Topics For a Candle-Lit Dinner

Enough with the silliness - on to serious things!

Thu, 04 Jan 2007 15:04:26 GMT

From the Department of Arts & Letters - (The Thousand Monkeys at a Thousand Typewriters Working Group):

I'm crafting a new short story to tide me over between completing this year's NaNoWriMo novel (expecting to complete by the end of the month, if the Fates allow), and next year's.

What's it about?

A firm that provides mediation services between for supernatural beings. This goes anywhere from convincing an overreacting witch to drop a curse against a normal dude, to (perhaps) negotiating a cease-fire during Ragnarok. Heh. I'm such a nerd.

I'll let you know how it goes.

Now, back to the levity!

More "teasers" from the philosophy department

Tue, 02 Jan 2007 18:20:43 GMT

Similar to last post. This came to why while I was on the verge of getting to sleep- that is seriously the best time for thinking. This stuff is not really new - I'm sure other philosophers have done it before, I just can't think of names - but I'm moving it along towards the spiritual spectrum.

"There are three things that humans can perceive about a phenomenon, whether it is external to them or internal. The first is “how”, that is, the way in which a phenomenon is occurring- “The sun appears to be rising”. The second is “what” – the way that a phenomenon affects the observer. “The sun rises, and the warmth and light are pleasant to me.” Finally, there is the “Why”, the Meaning – with a capital M – which is the relevance of the phenomenon not just to the observer, but part of the larger framework.

The “Why” does not reveal itself in any apparent way - it must be sought out. If there is a “Why”, it is only available, as far as we know, to human beings. Other beings have gotten the “how,” and most of them can deal with the “what” – in that they understand how to function in the world, and most develop some conception of what a thing is to them.

Other creatures do not seem to ask “Why,” as in: “What is the relevance of this phenomenon not only to me, but to all other experience?” We, humankind, feel uniquely empty without asking that question – and it is there, in the Why, not in the How (and only a little bit in the What) that the modern seeking of God begins."

It's That Time of Year Again

Mon, 25 Dec 2006 06:09:15 GMT

I am working my way towards writing out and explaining my philosophy of the way I practice Judaism... (I'm not certain of the difference between philosophy and religion, so I'm hesitant to draw any distinctions myself right now). Ultimately, I'm going to use that document (generally written on my own time, no worries!) to power next year's novel for NaNoWriMo.

However, as things get worked out, I will be posting "teasers" here- so we'll start at the first question, the underpinning of the way I interact with God:

"If God will not punish or reward you for your actions on Earth, what relationship would you seek with the Divine?"

That's where it starts- and I have a lot of fun going on from there. I would be happy to discuss it here with anyone who is interested- it will help me out, I'm sure.

A Graduate School Paradox - Someone call Zeno!

Fri, 08 Dec 2006 06:54:46 GMT

This goes beyond my powers to reconcile, so I place it out in the aether for others to examine.

Imagine, if you will, that you are a grad student filled with a tremendous quantity of productive energy, gained from a few hours of (seemingly) well deserved slacking off. Why is it, then, that the moment you actually turn from your leisure towards some research work, you are INSTANTLY drained of all motivation? Truly, it is as though I am covering half the distance towards productivity with each iteration. At this rate, I'll get there... never.

(Or, you know, tomorrow. There's always tomorrow).

Some number-crunching

Wed, 06 Dec 2006 20:26:43 GMT

Let me lay a little statistics on y'all:

A) Reports Written: 1

B) Dawns Observed: 1
...though this is disingenuous, since I went to bed last night after working hard for a few hours

C) Coffee Consumed: .83

D) Presentations Prepared: 1 honkin' awesome one.

E) Chutzpah Possessed: Amazingly Much

Bring me my sword, shield, and stallion- and a got-damn barrel of mead. It's Pillage Time.

Wed, 06 Dec 2006 02:32:13 GMT

So... It's been more than a year. Fine.

I post this here, so that you might follow my fate - (and I always do this at the end of the semester, don't I?)

I came into this evening thinking all I had to do was put together a powerpoint presentation for tomorrow.

Not so!

I have to write... A FORMAL RESEARCH PROPOSAL. With... a bunch of prelim research that I have NOT done up to this point. PLUS the presentation. This is old school, baby. This is how I used to roll in undergrad. This is where the magic happens.

Ladies and gents... Grad School is Hard. That's the motto. Grad School is Hard.

Had that moment where all the blood went to my face and gut and I wanted to throw up... but now I've had a moment to re-organize. Like I say- bring me my armor, my weapon, and my amber, liquid, honey-based courage. I'm going into battle.

Here's the chant for tonight:
"It's 12 hours until work, we've got a full cup of coffee, half a research project, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses.
Hit it."

A Deal:

Mon, 12 Dec 2005 06:12:39 GMT

In the spirit of giving that has come to be associated with this time of year, I offer a very generous deal. It is directed at the various... zealots, True Believers, people with too much time on their hands, and Church Ladies... whoever it may be, that are making a bigger stink this year than in previous years about making Christmas the national holiday, and Christianity the national religion.

So, here's the deal:

You quit trying to force your Christian holidays on the country, and I mean really quit, give it up for good, and I'll quit trying to force my Jewish ethics on said country. Like, y'know, helping poor people to get out of poverty, and being fair to your employees.

Cool? Cool. I'd shake on it, but I just washed my hands.

-Evan

Beating an Ugly Horse

Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:57:28 GMT

So- Harriet Miers looks to be juuuuust about up the creek. I mean, for the Democrats not to like you, if you are a judicial appointee under a Republican administration, well that's just par for the course. But for your own PARTY to say thee nay? That takes talent.

Thus, now that she is nearly completely out of favor, and I have little to fear by way of reprisals in my future, I humbly offer this piece of art. It's called: "Coincidence? I think not!"

meet

We Report. You Decide.

Dear Tom DeLay

Wed, 28 Sep 2005 19:39:32 GMT

Dear "The Hammer"-

You got NAILED

I hope this is the first of many. I want all you con-artists, you scammers, you rule benders-and-breakers, out of my Congress. All of you who make it so that I feel like I have to apologize whenever I say something nice about the government... get thee hence. You know there's dirt on you, somewhere. And if your laughing, prancing King can be felled, so too are you all subject to justice.

Take note, Maryland Governor Bobby Ehrlich - you studied at Tom DeLay's feet. Take care your own little piccadillos don't get lit up before you have a chance to be turned out of office by the voters.

Love always,
-Evan

Rehnquist

Sun, 04 Sep 2005 04:52:29 GMT

Two Open Letters tonight:

Dear Chief Justice Rehnquist: In a way, I'm sorry to see you go. I didn't agree with you very often, but I appreciate your respect for the institution of the court. You may have made some poor decisions, but at least you relished the fact that it was within the bounds of your consitutional power to make them. I'm sorry you've died, and I hope you didn't suffer very much.
I'll be even sorrier to see you go if the President bumps up Mr. Scalia or Mr. Thomas, they who are not even worthy of the title "Justice", to fill your spot. Which brings me to my second letter:

Dear Mr. Bush:

Your popularity is sinking apace with the city of New Orleans. You've already got a beastly nomination fight on your hands with Judge Roberts, in a Congress that is going to be caught up in trying to save the flooded mess that comes from cutting FEMA and stretching the Guard like so much Silly Putty. You've burned every bridge for miles, and dammed every river. Chief Justice Rehnquist is dead. Perhaps, now, you'll consider nominating someone who is truly acceptable to most Americans and will sail through the nomination process? Maybe your extreme right-wing backers don't need to be catered to this time. Lord knows you've been trying, and it hasn't made you many friends with the rest of the country. Take this opportunity to go from Mr. Bush to President Bush. Show some sensitivity, and maybe some of that political guile you and your friends used to wield with ease. Make life easier on everyone, at least in this case.

With hope and respect in abeyance,
-Evan Perlman

Disco Stu... Feels Right At Home

Sat, 03 Sep 2005 00:13:49 GMT

Allll right, my friends. With the general condition of things in this country (As Chappelle would say: "Republicans are Fvckin' Up!"), I thought we all might enjoy a bit of happiness. And what, in this nation of ours, makes people as happy as Nostalgia?

SO - I proudly present to you...

I LOVE THE 70'S - ECONOMIC ANALYSIS EDITION

For those of you who missed out on the 24-hour party that was the 1970's economy, I bid you shed no tear! Stagflation, the life of that party, is back!

BEHOLD!

Stagnating economy, StagFlation like we had in the 70's, observable now in the following ways:

Median houshold income has stayed even (about 44k/yr) since 2001, as CPI (consumer price index) has increased.

Poverty rate, as a side-effect, is now up 3 or 4 points to 12.1%. Which means, folks, that more than 1 in 10 people in this country are under the GOVERNMENT's definition of poor, which is a LOT lower than a respectable "living wage," especially in a lot of housing-bubbled markets.

Job growth has been well below where it would need to be to replace jobs lost at the beginning of the recession, and more importantly, the TYPES of jobs are vastly different. Middle-management, customer service, and manufacturing jobs are being replaced, mostly, by minimum-wage unskilled jobs, or by high-tech which can only absorb so much of the available labor pool. This results in a high rate of UNDERemployment, which is partly responsible for a trend of decreasing salaries for new college graduates.

Also, the unemployment rate doesn't take into account the number of people who have been laid off and have temporarily given up on looking for work, which would bump the unemployment rate up another 1 or 2 percent (big numbers, actually).

Let's not forget the combination of rising interest rates (because Greenspan the Shill is totally past-due for being put out to pasture), and this new oil shock, which was the only piece missing from a repeat of the 70's.

Bush is term-limited in '08, but we can still put Ford or Carter back in, and start wearing bell-bottoms, chest hair and gold medallions. I'm going to go listen to the BeeGee's.

Stayin' Alive,
-Evan

Faith

Thu, 01 Sep 2005 20:08:50 GMT

A quick thought on the use and mode of Faith, following my brief explanation earlier of my spiritual theories:

There are various definitions and uses of Faith in the wide spectrum of religious practices, but in the mode of Partnership with G-d, I think it would function in a more subtle way like this:

We have been given ownership of (and responsibility for) the world, and a tremendous capacity for learning and understanding. This means that we have the theoretical ability to, at some point, have perfect comprehension of the mechanics of the natural world, assuming we develop sufficiently sophisticated tools to observe and affect it.

Prior to that point, though, we need some way to act confidently in the world and go about our business of creating the harmony and peace that we're intended to. In a simple example, were we still at the point of science where we did not comprehend what made the sun rise each morning, we would need some way to be sure that it WOULD rise, or else we'd huddle forever by the fires in our cave, and become paralyzed. Having faith in G-d's ability to power the world as we observe it acts as a fine placeholder until we understand the mechanics of G-d's presence in the world.

Faith, in this mode, is reassurance, a comfort that allows us to do the holy work of this partnership.

(For anyone who isn't interested in spiritual posts, I apologize. I'm on a kick right now, I'll get back to political commentary/satire soon enough.)

More on ID

Thu, 01 Sep 2005 17:23:31 GMT

So, I think I need to revise my position a li'l bit, as per two posts ago. I think I'm not at all affiliated with Intelligent Design, at least not when it's defined as: "the belief that life is so intricate that only a supreme being could have designed it," (Laurie Goodstein, NY Times National section, Aug 31).

I'm going to go back now, and explain that my religious theory is not, in any way, Intelligent Design, (Caps or not). And really, now that I have the chance to think about it, I realize that it's the "Design" part of the phrase that really bugs me. I find it strangely unfulfilling, thinking that life has been designed towards a specific end. Here's why:

My perspective has it that humanity and G-d are involved in a contract with each other (and there's precedent for this, there are human-divine contracts all over the Torah). We agreed to be G-d's partners in creation, helping in the day-to-day activities that progress the world. In return, we were given absolute free will (within the bounds of physics, etc) and mastery over Earth, though our ability to utilize it remains constrained to our level of scientific understanding.

So Intelligent Design, in one respect, contradicts the idea of free will: if there is already an end-point established, a goal for creation, then we lose our ability to choose because G-d's immediate intervention will inevitably lead us there.
In another respect, it violates the mastery we were given, because at some point the miracles of G-d and the miracles of man's science will start bumping into each other. In other words, once we obtained the ABILITY to cross-breed and manipulate genes, we would be rubbing up against G-d's alleged activity of picking and choosing which mutations are advantageous. It's kind of a too-many-cooks-in-the-kitchen thing.

Strict creationism, by the way, is right out: the idea that "living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time" doesn't stand up in any arena, scientific OR religious. Observation of, say, a new breed of dog would easily indicate the possibility of new bloodlines, and by extrapolation the creation of new species. Clearly, living things alter, and have altered. In a religious mode, if everything is now as it was created, and it was created "perfect" (through whatever definition of perfect), then messianic times should have begun instantly with the creation of the world, and continued on from there.

And, a last thought: If there is not a pre-defined goal, which has been intelligently designed, where do messianic times, (the World to Come) fit into this? It depends- I can't speak for the Apocolyptic view, where an end-time is suddenly foisted on the earth, leading to a new and radically different messianic period (and if that's the case, why bother developing life on Earth towards that point- why not just make it start?)
Jewishly, though, there is room for the vaguer goal. Jewish messianic thought is organic and bottom-up. The Messiah functions as, essentially, confirmation that we've done a good job.

Essentially, G-d is not forcing us towards any one right path, but has given us the tools and the ability to seek a harmony with the world and with G-d. Ideas of time here get complicated, but essentially the "goal" is to stretch the momentary time that humans inhabit into the timeless harmony G-d inhabits (not mutually exclusive, but this is a conceptual construct), and G-d is our partner as a motivator, a consultant, and a way to evaluate our own path.
Or, put another way (because in Judaism there's always another way to put things) G-d has a general idea of where he'd like creation to get to, but the process of actually getting there is up to us, because we are the moment-to-moment side of the partnership.

Wrapping it all up, then, Intelligent Design conflicts with the way I roll, which is more like Helping the World to Enlighten Itself.
I probably didn't explain it well, so please post questions or comments.

Quick interlude

Wed, 31 Aug 2005 15:49:47 GMT

Just thought I'd share this, one of those lame personality-test things I took to kill time. Because it kind of made me laugh.

What Famous Leader Are You?
personality tests by similarminds.com

Tony, I guess you're right. I am a mutated dwarf.

Be back later with more politics!

Different Approaches to Intelligent Design

Wed, 31 Aug 2005 02:46:24 GMT

All right- with the publication of an op-ed piece in the NY Times today, called "Show Me The Science", I got to thinking. The piece was a discussion of the role of intelligent design in scientific debate. For those of you who can't read it at this link: Show Me The Science , I have pasted in a paragraph or two that give you the salient points.

"With evolution, however, it is different. The fundamental scientific idea of evolution by natural selection is not just mind-boggling; natural selection, by executing God's traditional task of designing and creating all creatures great and small, also seems to deny one of the best reasons we have for believing in God. So there is plenty of motivation for resisting the assurances of the biologists. Nobody is immune to wishful thinking. It takes scientific discipline to protect ourselves from our own credulity, but we've also found ingenious ways to fool ourselves and others. Some of the methods used to exploit these urges are easy to analyze; others take a little more unpacking.
"Brilliant as the design of the eye is, it betrays its origin with a tell-tale flaw: the retina is inside out. The nerve fibers that carry the signals from the eye's rods and cones (which sense light and color) lie on top of them, and have to plunge through a large hole in the retina to get to the brain, creating the blind spot. No intelligent designer would put such a clumsy arrangement in a camcorder, and this is just one of hundreds of accidents frozen in evolutionary history that confirm the mindlessness of the historical process."

The article is not just a refutation of intelligent design, but also of the way it's attempting to enter into the public sphere.
"Instead, the proponents of intelligent design use a ploy that works something like this. First you misuse or misdescribe some scientist's work. Then you get an angry rebuttal. Then, instead of dealing forthrightly with the charges leveled, you cite the rebuttal as evidence that there is a "controversy" to teach." etc.

Based on this, I've decided to chat on the issue from a few perspectives, in keeping with the theme of my posts, politics and religion.

1) Politics:
This, to me, is one of those examples of a group being really good at shaping the dialogue, claiming the message, whatever. Basically, it goes like this:
Pollster: "Excuse me, Mrs. Joe American: Would you like your children to learn about creation or intelligent design, which are in line with your own religious convictions?"
M J A: "Yes"
Pollster: "Well, isn't it awful that the school board won't let it be taught as fact, even though you believe it's true?"
M J A: "Yes, by gum!"
Pollster: "So, do you think evolution should be taught in schools?"
M J A: "I do, by crackey! I do!"

And then, the last question gets posted on CNN, MSNBC, or Fox (in bigger letters). Now, I'm NOT saying the poll goes like that, but that is what is in most people's minds when they get to that last question, which I believe is a result of a skewed national debate. The question I'd like to see asked is this:

Pollster: "Given that there is a tradition of separating church and state in this country, and given that you are TOTALLY free to instruct YOUR child in whatever belief system works for you: do you think that creation, a RELIGIOUS belief, should be taught in SECULAR public school?"
M J A: "Ah, well, gosh, Jim, no. Not when I think of it that way."

Because, Mary-Ann Faithful, you and I can instruct our kids in ANYTHING we want, when they are home. Even a belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.In fact, we can even send them to a religious school, where they will be taught our beliefs as fact. No problem. But this is a secular public school, and evolution is science qua science, testable, contradictable, etc, and creation is religion. Ultimately, the school doesn't care about if it's right or wrong- science doesn't do Truth (capital T), but Observation and Experiment. That's really the end of that.

2) Religion: Intelligent Design, or How The Discovery Institute Jacked My Ride
This is a really long discussion, and I'm suddenly pretty tired, so let me break it down in outline form:
I. Intelligent Design Proponents
A. The Discovery Institute believes in Intelligent Design
B. I believe in intelligent design.
C. Those are not, by any means, the same thing.
i. The DI says that Intelligent Design (capitalized) is a competitive theory alternative to evolution that can explain the sorts
of changes we see as the result of the hand of an intelligent designer. No offense to them, but it's basically creationism
made more palatable.
ii. The EP (me) says that intelligent design (not caps) is not a competitive theory, or science at all, but is a completely
religious and theological view that is contemplated in concert with observable scientific evolution.

II. Evan's Intelligent Design Logic
A. Evolution is, over time, a process by which creatures, species, and ultimately all living things perfect themselves.
B. G-d's motivating energy in the world is, at its most basic, a drive towards a new level of perfection.
C. G-d must operate in the world through some manner or another, whether comprehensible to current scientific knowledge or not.
i. Even if we can explain the entire mechanics of evolution, it does not, to me, negate the presence of G-d in evolution.
D. Therefore, I feel reasonably safe saying that G-d "likes" evolution, approves of it, and powers its continuance, in a manner
manifested by the process that we are still struggling to describe and fully understand.

I have no problem not teaching this in school. It's what I believe, it's what I'll probably tell my kids, though they're free to learn other things. It ain't science. It's just my philosophy.

That's all I've got for tonight- tomorrow is my plan to fight back and re-take the message.
I'm going to go evolve something useful. I say "Bah!" to opposable thumbs. Give me built-in side-view mirrors!

Please comment, I'd like to discuss

The Start of the Beginning

Thu, 25 Aug 2005 21:11:06 GMT

Hi friends:

I think I've figured out how to format this blog, if I ever want to become mega-famous. I'm just gonna divide it into two sections, Politics & Religion, and whenever I post it will be on one or the other, or (as long as the current political climate holds) both, in a topical manner.

So, for today:

POLITICS:

Item 1: My secret lovers in BRAC decided to close Walter Reed Army Hospital today. Combined with their decision to close Ft. Monmouth yesterday, and their probable axing of many of the teaching centers, this means that: The Armed Services are reluctant to prepare or train their soldiers prior to war, or to treat the kinds of injuries that unprotected rookies tend to suffer. That's great.

Item 2: I CALL DIBS ON THIS IDEA!!!!
Assuming that gas prices remain as skull-f***ingly high as they are now, or aspire to even greater celestial records, this is my plan for local organizers on Election Day, November 7 2006. Ready? CAR-POOLS.
Check this signage out: "Gas Prices Too High to Drive? Car Pool to Polls and Thank the Republicans."
Clearly it needs work, but I think I've struck gold. Remember, DIBS!

That's all for now. See you tomorrow.

Oh BRAC, the blood of your brother cries out to me from the soil.

Wed, 24 Aug 2005 15:46:22 GMT

Brac. Brac, brac, brac... (Base Realignment and Closing Commission)

You went ahead and closed Fort Monmouth, in my home state of New Jersey. I'll quote at length from the NY Times article on the subject.

"It spent a considerable amount of time discussing Fort Monmouth in New Jersey before voting to close it. Philip E. Coyle III, a commission member who was the Pentagon's top weapons evaluator for much of the 1990's, said that the Defense Department has proposed breaking up a well-established facility at the wrong time - a time of war - and sending the pieces to places not known as "world class centers of excellence."

He noted that Fort Monmouth provides daily support for the military in Iraq and Afghanistan, and played a role in homeland security, saying it supported the police and firefighters after the Sept. 11 attacks with technical support that included cameras to search for victims. Fort Monmouth pumps about $1.4 billion into New Jersey each year, according to the Army.

Officials had lobbyed to preserve the bases. New Jersey officials had argued that Fort Monmouth should be kept open because few of those civilian engineers are thought to be prepared to move to Maryland and the Army will suffer a loss of scientific talent when it is most needed.

Representative Rush Holt, whose district takes in much of Fort Monmouth, said today after the vote that the base was leading the effort to detect and disarm roadside bombs in Iraq.

Gen. James T. Hill, a retired Army officer on the panel, had said during deliberations, however, that the plan to consolidate was about the future and noted the closure of the base was the single largest army savings generator."

So okay, you want to save some money, and look to the future. And you do this... by closing one of your most successful and relevant bases. That's like saying: "Gee, I'm having a little trouble meeting my household's monthly budget. I think I'll give up my house so that I don't have to pay the mortgage."

And how do you expect this to benefit the Armed Services in the future, when it seems to me that an even more disastrous Iraq experience will lead to even poorer recruitment results in the future, which will justify more base closures in the future. "Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera." Sing it, King of Siam.

I mean... jeezy creezy... let's hope the BRAC recommendations don't make it past Congress.

(The only up-side to this decision is that the Ft. Monmouth activities would be relocated to Aberdeen Proving Ground, in my adopted home of Maryland. But it's still a stupid decision).

If you get a chance, call up Rush Holt's office (he's the Rep for Monmouth), offer your sympathies, and ask what you can do to help. (202) 225-5801.

See you later, once they've closed everything else.

Real Quick-a-like

Tue, 23 Aug 2005 17:14:40 GMT

Okay gang, it's been about 8 months since the last post, and here's the major new things:

1) I've been dating a lovely, lovely Jewess (starfishumd on livejournal) for almost all of those 8 months, actually since 5 days after my last post.

2) I've become a Doctoral student in Public Policy, at UMBC.

3) I've taken to writing on theology (with Amanda, my Jewess) in my spare time.

That's the big things. Mostly, what I'll post about are numbers 2 and 3, because they allow for extensive, insightful commentary in the realms of politics and religion, which is what I love so dearly.

So, to kick it off, here's my first bit of wisdom.

:::

Pat Robertson thinks we should assassinate Hugo Chavez. (more info at http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/23/robertson.chavez/index.html , let me know if the link stops working)
He has said it loudly, and publicly. Now, I'm not familiar with the arcane laws of the Hague, but is there any way that this qualifies as international terrorism? Goodness, I hope so.

:::

K, that's all for now. More fun things later, a lot of long, project-related posts. And maybe a collectively-written series of kinda-almost superhere stories.

Bye for now!