Quote of the day: Humanities are still relevant

“So, yes, the humanities are still relevant in the 21st century — every bit as relevant as an iPhone.”

Nicholas Kristoff, “Don’t Dismiss the Humanities”, New York Times, 2014-08-13
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/14/opinion/nicholas-kristof-dont-dismiss-the-humanities.html

He discusses that thoughts of Isaiah Berlin, John Rawls, and Peter Singer and their relevance to ideas today.  He points out that “the humanities are not only relevant but also give us a toolbox to think seriously about ourselves and the world.”

The value of an iPhone is not the same as the values that guide our lives.  For the first, we need the technologists.  For the second, we need the philosophers.

Free market and education

From an undated note on my desk:

Inspired by a letter in the Wall Street Journal (1983-05-05) extolling free enterprise in education.

The free market is not an ideology in itself; it is a realization of a philosophy of diversity of ideas.

The trouble with our free enterprise is that goods and services are judged solely on how much somebody with money (or other barter) is willing to pay.

Leaky pipes and voting

Voting is as important as tending to leaky pipes.  If you don’t tend to a leaky pipe, you may a flooded basement.  If you don’t tend to your government by voting, you may have flooded streets.

This was inspired in party by John W. Gardner’s statement:

“The society which scorns excellence in plumbing as a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy: neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water.”

and by Jackie Calmes “As Numbers Grow, Single Women Emerge as Political Powerhouse”, New York Times, 2014-07-02

Calmes points out that single women are more likely not to vote, especially in mid-term elections.

For more wonderful quotes by John W. Gardner, see http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_W._Gardner.  I especially like his comment on taxes:

“Handing money back to the private sector in tax cuts and starving the public sector is a formula for producing richer and richer consumers in filthier and filthier communities. If we stick to that formula we shall end up in affluent misery.”

The Bible is unerring?

When the royal printers, Robert Barker and Martin Lucas, released their 1631 King James Bible, they dropped a "not" - "Thou shalt commit adultery".  See "To Err is Human: Typos in Literature", ABE Books.

"The Great He Bible" of 1611 has "and he went into the city" in reference to Ruth - Ruth 3:15.  However, if you check http://bible.cc/ruth/3-15.htm you find that some versions use "he" and some use "she".

If typos creep into printed Bibles, how often do mistranslations creep in?  How many mistranslations were done in ignorance and carelessness?  How many mistranslations were done deliberately to put forward a certain viewpoint that was not validated by the original text?

I think the point of Bible study should not be to take every word as literally true but to look for the greater truths among conflicting points of view.  For example, adulterers shall be put to death (Deuteronomy 22:22) compared to "he who is without sin cast the first stone", John 8:7.  One might say that forgiveness is more important than strict punishment for every act that is considered a misdeed.

Protect the unborn, forget the pain of the born children

Idaho has a "Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act" which supposedly is based on some neuroscience findings about what a fetus might feel.  It tried to convict a woman of self-abortion because she used RU-486, a legal drug bought out of state.  The case was dropped because of lack of evidence.

My question is if these pseudo-conservatives are so concerned about the pain of the unborn, why are they not also concerned about the pain of the born caused by their own wars?  Does not a drone missile cause pain and death to children?  Does not a nuclear bomb cause pain and death to children?  Think Sadako Sasaki of a thousand cranes.

For a lengthier discussion of the implications of basing decisions on limited scientific research, see "Can Neuroscience Challenge Roe v. Wade", William Egginton, New York Times, 2012-10-28.

Here we are at Irregular Blog entry 1000

This is the 1000th blog entry I've posted in the "Irregular Blog".  It's been nearly four-and-a-half years since I posted the first entry at http://magree.blogspot.com. 

It hasn't been the most popular blog around; it took a long time to even get to over 20 subscribers per day and to get two followers.

I suppose it doesn't matter in the bigger scheme.  I've gotten some ideas out of my head.  Some of you, if you didn't get new ideas in your head, you might have gotten a little different view of some ideas.  I do hope that long-time readers, if any, have had a few "Ah, hah" moments and a few chuckles.

Almost twelve years ago, newly arrived in Duluth and walking around, I was struck with the urge to write more than letters to the editor.  I told myself, if you want to write, you have to write.

I did join the Lake Superior Writers Group and wrote a few essays.  One was a collection of bear stories, but only Kyle Eller, editor-to-be of the Duluth Budgeteer, was the only one to show up that evening.

I started picking up the Northland Reader, which had ads for writers.  I called Richard Thomas, the editor, and he said I should send something in.  I sent in "Bear Stories".  Lucky me, he published it in the 1999-09-30 issue.

Every few issues, I would send something more and he generally would publish it.  Then I started submitting something for every bi-weekly issue.  Then the Northland Reader became the Reader Weekly, and I started writing weekly.  Then I was bumped down to bi-weekly.  My guess is that I had about 160 fans; that is, something like that many people told me they enjoyed the columns.

I think I wrote over 200 articles until I was bumped one too many times.

I posted many of these at my website, http://www.cpinternet.com/~mdmagree and still have a few buried on my hard drive.  I also started writing a blog at the same site.  Then I discovered Blogger and started writing entries for it.

People often asked me what I wrote about.  I replied, "What I damn well please."

I have continued that attitude with this blog.  But now I don't have to meet a deadline.  Of course, I like to post something everyday, but if I don't, I don't.  However, if I want to write two or three entries, I can.  I have no space limitation except my readers' attention span.

If you like what I write, please tell your friends.

Here's to the next 1,000 blog entries.  No, let's be ambitious, here's to the next 10,000 entries.

Second Amendment and Insurrection

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

- Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States

Many people are using this amendment to justify carrying guns to defend themselves against what they believe is the tyranny of the state.  But the amendment doesn't mention the security of the "people"; it says that a militia is necessary for the security of the state.

Moreover, Article I, Section 8, enumerating the powers of Congress states that it shall have the power

"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;"

Some of the people who want to be armed against a tyrannical state give a broad definition of the Militia, citing some law defining the Militia, that the Militia includes most adult males.

So, if those arming themselves against a tyrannical state rise up against a state they judge tyrannical, then they should obey Congress when they are called upon to put down their own insurrection.

Oh, well!  As I read somewhere lately, the Constitution is not a coherent philosophical document, but a political document full of compromises and sometimes inconsistencies.  Too many people are making it a philosophical document, selecting only those clauses that support their political beliefs.

Critical thinking about pricing disparities

Many students have complained about the high cost of books, especially at university bookstores.  I recently found out how great the disparity was between bookstore prices and online prices.

I keep telling myself to take Critical Thinking in the Philosophy Department at the University of Minnesota, Duluth.  I even got my wife to consider taking it also.

Today, I looked it up in the UMD catalog.  For the fall semester the class is full and even the waiting list is full.  Besides, I looked at the costs and it would be about $1,000 apiece to take the class, if I read the fee schedule correctly.

OK, what's the text, maybe I'll just read that.  I clicked on the bookstore link and Moore and Parker's "Critical Thinking" is $111 new and $83.25 used.  What does Abe Books charge, a consortium of used booksellers across the country?  Would you believe $1.00?  With shipping less than $4.00?

As always, there is a caveat.  Although the books may be in fair or good condition, these super-low prices are for editions from the 1990's.  If you want an edition in 2004 or 2005, then the prices with shipping are about $35.00.  If you want the latest edition (2009), then it will cost you less than $70.00.  Three were available new and one used.  That still beats $83.25.

The advantage to the newer editions may that they use examples from current events.  I would think the pre-2000 editions wouldn't have much about global warming or wars of choice.

Now to figure out when I want to read "Critical Thinking".  I think I have over 200 books on my to read list:)