Friday, June 27, 2008
Video Games that Help
Finally, our electronic culture starts to be productive...
http://www.wired.com/gaming/gamingreviews/multimedia/2008/06/pl_games
Seriously, I think this was an amazing idea.
http://www.wired.com/gaming/gamingreviews/multimedia/2008/06/pl_games
Seriously, I think this was an amazing idea.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
random thought
America has killed its president.
No, not Bush... Im talking about any/all presidents.
I should probably explain myself, but I dont really feel like it.
America has killed its president.
No, not Bush... Im talking about any/all presidents.
I should probably explain myself, but I dont really feel like it.
America has killed its president.
life, an observation
A quote from Finite and Infinite Games
"The rules of the finite game may not change; the rules of an infinite game must change.
Finite players play within boundaries; infinite players play with boundaries.
Finite players are serious; infinite games are playful.
A finite player plays to be powerful; an infinite player plays with strength.
A finite player consumes time; an infinite player generates time.
The finite player aims for eternal life; the infinite player aims for eternal birth.
The choice is yours."
"The rules of the finite game may not change; the rules of an infinite game must change.
Finite players play within boundaries; infinite players play with boundaries.
Finite players are serious; infinite games are playful.
A finite player plays to be powerful; an infinite player plays with strength.
A finite player consumes time; an infinite player generates time.
The finite player aims for eternal life; the infinite player aims for eternal birth.
The choice is yours."
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
neutrality
I do not believe in religious neutrality.
In the last several years, it has become a popular phrase to: "accept all religions". In fact, Senator Obama just said it the other day (or so the news tells me). Specifically, he was saying that we are no longer a Christian nation, and that we need to accept "all religions".
Ironically, technically speaking, I do not believe were were ever an entirely Christian nation. Even in the beginning, there were certainly non-Christians. Is he talking about a majority? That cant be it, because we still certainly have a majority of the United States that at least professes to be followers of Christianity.
I believe the point he was getting at is that the minority of non-Christians are rising, and that their religions (or anti-religions) need to have the same equal playing ground as Christianity has.
And this is where I get off that bus. Putting my own personal belief in Christianity aside, and speaking purely philosophically, with regard to theological structures... it is impossible to respect all religions at once, unless of course one takes a stance to ignore them all.
I am a complete supporter in a strict separation of church and state, or at least an attempt for the United States to take a position of ignoring all religious institutions. To me, it makes total sense for a president to choose to reject any and all dabblings in religious institutions. (This of course would necessarily have to include both your deistic religions, those that believe in a God or spirit world, such as Christianity and Islam... as well as your anti/non deistic religions, including atheism and secular humanism)
However, the absolute worst thing that a presidential candidate can do would be to attempt to respect all world religions at once. Not only does this have sever theological ramifications, but philosophically and psy/sociologically this borders on a necessary schizophrenia. As wonderfully beautiful as "accepting of all religions" may sound, it simply is not possible.
In its purest form, a "religion" is a nonnegotiable Truth statement about the world, its parameters, and the very reason for life and existence. It is not an opinion, but a fact in the eyes of its believers. For a president to be accepting of "all contradicting facts" is complete non-sense. In my opinion, a leader of this country should either accept one truth statement, and make decisions from its base while being respectful to those that do not agree (though not to their belief because it directly contradicts his own). Or, he must take a position to not meddle at all in a truth statement at all, which would make for an ironically hilarious method of operation as a leader of a nation, who is constantly required to make pseudo-moral decisions.
It is pure insanity for the leader of the United States of America to say that he accepts everyone's contradicting statements about the truth of existence. Even worse, that he would then try and incorporate all of their positions on public policy.
In the last several years, it has become a popular phrase to: "accept all religions". In fact, Senator Obama just said it the other day (or so the news tells me). Specifically, he was saying that we are no longer a Christian nation, and that we need to accept "all religions".
Ironically, technically speaking, I do not believe were were ever an entirely Christian nation. Even in the beginning, there were certainly non-Christians. Is he talking about a majority? That cant be it, because we still certainly have a majority of the United States that at least professes to be followers of Christianity.
I believe the point he was getting at is that the minority of non-Christians are rising, and that their religions (or anti-religions) need to have the same equal playing ground as Christianity has.
And this is where I get off that bus. Putting my own personal belief in Christianity aside, and speaking purely philosophically, with regard to theological structures... it is impossible to respect all religions at once, unless of course one takes a stance to ignore them all.
I am a complete supporter in a strict separation of church and state, or at least an attempt for the United States to take a position of ignoring all religious institutions. To me, it makes total sense for a president to choose to reject any and all dabblings in religious institutions. (This of course would necessarily have to include both your deistic religions, those that believe in a God or spirit world, such as Christianity and Islam... as well as your anti/non deistic religions, including atheism and secular humanism)
However, the absolute worst thing that a presidential candidate can do would be to attempt to respect all world religions at once. Not only does this have sever theological ramifications, but philosophically and psy/sociologically this borders on a necessary schizophrenia. As wonderfully beautiful as "accepting of all religions" may sound, it simply is not possible.
In its purest form, a "religion" is a nonnegotiable Truth statement about the world, its parameters, and the very reason for life and existence. It is not an opinion, but a fact in the eyes of its believers. For a president to be accepting of "all contradicting facts" is complete non-sense. In my opinion, a leader of this country should either accept one truth statement, and make decisions from its base while being respectful to those that do not agree (though not to their belief because it directly contradicts his own). Or, he must take a position to not meddle at all in a truth statement at all, which would make for an ironically hilarious method of operation as a leader of a nation, who is constantly required to make pseudo-moral decisions.
It is pure insanity for the leader of the United States of America to say that he accepts everyone's contradicting statements about the truth of existence. Even worse, that he would then try and incorporate all of their positions on public policy.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
fickle people
I dont know why I bend so far for these two people... only to have them constantly tell me that I am doing everything wrong.
Yes, I know, this is totally an emo post... but all the same.
I am done trying to make them happy.
Let's see what happens next.
Yes, I know, this is totally an emo post... but all the same.
I am done trying to make them happy.
Let's see what happens next.
George Carlin
There is an old saying about how it is easier to cry over one death than a thousand.
Once the body count rises, death becomes a statistic, not an actual event.... apparently.
I find it amusing how the nation "mourned" for the death of George Carlin. In honesty, he was no different than any other person on earth. For that matter, he is no different than anyone else in the United States. Random stat for you, just to make an observation... approx. 2.4 million people died in the US alone last year. ha. I bet you actually just skimmed that number. I would, in fact, I just did after re-reading this post. 2.4 million people is quite the body count. Sure, many of them died of natural causes, but many of them didnt.
I understand why George Carlin was important/famous, and I am not being disrespectful to him... in fact, this statement is completely irrelevant to him as a person.
That being said, why is it that we will all feel "sad" about the death of one, while ignoring the deaths of millions of others?
I think, perhaps, that I have taken an even worse route to this entire situation. In all honesty, I really dont emotionally associate with this death. (that would be the more politically correct way of saying that I just dont care that he died)
Death is a funny thing like that. I am still not sure why so many people cry over it... and for that matter, are so afraid of it.
Once the body count rises, death becomes a statistic, not an actual event.... apparently.
I find it amusing how the nation "mourned" for the death of George Carlin. In honesty, he was no different than any other person on earth. For that matter, he is no different than anyone else in the United States. Random stat for you, just to make an observation... approx. 2.4 million people died in the US alone last year. ha. I bet you actually just skimmed that number. I would, in fact, I just did after re-reading this post. 2.4 million people is quite the body count. Sure, many of them died of natural causes, but many of them didnt.
I understand why George Carlin was important/famous, and I am not being disrespectful to him... in fact, this statement is completely irrelevant to him as a person.
That being said, why is it that we will all feel "sad" about the death of one, while ignoring the deaths of millions of others?
I think, perhaps, that I have taken an even worse route to this entire situation. In all honesty, I really dont emotionally associate with this death. (that would be the more politically correct way of saying that I just dont care that he died)
Death is a funny thing like that. I am still not sure why so many people cry over it... and for that matter, are so afraid of it.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Video of the Day.
It is embarrassing how much I like this song.
HA!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKXm3Qg7sBo
HA!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKXm3Qg7sBo
Monday, June 16, 2008
Quote of the Day
"It is often the clearest minds who are the first to go mad. Then the so-called sanity of the masses is nothing more than the comfortable insanity afforded them by a lack of courage or insight."
Thursday, June 12, 2008
quote of the day
"The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and the lightning bug."
-Mark Twain
-Mark Twain
Blogged with the Flock Browser
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Downloading the Internet
I have joked about this before...But now my dreams are getting closer to some sort of realization.
I can now download all of flickr... well, sort of. :-)
I am not sure why I enjoy this so much. Does this make me a nerd? I suppose so. It is just need to know that I dont have to be slowed down by all that ucky user interface non-sense... that stupid "right click and save as" business... none of this "next page, next page, next page"... no banner ads, or textual distractions.
It is just me, terminal, the tag of my choosing... and the world wide web of pictures come to my hard drive... oh happy day.
I can now download all of flickr... well, sort of. :-)
I am not sure why I enjoy this so much. Does this make me a nerd? I suppose so. It is just need to know that I dont have to be slowed down by all that ucky user interface non-sense... that stupid "right click and save as" business... none of this "next page, next page, next page"... no banner ads, or textual distractions.
It is just me, terminal, the tag of my choosing... and the world wide web of pictures come to my hard drive... oh happy day.
Blogged with the Flock Browser
Monday, June 09, 2008
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Flock
Seriously,
If you dont use it already... download Flock
It will change your life.
http://flock.com/
If you dont use it already... download Flock
It will change your life.
http://flock.com/
Blogged with the Flock Browser
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
