Democracy feels it's best served when the majority rules. I do not take comfort in that statement when the median is below average.
Farewell Reader, have a good day.
Hussman
Sunday, November 14, 2004
Friday, November 12, 2004
Daily Rant
Wow, I've had people read my blog that weren't involved in writing it. As I read through my posts, I realize that a) I certainly shift focus a lot, and b) I appear to hate religion.
I thought I should clarify my thoughts on that topic. I don't hate religion, and at times I admire the good that a few of them do, but I am incredibly frustrated with the rest of them.
I am agnostic. Simply, I don't see any evidence that the organized religions are related to the creation of the universe; however, I am not so arrogant to think that there isn't some higher being, deity, creator or whatever. I'm intelligent enough to know that I don't know the answer to that question. I would love for there to be an afterlife, but I will never know if there is one until oxygen is no longer delivered to my brain.
And there lies my frustration with organized religions. I know it's cliche to divide people into groups of two, but I often view the religious this way. They either don't believe, or they do. If the practitioners don't believe in their preachings, then they are hypocritical power-mongers using religion for social connections and control. If they do believe in it, in most cases they have a perspective that the universe exists for the creation of man, which I view a rather...arrogant. They may be good people, and treat their fellow man well, but to assume that we are the ultimate creation of life just because we developed a system of grunts for communicating abstract thoughts and put our opposable thumbs to use seems short-sighted.
Most every religion (except maybe Ba'hai or Hinduism) believes that there brand is the correct one, and all others are wrong. I think there is a logical axiom stated that if multiple, mutually-exclusive hypotheses assume that each must be true, then all or all but one are false. So which one is correct, if any?
In any case, each religion elevates themselves above the rest. JOIN OUR CLUB, WE'RE THE BEST! The rest of you will go to Hell. The different Christian denominations are always pointing fingers at each other, saying the other taints the message of Jesus. If only they understood his message as well as I do, and I don't even believe, according to their defintion.
Many (but not all) Christians seemingly forgot the true message of the Sermon on the Mount (beautiful words, by the way), and that when Mary Magdelene was about to be killed for being a whore, Jesus said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Jesus never cast the stone. If Jesus wasn't throwing it, then he was a sinner too, which implies that he understood that people aren't perfect. Everyone has moments in their life they wish they've never done, I sure do, but that is the point of living. We make mistakes, we learn from them, we improve, we make more mistakes, we survive. We don't go to hell because we ate meat on Friday.
Farewell Reader, have a good day.
Hussman
I thought I should clarify my thoughts on that topic. I don't hate religion, and at times I admire the good that a few of them do, but I am incredibly frustrated with the rest of them.
I am agnostic. Simply, I don't see any evidence that the organized religions are related to the creation of the universe; however, I am not so arrogant to think that there isn't some higher being, deity, creator or whatever. I'm intelligent enough to know that I don't know the answer to that question. I would love for there to be an afterlife, but I will never know if there is one until oxygen is no longer delivered to my brain.
And there lies my frustration with organized religions. I know it's cliche to divide people into groups of two, but I often view the religious this way. They either don't believe, or they do. If the practitioners don't believe in their preachings, then they are hypocritical power-mongers using religion for social connections and control. If they do believe in it, in most cases they have a perspective that the universe exists for the creation of man, which I view a rather...arrogant. They may be good people, and treat their fellow man well, but to assume that we are the ultimate creation of life just because we developed a system of grunts for communicating abstract thoughts and put our opposable thumbs to use seems short-sighted.
Most every religion (except maybe Ba'hai or Hinduism) believes that there brand is the correct one, and all others are wrong. I think there is a logical axiom stated that if multiple, mutually-exclusive hypotheses assume that each must be true, then all or all but one are false. So which one is correct, if any?
In any case, each religion elevates themselves above the rest. JOIN OUR CLUB, WE'RE THE BEST! The rest of you will go to Hell. The different Christian denominations are always pointing fingers at each other, saying the other taints the message of Jesus. If only they understood his message as well as I do, and I don't even believe, according to their defintion.
Many (but not all) Christians seemingly forgot the true message of the Sermon on the Mount (beautiful words, by the way), and that when Mary Magdelene was about to be killed for being a whore, Jesus said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Jesus never cast the stone. If Jesus wasn't throwing it, then he was a sinner too, which implies that he understood that people aren't perfect. Everyone has moments in their life they wish they've never done, I sure do, but that is the point of living. We make mistakes, we learn from them, we improve, we make more mistakes, we survive. We don't go to hell because we ate meat on Friday.
Farewell Reader, have a good day.
Hussman
Thursday, November 11, 2004
Daily Rant
Taken from http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/#1
Protests, Prayer Vigils To Greet 'Kinsey'
Religious conservatives and family-values groups are planning to wage a battle against Fox Searchlight's Kinsey, about the pioneering sex researcher, when the movie opens in limited release on Friday. In a statement on Wednesday, Robert Knight of Concerned Women for America charged that the movie "lionized" a man whose "proper place is with Nazi Dr. Josef Mengele or your average Hollywood horror flick mad scientist." Knight went on to assert that Kinsey "was the godfather of the homosexual activist movement, the campaign to mainstream pornography, and even the campaign to strike down abortion laws." The youth group Generation Life, composed of "virgins and renewed virgins," announced that it would picket theaters showing the film. And the conservative WorldNetDaily.com has taken aim at the movie in the current issue of its monthly magazine Whistleblower, in which it charges that Kinsey transformed America "in five decades from the Leave It to Beaver innocence of the 1950s to today's wanton, 'anything-goes' sexual anarchy."
The first thoughts that come to my mind are:
1) Why should I care what these zealots think?
2) Unfortunately, some people with considerable influence do care what they say.
The arrogance of the religious zealot never fails to amaze me. Do these people forget that they are the by-products of sex? Do they not understand that Kinsey objectively studied the human urge to have sex, and that these urges are the reason they exist?
As a race, we've been having sex for much longer than we've had the ability to talk. Without these urges, the dominant males would have been enjoying themselves doing more destructive things, like clubbing sabre-tooth tigers, wooly-mammoths, and other males, as opposed to wooing (or clubbing) desirable females and procreating.
But I'll call the zealots out on their own words.
-a man whose "proper place is with Nazi Dr. Josef Mengele or your average Hollywood horror flick mad scientist."
Pure idiocy. He apparently doesn't make one key distinction: Kinsey's subjects were willing participants, Mengele's were not.
-"virgins and renewed virgins," announced that it would picket theaters showing the film.
I love that term 'renewed virgins.' People asking for a Mulligan on their first time. It reminds me of Jill's girlfriend who would wait until her period to have sex with a guy so that she could say that they 'were her first.'
-"in five decades from the Leave It to Beaver innocence of the 1950s to today's wanton, 'anything-goes' sexual anarchy."
Let's see, the only real difference between the '50's and today is that we have much more information being transmitted in real time. The media has instant access to everything. But let's say there wasn't 'sexual anarchy' in the '50's. This would be the only time there wasn't anarchy. The evidence is clear with "All's fair in love and war."
Farewell Reader, have a good day.
Hussman
Protests, Prayer Vigils To Greet 'Kinsey'
Religious conservatives and family-values groups are planning to wage a battle against Fox Searchlight's Kinsey, about the pioneering sex researcher, when the movie opens in limited release on Friday. In a statement on Wednesday, Robert Knight of Concerned Women for America charged that the movie "lionized" a man whose "proper place is with Nazi Dr. Josef Mengele or your average Hollywood horror flick mad scientist." Knight went on to assert that Kinsey "was the godfather of the homosexual activist movement, the campaign to mainstream pornography, and even the campaign to strike down abortion laws." The youth group Generation Life, composed of "virgins and renewed virgins," announced that it would picket theaters showing the film. And the conservative WorldNetDaily.com has taken aim at the movie in the current issue of its monthly magazine Whistleblower, in which it charges that Kinsey transformed America "in five decades from the Leave It to Beaver innocence of the 1950s to today's wanton, 'anything-goes' sexual anarchy."
The first thoughts that come to my mind are:
1) Why should I care what these zealots think?
2) Unfortunately, some people with considerable influence do care what they say.
The arrogance of the religious zealot never fails to amaze me. Do these people forget that they are the by-products of sex? Do they not understand that Kinsey objectively studied the human urge to have sex, and that these urges are the reason they exist?
As a race, we've been having sex for much longer than we've had the ability to talk. Without these urges, the dominant males would have been enjoying themselves doing more destructive things, like clubbing sabre-tooth tigers, wooly-mammoths, and other males, as opposed to wooing (or clubbing) desirable females and procreating.
But I'll call the zealots out on their own words.
-a man whose "proper place is with Nazi Dr. Josef Mengele or your average Hollywood horror flick mad scientist."
Pure idiocy. He apparently doesn't make one key distinction: Kinsey's subjects were willing participants, Mengele's were not.
-"virgins and renewed virgins," announced that it would picket theaters showing the film.
I love that term 'renewed virgins.' People asking for a Mulligan on their first time. It reminds me of Jill's girlfriend who would wait until her period to have sex with a guy so that she could say that they 'were her first.'
-"in five decades from the Leave It to Beaver innocence of the 1950s to today's wanton, 'anything-goes' sexual anarchy."
Let's see, the only real difference between the '50's and today is that we have much more information being transmitted in real time. The media has instant access to everything. But let's say there wasn't 'sexual anarchy' in the '50's. This would be the only time there wasn't anarchy. The evidence is clear with "All's fair in love and war."
Farewell Reader, have a good day.
Hussman
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
Random Thought
It amazes me at how much people in Silicon Valley complain when there is a little rain.
Introduction
Oh boy, it's been a month of Sundays since I've written here. I just read Mark Cuban's blog for about three minutes, and realized that I liked doing it when I did it.
Mark Cuban is a bright guy. He just posted a blog entry on the music industry that skewers them. I didn't know all of the reasons that he listed for the decrease in CD sales. To think, that is his spare time.
Daily Rant
Oh, nothing to rant about, really, but my mind has been wandering.
Okay, this will probably turn out to be just another 'I FOUND GOD IN PI!' post, but what the hell, it's 1:22 in the morning and I can't sleep.
I've been re-reading Carl Sagan's CONTACT. The final storyline (a message in 'pi') has had me thinking about pi and where it comes from. Obviously it's the ratio of the circumference of a circle divided by its diameter. But why can it be derived in so many different ways? Also notice that it's tied to the other transcendental numbers like e.
Sagan tries to prove the existence of god by saying there is a Message very deep into the transcendental (boy that word is fun to type) constants. I'm not so sure you need to go that far. Just take a look--pi can be related to e, and it can also be related to the product of primes.
Prime numbers are supposed to be unpredictable and you can get pi?
It's occurrences like these that make me think about Order-Chaos deities. Yes reader, that's a big jump, but stick with me. I don't remember where I read about them first, maybe a fantasy book, but assume the following:
1. Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc. are all some form of mythology, just like the ancient Greeks and Romans. They are religions derived by man, used for controlling man.
2. As stated eloquently by Heinlein, "The Universe is too perfect to be random."
3. Therefore, there is a higher intelligence, some form of god, or gods, and it (they) don't necessarily follow the rules in the books we are told to read.
I know what you're thinking, 'How the hell would this line of thought relate to mathematics, and then life? '
Maybe there are two gods: Order and Chaos. Perhaps they are brothers. They like to play with each other, each outdoing the other in their little games. Order does something to unite the fabric of existence, Chaos does something to tear it apart. And we see the results of their play littering the universe.
Order says, "I'm going to liberate energy into to the nothingness of existence!"
Chaos says, "Nice trick, I will make it expand forever"
Order says, "Ah, okay, I will allow the energy to assume the shape of mass, and the mass will have strong, weak, electromagnetic, and gravitational forces that will provide it shape and form."
Chaos says, "Wonderful, I will make it so that you can never know exactly the position and momentum of the most discrete particles."
Order says, "In the structure of the universe, I will provide form to the mass and energy that is reproducible"
Chaos says, "Neat, I'm forcing the entropy of the universe to always increase, and eventually it must stop moving."
Order says, "I will create a system of mathematics that is universal, and will allow the representation of reality in abstract form."
Chaos says, "The math is beautiful, but many of the fundamental constants will continue infinitely."
Order says, "And my ultimate achievement will be the creation of life that will reverse the trend of entropy and collect free energy on its own will."
Chaos says, in awe, "Miraculous, really nice one there. But they must die."
And so their games continue. I don't believe they are watching us closely, although we may be a part of them. To me, the universe is much too big for them to be preoccupied with the not-so-significant actions of creatures little more advanced than the common ant. In short, it's their world, we're just living in it.
Did I observe an interesting person?
Menen was crying at work again today. She lost her husband over two months ago, but sometimes she is still wracked in grief. It's hard to know what to say to her, although I find that saying hello to her later in the day seems to help a little.
Have I heard anything funny today?
I am working on a bit with Jesus in a sanitarium.
Hobby Update
My guitar playing has steadily declined. I tried working on Paganini's No. 16 (5 has been intimidating), but it seems that I can't get the focus I once had when I was younger. I need to redirect my goals on this.
Stand-up is getting better. A lot better.
Farewell Reader, have a good day.
Hussman
Mark Cuban is a bright guy. He just posted a blog entry on the music industry that skewers them. I didn't know all of the reasons that he listed for the decrease in CD sales. To think, that is his spare time.
Daily Rant
Oh, nothing to rant about, really, but my mind has been wandering.
Okay, this will probably turn out to be just another 'I FOUND GOD IN PI!' post, but what the hell, it's 1:22 in the morning and I can't sleep.
I've been re-reading Carl Sagan's CONTACT. The final storyline (a message in 'pi') has had me thinking about pi and where it comes from. Obviously it's the ratio of the circumference of a circle divided by its diameter. But why can it be derived in so many different ways? Also notice that it's tied to the other transcendental numbers like e.
Sagan tries to prove the existence of god by saying there is a Message very deep into the transcendental (boy that word is fun to type) constants. I'm not so sure you need to go that far. Just take a look--pi can be related to e, and it can also be related to the product of primes.
Prime numbers are supposed to be unpredictable and you can get pi?
It's occurrences like these that make me think about Order-Chaos deities. Yes reader, that's a big jump, but stick with me. I don't remember where I read about them first, maybe a fantasy book, but assume the following:
1. Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc. are all some form of mythology, just like the ancient Greeks and Romans. They are religions derived by man, used for controlling man.
2. As stated eloquently by Heinlein, "The Universe is too perfect to be random."
3. Therefore, there is a higher intelligence, some form of god, or gods, and it (they) don't necessarily follow the rules in the books we are told to read.
I know what you're thinking, 'How the hell would this line of thought relate to mathematics, and then life? '
Maybe there are two gods: Order and Chaos. Perhaps they are brothers. They like to play with each other, each outdoing the other in their little games. Order does something to unite the fabric of existence, Chaos does something to tear it apart. And we see the results of their play littering the universe.
Order says, "I'm going to liberate energy into to the nothingness of existence!"
Chaos says, "Nice trick, I will make it expand forever"
Order says, "Ah, okay, I will allow the energy to assume the shape of mass, and the mass will have strong, weak, electromagnetic, and gravitational forces that will provide it shape and form."
Chaos says, "Wonderful, I will make it so that you can never know exactly the position and momentum of the most discrete particles."
Order says, "In the structure of the universe, I will provide form to the mass and energy that is reproducible"
Chaos says, "Neat, I'm forcing the entropy of the universe to always increase, and eventually it must stop moving."
Order says, "I will create a system of mathematics that is universal, and will allow the representation of reality in abstract form."
Chaos says, "The math is beautiful, but many of the fundamental constants will continue infinitely."
Order says, "And my ultimate achievement will be the creation of life that will reverse the trend of entropy and collect free energy on its own will."
Chaos says, in awe, "Miraculous, really nice one there. But they must die."
And so their games continue. I don't believe they are watching us closely, although we may be a part of them. To me, the universe is much too big for them to be preoccupied with the not-so-significant actions of creatures little more advanced than the common ant. In short, it's their world, we're just living in it.
Did I observe an interesting person?
Menen was crying at work again today. She lost her husband over two months ago, but sometimes she is still wracked in grief. It's hard to know what to say to her, although I find that saying hello to her later in the day seems to help a little.
Have I heard anything funny today?
I am working on a bit with Jesus in a sanitarium.
Hobby Update
My guitar playing has steadily declined. I tried working on Paganini's No. 16 (5 has been intimidating), but it seems that I can't get the focus I once had when I was younger. I need to redirect my goals on this.
Stand-up is getting better. A lot better.
Farewell Reader, have a good day.
Hussman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)