"It is not by prayer and humility that you cause things to go as you wish, but by acquiring a knowledge of natural laws. The power you acquire in this way is much greater and more reliable than that formerly supposed to be acquired by prayer, because you never could tell whether your prayer would be favorably heard in heaven. The power of prayer, moreover, had recognized limits; it would have been impious to ask too much. But the power of science has no known limits. We were told that faith could remove mountains, but no one believed it; we are now told that the atomic bomb can remove mountains, and everyone believes it." - Bertrand Russell
Random Playlist Song: Trevor Pinnock - The English Concert and Choir: Handel - Messiah - Hallelujah (chorus)
Hallelujah! For the lord god omnipotent reigneth. The kingdom of this world is become the kingdom of our lord, and of his christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.
King of kings, and lord of lords. Hallelujah!
***
The Origin of Children
(Original version by Erkki Aalto, Dept. of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Stork Science, University of Helsinki)
(English version by Jopi Louko, Institute of Stork Research, University of Alberta)
Two different theories exist concerning the origin of children: the theory of sexual reproduction, and the theory of the stork. Many people believe in the theory of sexual reproduction because they have been taught this theory at school.
In reality, however, many of the world's leading scientists are in favour of the theory of the stork. If the theory of sexual reproduction is taught in schools, it must only be taught as a theory and not as the truth. Alternative theories, such as the theory of the stork, must also be taught.
Evidence supporting the theory of the stork includes the following:
1. It is a scientifically established fact that the stork does exist. This can be confirmed by every ornithologist.
2. The alleged human foetal development contains several features that the theory of sexual reproduction is unable to explain.
3. The theory of sexual reproduction implies that a child is approximately nine months old at birth. This is an absurd claim. Everyone knows that a newborn child is newborn.
4. According to the theory of sexual reproduction, children are a result of sexual intercourse. There are, however, several well documented cases where sexual intercourse has not led to the birth of a child.
5. Statistical studies in the Netherlands have indicated a positive correlation between the birth rate and the number of storks. Both are decreasing.
6. The theory of the stork can be investigated by rigorous scientific methods. The only assumption involved is that children are delivered by the stork.
***
Something for Chara:
John Horgan - Why I Can't Embrace Buddhism
"The major vehicle for achieving enlightenment is meditation, touted by both Buddhists and alternative-medicine gurus as a potent way to calm and comprehend our minds. The trouble is, decades of research have shown meditation's effects to be highly unreliable, as James Austin, a neurologist and Zen Buddhist, points out in Zen and Brain. Yes, it can reduce stress, but, as it turns out, no more so than simply sitting still does. Meditation can even exacerbate depression, anxiety, and other negative emotions in certain people.
Much more dubious is Buddhism's claim that perceiving yourself as in some sense unreal will make you happier and more compassionate. Ideally, as the British psychologist and Zen practitioner Susan Blackmore writes in The Meme Machine, when you embrace your essential selflessness, "guilt, shame, embarrassment, self-doubt, and fear of failure ebb away and you become, contrary to expectation, a better neighbor." But most people are distressed by sensations of unreality, which are quite common and can be induced by drugs, fatigue, trauma, and mental illness as well as by meditation.
Even if you achieve a blissful acceptance of the illusory nature of your self, this perspective may not transform you into a saintly bodhisattva, brimming with love and compassion for all other creatures. Far from it—and this is where the distance between certain humanistic values and Buddhism becomes most apparent. To someone who sees himself and others as unreal, human suffering and death may appear laughably trivial. This may explain why some Buddhist masters have behaved more like nihilists than saints. Chogyam Trungpa, who helped introduce Tibetan Buddhism to the United States in the 1970s, was a promiscuous drunk and bully, and he died of alcohol-related illness in 1987. Zen lore celebrates the sadistic or masochistic behavior of sages such as Bodhidharma, who is said to have sat in meditation for so long that his legs became gangrenous.
What's worse, Buddhism holds that enlightenment makes you morally infallible—like the pope, but more so... But what troubles me most about Buddhism is its implication that detachment from ordinary life is the surest route to salvation. Buddha's first step toward enlightenment was his abandonment of his wife and child, and Buddhism (like Catholicism) still exalts male monasticism as the epitome of spirituality. It seems legitimate to ask whether a path that turns away from aspects of life as essential as sexuality and parenthood is truly spiritual. From this perspective, the very concept of enlightenment begins to look anti-spiritual: It suggests that life is a problem that can be solved, a cul-de-sac that can be, and should be, escaped."
***
Hearing out religion in public debate - Dec 15, 2004
"Thoughtful debate over how to shape our life as a community is precluded if religious voices are gagged. This would disenfranchise people of religious faith, be undemocratic, and cause social disharmony." - Associate Professor Thio Li-ann (another law professor, so now A/P Tan Seow Hon is not the only religio-conservative writing op-eds for the ST)
budak asked for my "thoughts on the article... arguing against the notion of a secular system."
The article didn't really argue against a secular system. It merely asserted that religious views should be taken into account.
As philosopher Immanuel Kant taught, the logic of any moral argument is its capacity to be universalised. We should evaluate the merits of any view and ask: 'Does it serve the common good?' (from original article)
If we only apply this criterion, where would religion come into the picture? An idea coming from a religious viewpoint would have as much merit as the same idea coming from a seular viewpoint. The imperative: "Don't let the poor starve", if commanded by gods, has as much merit as the same imperative motivated by secular humanism.
What secularists mean when they disavow and discount religiously-grounded views is that ideas should be evaluated not on their spiritual merits, if any, but on their intellectual merits. ie "My god said so" is not an adequate basis on which to make public policy. As such, A/P Thio is really going off in the wrong direction.
Someone on the Young Republic mailing list:
"What I find most disconcerting is that her examples of societal and religious values coming together turns on those which are socially conservative and would limit personal choice when there might be no tangible 3rd party harm (pornography) beyond that of offending the socially conservative I suppose. With regards to AIDS, I find it terribly disturbing that there should be an ideological war on how best to combat it, especially those which support abstinence only policies or a mixed one.
I mean, where is the voice of the religious left?"
***
Wannabe Lawyer
"The dangers, as always, with centralised decision-making, are unforeseen or unintended outcomes, or just plain stupidity. The list of failures is long and illustrious. Chartered Semiconductors, Micropolis Hard Drives, the North-East MRT line, the IT industry boom and bust (anyone remember the singapore one network?), the purchase of Global Crossing by ST Telemedia without due diligence; the belated entry into the biomedical sector at a time when Big Pharma are finding it hard to innovate due to stupid patent policy, and at the same time strengthening all the components of IP laws without public debate and consultation, and ALSO ignoring a growing body of empirical evidence and real-world studies which strongly suggest that the chilling effects of overbroad and overstrong IP laws actually hinder and obstruct innovation and creativity."
Ah well. What can we do? As always, father knows best. The unwashed masses are naive, ignorant and stupid, and require someone to tell them what is right, good and proper, and what they would *really* want if they were enlightened.
As nilsinelabore comments in an earlier post about similar issues:
"Unfortunately our press is not there to question any questionable policies. The best and brightest of her youth are either co-opted into the establishment or have migrated. The remaining ones who dared to challenge the status quo probably will have their heads broken by knuckle dusters."
***
"lalala", whose email is "lalala@gmail.com", homepage is "lalala.blogspot.com" and who hails from "lalaland" writes:
"gosh gabriel, have you read hornby's 'how to be good'? you'd qualify as the angriest boy in town."
No, I have not, and I'm not sure what the Angriest Man in Holloway did to qualify for that title.
***
A novel perspective, courtesy of my favourite misanthrope:
"The same mentally-challenged pigs who are pro-censorship also tend to be anti-abortion. These two antiquated notions seem to go hand-in-hand, not unlike sodomy and Vaseline.
"Choose life!" these vapid creeps will bleat.
My question is, WHY?
Choose life, my ass. What these monsters are "choosing" actually involves no choice at all. The poor kid coming down the chute has no choice. That child is hardly begging to be born into decades of screaming hell with savage dumbshits for parents and a lifetime of wage slavery to look forward to afterward. And these clods who "choose life" will likely choose it several times, so the first mistake (i.e., kid) can have other kids to fight with. Ever seen two young siblings get together without fighting? No. Neither have I. So what's the appeal of having a multiple litter?
"You could be aborting the next Einstein," some brainless jackass will bray.
Right. But you're probably aborting the next Jeffrey Dahmer, instead."
***
FACT (Families Against the Casino Threat in Singapore)
"Do you want your children to grow up learning that it is OK to gamble?
If your answer is "NO", then join us, as families living in Singapore, to say "NO" to the casino threat that's looming.
We recognise that there can be no end to the arguments on the pros and cons of having a casino in Singapore. We recognise that lotteries & betting are already legalized in some way or another in Singapore. So what's wrong with having a casino?
As concerned parents, we say: It's time to draw a line.
We are ordinary Singaporean families. We want to raise our families without the temptations and threats presented by a casino operation.
When the fundamental values of growing a family is affected by economic expediency, we as a society, must have the maturity and the courage to say "NO". Whatever the so-called economic value that is touted.
Will you be one of the Families Against the Casino Threat in Singapore? Join us in petitioning our President and urge him to advise our government to reject any plan allowing a casino in Singapore.
It's not too late to turn things right. Sign Up Now!!"
Someone should set up an opposing movement:
Do you want your children to grow up learning that it is OK to let the Moral Majority (TM) impose their whims on the rest?
If your answer is "NO", then join us, as progressive intellectuals living in Singapore, to say "NO" to the Moral Majority whose shrill cries and appeals to emotion and "morals" drown out good sense.
We recognise that there can be no end to the arguments on relative morality, and no shortage of prophets of doom warning of an impending apocalypse if we give up our faux Asian Values. We recognise that the same arguments and appeals to emotion that some organisations are using have been used time and time again against various disparate causes, but in those cases have since faltered and now seem ludicrous, just as the current ruckus will one day seem a visceral backlash towards liberalisation by conservatives.
As level-headed people, we say: It's time to draw a line.
We are ordinary Singaporeans. We want to live our lives, sans families (as more and more are doing these days) or otherwise, without having to suffer the dictates of a paranoid conservative faction.
When the fundamental value of liberty is affected by distinctly illusory spectres of doom conjured up by self-proclaimed guardians of Morality and The Family, we as a society, must have the maturity and the courage to say "NO", however raucous the noises made by those wanting to return to an era of paternalism and rigidity.
Will you be one of the Individuals For Reason? Join us in petitioning our President and urge him to advise our government to continue in its liberalisation, so we may progress as a nation.
It's not too late to turn things right. Sign Up Now!!
Someone: "Who's up for setting up FARTS? Thats Families Against the kranji Racecourse Threat to Singapore!"
Amazing why the Moral Majority (TM) has not chosen to go after:
- The National Lottery (State-sanctioned and state-run gambling! A clear imprimatur from the government, if there ever was one)
- Cigarettes (Largesse from the state to destroy your bodies. Imagine the health care costs shouldered by grieving families. Imagine how people destroy their bodies over many decades. People can't stop themselves when they start gambling - so too does it apply for cigarettes. We must save idiots from themselves!)
- Prostitution/massage parlors (Again, state-sanctioned and state-regulated. Are the authorities saying it's alright for people to buy sex? What kind of message are we sending to our children?!)
- Alcohol (Essentially, it's a poison, which is why the liver metabolises it. Are we telling our children that it is alright to poison themselves just for fleeting, momentary pleasure?!)
- Abortion/contraception (An endorsement of casual sex, or sex purely undertaken for pleasure, if there ever was one)
- Divorce (Our divorce rates are approaching those of the West! Morality is crumbling. Children are suffering. Nevermind that previously many people were stuck in miserable, loveless marriages. All that matters is that they were married on paper. Who cares about the quality of their relationship, or the effects on their children?! We must maintain appearances; it is an Asian Value after all to pride appearances over reality.)
- School fee hikes (School fee hikes teach our children that such a priceless thing as learning should be charged for. What kind of attitude are we inculcating in them for the Knowledge Based Economy?)
- Gays (We must set up 'Families Against Gays in Singapore' - FAGS, since we all know gays are ruinous for the institution of the Family)
- Chinese 'B' (We are allowing standards to drop just because some lazy kids complain? Hah! We must teach them the value of hard work and knowing their roots.)
- Chewing gum (By legalising chewing gum, we are teaching our kids that it is alright to spit or dispose of used gum all over the place)
- Multi storied buildings (We are encouraging people to commit suicide by leaping to their deaths from multi storied buildings... All buildings in Singapore must be made single-storied)
- Boat trips to Batam (Since everyone knows that the only reason Singaporean men travel to Batam is to have sex, we should ban males travelling singly or in groups from going to Batam. We need 'BUSTED' - 'Batam Uncles Sex Trip Education')
Really, we should ban the stock market too, for it does not create any real wealth or produce any real output, and it can similarly bankrupt people.
***
I always say: the way to get rich is to organise seminars teaching people how to get rich.
Alwyn: "even this clement chiang fella.. 2k per person per seminar.. and he has like classes of 200 people? that's close to 400k per class! minute costs
and the fact that he has a few classes going on at the same time? this guy needn't trade options to be rich! just teach it only!"
***
Keeping the Faith in My Doubt - "Opposing self-righteousness is easier said than done. How do you denounce dogmatism in others without succumbing to it yourself? No one embodied this pitfall more than the philosopher Karl Popper, who railed against certainty in science, philosophy, religion and politics and yet was notoriously dogmatic. I once asked Popper, who called his stance critical rationalism, about charges that he would not brook criticism of his ideas in his classroom. He replied indignantly that he welcomed students' criticism; only if they persisted after he pointed out their errors would he banish them from class."
Science Fair Projects - Bartholin's gland - "The Bartholin's glands (also called Bartholin glands or greater vestibular glands) are two glands located slightly below and to the left and right of the opening of the Censored page in women. They secrete mucus to provide lubrication, especially when the woman is Censored page, thus facilitating Censored page."
wth
Spider experiments with Drugs - "Scientists at the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) have turned their attention from the mysteries of the cosmos to a more esoteric area of research: what happens when you get a spider stoned."
While browsing the member list of the Luxuriant Flowing Hair Club for Scientists I saw the picture of the hair of Patrick J. O'Brien, LFHCfS, Institut fuer Geowissenschaften, Full Professor, Chair of Petrology,
Universität Potsdam, Germany. OMG.
Interesting Christmas research - "The Deadweight Loss of Christmas: Joel Waldfogel at the University of Pennsylvania reported in the American Economic Review: "A potentially important micro-economic aspect of gift-giving is that gifts may be mismatched with the recipients' preferences ... Estimates indicate that between a tenth and a third of the value of holiday gifts is destroyed by gift-giving."
MovieMartyr.com - Suffering for your cinema...
