Sunday, March 11, 2007
I'm with Bryan on this ...
... Are Mensa Members Thick?
This may be, however, because I tend to feel happy and like to think I'm reasonably bright. Of course I could be a lot dimmer than I think I am. On the other hand I am pretty sure that Mensa members are thick.
Update: As Andrew points out, my typing skills are definitely sub-Mensa. I have therefore corrected my misspelling of thick.
This may be, however, because I tend to feel happy and like to think I'm reasonably bright. Of course I could be a lot dimmer than I think I am. On the other hand I am pretty sure that Mensa members are thick.
Update: As Andrew points out, my typing skills are definitely sub-Mensa. I have therefore corrected my misspelling of thick.
Today's Inquirer reviews ...
... include:
... my review of John Banville's Benjamin Black thriller: Prize-winner offers his first crime novel.
Carlin Romano on Milan Kundera: Kundera's musings on the novel.
Glenn Altschuler on Lincoln's Smile and Other Enigmas: Essayist explores act, art of seeing.
Michael McHale takes to the road with Colum McCann: Compelling look at a Gypsy's life .
Allen Barra is much taken with Kurt Anderson's Heyday: Two for the road through America, 1848 .
Martha Woodall thinks Kimg Hurley may be on to something: Business thriller is a promising debut .
Katie Haegele's DigitaLit column looks at another Michael Betcherman email mystery: Follow the adventures of 'Suzanne' via a flurry of e-mails .
During the past week, Karen Heller really liked Vendela Vida's Let the Northern Lights
Erase Your Name: She heads north to a fresh start.
Finally, Sandy Bauers likes the sound of Down Under: The Aussie accent and lingo carry us along down under.
... my review of John Banville's Benjamin Black thriller: Prize-winner offers his first crime novel.
Carlin Romano on Milan Kundera: Kundera's musings on the novel.
Glenn Altschuler on Lincoln's Smile and Other Enigmas: Essayist explores act, art of seeing.
Michael McHale takes to the road with Colum McCann: Compelling look at a Gypsy's life .
Allen Barra is much taken with Kurt Anderson's Heyday: Two for the road through America, 1848 .
Martha Woodall thinks Kimg Hurley may be on to something: Business thriller is a promising debut .
Katie Haegele's DigitaLit column looks at another Michael Betcherman email mystery: Follow the adventures of 'Suzanne' via a flurry of e-mails .
During the past week, Karen Heller really liked Vendela Vida's Let the Northern Lights
Erase Your Name: She heads north to a fresh start.
Finally, Sandy Bauers likes the sound of Down Under: The Aussie accent and lingo carry us along down under.
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Michael Novak learns it's hard ...
... to find a good atheist to talk to: Lonely Atheists of The Global Village. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
It would have been wonderful if any of our three authors had measured their vision of religion against the hard-won Biblical faith of the originally atheist scientist Anatoly Sharansky, who served nine years in the Soviet Gulag simply for vindicating the rights of Soviet citizens who were Jews. Sharansky has written the record of his suffering in a brilliant autobiography, Fear No Evil.
Their natural habit of mind is anthropomorphic. They tend to think of God as if He were a human being, bound to human limitations. They are almost as literal in their readings of the Bible as the least educated, most literal-minded fundamentalist in Flannery O’Connor’s rural Georgia.
It would have been wonderful if any of our three authors had measured their vision of religion against the hard-won Biblical faith of the originally atheist scientist Anatoly Sharansky, who served nine years in the Soviet Gulag simply for vindicating the rights of Soviet citizens who were Jews. Sharansky has written the record of his suffering in a brilliant autobiography, Fear No Evil.
Their natural habit of mind is anthropomorphic. They tend to think of God as if He were a human being, bound to human limitations. They are almost as literal in their readings of the Bible as the least educated, most literal-minded fundamentalist in Flannery O’Connor’s rural Georgia.
There's no excuse ...
... Confessions of a Book Abuser. (Hat tip, Christine Klocek-Lim)
I make few an very tiny notes sometimes in the books I review. Mostly, I rely on my memory (nothing odd about that: I picked up a skill in that respect years ago when I was an editor of books, as distinct from a book editor).
I make few an very tiny notes sometimes in the books I review. Mostly, I rely on my memory (nothing odd about that: I picked up a skill in that respect years ago when I was an editor of books, as distinct from a book editor).
Friday, March 09, 2007
I remember reading ...
... and being much affected by Journal in the Night when I was in college: Theodor Haecker.
Have trouble sleeping?
... you ain't the only one: How some folks try to manage when no snooze is bad news.
Go figure ...
... newspapers may not think books are that important - unless, of course, it's one reviewed in the Times - but people are sure fighting over them: e-books and search. (Hat tip, Maxine Clarke.)
No laughing matter ...
... Heard the one about the atheist who scorned a comedian for his belief in a comforting God? (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
Dawkins really can be a self-important horse's ass.
Dawkins really can be a self-important horse's ass.
A tuneful gift ...
... from Philadelphia: Former - and still much loved - music director Wolfgang Sawallisch conducting Bach-Stokowski.
I can sign onto this list ...
... filtered and compiled by the FIS Grandee himself: A Tolerable Equanimity: The List . One question, though, regarding No. 4: What about an evolutionary biologist?
Thursday, March 08, 2007
By the way ...
... they're live blogging the NBCC awards over at Critical Mass. (That's why I'm still here, because I have to move a story about it for tomorrow's paper).
Here's the review ...
... that didn't make it online Sunday: The other woman became, like Plath, a suicide .
What's that ...
... about teens not reading? Teens buying books at fastest rate in decades. (Hat tip, Rus Bowden.
To the best of my knowledge, The Inquirer is the only paper that has a column devoted to Young Adult books.
To the best of my knowledge, The Inquirer is the only paper that has a column devoted to Young Adult books.
From a great book ...
"Two of the more startling discoveries I made in the course of working on this book were that Joe Waynick, chief executive of Alcor, is a Seventh Day Adventist, and David Gobel, founder of the Methusaleh Foundation which supports research in longevity, is a Jehovah's Witness. Only Americans, I thought, could so smoothly combine such a secular goal as a medicinal immortality with such fundamentalist belief systems.'
- Bryan Appleyard, How to Live Forever or Die Trying
- Bryan Appleyard, How to Live Forever or Die Trying
This does not surprise me, though I was surprised to read it only a day after the thought had occurred to me that reductive naturalism and fundamentalism are but two sides of the same coin. The adherents of both are literalists, resistant if not actually immune to symbol, ambiguity or nuance.
Bryan's book, by the way, which I will have more to say about eventually, is so good that I would advise you not to wait for it to be published here. Just go to Amazon. com UK and pay the extra pence. The chapter I read last night, "The Mirror of Death," is simply extraordinary.
Update: Bryan makes the same point as I do above in his next chapter: "Both Islamic and Christian fundamentalists insist on the actual physical reality of what will occur after death. They do so in the global cultural context of - and in reaction to - scientism, another fundamentalism whose faith is in the literal possibility of the omniscience and omni-competence of science. For these faiths, metaphor and analogy are not enough, nor is the vagueness of the eternal contemplation of the deity. Rather, the reward of the afterlife will be understandable in the terms of this life - as sensual pleasures, reunion with loved ones and so on. In the faith of scientism the compeletion of the scientific project would also involve a complete solution to the problems attendant on being human."
Since you ask ...
... Book reviews and ad revenues. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
" Perhaps Mr. Wilson may elaborate on his brief suggestion in the WSJ," Jerome Weeks asks.
Well, I'll try. Not long ago, The Inquirer's publisher, Brian Tierney, asked staffers to send him any ideas we might have for revenue enhancement. The Inquirer, being privately held, is no longer subject to pressure from Wall Street, but it does have its own set of economic constraints - banks, for instance.
" Perhaps Mr. Wilson may elaborate on his brief suggestion in the WSJ," Jerome Weeks asks.
Well, I'll try. Not long ago, The Inquirer's publisher, Brian Tierney, asked staffers to send him any ideas we might have for revenue enhancement. The Inquirer, being privately held, is no longer subject to pressure from Wall Street, but it does have its own set of economic constraints - banks, for instance.
My reasoning was simply that, as newspapers around the country cut back on book reviews, a sort of gap is opened. Just because your local newspaper doesn't publish reviews doesn't mean that people don't want to read them. People like to read reviews, period - book reviews. movies reviews, music reviews. So, I figured, why not come up with a review section that could be sold to papers in various cities, the way that tabloid Parade is, only using POD technology: Papers that subscribed could print what they want, and provision could be made for the inclusion of reviews of books by local authors. If enough papers subscribed, the cost of the reviews might well be covered , and I would suspect that publishers would be interested in pumping some ad revenue into a book review section appearing simultaneously in cities all over the country.
But Jerome is right that a book section doesn't need to depend exclusively - or even principally - on ad revenue from publishers. Bookstores - both chains and independents - are poential advertisers. And what about Levanger. What about travel agencies and literary tours? Wgat about theater packages? Not a bad place to advertise laptops, either.
The largest segment of the population in this country is over 40 and it has the largest disposable income in history, income it doesn't have to ask Mom and Dad about spending.
And yes, I do think such a print section would have to have an online component that is genuinely cutting edge, greatly supplementing the print version, in fact.
This is all off the top of my head of course and I am no business person. There may be all kinds of sound business reasons working against it - though business people I have mentioned it to have all told me they thought it was a great idea.
But Jerome is right that a book section doesn't need to depend exclusively - or even principally - on ad revenue from publishers. Bookstores - both chains and independents - are poential advertisers. And what about Levanger. What about travel agencies and literary tours? Wgat about theater packages? Not a bad place to advertise laptops, either.
The largest segment of the population in this country is over 40 and it has the largest disposable income in history, income it doesn't have to ask Mom and Dad about spending.
And yes, I do think such a print section would have to have an online component that is genuinely cutting edge, greatly supplementing the print version, in fact.
This is all off the top of my head of course and I am no business person. There may be all kinds of sound business reasons working against it - though business people I have mentioned it to have all told me they thought it was a great idea.
In today's Inquirer ...
... Martha Woodall tells about Carolyn See's visit tomorrow to Bucks County Community College: Author Carolyn See making rare visit.
More here.
More here.
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Apologies to all ...
... I made it back to the office, but find myself horribly behind in just about everything. So blogging has had to be spotty. We'll get up to speed soon, I promise.
Taking crime off the streets ...
... and putting it in the home: Crime and family in books and film .
I love this comment Maxine makes about John Osborne: "I've read all his plays and I read the columns he wrote regularly in the Spectator in his later years with a ghastly fascination. " It's that "ghastly fascination" that does it.
I love this comment Maxine makes about John Osborne: "I've read all his plays and I read the columns he wrote regularly in the Spectator in his later years with a ghastly fascination. " It's that "ghastly fascination" that does it.
Peter Stothard confesses ...
... to a one-time fascination with Jim Morrison: Caresses of a snake.
I confess to a lingering fondness for The Doors, "L.A. Woman" in particular.
I confess to a lingering fondness for The Doors, "L.A. Woman" in particular.
In case you missed Monty Python's version ...
... here's What's it all about, Terry? (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
I missed this yesterday ...
... along with everything else: Me, Me, Me...and Clive . I thought that Bryan's piece on Helen Mirren was as good as it gets. Obviously, no one does this sort of thing better.
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Thank you, everyone ...
... for the kind wishes. I am at last able to sit up and take nourishment, but I also have a review to write, so blogging will have to wait until tomorrow.
Monday, March 05, 2007
Well, Britain may not be as religious ...
... as the U.S., but it sure has an oddly faith-based health system: Tax-funded Shamans.
What's in a name?
... more than you might think: What Does Your Name Mean?
I don't think I'm naive, but I am old.
I don't think I'm naive, but I am old.
What Frank Wilson Means |
F is for Flamboyant R is for Responsible A is for Athletic N is for Natural K is for Keen W is for Wired I is for Irresistible L is for Lively S is for Stunning O is for Old N is for Naive |
Nat Hentoff ...
... on Castro's useful idiots. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
A key ALA official, Judith Krug, heads its office of Intellectual Freedom. In my many years of reporting on the ALA's sterling record of protecting American librarians from censorship, I often quoted her in admiration. But now, she said at an ALA meeting about supporters of the caged librarians, "I've dug in my heels... I refuse to be governed by people with an agenda." The Cuba issue, she continued, "wouldn't die," though she'd like to "drown it."
The agenda, Miss Krug, is freedom.
I have no qualifications whatsoever ...
... for commenting on this, but it looks interesting: How to create a universe .
This comes just in time ...
... How to Maintain Your Life on an Even Keel.
Of course, this helps: The Perils of Self-Belief . I find it interesting that Amanda Marcotte's "style" has become an object of international derision.
Of course, this helps: The Perils of Self-Belief . I find it interesting that Amanda Marcotte's "style" has become an object of international derision.
Sunday, March 04, 2007
Maybe they're not right ...
... but they've got credentials, data, arguments - and surely deserve to be heard, right?
'Global Warming Is Lies' Claims Documentary.
More here.
I did quite well on the quiz.
'Global Warming Is Lies' Claims Documentary.
More here.
I did quite well on the quiz.
Almighty evolution ...
... Darwin's God. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
I would note that finding out what goes on in the brain when one looks at a tree has nothing to do with whether or not the tree exists. The question of how a belief in God evolved depends on the presumption that it did. This is the problem with sociobiology: It involves a petitio. The conclusion - that something is the product of evolution - is presumed. We then devise a scenario as to how that might have been. And that scenario is then used as proof of what has all long been assumed. The problem is that it is short on evidence and long on speculation. Maybe most people have always believed in God because there is a God. That's worth considering. And try this little thought experiment. In the Greek myths, Gods often take on human form. That they do this indicates that their normal "divine form" is altogether different from human form. So how would a God who had not taken on human form appear to us? Possibly as a huge and distant sphere of exploding gases.
Speaking of Bryan ...
... Gordon McCabe takes him to task in Dawkins v Appleyard. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
There is no link to Bryan's review but I have no reason to think that Gordon's account is inaccurate. But I have read Dawkins's book - and reviewed it - and I find I must object to Gordon's objections.
"Dawkins's attack,"Gordon notes, "is essentially an attack upon religion and religious belief, not theology. The majority of people who hold religious beliefs are ignorant of theology, so an attack upon religion and religious belief can be made, quite legitimately, without engaging in theological debate."
There is no link to Bryan's review but I have no reason to think that Gordon's account is inaccurate. But I have read Dawkins's book - and reviewed it - and I find I must object to Gordon's objections.
"Dawkins's attack,"Gordon notes, "is essentially an attack upon religion and religious belief, not theology. The majority of people who hold religious beliefs are ignorant of theology, so an attack upon religion and religious belief can be made, quite legitimately, without engaging in theological debate."
Here's a definition of religion that I think we can all accept: "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs."
Admittedly, theology is the systematic study of such beliefs. The majority of those who hold religious beliefs may be ignorant of the systematic study of those beliefs, but they are not necessarily ignorant of the beliefs themselves. Gordon makes an assumption about believers that is unsupported - and given the sales figures for books about religion - untenable. Those who have criticized Dawkins for not knowing theology aren't objecting to his unfamiliarity with the work of Karl Rahner or Paul Tillich. He doesn't even seem familiar with C.S. Lewis or Ronald Knox. In fact, he comes off as ignorant not only of theology, but of religion as well. He does not engage the beliefs in any serious way. At the very least, he could have taken the time to read Rudolf Otto's The Idea of the Holy.
Gordon also says: "Religion is so powerful in the US, that many atheistic scientists and politicians decide, as an act of strategic pragmatism, that a partition of science and religion is the only realistic policy that will enable them to perform their work unhindered; (ii) Because so many people in the US are religiously indoctrinated from an early age, many scientists there are Christian, and need to find a way, within their own head, of reconciling their religious and scientific beliefs."
Well, I would like to know how Gordon knows (i). I have never known anyone in any field who was chary of telling me he was an atheist - most seem rather proud of it. Please show me some evidence that some scientist has had to keep his atheism to himself in order to work unhindered in this country. Carl Sagan and Stephen Gould did quite well quite publicly here and neither was a believer. As for (ii), Owen Gingerich, a lifelong Mennonite, seems to have always felt that his scientific work and his religious beliefs were in synch. And Francis Collins was raised in a freethinking family and was an atheist before becoming a Christian. There are also such people as Georges Lemaitre, Gregor Mendel and, more recently, Freeman Dyson and John Polkinghorne (who, I know, would disagree with Gordon's later assertion that Christianity's "historical claims are inconsistent with the laws of physics, or refutable with empirical evidence" - I heard Polkinghorne discuss this once at the Princeton Theological Center. Moreover, what Gordon is referring to - the Virgin Birth, the Immaculate Conception, and the Resurrection - are not asserted as being consistent with the laws of physics, but quite the opposite, as miracles.)
I'm glad for Gordon that "the explicability and intelligibility of the world doesn't seem to be a mystery to" him (though, if the world is indeed inexplicable, I wonder why). But that doesn't mean it couldn't seem a mystery, as it apparently does, to many others besides Gordon. Moreover, just because it doesn't seem to be a mystery to Gordon doesn't mean it isn't a mystery.
Finally, it is nice that Dawkins does not think that religion is the root of all evil. Now if he will just explain where he gets this bizarre notion of evil in the first place.
Admittedly, theology is the systematic study of such beliefs. The majority of those who hold religious beliefs may be ignorant of the systematic study of those beliefs, but they are not necessarily ignorant of the beliefs themselves. Gordon makes an assumption about believers that is unsupported - and given the sales figures for books about religion - untenable. Those who have criticized Dawkins for not knowing theology aren't objecting to his unfamiliarity with the work of Karl Rahner or Paul Tillich. He doesn't even seem familiar with C.S. Lewis or Ronald Knox. In fact, he comes off as ignorant not only of theology, but of religion as well. He does not engage the beliefs in any serious way. At the very least, he could have taken the time to read Rudolf Otto's The Idea of the Holy.
Gordon also says: "Religion is so powerful in the US, that many atheistic scientists and politicians decide, as an act of strategic pragmatism, that a partition of science and religion is the only realistic policy that will enable them to perform their work unhindered; (ii) Because so many people in the US are religiously indoctrinated from an early age, many scientists there are Christian, and need to find a way, within their own head, of reconciling their religious and scientific beliefs."
Well, I would like to know how Gordon knows (i). I have never known anyone in any field who was chary of telling me he was an atheist - most seem rather proud of it. Please show me some evidence that some scientist has had to keep his atheism to himself in order to work unhindered in this country. Carl Sagan and Stephen Gould did quite well quite publicly here and neither was a believer. As for (ii), Owen Gingerich, a lifelong Mennonite, seems to have always felt that his scientific work and his religious beliefs were in synch. And Francis Collins was raised in a freethinking family and was an atheist before becoming a Christian. There are also such people as Georges Lemaitre, Gregor Mendel and, more recently, Freeman Dyson and John Polkinghorne (who, I know, would disagree with Gordon's later assertion that Christianity's "historical claims are inconsistent with the laws of physics, or refutable with empirical evidence" - I heard Polkinghorne discuss this once at the Princeton Theological Center. Moreover, what Gordon is referring to - the Virgin Birth, the Immaculate Conception, and the Resurrection - are not asserted as being consistent with the laws of physics, but quite the opposite, as miracles.)
I'm glad for Gordon that "the explicability and intelligibility of the world doesn't seem to be a mystery to" him (though, if the world is indeed inexplicable, I wonder why). But that doesn't mean it couldn't seem a mystery, as it apparently does, to many others besides Gordon. Moreover, just because it doesn't seem to be a mystery to Gordon doesn't mean it isn't a mystery.
Finally, it is nice that Dawkins does not think that religion is the root of all evil. Now if he will just explain where he gets this bizarre notion of evil in the first place.
Two other reviews ...
... both by Bryan, are well worth your attention: Lee Smolin and Picture Books.
Today's Inquirer reviews ...
... I shall begin, selfishly, with my own review of John Heilpern's biography of John Osborne, one of the best literary biographies I have ever read: A life of torment, given and received.
Patricia Haberstroh looks at Frieda Hughes's latest collection: Poets' daughter faces midlife with art. (An unfortunate headline, since Frieda Hughes is not just the daughters of poets, but a poet of note herself. Moreover, this review is accompanied by Katie Haegele's review of a biography of Assia Wevill, Ted Hughes's second wife. That review has not managed to make it online yet. Jeez.)
Sarah Weinman likes Lisa Scottoline: She makes reader care about heroine.
Katie Haegele's young adult review did make it online: Young Adult Reader | Six guys with special talents, and the onus that goes with them.
During the past week, Sam Starnes weighed in on Patrick Anderson's The Triumph of the Thriller: Book Review | It's criminal that these titles lack shelf respect.
Patricia Haberstroh looks at Frieda Hughes's latest collection: Poets' daughter faces midlife with art. (An unfortunate headline, since Frieda Hughes is not just the daughters of poets, but a poet of note herself. Moreover, this review is accompanied by Katie Haegele's review of a biography of Assia Wevill, Ted Hughes's second wife. That review has not managed to make it online yet. Jeez.)
Sarah Weinman likes Lisa Scottoline: She makes reader care about heroine.
Katie Haegele's young adult review did make it online: Young Adult Reader | Six guys with special talents, and the onus that goes with them.
During the past week, Sam Starnes weighed in on Patrick Anderson's The Triumph of the Thriller: Book Review | It's criminal that these titles lack shelf respect.
Saturday, March 03, 2007
Neither snow, nor rain ...
... nor heat, nor gloom of night stays the OWL from the swift completion of his appointed rounds: Wicked wind gusts define ’07 blizzard. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
Maybe Richard Dawkins ...
... will renounce coffee: Faith in Starbucks.
I like the reference to "the usual New York Times's flaccid and overlong account of the affair." I'm glad someone else has noticed.
I like the reference to "the usual New York Times's flaccid and overlong account of the affair." I'm glad someone else has noticed.
A roundup ...
... of poets' blogs from Rus Bowden:
Art Durkee is On the Road.
Peter Garner hits upon some Satires of Circumstance.
Tanya Allen is keeping tabs on Poetry Reviews. Specifically here.
Art Durkee is On the Road.
Peter Garner hits upon some Satires of Circumstance.
Tanya Allen is keeping tabs on Poetry Reviews. Specifically here.
Friday, March 02, 2007
Alvin Plantinga ...
... on Richard Dawkins: The Dawkins Confusion. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
Dave also sends along this link to Plantinga on Religion and Science.
Dave also sends along this link to Plantinga on Religion and Science.
I'm skeptical of this ...
... if only because of the standard apocalyptic tone of the Amazon link - Act now! Save the planet! - but I'd start getting skeptical about myself if I never presented opposing viewpoints: a guide to climate change. (Hat tip, Maxine Clarke.)
More on Auden ...
... Historical as Munich. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
I was reading this and it seemed familar and I wondered if I had posted it already. Then, I realized I had read it in the TLS - to which I subscribe (take note, Peter) - I guess last week.
I was reading this and it seemed familar and I wondered if I had posted it already. Then, I realized I had read it in the TLS - to which I subscribe (take note, Peter) - I guess last week.
Open debate ...
... A bygone age. (Hat tip, Maxine Clarke.)
Maxine cites this paragraph:
So, what to conclude from all this? One thing that strikes me is that people back then seemed much more willing to debate issues in the open — the arguments about rust had been rumbling on for weeks, with many disagreements and new revelations appearing all the time. Somehow, that doesn’t seem to happen so much now. Have scientists become more secretive, or polite? Or is research nowadays more competitive, so that people are less inclined to disclose their results freely?
I think the problem is that many scientists nowadays are not disinterested enough. Like journalists, they want to shape policy. But science isn't about shaping policy - and journalism shouldn't be. Underlying this is a lack of faith in the good judgment of the citizenry: We should only let them know what we think they should know. Don't want to muddle their poor brains with too much information, especially if that only highlights how complex problems can be.
Maxine cites this paragraph:
So, what to conclude from all this? One thing that strikes me is that people back then seemed much more willing to debate issues in the open — the arguments about rust had been rumbling on for weeks, with many disagreements and new revelations appearing all the time. Somehow, that doesn’t seem to happen so much now. Have scientists become more secretive, or polite? Or is research nowadays more competitive, so that people are less inclined to disclose their results freely?
I think the problem is that many scientists nowadays are not disinterested enough. Like journalists, they want to shape policy. But science isn't about shaping policy - and journalism shouldn't be. Underlying this is a lack of faith in the good judgment of the citizenry: We should only let them know what we think they should know. Don't want to muddle their poor brains with too much information, especially if that only highlights how complex problems can be.
I had forgotten ...
... how two-faced the guy actually is - and always has been: Bonnie Prince Al.
This was the real Al, not the virtual one, and one we knew well from the past: the one who at the 1996 convention made a five-Kleenex speech about how his sister's horrific death in 1984 from lung cancer had turned him into an indefatigable foe of tobacco, when in 1988 he had bragged about raising the crop; who went from co-sponsoring a bill to make a fetus a person to defending late-term abortion at NARAL celebrations, and then denied that he had changed anything; the Al who wasted unknown gallons of water during a drought to float his canoe for a save-the-earth photo op; the Al who in March, 2000, declared his intention to crusade for campaign finance reform, because he had been nearly indicted in a fund-raising scandal; the Al who ran in 2000 as, a people-vs.-the powerful populist, while being outed as a slumlord who left his indigent tenants living in squalor; the Al who in the Florida recount promised to "count every vote" (for him, that was), while trying furiously to discredit those of overseas servicemen, and others whose problem was a slight technicality, with which the voters had nothing to do.
This was the real Al, not the virtual one, and one we knew well from the past: the one who at the 1996 convention made a five-Kleenex speech about how his sister's horrific death in 1984 from lung cancer had turned him into an indefatigable foe of tobacco, when in 1988 he had bragged about raising the crop; who went from co-sponsoring a bill to make a fetus a person to defending late-term abortion at NARAL celebrations, and then denied that he had changed anything; the Al who wasted unknown gallons of water during a drought to float his canoe for a save-the-earth photo op; the Al who in March, 2000, declared his intention to crusade for campaign finance reform, because he had been nearly indicted in a fund-raising scandal; the Al who ran in 2000 as, a people-vs.-the powerful populist, while being outed as a slumlord who left his indigent tenants living in squalor; the Al who in the Florida recount promised to "count every vote" (for him, that was), while trying furiously to discredit those of overseas servicemen, and others whose problem was a slight technicality, with which the voters had nothing to do.
This sounds pretty circumstantial to me ..
... MI5 suspected Auden of aiding Cambridge spies' escape. (Hat tip, Vikram Johri.)
Auden might very well have given Burgess permission to stay at his villa. That doesn't mean he knew Burgess was a spy or that Burgess was attempting to elude British authorities.
Auden might very well have given Burgess permission to stay at his villa. That doesn't mean he knew Burgess was a spy or that Burgess was attempting to elude British authorities.
Good news for Mark Sarvas ...
... though it took a while to arrive: APRIL 29, 2003 - FEBRUARY 21, 2007. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
Congratulations to Mark.
Congratulations to Mark.
Note with caution ...
... Climate on Mars.
I think Glenn it right about this:
Right or not, this doesn't matter to me -- as I've noted before, I think we should be trying to minimize our burning of fossil fuels for lots of other reasons. But it does suggest that people should be wary of getting too far ahead of the science. And if this explanation turns out to be correct, overselling global warming could lead to a backlash in which efforts to reduce pollution lose credibility, which would be bad as we should be reducing pollution regardless of global warming. (Emphasis mine.)
I think Glenn it right about this:
Right or not, this doesn't matter to me -- as I've noted before, I think we should be trying to minimize our burning of fossil fuels for lots of other reasons. But it does suggest that people should be wary of getting too far ahead of the science. And if this explanation turns out to be correct, overselling global warming could lead to a backlash in which efforts to reduce pollution lose credibility, which would be bad as we should be reducing pollution regardless of global warming. (Emphasis mine.)
Are you ready?
... Do the Impossible: Know Thyself
... on a purely scientific or naturalistic view, nothing is more important than anything else, in the sense in which the words are being used here. In a universe deprived of intentionality as a whole, a volcano is no more important than the death of a beetle, or the explosion of a star. Nothing is important or significant but conscious thinking makes it so: the type of thinking, moreover, that employs moral categories that are inherently non-natural.
... on a purely scientific or naturalistic view, nothing is more important than anything else, in the sense in which the words are being used here. In a universe deprived of intentionality as a whole, a volcano is no more important than the death of a beetle, or the explosion of a star. Nothing is important or significant but conscious thinking makes it so: the type of thinking, moreover, that employs moral categories that are inherently non-natural.
Another look ...
... at Martin Amis's House of Meetings, this one from John Banville: Executioner Songs. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
It's not my view, but it's well argued, that's for sure. Maybe you have to be a novelist to appreciate it.
It's not my view, but it's well argued, that's for sure. Maybe you have to be a novelist to appreciate it.
Post mortem ...
... Tomb of the (Still) Unknown Ancients . (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
Amos Kloner, the archaeologist who supervised work at the tomb when it was first discovered in 1980, has called the documentary's claims "impossible" and "nonsense."
Wonder why Larry King didn't have him on.
Amos Kloner, the archaeologist who supervised work at the tomb when it was first discovered in 1980, has called the documentary's claims "impossible" and "nonsense."
Wonder why Larry King didn't have him on.
I'm envious ...
... Maxine alerts her compatriots: BBC classics on special offer. I'm envious because I presume they wouldn't play in my DVD player. I have a DVD of the classic film of J.B. Priestley's An Inspector Calls, with the great Alastair Sim, and I can't watch it. (My computer DVD gives me the option of changing the setting, but - and I must betray the limits of my technological savvy now - I do not know if, having changed it, I could change it back.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)