacting in a communicative way. Grammar mistakes won′t be looked at or even mentioned. By using this method described above - that is called immersion - the learners should be able to learn more than one thinks.

Following Lozanov′s own definition suggestopedics/desuggestopedics has nothing in common with methodical improvements within the framework of the traditionally known potential of brain and mind. It is organized on the basis of conditions and laws for systemic activation and utilization of the reserve (potential, unused) capacity of brain and mind discovered by Lozanov. This means 3- to 5-fold better results for the time being, without tiredness and home learning. The integral learning process is like this in a happy game.

Following Lozanov he contributes this effect described above to the psychophysiological laws of mind/brain functions in any communication and particularly in the learning communication as follows:

_ integral unity and simultaneousness of conscious and paraconscious processes;
_ integral unity and simultaneousnes of central and peripheral perceptions;
_ integral unity and simultaneousness of a various-degree activation not only of the left and right hemispheres but also of the entire brain system;
_ integral unity and simultaneousness of globality and partiality in the functions of mind/brain;
_ integral unity and simultaneousness of affectivity and logic, deliberation and intuition;
_ integral unity and simultaneousness of psychosomatic reactions;
_ preparedness of mind to work on its reserve level provided that adequate conditions have been set up.

6.1 Accelerated Learning

Accelerated Learning has been variously described as Suggestopedia, Superlearning, Whole Brain Learning, Integrative Learning, Quantum Learning and Holistic Learning. The father of Accelerated Learning was undoubtedly Georgi Lozanov. He introduced a technique called Suggestopedia into his classroom in the Seventies. Suggestopedia is basically a technique of introducing positive suggestion into and eliminating negative suggestion from the learning process. Dynamic descriptions and key points of the material to be learned are fixed into the subconscious using music during "concert" sessions and later activated to provide the basis for the detailed learning. Lozanov discovered that the brain has an almost infinite potential for learning if the subconscious mind receives information in the right way.

His work was treated with great skepticism at first and, in order to quantify the benefits of his method of teaching, he founded a language school and proved that Suggestopedia could deliver a 300% improvement in the speed and effectiveness of learning. He visited the United States and developed a course to teach his techniques to other teachers. Even then it was a number of years until his techniques gained widespread acceptance and other teachers such as Peter Kline, Eric Jensen, Sheila Ostrander and Bobbi DePorter started to develop his ideas further. Howard Gardner also contributed his theory of Multiple Intelligences at this time and Win Wenger published his work on increasing intelligence.

These days the term Accelerated Learning covers a whole spectrum of techniques from Lozanov′s original ideas of Suggestopedia and using music to the use of drama and visualisation, teaching multiple intelligence′s, creating the co-operative classroom and enhancing self-esteem. Above all, Accelerated Learning is FUN learning. It is about bringing fun back into the classroom.

In this context so-called sensory images are considered as "...the fundamental language of the brain", i.e. everything that you know is represented metaphorically by your unconscious. Every phrase and every word has absolutely no meaning of its own. It only has the meaning that you attach to it. And on a deeper level, that means that everything you know is somehow represented in images, sounds, and feelings.

The importance of accessing and utilising Multi-Sensory Imaging (and encoding) is further backed up by studies into sensory modality. Much of the work done in this area has been carried out within the field of Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP). Following its theory each person has a dominant sensory system. Thus you may prefer to communicate or learn in either:

A Visual Way
(i.e. you are orientated to visualise)

An Auditory Way
(you normally like to hear presentations or talk out problems)

A Kinaesthetic Way
(kinaesthetic means, "to do with movement, active, action orientated′)".

Many people think that a revolution must occur in the way we teach and the way we learn. Accelerated Learning is a proven method of increasing the absorption of knowledge - the key to the success of any educational system. Most of the major developments in the field have occurred in the United States where the techniques of Accelerated Learning are widely and most successfully used.

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

jeans

quote from somewhere - Scientists from the Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Detroit, US, examined key genes in humans and several ape species and found our "life code" to be 99.4% the same as chimps.

Scientists decoding the human genome have discovered that just 78 genes separate men from women.


Humans are said to have between 20,000 and 25,000* genes. 78 genes out of 25,000 is in the neighbourhood of .4%. {revised as 78 out of 20,000 is close to .6%!}

So, while, superficially, that looks close, it's important to consider which genes are different. Y chromosomal and X chromosomal differences comprise the majority of difference between men and women I think.

Friday, April 15, 2005

Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4.
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6.
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8.
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11.
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.

(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14.
(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.

(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15.
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.

(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Article 16.
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.

(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.

(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.
(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.

(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22.
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23.
(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24.
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26.
(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27.
(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.

(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28.
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29.
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.

(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.


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

Monday, April 11, 2005

parent hood

hatch- What will you say? What will you say when they ask why? Why this, and why that? Of course those aren't easy questions...The questions I'm more wondering about will come in time.

Why so many wars? Why is it so confusing? Why is the telephone off the hook for those who really need a ride? Why is it so unfair? Why is it that you either "drink bubbles or you die of thirst". It baffles me. We all bloody see it and noone wants it but yet, it gets worse daily... Is humanity a junkey? Hungry for illusions, for chocolate.

Your kids may not say those questions, but the questions will be asked IMO and experience. What will you say when they ask why?

bob - Scram kid you are starting to bug me?

hatch - That's what my dad used to say. Don't you love me now.

I'm serious. I know many guys and gals have little ones here and some coming soon too.

I have a buddy back home with two little ones now. Sounds crazy to me the guy was so unstable. I told him once: "I don't want kids because I can't control myself yet." He replied: If you wait to be ready, you'll wait for ever. You should see us sometimes, the whole family looks like a feak show."

bob - Anyway there are too many people in the world already. People = problems.

hatch - So I take it that's what you'll say to your child bob? Hmmm...Will you be surprised if that 15 years old kid replies: "Then why did you and mom make me? I never asked for any of this!"

bob - Smart kids ask smart questions. Anyway I'd tell him that yes there are too many people in the world but since he is here already he might as well find some happiness in life without making too much of a pig of himself in the process. Heck I'd tell him that he might even be able to do some good if he is cheerful, creative, honest and humble enough. At fifteen a kid can start getting used to the idea that life can be difficult and their parents aren't perfect.

hatch - There are no bad questions coming out of a fifteen years old if he is asking about world problems. Only the questions that the less fortunate and not so smart kids will "not" ask. I wish all my teachers had known that...

bob - I don't know anything.

jdsmith - Hatch you yourself still ask questions that have no answers. What's the point? Get on with your life. Get over it...whatever it is that you feel you missed, or missed out on. Don't dwell sooooooo much on this negative crap. Life is too damn cool. (This is pretty much what I'll tell my kid too BTW)

And trust me, a 15 yr old doesnt ask why was he born. My 5 yr old already has! lol

He asks, I answer. Plain and simply. If I don't know, I say, I don't know and we try to figure it out together.

It's called parenting, and no, you are right, not every parent knows how to do it well. Free will is a wonderful thing. One's adult actions and behaviors are not limited to one's crappy childhood experiences. I know this for a fact.

hatch - Hold your horses! My wife and I are thinking about having a kid dude and we both feel unsure about it. Those were some of the reasons "we" felt it would be a challenge to raise a child. Nowhere did I imply that this had anything to do with my childhood. Secondly it's not so damn cool if you get out of your luxurious life and take a look around. Besides, why do teenagers commit suicide? That won't be your child of course. Thirdly, you dismiss my intentions too quickly and so did Brian as I'm now posting this in the flounders. Fourthly, If what I write doesn't make sense to you, there are no need to suggest that I have issues. This one made sense to my wife and I. So I guess we have issues for thinking about adopting a troubled teenager. I can't talk about the struggles of being a teenager...Without your comments related to my childhood. Nevermind mentionning I want to adopt one don't you think?

bob - I suggest you try raising a puppy first.

TainanCowboy - Everyday I bring the boy home from his school. The ride home through traffic usually goes something like this:

Me:"You see what that person did?"
Boy:"Yes"
Me:"Thats a dumbass thing to do, it almost caused an accident. You should never do that when you get your 'scooter."
Boy:"Oh...OK."
Me:"And don't use the word 'dumbass.'"
Boy:"Oh...OK, Momma says you use a lot of words I should not use."
Me:"Right, just remember your Momma is always right."
Boy:"Oh...OK...I want a car."
Me:"Forget it...you're just 9 or 10 yrs old. How old are you ?"
Boy:"Oh...I'm not telling you."
Me:"You wanna walk home?"
Boy:"Oh...you want to tell Momma you come home without me?"
Me:"You little terrorist."
Boy:"Oh...Hahahahahahahaaaaa"

tom waits wrote

I'm leaving my family, I'm leaving all my friends. My battle's at home but my heart is in the wind where the clouds are like headlines on a new front page sky. My tears are salt water and the moon is full and high...Shiver me timbers...

stories

Stories [sic] sometimes celebrate the raw, vital human instinct to invent fantasies, to lie for the sport of it, to bait with red herrings, to play Scheherazade to an audience real or imagined. For Mr. McDonagh, that instinct is as primal and energizing as the appetites for sex and food. Life is short and brutal, but stories are fun. Plus, they have the chance of living forever.

Saturday, April 09, 2005

funniest story I heard all day

mordeth- My last girlfriend liked to hold my hand. I don't really care for it. Makes it uncomfortable to walk. One day we are walking through a park and she tries to hold my hand...I hold her hand for a few seconds then let go. So she makes a cute whine sound and pouts. So I ask her "Why do you like to hold hands?". She thinks about this for a bit and responds with "It makes me feel safe." Oh...ok...so I offer my hand and she takes it happily. A few seconds later I use the hand that I'm holding onto to fling her into some bushes and as she struggles to get up I say "Doesn't feel so safe now....does it?"

True story.

Gilligan"s Island

Years ago, CBS had a popular little series called Gilligan's Island.
There is, however, a dark secret about this "comedy" you may never
have realized. The island is a direct representation of HELL.

Nobody on the island wants to be there, yet none are able to
leave. Each one of the characters represents one of the 7 deadly
sins:

Ginger represents LUST - she wears skimpy outfits, is obsessed
with her looks, and is a borderline nymphomaniac.

Mary Ann represents ENVY - she is jealous of Ginger's beauty.

The Professor represents PRIDE - he is an annoying know-it-all.

Mr. Howell represents GREED - no explanation needed.

Mrs. Howell represents SLOTH - she has never lifted a finger to
help on any of their escape plans.

The Skipper represents two sins: GLUTTON - again, no explanation
needed and ANGER - he violently hits Gilligan on each show.

This leaves Gilligan. Gilligan is the person who put them
there. He prevents them from leaving by foiling all of their escape
plots. Also, it is HIS island. Therefore, Gilligan is SATAN.

........ Crazy? He does wear red in every episode.

inductive and deductive reasoning

bob -Can you guys give me good definitions of deductive and inductive reasoning with examples? Perhaps with examples illustrating the difference between them. And please, if you could, keep it down to a hundred words or so. Thanks. (it's for my blog)

puiwaihin - Deductive reasoning: Using statements of general facts to prove with absolute certainty the truth of a specific proposition. These are similar to mathematics and follow strict rules. Statements that do not follow the rules are invalid and do not reach a statement of truth. Statements that do follow the rules will be true as long as all the propositions at the start of the reasoning are also true.

Example of good logic-
To be proven: I have skin
Premise1: All healthy human males have skin
P2: All humans have a gender
P3: The only human genders are male and female
P4: I am human
P5: I am not female
P6: I am healthy
Statement1: Since I am human, I have a gender
S2: Since my gender is not female, and the only other gender humans can have are male and female, I must be male
Proved (S3): Since I am a healthy male, I have skin.

As long as all the premisies are true, nothing new outside the premises, and the form of the arguments follow the rules of logic, the conclusion must be true.

Inductive reasoning: Using specific observations to create a general rule. Induction can ascertain absolute truth when every case involved is examined (such as in computer science), but most often the conclusion goes beyond what has been observed. Conclusions reached by inductive reasoning can be shown to be false later when more observation is made.

Example:
1. Every time you wake up the building you went to sleep in is still around you.
2. You conclude that after you go to sleep the building around you will still be there when you wake up.

bob - But what if there is an earth quake?

Danimal - Bob, On some of this, I’m borrowing a bit from a previous post, but with a little editing, it’s basically what I want to say.

Induction:
Induction essentially means noticing a pattern and making a prediction that follows that pattern. Most often an inductive argument makes predictions about future events based on past experiences. For example:

1. The sun has always risen every morning so far.
2. The sun will rise tomorrow (or every morning). [*]

“The sun has always risen,” is the pattern. The conclusion is simply taking that pattern and extending it to the future. It doesn't always have to be about future events, though. For example, if I was conducting an archeological dig and happened upon a Neanderthal, I could say:

1. Neanderthals have always hunted wild animals.
2. This particular Neanderthal hunted wild animals.



Again, the premise sets a pattern: Neanderthals have always hunted wild animals. The conclusion uses this pattern to make a prediction (or probability argument) about the habits of specific Neanderthals.


Deduction:
In deduction, we basically “deduce” the conclusion from the premise(s). A deductively valid argument is one where, if all of it’s premises are true, the conclusion must be true. For example,

1) Only Bush or Kerry will win
2) Bush won
Therefore Kerry lost.

If premises 1 and 2 are true, then there is no possible way for the conclusion to be false.


Specifics on how they are different
What’s unique about inductive arguments is that they lead us to genuinely new beliefs. Whereas with deduction, the conclusion is always contained within the premise, whether it is implicit or explicit.

Unlike deduction, induction is basically a probability argument. All the premises might be true, but the conclusion might still be false. For example, if I was waiting for the subway, I might say,

1) This subway has been on time every day for the last 20 days.
2) This subway will be on time today.

But it is always possible that the subway will not actually be on time, just like it’s true that the sun will not rise every morning for eternity. What has happened in the future may be an indication of what will happen, but past events do not guarantee the truth of future events. Correct premises only increase the probability that a conclusion will be true.

Danimal - bob wrote: But what if there is an earth quake?

Induction is a probability argument. The premises do not guarantee the truth of its conclusion.

Danimal - Quote:

To be proven: I have skin
Premise1: All healthy human males have skin
P2: All humans have a gender
P3: The only human genders are male and female
P4: I am human
P5: I am not female
P6: I am healthy
Statement1: Since I am human, I have a gender
S2: Since my gender is not female, and the only other gender humans can have are male and female, I must be male
Proved (S3): Since I am a healthy male, I have skin.



There’s a much quicker and easier way to prove this:

1: All healthy human males have skin
2. puiwaihin is a healthy human male
Therefore, puiwaihin has skin

bob - So the basic difference between inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning is that deductive reasoning is based upon established fact and points to further factual conclusions that can logically be made based on those facts; while inductive reasoning is based on past knowns and is generally used to make predictions about future events?

I am pretty certain that is what you said but I remember these things better if I write them in my own words.

Thanks guys.

By the way, the earthquake thing was suppossed to be a joke.

Tuesday, April 05, 2005

yet more metaphysics (the part where it gets good)

bob - You are relying on a concept that has no basis in fact to explain a fact that you experience on a daily basis. Try this experiment. Pay very close attention to your own thoughts and the feelings that go with them and make a "rational decision" about whether or not you want to have the same sorts of thoughts and feelings in the future. When you realize that you are indulging in some self pity or are over critical perhaps "think" about how you could instead "choose" to focus on how lucky you are or on the positive qualities in the people around you. After a few months of this notice how your thoughts and emotions have changed for the better and then "decide" if you want to continue with this. You'll be believing in your own free will in no time.

butcher boy - bob wrote: You are relying on a concept that has no basis in fact to explain a fact that you experience on a daily basis.


free will is not a fact. That is just the problem. Given the law of cause and effect, it seems much more likely that free will is only an illusion.

Quote:
Try this experiment. Pay very close attention to your own thoughts and the feelings that go with them and make a "rational decision" about whether or not you want to have the same sorts of thoughts and feelings in the future. When you realize that you are indulging in some self pity or are over critical perhaps "think" about how you could instead "choose" to focus on how lucky you are or on the positive qualities in the people around you. After a few months of this notice how your thoughts and emotions have changed for the better and then "decide" if you want to continue with this. You'll be believing in your own free will in no time.


This is all very nice but even you have had to put specific words in quotation marks. Now why did you need to do that? I may well be believing in free will in no time (in fact I do believe in free will). That is not the issue though. The issue is is that belief well founded? Not that I can see. In fact to me it seems to be the ultimate act of faith as it goes against one of the most basic laws we know - cause and effect. So the problem remains.

bob - Let's take this position of yours to it's logical conclusion.

Some billions of years ago the universe big banged it's way into existence and at that point a cause effect chain of reactions was set off which essentially determined EVERYTHING that was to come after. Every last detail. Including, for example, the decision I just made.... hang on, to scratch my ass. And this feeling I have that I should perhaps try to be kinder to my wife is nothing more than an electro-chemical event. An electro-chemical event whose outcome was already decided some billions of years ago. And the music I happen to hear, the books I read, this conversation I am having with you now were also all predetermined way back when, as were the emotional reactions and insights that might come from those experiences. Similarly everything that you do, everything that you experience and learn from in subtle and complex ways was also predetermined from the start. Your conscious participation in these events has no effect. No need to consider the pros and cons of anything because it has already been determined what you will do.

Honestly, does the scenario that I am describing here resonante in any way with that deep part of yourself that knows it is alive? The part that FEELS things like love and that big burden of guilt. The part that feels responsible for it's actions? Maybe this sense of freedom we have is, like you say, just an illusion, but by god you have to admit it is a persistant illusion, and the facts of life sure come into focus fast when you accept the apparent reality of choice. Choice within a context of course. Choices within the parameters of what you consciously and unconsciously know now, but choice nevertheless. There are a lot mysteries. Existence is a mystery. The origins of life are a mystery. Life's consciousness of itself is a mystery. Free will and our ethical nature are mysteries. If you accept the idea of god, then there is another mystery. My question is does another mystery help to explain the mysteries that already confront us?

jdsmith - I said this earlier in this thread, but it seems I should say it again:

God is a metaphor for a mystery that absolutely transcends ALL human categories of thought. joseph campbell.

You must at least think about this before you start discussing God's will and free will.

Faith is the supposedly intangible aspect of religion that many people get hung up on. But I feel, faith is intrinsic to us...we eat until we are full..yet as thinking beings, why don't we eat until all available food is gone? Physical limitations be damned. Why not eat every last berry, or every last fry? Because Faith allows us the belief that there wil be more fries in the future. I've seen a guy eat 60 hotdogs...far beyond normal physical limitations.

Why do we have faith? We are people mostly positive about their daily existence? How many people run screaming through the streets "I need to eat!"

God is something we cannot ever comprehend. And that's ok.We're smart enough to recognize out own insignificance as well as our own individual purpose. Does that mean god does not exist? No. Does that prove god's existence? No.

So what?

A great great part of literature, the religion of literature, is that the more one reads, the more one knows one doesn't know.

And again, that's ok.

Who's judging?

Peace.

bob - [quote="jdsmith"] God is a metaphor for a mystery that absolutely transcends ALL human categories of thought. joseph campbell.

That sounds to me like another one of those supposedly brilliant lines conjured up by some supposedly brilliant person that when looked at a little less obsequiously seem rather less brilliant. To start with why would we need a metaphor for something that absolutely transcends human thought? It might just be my narcisism acting up here again but I thought we were doing a pretty good job of thinking about these things right here. And why specify human? Does he imagine monkeys do a more insightful job of pondering these questions?

jdsmith - No, he implies that as humans we ONLY can even consider these things. And if you dont know what a metaphor is, look it up. They are powerful entities.

And this may just be MY narcisim talking.

bob - jdsmith wrote: No, he implies that as humans we ONLY can even consider these things. And if you dont know what a metaphor is, look it up. They are powerful entities.

And this may just be MY narcisim talking.


Powerful entities. Yeah the questionaire said something about that. I said that yes I believed I was a powerful entity but actually what I meant was that there were powerful entities living INSIDE me and that they only became manifest during certain phases of the moon. They didn't leave room for that on the questionaire though. Cheap bastards.

more metaphysics

Danimal -This assumption isn’t born out of faith. It’s merely an inductive inference we make based on experience. The same is true with the existence of gods.


I suspect that some who believe in God would claim that their belief was merely and inductive inference based on experience.


bob - butcher boy wrote: I probably lean more towards a belief than a non-belief. Why? Well I like to believe that I really do choose to do my actions. I cannot reconcile myself to the idea that I am just a very complicated piece of machinery that seems to have free will, but in fact does not. Without free will I cannot see any value in morality since whether something is moral or not will really have no effect on what we do anyway. Perhaps this is just another side to the egotistical human that STV talks of above. Anyway after that bit of rambling, I'm thinking that only the existence of a God can allow me out of the trap of determinism, and as I don't really like being in that trap, then I am tending towards belief in God rather than belief in nothing.


Why not accept free will and an ethical sense as apparent facts of life? Ones that you can use to create yourself. There are a lot of things we can't understand - the fact of existence for example - but that we accept as part of reality anyway. The god notion doesn't explain free will any better than it explains the existence of the universe.
butcher boy - bob wrote:
The god notion doesn't explain free will any better than it explains the existence of the universe.

It doesn't explain it but it allows the possibility which I think the 'Godless' option precludes.

jdsmith - I feel that free will is more a matter of understanding one's own actions and desires in relation to their known and unknown consequences than god's gift to mankind.

Chris - butcher boy wrote: It always amuses me when hardcore atheists say that belief in God is irrational. They never see that both sides are limited to faith rather than proof.

I don't believe in leprechauns. I can't prove they don't exist, though. Am I irrational? Is my position based in faith?

Is belief in leprechauns irrational?

Chris - fred smith wrote: If anyone really thinks about these things I do not understand how so many can doubt the existence of God.

Well, the total lack of evidence for the existence of God, and the sheer absurdity of the notion of God are both good reasons to doubt God's existence.

bob - butcher boy wrote: bob wrote: The god notion doesn't explain free will any better than it explains the existence of the universe.


It doesn't explain it but it allows the possibility which I think the 'Godless' option precludes.


Free will and an ethical sense are as real as anything else we experience. It is no more neccssary to assume a god behind them than there is to assume a god behind the universe. The godless option precludes nothing.

TomHill - bob wrote: Free will and an ethical sense are as real as anything else we experience. It is no more neccssary to assume a god behind them than there is to assume a god behind the universe. The godless option precludes nothing.


Yet it seems logical to you to assume there is no god behind them.

Anyone who says there is no god... prove it.

Prove what you say? I cant prove there is a god. I cant prove a damn thing. How can you prove a counter argument?

Somebody wrote - The mainstream belief in God is that he has always existed. Some ask "What was before God?"
The answer is "Nothing. God has always existed and nothing existed prior to him (it)." or contrary to mainstream belief; "Something did exist before God." If so what was/is it? and did anything exist before that? Both arguments seem highly illogical.

When did time begin? What was there before time? The logical answers are; "No time." and "Time" but both are illogical answers. Did time always exist? If so when? and what was before that? (please feel free to add other answers )

Is the universe endless? Apparently so, because the scientists believe it is expanding. If it is not endless, what is on the other side? If it is, how can it be expanding? If it is a series of wormholes, black holes and white holes, there must logically still be an edge of the universe? But what is on the other side? Totally illogical, yet the universe exists.

The Universe is estimated by scientists to be 10-15 million years old (a little older - or younger - than our galaxy ).
This would imply the universe had a beginning. What was here before the universe? Nothing? Did the universe appear nowhere and from nothing? Illogical? If there was something here, what was it? Where was it? and what was here before that? and before that? and before that? etc.? Logical?

I was taught in science class that energy can not be created or destroyed, only changed. Does that mean that energy has always existed? Where did it come from? It must have been here before the universe. But where is that? I was taught in the same science class that it is illogical to believe that God could always have existed. (Alright not in these explicit terms - but God doesn't exist = God could not have always existed. )

Is it logical to believe that energy could have always existed, but God could not?

It seems that it is highly illogical to believe in God. And it seems highly illogical not too.

TomHill wrote - bob wrote: Free will and an ethical sense are as real as anything else we experience. It is no more neccssary to assume a god behind them than there is to assume a god behind the universe. The godless option precludes nothing.


Yet it seems logical to you to assume there is no god behind them.

Anyone who says there is no god... prove it.

Prove what you say? I cant prove there is a god. I cant prove a damn thing. How can you prove a counter argument?


bob - You want me to prove the non existence of something that nobody has ever seen?

Danimal - butcher boy wrote: I understand both the Easter Bunny and the Dragon examples but think that they represent something different. It is possible that we have merely invented the God figure for our own sanity and to explain certain things we can't understand, despite much thought and reflection. I'm not so sure the same can be said for the idea of the Easter Bunny or the invisible dragon. I am one of those 'not too sure variety' although at the moment I probably lean more towards a belief than a non-belief. Why? Well I like to believe that I really do choose to do my actions. I cannot reconcile myself to the idea that I am just a very complicated piece of machinery that seems to have free will, but in fact does not. Without free will I cannot see any value in morality since whether something is moral or not will really have no effect on what we do anyway. Perhaps this is just another side to the egotistical human that STV talks of above. Anyway after that bit of rambling, I'm thinking that only the existence of a God can allow me out of the trap of determinism, and as I don't really like being in that trap, then I am tending towards belief in God rather than belief in nothing. (I don't think the Easter Bunny or the invisibkle dragon help in this regard )

They’re only different in terms of their emotional fulfillment. Otherwise, belief in God is not any more rational than belief in invisible dragons. When we talk about belief in God existing on the same footing as disbelief, it’s really irrelevant whether belief in God helps you cope. It might be more relevant in terms of its practical value, but it doesn't make it any more true.

By the way, you seem to be saying that rejecting the concept of god mandates acceptance of determinism. Why would you say that? Free will can exist without god.

smerf wrote - I don't know if God is dead, but God sure is old.

According to the US Geological Survey, a part of the US Department of the Interior, the Earth is around 4.54 billion years old; the Milky Way Galaxy is between 11-13 billion years old; and the Universe is between 10-15 billion years of age. Although, I don't see how the Universe could ever be 10 billion years old and the Milky Way 11 billion years old. Shouldn't the Universe come first? Scientists.

butcher boy - Danimal wrote: By the way, you seem to be saying that rejecting the concept of god mandates acceptance of determinism. Why would you say that?


Because I need to find a way to be able to break the law of cause and effect. I cannot see how you can have free will without this condition being met. If there is something else that can break into the chain of cause and effect that allows us real control then that would do just as well as 'God'. Thing is, I haven't been able to work out even a basic concept about how that might occur.

metaphysics

Fred Well, when I ponder the infinite whether for time or space I tend to think of the mind bewildering qualities of the life that we lead and live and how the day to day lives that we have here are vastly unimportant. This could lead to cynicism and negativity and nihilism, but for me they lead to awe and amazement about the truly amazing gifts that I have been given for these fleeting moments that we call our lives. If anyone really thinks about these things I do not understand how so many can doubt the existence of God.

bob - The universe is infinitely complex. That's a fact that is impossible for any thinking person to avoid. But how does postulating some phantasmagorical creator make it any more comprehensible? Any more likely?

fred - It depends on your concept of the divine. If you cannot wrap your mind around the need for such a concept and insist that somehow God must be manlike, then you may be confused, others are less so. Suffer as you must.

bob - I don't insist that God must be anything Fred since the concept makes absolutely no sense to me. I know the universe exists. I know I exist. Heck, I'm even fairly certain that you exist. But God? What is that? A figment of man's imagination. One that has inspired the best and the worst in us, but a product of pure lunacy nonetheless.
Somebody wrote - I tend to agree. Humans are so egotistical that they cannot accept that there measely existence is going to be snuffed out.

So they invent a god, the afterlife.... heaven and hell... then come the Marvelous Muftis, Rabid Rabbi's, Predatory Priests, and Nuns who get none... all telling us how we should live our live according to their banal interpretations of some so called sacred scripts handed down to them by God, the Son of God, and Bezelbub.

bob - fred smith wrote: It depends on your concept of the divine. If you cannot wrap your mind around the need for such a concept and insist that somehow God must be manlike, then you may be confused, others are less so. Suffer as you must.


I am not sure what you meant by "need" here Fred. Do you mean the "logical" need for a being which created the universe, but whose existence but was not in itself created by any other thing? If that is what you meant, why can't it be that the universe itself is that thing?

The other thing I wanted to mention is that I suffer much LESS since giving up entirely on the concept of god. It always seemed vaguely nuts to me but when I even admitted to the possibility of God as some sort of all knowing being that sat in judgement of my thoughts and actions I tended to feel a bit paranoid. Paranoid and confrontational at the same time. Like the kid who challenges his parents just because it feels good.
These days, mostly as a result of reading about buddhism, I feel that man is esssentially good and that living in accordance with that basic nature is what will make you happy. There is no heaven and no hell but the ones you create inside yourself with the way you think, talk and behave. You can achieve greater peace of mind by simply watching yourself very closely and asking yourself whether or not what you are thinking, saying or doing is likely to lead to long term happiness. It's pretty simple. Getting into the habit of cussing to yourself about every minor annoyance isn't likely to contribute to your long time happiness. Nor is creating bad feelings with the people in your life because you can't control your temper. Replacing your negative thoughts, emotions, and behaviours with positive ones however will contribute to your long term happiness. There is no need for a God in any of this, and I have never suffered less than since I adopted this basic attitude toward life. There may be an afterlife. There may not be. What I know for sure is that there is this life and it makes sense to enjoy it as much as I can by trying to build a web of affectionate, respectful, fun - heck maybe even a wee bit naughty - relationships around myself while I am here.

butcher boy wrote - bob wrote: These are all facts that I can observe. It would however require faith to believe that there is some God behind all of this. I don't see the point.
The point is that is is both impossible to prove God exists or that God does not exist. Therefor the claim either that God exists or that God does not exist must be based on an article of 'faith'.

Suppose I told you there is an invisible dragon in my garage? You probably wouldn't believe me because the default assumption is that invisible dragons don’t exist. This assumption isn’t born out of faith. It’s merely an inductive inference we make based on experience. The same is true with the existence of gods.

butcher boy - I understand both the Easter Bunny and the Dragon examples but think that they represent something different. It is possible that we have merely invented the God figure for our own sanity and to explain certain things we can't understand, despite much thought and reflection. I'm not so sure the same can be said for the idea of the Easter Bunny or the invisible dragon. I am one of those 'not too sure variety' although at the moment I probably lean more towards a belief than a non-belief. Why? Well I like to believe that I really do choose to do my actions. I cannot reconcile myself to the idea that I am just a very complicated piece of machinery that seems to have free will, but in fact does not. Without free will I cannot see any value in morality since whether something is moral or not will really have no effect on what we do anyway. Perhaps this is just another side to the egotistical human that STV talks of above. Anyway after that bit of rambling, I'm thinking that only the existence of a God can allow me out of the trap of determinism, and as I don't really like being in that trap, then I am tending towards belief in God rather than belief in nothing. (I don't think the Easter Bunny or the invisibkle dragon help in this regard )

Sunday, April 03, 2005

Extracts from the Bible

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

1) If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)

2) All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)



A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

1) If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, "You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord." When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)

2) The false prophets or dreamers who try to lead you astray must be put to death, for they encourage rebellion against the LORD your God(Deuteronomy 13:1-5 NLT)

3) But any prophet who claims to give a message from another god or who falsely claims to speak for me must die.' (Deuteronomy 18:20-22 NLT)

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)

1) If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)

2) Suppose a man or woman among you . . . has violated the covenant by serving other gods or by worshiping the sun, the moon, or any of the forces of heaven, which I have strictly forbidden. When you hear about it, investigate the matter thoroughly. If it is true that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then that man or woman must be taken to the gates of the town and stoned to death. (Deuteronomy 17:2-5 NLT)

Yes, keep the Sabbath day, for it is holy. Anyone who desecrates it must die; anyone who works on that day will be cut off from the community. Work six days only, but the seventh day must be a day of total rest. I repeat: Because the LORD considers it a holy day, anyone who works on the Sabbath must be put to death.' (Exodus 31:12-15 NLT)

For more such wisdom from the Bible and references to various incidents of God killing innocent children and the like, see

http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm

Extracts from the Koran

"They say, 'Accept the Jewish or the Christian faith and you shall be rightly guided.' Say, 'By no means! We believe in the faith of Abraham, the upright one. He was no idolater.'" (Surah 2:135)


"The only true faith in God's sight is Islam." (Surah 3:19)


"Say, 'Obey Allah and the apostle.' If they give no heed, then truly, Allah does not love the unbelievers." (Surah 3:29)


"If you fear that you cannot treat orphans with fairness, then you may marry other women that seem good to you: two, three or four of them." (Surah 4:1)


"Try as you may, you cannot treat all your wives impartially." (Surah 4:3)


"Men take authority over women... As for those who are disobedient, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them." (Surah 4:34)


"Believers, do not approach your prayers when you are drunk, but wait till you can grasp the meaning of your words..." (Surah 4:43)


"Will they not ponder on the Koran? if it had not come from God, they could have surely found in it many contradictions." (Surah 4:82)


"Seek out your enemies relentlessly." (Surah 4:104)


"They denied the truth and uttered a monstrous falsehood against Mary. they declared: 'We have put to death the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, the apostle of God.' they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but they thought they did...they did not slay him for certain. God lifted him up to him..." (Surah 4:157-158)


"The Jews and Christians say: 'We are the children of God and His loved ones.' Say: 'Why then does He punish you for your sins?" (Surah 5:18)


"Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends." (Surah 5:51)


"Unbelievers are those who say: 'God is one of three.' There is but one God. If they do not desist from so saying, those of them that disbelieve shall be sternly punished." (Surah 5:73)


"The God will say: 'Jesus, son of Mary, did you ever say to mankind 'Worship me and my mother as gods besides God?' 'Glory to You, 'he will answer, 'how could I ever say that to which I have no right?" (Surah 5:116)


"If you fear treachery from any of your allies, you may fairly retaliate by breaking off your treaty with them." (Surah 9:12)


"Fight against such as those to whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]...until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (Surah 9:29)


"The Christians say: The Christ is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them." (Sura 9:30)


"Prophet make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home." (Surah 9:73)


"And say: All praise is due to Allah, WHO HAS NOT TAKEN A SON and WHO HAS NOT A PARTNER in the kingdom."(Sura 17.111)


"'How shall I bear a child,' she [Mary] answered, 'when I am a virgin...?' 'Such is the will of the Lord,' he replied. 'That is no difficult thing for Him...God forbid that He [God[ Himself should beget a son!...Those who say: 'The Lord of Mercy has begotten a son,' preach a monstrous falsehood..." (Surah 19:20-21, 29, 88-89)


"NEVER DID ALLAH TAKE TO HIMSELF A SON, and never was there with him any (other) god . . ." (Sura 23:91)


"Muhammad is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (Surah 48:29)


"The Day of Resurrection will not arrive until the Moslems make war against the Jews and kill them, and until a Jew hiding behind a rock and tree, and the rock and tree will say: 'Oh Moslem, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him!'" (Sahih Bukhari 004.52.176)

And fight in the way of God with those who fight with you. . . . And slay them wherever you come upon them, and expel them from where they expelled you; [your own] persecution is more grievous than slaying [others]."

Surah 2 Verse 217



" . . . take not to yourselves friends of them [the disbelievers] until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them . . . "

Surah 4 Verse 89

"This is the recompense of those who fight against God and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth, to do corruption there: they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall alternately be struck off, or they shall be banished from the land."

Surah 5 Verse 33

"Fight them [the unbelievers], till there is no persecution and the religion is God's entirely."

Surah 8 Verse 39



"Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush."

Surah 9 Verse 123





"The recompense of evil is evil the like of it . . . "

Surah 42 Verse 40

"When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads."

Surah 47 Verse 4

Saturday, April 02, 2005

a poem

I got style
I got wit
I got a nipple
on my tit.