I'm going to start by looking at the first and last brain-twisters. In my opinion, they're kind of the same argument. The contradiction comes from a lack of clarity in the definitions.
If an object is "unmovable," by definition that means that NOTHING can move it. Similarly, if a force is "unstoppable," that means that NOTHING can arrest its motion. Clearly these two things cannot exist in the same universe, so the hypothetical situation doesn't even make sense. It would (almost) be like saying, "What if gravity were both attractive and repulsive?" According to what we know of physics, this can't happen. The question is meaningless.
(For what it's worth, I'm working really hard here not to throw in a discussion of coordinate systems and how motion is always measured relative to something else.)
Similarly, the "omnipotent" being needs a good definition of "omnipotent." What do you mean when you ask the question? Could this omnipotent being increase its own power? In which case the conflict dissolves - the omnipotent being could create a stone it could not (initially) lift, and then increase its power until it could lift the stone. There needs to be a baseline of power against which to measure the "unliftable stone;" but this contradicts the idea of a truly "omnipotent" being. Again, the argument is meaningless without further clarification.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Philosophy
I'm generally not shy about my hatred for philosophy. I think it's because I'm scientifically-minded; I like to test theories, not just debate them. And a lot of times it seems like philosophers argue about semantics and language so abstract that what they're saying has no real meaning. Other times, it seems like philosophers argue about things that could be tested or understood scientifically.
I'm not gonna say that all philosophy is bunk; I understand that philosophy helps exercise logical and critical thinking muscles. However, a lot of times I read a philosophical argument or brainteaser and have to roll my eyes. For example, I recently read this article on "philosophical brainteasers" and they all seem to fall into one of two categories:
1) things that people think are paradoxes because they don't properly understand math and science, or
2) arguments based on contradicting definitions.
Over the next several posts, I'll go through them and explain my thoughts on each of the paradoxes. If there's a lack of science / math understanding, I'll point that out and do my best to correct the misunderstanding. If it's a semantics argument, I'll point that out too.
I realize that a lot of this is going to sound pretty snarky. And like I said, I have respect for philosophy as a means to sharpen logic and critical thinking. But I also hate it when people equate something scientific with something mystical or abstract. (I'm thinking mostly of brain twister #8. I did a facepalm as soon as I read that one. Basic misunderstanding of physics going on there.)
And yeah, it'll probably take a while for me to get through all of them. I'm not exactly regular about posting stufff...
(although as I have zero followers I don't think it's really an issue. If you've stumbled upon my blog, HI! leave a comment so I know my words aren't going into the great black hole of cyberspace.)
I'm not gonna say that all philosophy is bunk; I understand that philosophy helps exercise logical and critical thinking muscles. However, a lot of times I read a philosophical argument or brainteaser and have to roll my eyes. For example, I recently read this article on "philosophical brainteasers" and they all seem to fall into one of two categories:
1) things that people think are paradoxes because they don't properly understand math and science, or
2) arguments based on contradicting definitions.
Over the next several posts, I'll go through them and explain my thoughts on each of the paradoxes. If there's a lack of science / math understanding, I'll point that out and do my best to correct the misunderstanding. If it's a semantics argument, I'll point that out too.
I realize that a lot of this is going to sound pretty snarky. And like I said, I have respect for philosophy as a means to sharpen logic and critical thinking. But I also hate it when people equate something scientific with something mystical or abstract. (I'm thinking mostly of brain twister #8. I did a facepalm as soon as I read that one. Basic misunderstanding of physics going on there.)
And yeah, it'll probably take a while for me to get through all of them. I'm not exactly regular about posting stufff...
(although as I have zero followers I don't think it's really an issue. If you've stumbled upon my blog, HI! leave a comment so I know my words aren't going into the great black hole of cyberspace.)
Pizza
Well it's Wednesday, which means that it is the Day of Great Decision
here at work.
First, we have to decide whether or not to get a "specialty" pizza (as
opposed to plain). This requires at least 3 people, preferably 4.
Often, there are several people in the "I'll get a specialty pizza if
there are enough people, but I'm not gonna be emphatic about it."
Which of course complicates matters. And then there are the guys who
might have brought lunch, but are willing to chip in for pizza and eat
the lunch they brought on Thursday. But only if the rest of us need
another person.
Then, if it's been decided to get a specialty pizza, we have to decide
which one to get. We've never had a bad pizza, so no one really wants
to choose because there isn't a lot of strong feeling about a "best"
or "worst" to get. (There's a lot of "Does this sound good to
everyone?" "Yup sounds fine." "Or how about this one?" "Also good."
in this round.) If someone who does not normally get specialty pizza
decides to try it, we make that person choose.
FINALLY, it's time for money collection. Pizza slices are $1.50 /
slice (plain) and $2 / slice (specialty). And there's always at least
one person who recently had to go to the ATM and hasn't bought
anything since then so all they have is twenties. So we have the
great "I'll pay for everyone's pizza with my $20 if everyone gives me
what they owe" finagling, with various people trying to trade money
amongst ourselves to get the correct change to give the guy who only
has $20's. My hand to God, one of my coworkers paid in dimes one
week.
And that's the news from your Friendly Neighborhood Engineers.
UPDATE 03/17/11
Bug has illustrated this beautifully. (This has fast become one of my favorite webcomics.)
here at work.
First, we have to decide whether or not to get a "specialty" pizza (as
opposed to plain). This requires at least 3 people, preferably 4.
Often, there are several people in the "I'll get a specialty pizza if
there are enough people, but I'm not gonna be emphatic about it."
Which of course complicates matters. And then there are the guys who
might have brought lunch, but are willing to chip in for pizza and eat
the lunch they brought on Thursday. But only if the rest of us need
another person.
Then, if it's been decided to get a specialty pizza, we have to decide
which one to get. We've never had a bad pizza, so no one really wants
to choose because there isn't a lot of strong feeling about a "best"
or "worst" to get. (There's a lot of "Does this sound good to
everyone?" "Yup sounds fine." "Or how about this one?" "Also good."
in this round.) If someone who does not normally get specialty pizza
decides to try it, we make that person choose.
FINALLY, it's time for money collection. Pizza slices are $1.50 /
slice (plain) and $2 / slice (specialty). And there's always at least
one person who recently had to go to the ATM and hasn't bought
anything since then so all they have is twenties. So we have the
great "I'll pay for everyone's pizza with my $20 if everyone gives me
what they owe" finagling, with various people trying to trade money
amongst ourselves to get the correct change to give the guy who only
has $20's. My hand to God, one of my coworkers paid in dimes one
week.
And that's the news from your Friendly Neighborhood Engineers.
UPDATE 03/17/11
Bug has illustrated this beautifully. (This has fast become one of my favorite webcomics.)
Monday, March 22, 2010
Unprintable
I just read this (h/t to Nick Kristof.)
If I ever meet Rupert Murdoch, I will punch him in the face. Seriously - what is his deal? It's apparently not even a business decision:
"What is puzzling to analysts and industry executives — including some within the News Corporation — is that none of this makes much sense as a business proposition to aid The Journal, especially at a time when newspapers are struggling through a long-term financial decline. But for Mr. Murdoch, the chairman and chief executive of the company, these people say, profit is not necessarily what all this is about.
If I ever meet Rupert Murdoch, I will punch him in the face. Seriously - what is his deal? It's apparently not even a business decision:
"What is puzzling to analysts and industry executives — including some within the News Corporation — is that none of this makes much sense as a business proposition to aid The Journal, especially at a time when newspapers are struggling through a long-term financial decline. But for Mr. Murdoch, the chairman and chief executive of the company, these people say, profit is not necessarily what all this is about.
For him, newspapering is a blood sport...
...in the News Corporation’s planning discussions about the local New York section, the talk has been less about what The Journal would gain than about “killing The New York Times,” according to several people with direct knowledge of the preparations, who asked for anonymity to discuss what are supposed to be secret matters. “It’s not an economic decision,” one of them said. ..
...Alan D. Mutter, a media analyst and consultant, recently wrote on his Reflections of a Newsosaur blog that “no meaningful business advantage can be gained” from the venture, making it “nothing more than an expensive ego trip aimed at kicking the N.Y.T. while it’s down.” "
In other words, he's (something I refuse to print). He just wants to destroy The Times. No real reason - just malice.
What a (something I refuse to print).
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Archy the Cockroach
When I took a poetry class in high school, one of the poems we read was "The Lesson of the Moth" by Don Marquis. Well, we humans claim it was written by Don Marquis. Don himself claimed he had a pet cockroach, Archy, who wrote free-verse poetry by jumping up and down on the keys of a typewriter.
Today, on a whim, I googled Archy's poetry. Here are two poems I found particularly interesting. They were written around the 20's (not entirely sure), but they could have been written yesterday:
the big bad wolf
what the ants are saying
And here's the webpage on Don Marquis.
Thoughts?
Today, on a whim, I googled Archy's poetry. Here are two poems I found particularly interesting. They were written around the 20's (not entirely sure), but they could have been written yesterday:
the big bad wolf
what the ants are saying
And here's the webpage on Don Marquis.
Thoughts?
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
"Moral Hotness" - Part One
Here are the first three entries for "Guys Who Have 'Moral Hotness'". For info on what that is, see the previous post.
Name: Mr. Rogers
Why He's Awesome: I think this article in Mental Floss sums it up pretty well. From everything I've read, he was much the same person on-screen and off-screen. He genuinely cared about people, especially children, and went out of his way to make sure everyone knew that they were special.
Name: Fr. Hesburgh
Why He's Awesome: Fr. Hesburgh has an incredibly high degree of integrity. Perhaps my favorite story is how a bunch of people were invited to a rally initiated by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. A lot of them were afraid to go, but Fr. Hesburgh jumped right in his car and went to the demonstration. He's said that he didn't think twice about it - even though times were turbulent and it might have been a dangerous thing to do, it was the right thing to do. There's an awesome picture of him, arms linked with Dr. King, both of them singing at the demonstration.
Name: Nick Kristof
Why He's Awesome: In a world where the "news" often degenerates into celebrity gossip, one can always count on Nick Kristof to shine a spotlight on issues of importance. His editorials discuss human rights issues with anecdotes, statistics, and impassioned persuasion. This is a man who has been to the far reaches of the globe and wants his audience to understand how other people live. What I like best about his articles is that he also includes ways for his readers to help in a given situation. He'll provide information on organizations working to help those living in dire poverty, or suffering malnutrition, or whatever the issue of the day is. Through his writing, it's easy to see that he sincerely cares about people and wants to make the world a little bit better.
I've often said, "As long as there are people who care, I'll try not to worry too much." These men (and others like them) are the reason I sleep well at night. I know that there are men of integrity, compassion, and strong moral fiber who live the highest virtues. These men are an inspiration. And I'll take a Morally Hot guy over a Hollywood Hunk of the Week any day.
Name: Mr. Rogers
Why He's Awesome: I think this article in Mental Floss sums it up pretty well. From everything I've read, he was much the same person on-screen and off-screen. He genuinely cared about people, especially children, and went out of his way to make sure everyone knew that they were special.
Name: Fr. Hesburgh
Why He's Awesome: Fr. Hesburgh has an incredibly high degree of integrity. Perhaps my favorite story is how a bunch of people were invited to a rally initiated by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. A lot of them were afraid to go, but Fr. Hesburgh jumped right in his car and went to the demonstration. He's said that he didn't think twice about it - even though times were turbulent and it might have been a dangerous thing to do, it was the right thing to do. There's an awesome picture of him, arms linked with Dr. King, both of them singing at the demonstration.
Name: Nick Kristof
Why He's Awesome: In a world where the "news" often degenerates into celebrity gossip, one can always count on Nick Kristof to shine a spotlight on issues of importance. His editorials discuss human rights issues with anecdotes, statistics, and impassioned persuasion. This is a man who has been to the far reaches of the globe and wants his audience to understand how other people live. What I like best about his articles is that he also includes ways for his readers to help in a given situation. He'll provide information on organizations working to help those living in dire poverty, or suffering malnutrition, or whatever the issue of the day is. Through his writing, it's easy to see that he sincerely cares about people and wants to make the world a little bit better.
I've often said, "As long as there are people who care, I'll try not to worry too much." These men (and others like them) are the reason I sleep well at night. I know that there are men of integrity, compassion, and strong moral fiber who live the highest virtues. These men are an inspiration. And I'll take a Morally Hot guy over a Hollywood Hunk of the Week any day.
Monday, September 14, 2009
"Moral Hotness"
I was thinking the other day about how unfair it seems that people with good looks get all the good publicity. Shouldn't other traits be more important? Case in point: once a year, People Magazine dedicates an issue to the "hottest" men. But I think having integrity and moral fiber is more important than being "hot."
So, I think I'll do a blog entry on men who are "morally hot." And, I'm asking for submissions! (I have two of my own who are making the list.) Here are the rules:
1) For now, it's men only. I will probably do a post at some point in the future on morally hot women. But now is not that time.
2) The man you nominate does not need to be physically attractive! Don't feel sheepish about nominating someone because you know he's not particularly cute. That's not what this is about. Moral hotness is the key.
3) The man you nominate must be currently alive. Going through the annals of history for morally hot men would take far too long.
4) The man you nominate must be nominally famous. Maybe your next-door-neighbor saves orphaned kittens after his day-job performing heart transplants on refugee children from Franistan. Don't nominate him. (Bonus points if you get the "Franistan" reference.) What qualifies as "nominally famous"? It's kind of subjective. If your guy has a fan page on facebook, that makes him at least nominally famous. Ditto if the New York Times has mentioned him (however briefly). You can always provide a reason with your submission as to why your guy should be considered.
5) Include in your submission a brief explanation of why your guy is morally hot. It can be an anecdote, a brief biography, whatever. If you have a picture of him, include it.
So, I think I'll do a blog entry on men who are "morally hot." And, I'm asking for submissions! (I have two of my own who are making the list.) Here are the rules:
1) For now, it's men only. I will probably do a post at some point in the future on morally hot women. But now is not that time.
2) The man you nominate does not need to be physically attractive! Don't feel sheepish about nominating someone because you know he's not particularly cute. That's not what this is about. Moral hotness is the key.
3) The man you nominate must be currently alive. Going through the annals of history for morally hot men would take far too long.
4) The man you nominate must be nominally famous. Maybe your next-door-neighbor saves orphaned kittens after his day-job performing heart transplants on refugee children from Franistan. Don't nominate him. (Bonus points if you get the "Franistan" reference.) What qualifies as "nominally famous"? It's kind of subjective. If your guy has a fan page on facebook, that makes him at least nominally famous. Ditto if the New York Times has mentioned him (however briefly). You can always provide a reason with your submission as to why your guy should be considered.
5) Include in your submission a brief explanation of why your guy is morally hot. It can be an anecdote, a brief biography, whatever. If you have a picture of him, include it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
