The Whale of Ignorance
Monday, February 28, 2005
Coincident with Larry Summers, a new theme in the liberal elite internet echo-chamber: the general crappiness of undergraduate education at big name universities (read: Harvard) (and the comparative value of the elite liberal arts colleges, which I buy into just a little bit):
From Slate: "If you want to impress a shopkeeper in Yemen, by all means go to Harvard. If you want the best education for the money, you might want to consider Swarthmore or Williams."
From The New York Review of Books"Under these circumstances, one might expect to see students fleeing to colleges whose sole mission is teaching undergraduates. Fine colleges such as Swarthmore, Amherst, and Williams, which have significant endowments and high academic standards, do indeed have considerable drawing power. Yet these are small and relatively fragile institutions"
From The Atlantic: "Empty seats in the various halls and auditoriums multiply as the semester rattles along, until rooms that were full for the opening lecture resemble the stadium of a losing baseball team during a meaningless late-August game. " ¶ 6:09 PM 1 comments
From Slate: "If you want to impress a shopkeeper in Yemen, by all means go to Harvard. If you want the best education for the money, you might want to consider Swarthmore or Williams."
From The New York Review of Books"Under these circumstances, one might expect to see students fleeing to colleges whose sole mission is teaching undergraduates. Fine colleges such as Swarthmore, Amherst, and Williams, which have significant endowments and high academic standards, do indeed have considerable drawing power. Yet these are small and relatively fragile institutions"
From The Atlantic: "Empty seats in the various halls and auditoriums multiply as the semester rattles along, until rooms that were full for the opening lecture resemble the stadium of a losing baseball team during a meaningless late-August game. " ¶ 6:09 PM 1 comments
Thursday, February 24, 2005
Where do people get the idea that the US was founded on Christian principles? Intelligent design is similarly stupid and in need of burial -- though I think it's not as dangerous as this Christian nation myth -- but at least it has its roots in a once plausible theory about human origins. Brooke Adams has a succinct rebuttal of this increasingly popular and stupid claim in The Nation -- here's an excerpt:
"In 1797 our government concluded a "Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, or Barbary," now known simply as the Treaty of Tripoli. Article 11 of the treaty contains these words:
As the Government of the United States...is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion--as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity of Musselmen--and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
This document was endorsed by Secretary of State Timothy Pickering and President John Adams. It was then sent to the Senate for ratification; the vote was unanimous. It is worth pointing out that although this was the 339th time a recorded vote had been required by the Senate, it was only the third unanimous vote in the Senate's history. There is no record of debate or dissent. The text of the treaty was printed in full in the Philadelphia Gazette and in two New York papers, but there were no screams of outrage, as one might expect today." ¶ 4:13 PM 0 comments
"In 1797 our government concluded a "Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, or Barbary," now known simply as the Treaty of Tripoli. Article 11 of the treaty contains these words:
As the Government of the United States...is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion--as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity of Musselmen--and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
This document was endorsed by Secretary of State Timothy Pickering and President John Adams. It was then sent to the Senate for ratification; the vote was unanimous. It is worth pointing out that although this was the 339th time a recorded vote had been required by the Senate, it was only the third unanimous vote in the Senate's history. There is no record of debate or dissent. The text of the treaty was printed in full in the Philadelphia Gazette and in two New York papers, but there were no screams of outrage, as one might expect today." ¶ 4:13 PM 0 comments
Tuesday, February 22, 2005
Keys' thoughts on band names and my screwing around on Friendster got me thinking that if I were in a band, it would be called "The Furies" or "Socrates's Toga". Our set would consist of covers of "Common People", "Purple Rain", "Gimme the Loot" and "A Love Supreme". Our lead singer and guitarist would be a woman - a fiery redhead. Our keyboardist would be a Japanese jazz-pianist. Our bassist would be a goofy white guy, he'd be at least 6'5'' and prone to injuring himself. I would play the drums and rap on "Gimme the Loot". We would wear togas. And we would be too cool to talk to the other bands. Sorry, that's just how we would be. And I'd have to get "THUG LIFE" tatted on my chest. That's the one tattoo that I've always thought would be inexplicably awesome. But I'd have to get a Bowflex and commit some felonies before I could pull that one off.
¶ 10:38 PM 1 comments
Monday, February 21, 2005
Y'know those restaurants you pass everyday that don't do any business? The ones that make you say, "that's gotta be a front for something"? Well, according to the New York Times it may turn out to be the case for Rice to Riches, a trendy-ish rice pudding store just north of Little Italy that's allegedly been used to launder money for the owner's illegal gambling ring. It's two blocks from my sister's place, and I'd wondered how it stayed open, though, sadly, I never wondered if it was a front for anything.
¶ 10:28 PM 0 comments
¶ 10:28 PM 0 comments
Thursday, February 17, 2005
I encountered this classic criticism of the moral-shortsightedness of the emotions by Adam Smith (yes, the venerable economist) from "On Universal Benevolence" while reading Martha Nussbaum's _Upheavals of Thought_ , which struck me particularly because it accurately anticipates my own (and, I assume, your) lack of *feeling* about the tsunami disaster, et al.:
"Let us suppose that the great empire of China, with all its myraids of inhabitants, was suddenly swallowed up by an earthquake, and let us consider how a man of humanity in Europe, who had no sort of connexion with that part of the world, would be affected upon receiving inelligence of the dreadful calamity. He would, I miagine, first of all, express very strongly his sorrow for the misfortune of that unhappy people, he would make many melancholy reflections upon the precariousness of human life, and the vanity of all the labours of man, which could thus be annihilated in a moment... and when all this fine philosophy was over, when all these human sentiments had been once fairly expressed, he would pursue his business or his pleasure with the same ease and tranquility, as if no such accident had happened. The most frivolous disaster which could befal hismself would occasion a more real disturbance. If he was to lose his little finger to-morrow, he would not sleep to-night; but, provided he never saw them, he will snore with the more profound sincerity over the ruin of a hundred millions of his brethren, and the destruction of that immense multitude seems planly an object less intersting to him, than this paltry misfortune of his own." ¶ 12:51 AM 0 comments
"Let us suppose that the great empire of China, with all its myraids of inhabitants, was suddenly swallowed up by an earthquake, and let us consider how a man of humanity in Europe, who had no sort of connexion with that part of the world, would be affected upon receiving inelligence of the dreadful calamity. He would, I miagine, first of all, express very strongly his sorrow for the misfortune of that unhappy people, he would make many melancholy reflections upon the precariousness of human life, and the vanity of all the labours of man, which could thus be annihilated in a moment... and when all this fine philosophy was over, when all these human sentiments had been once fairly expressed, he would pursue his business or his pleasure with the same ease and tranquility, as if no such accident had happened. The most frivolous disaster which could befal hismself would occasion a more real disturbance. If he was to lose his little finger to-morrow, he would not sleep to-night; but, provided he never saw them, he will snore with the more profound sincerity over the ruin of a hundred millions of his brethren, and the destruction of that immense multitude seems planly an object less intersting to him, than this paltry misfortune of his own." ¶ 12:51 AM 0 comments
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
Having grown up in NYC and gone to Swarthmore, I have no college sports allegiances, but I'm thinking of adopting as my college football team whichever program hires Norm Chow as head coach, which should happen if the Titans have a good 2005. And I'll root for the Titans along with the Giants next year.
¶ 3:33 PM 0 comments
Monday, February 14, 2005
"There's nothing more interesting than a wall behind which something is happening." -- Victor Hugo, from an article on "The Gates" in the New York Times.
¶ 8:33 PM 0 comments
Saturday, February 12, 2005
From a radio interview with the recently deceased Arthur Miller, "Willy is trying to become great without being great, which is what most of us are doing or dreaming about doing."
¶ 10:14 AM 0 comments
Tuesday, February 08, 2005
A not-so-interesting discussion of the use of the term 'evil' in forensic psychology in the Times today...
A fairly standard thought in philosophy is that an evil act is one that is done with full recognition of the act's wrongness. I mention this because I have intentionally engaged in an evil act recently, to make sure that my hunch that one can do so without guilt was correct (this has some important philosophical ramifications). I stole something, knowing that it was wrong. And I didn't feel guilty afterwards. And I'm pretty confident that I could kill an innocent person (which, unlike petty theft, definitely could not be justified by philosophical curiousity) without feeling guilt afterwards. I wouldn't, because it's wrong, but I wouldn't feel guilty if I did either. And I don't think this makes me a psychopath. Just in case you were wondering. I mean, there's no chance I'll ever do it -- I promise -- but guilt plays no role in that conclusion whatsoever.
¶ 4:55 PM 0 comments
A fairly standard thought in philosophy is that an evil act is one that is done with full recognition of the act's wrongness. I mention this because I have intentionally engaged in an evil act recently, to make sure that my hunch that one can do so without guilt was correct (this has some important philosophical ramifications). I stole something, knowing that it was wrong. And I didn't feel guilty afterwards. And I'm pretty confident that I could kill an innocent person (which, unlike petty theft, definitely could not be justified by philosophical curiousity) without feeling guilt afterwards. I wouldn't, because it's wrong, but I wouldn't feel guilty if I did either. And I don't think this makes me a psychopath. Just in case you were wondering. I mean, there's no chance I'll ever do it -- I promise -- but guilt plays no role in that conclusion whatsoever.
¶ 4:55 PM 0 comments
I was teaching a section on Kuhn, and thought it would be nice to have case of incommensurability from everyday life on the table before we talked about paradigms.
Me: Has anybody seen "Annie Hall"?
[no hands go up]
Me: That's fine... can someone name a good movie that's a drama?
Student #1: Boondock Saints.
Me: That's not a drama.
Student #2: The Bourne Supremacy.
Me: Who *are* you people?
¶ 4:25 PM 0 comments
Me: Has anybody seen "Annie Hall"?
[no hands go up]
Me: That's fine... can someone name a good movie that's a drama?
Student #1: Boondock Saints.
Me: That's not a drama.
Student #2: The Bourne Supremacy.
Me: Who *are* you people?
¶ 4:25 PM 0 comments
Thursday, February 03, 2005
Malcolm Gladwell talks sports. His advice for Andy Reid: "go no-huddle at random, unpredictable points during the game -- to throw Belichick out of his comfort zone."
¶ 6:56 PM 0 comments
Apparently, there is more than one Chinese restaurant in PR (see comment below).
¶ 5:40 PM 0 comments
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
Apparently, there is only one Chinese restaurant in Puerto Rico. My sister reports that the owner used to dine at our family's restaurant.
¶ 7:48 PM 0 comments
