***
I clicked "recover post" accidentally (and unknowingly) and lost quite a bit of text. GAH.
It seems I've won 2 lotteries in 1 day. My junk mail is so heartening.
My desktop has finally passed from its erstwhile state of undeath to earn true, well-deserved and peaceful rest. RIP.
***
Posted on the Evolution IVLE forum:
A: just an alternative view point - http://www.tmch.net/createevolve.htm
Response (no prizes for guessing who): Well, there are alternative view points that the Holocaust never happened either.
The reason that most scientists (except our favourite Mr Dawkins) are so skittish about religion and the religion-science conflict is that they're trying to be nice and turning the other cheek, so to speak.
Scientists and philosophers can and indeed do likewise engage in what the person who wrote that page is doing, but in the other direction. Perhaps you could also investigate those alternative view points.
Yet another alternative view point
"RESOLVING THE CONFLICTS BETWEEN EVOLUTION AND CREATION SCIENCE"
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_resol.htm
The universe might really have no real history at all: "You can equally argue that this god created the universe 2 seconds ago, and you did not write the essay, this god did and placed in your mind two seconds ago a memory so that you think you did. He is so good deception and hiding of his creation that he even put a copy of the file on your hard drive when he created that too!!" Assuming the existence of a God with infinite powers, there is no logical argument that can refute this scenario.
***
"Reductionism and extremism both try to keep things simple. Reductionism attempts to reduce the complex to the simple, both in matters of type, kind or form, and causality. Where there are many types or forms, differing in both minor and major degrees, reductionism -- unable or unwilling to make distinctions -- claims there is only one type or form. Where there are many different causes combining to produce an effect, reductionism insists there is only one cause. Extremism, the other product of simplistic thinking, defines an issue only in terms of its two extreme positions, denying the possible existence of alternative positions between the two extremes. For the extremist there is no middle ground, only one extreme or the other. Non-support for one extreme position is equated with support of the opposite extreme position. The problem with simplistic thinking, whether reductionism or extremism, is that in a world of almost infinite complexity and variety it rarely provides an accurate or truthful portrayal of reality." (Right and Wrong Racism by a 'Richard McCulloch')
I couldn't agree more with this part of the article.
Also interesting is a list of human subspecies, races and subraces. Though I don't see why he is so obsessed with preventing races from mixing genetically and disappearing. Hopefully he will soon respond to my email.
***
On defamation lawsuits:
"firstly, i find the concept of defamation lawsuits very uninteresting. what kind of a person must be so insecure as to think that his reputation must be sullied by such comments and therefore must be preserved through means of a lawsuit and lots of moneey. secondly, i find the laws regarding internet and free speech very ill-defined and open to contest. in this case obviously the internet should be de-regulated and left to anything and anyone. since, well, there are a billion reasons, not least the fact that people aren't brainless sods and most can pretty much follow clear logic and decide what's true and false or good and bad for themselves. i assure you that if this weren't the case, then
advertisements would be 100% effective and should be banned from any form of media. we should then move to shutting down coffeeshops and making gossip absolutely illegal." (Young Republic mailing list)
"Americans are now regaled with uncorroborated tales that George W. Bush, Jr., was a recreational cocaine user in his misspent youth. Ironically what will more greatly lower his W's standing with the US voter is for W to file defamation lawsuits. This sort of conduct will invite accusations that the plaintiff-politician is too thin-skinned and too hypersensitive. Lawsuits are energy sapping and time-consuming, voters prefer the politician to devote that energy and time to solving real problems." (Pity the Amusement - the politics of defamation for the Singapore voter)
Unfortunately, I am unable to find online a list of the footnotes for Michael D. Barr's Lee Kuan Yew: Race, Culture and Genes, although the original is mirrored in many places online. The Premier Institution of Social Engineering has access through ProQuest, but it's down at the moment; I wager that the footnotes would be a very interesting corroborative read. I shall have to make a mental note to try to access the Journal of Contemporary Asia again when NUS IT Care gets back to me. [Addendum: I've taken a look at the footnotes, and indeed they are interesting!]
Interestingly, a link to the aforementioned article is located on NTU's National Education page, which also has a link to:
Lee Kuan Yew's WWW Page - A Rajeev G.Mavinkurve Presentation
"This is a tribute to a Great Leader, the Father of Modern Singapore, first prime minister of Singapore, Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew on his 77th Birthday - September 16, 1999. Kuan Yew, means the light that shines far and wide. True to the meaning of his name, he has been admired all over and has been honored the architect of the century. I admire him for his Vision, Determination and his attitude of do my best under any circumstance."
***
I got into a flame war about Burma, Singapore, democracy and genocide et al on LiveJournal the night before my last exam. In all there were 116 comments exchanged between me and the two people I was arguing with. Whee. Some of the comments make for fascinating reads:
eterna2: I am saying. If country A is committing genocide. Then country B which is a democracy, shldn't interfere with A's internal affair! They can only sanction, etc etc. Becuz each country has their own rights.
If u are imposing what u thing shld be the right values on another totally different culture. That isn't democracy.
Me: You seem to have conflated cultural relativism and democracy.
And democracy is about carrying out the rule of the people, while protecting the rights of minorities. Genocide is anti-thetical to democracy.
eterna2: By nature of democracy, u need to have the consensus of the pple to act. So for genocide in another country. U either need to consensus of ur own pple to directly intervene. OR the consensus of the pple in THAT country. BUT as u are the government of ur country, U are not and cannot be the representive of THAT country. So U cannot interfere with THEIR affairs, becuz U do not represent them.
Me: "We are being slaughtered, but please do not take that as a sign that we want you to come and stop us from being killed. We don't mind being killed, really."
eterna2: The citizen may want pple to come and help them, but law specifically state that u cannot interfere, unless u declare the regime unlawful!
how many times do i have to say that? If u take the regime as a lawful government of the country. U have no rights to interfere at all!
regardless of what they do in their own country. Ur laws and idealogy only extend as far as ur own borders.
Me: That's *if* you take the regime as a lawful government of the country. Which you have not said before.
And the right of people not to be slaughtered surely trumps that of governments to hold sovereign power.
eterna2: But as long as u still recognise them as lawful, even if they genocide, u can do nothing, until u declare them unlawful. So if we are still recognising the Junta as the lawful government. Then we have no rights to critise or sanction them.
***
The Perception Laboratory's Face Transformer
"Welcome to the Perception Laboratory's Face Transformer. You can use the Perception Laboratory's Face Transformer to change the age, race or sex of a facial image, to transform it to the style of a famous artist, to make an exagerated caricature or even make an ape of yourself!"
The server was broken and didn't let me save the results, but I took some screencaps:
Wo-hen, Manga-style
Feminised Wo-hen - but it looks the same to me leh
Drunk Wo-hen
***
Norway woman convicted for rape - "A Norwegian court has sentenced a woman to nine months in jail for raping a man, the first such conviction in the Scandinavian country that prides itself for its egalitarianism."
TechnicalVirgin.com - offering alternatives to today's teens - "Of course, the safest way for teens to avoid unwanted pregnancy while satisfying their carnal needs is to limit themselves to homoerotic encounters until they are ready for procreation. But many boys and girls are uncomfortable with the idea of same-sex encounters. Anal sex, however, can be fun for both sexes, and thanks to modern improvements in strap-on sex tools, girls can enjoy being in control of their own anal encounters. So, teens, the next time you strip down for sex, remember the TechnicalVirgin motto — "Everything Butt!""
A good blow against abstinence-only sex education. I love the TV commercials...
What are the odds of dying? - Nice to know that you're twice as likely to die by drowning in a swimming pool than a bathtub.
Ed: As the link is now broken I have replaced it with an Internet Archive copy
Overweight people may live longer - "The researchers found that the people who had BMIs higher than 25 but lower than 30, which meant they were moderately overweight but not obese, did not have a reduced life expectancy. The people who lived the longest of all were those with BMIs of 25, which lies between the ideal and overweight margins. In comparison, there were 112,000 extra deaths among the obese category and nearly 34,000 extra deaths among the underweight category."
So in 30-40 years' time the life expectancy for females in Singapore and Hong Kong may suddenly drop below that for males, since we've so many anorexic ones around.
Some Like It Hot - "Forty public policy groups have this in common: They seek to undermine the scientific consensus that humans are causing the earth to overheat. And they all get money from ExxonMobil."
Decrying the West's sins of secularism / Theologian argues a return to Christian roots will cure U.S. and European ills - "But this is an old argument and a staple of conservative Christian critics of modernity. Take T.S. Eliot for example. Writing in 1939 shortly before World War II, when European democracy faced a much graver threat, Eliot famously argued in "The Idea of a Christian Society" that Great Britain would only survive if it rediscovered its Christian roots. Without this rediscovery, the country would lack the moral fortitude to withstand either Stalinism or Nazism. As he pointedly concluded, "If you will not have God ... you should pay your respects to Hitler or Stalin." Eliot was wrong, of course, in no small part because he did not understand that people valued and were willing to fight for the principles of democracy independently of their religious faith. A lack of piety does not imply a lack of patriotism. Weigel makes a similar mistake. He overstates the Christian influence on modern democracy and refuses to acknowledge the way in which core democratic principles such as toleration and consent had to be articulated in opposition to Christian doctrine. As a result, he fails to recognize the independent moral content of democracy and secularism. Democrats and secularists support values such as state neutrality, toleration and the freedom to have or not have children not because they are unprincipled atheists but because they are convinced moralists who believe that such principles are proper and good."
Cardinal Ratzinger on... - "Homosexuality: “Intrinsic moral evil”, The ban on women priests: “Necessary in order to protect true doctrine, to safeguard the communion and unity of the Church and to guide consciences of the faithful”, Mass in languages other than Latin: “A tragic breach”, Turkey joining the EU: “An enormous mistake”"
When I expressed disappointment at the new Pope's hardline stance, someone claimed to me that "at any rate, the dogmatic and moral teachings of the Church do not and cannot change. I challenge you to find me one example where she has done so". However, the most clear example of a change in doctrine is on whether non-believers and non-Catholics can be saved. A Papal Encyclicals Cheat Sheet is available, and one can see how doctrine and teachings have changed greatly over the years. One might also talk of the reforms of Vatican II. Of course, all manner of sophistic arguments more reminiscent of their Protestant Fundamentalist brothers from across the Atlantic are used to show how this change in doctrine isn't really a change. Hurr hurr. Intellectual suicide is not exclusively practised by fundies.
Can you find a job with your Arts (Sociology) degree? - "The student was proud of his job but he was somewhat miffed that a philosophy major from another university was offered a position in the same office. The engineering student said that, if he had known that he could have been given the same job with an Arts degree, he would have studied something fluffier. But he misunderstood Arts degrees. If you can understand the relevance of Edmund Husserl's thinking (or the implications of social theory or any of a long list of seemingly abstract topics), then you can probably figure out what's interesting about fluid flowing through a pipe (and almost everything else engineers know). The moral of the story is that if you want to do well in the job market, how well you learn may be more important that what you learn. Even in these tough times, there is still a place for those who are able to distinguish themselves by their creativity, intelligence, and academic discipline. Unfortunately, some Arts students make the same mistake that the chemical engineering student made. They think that Arts subjects are easy. They usually get their degrees but they usually pay the consequences later."
***
Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore & The Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace, Hebrew University of Jerusalem and University Scholars Programme, National University of Singapore
cordially invite you to a panel discussion on
Palestinians and Israelis Talk to Each Other: Dialogue on Conflict and Peace
by Said Zeedani, Professor of Philosophy, Al-Quds University, East Jerusalem
Basem L. Ra’ad, Professor of English and World Civilization, Al-Quds University, East Jerusalem
Dan Avnon, Professor of Political Science, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Eyal Ben-Ari, Professor, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
I would've wanted to go for this, but had no school on Friday. Besides which, I woke up at 3, so.
