2975 Bits bouncing around for the past two weeks

Wednesday, June 2, 2010 (Oh Good Grief! June already?)

Where would Christianity be if Jesus got eight to fifteen years with time off for good behavior?
--New York State Senator James Donovan, speaking in support of capital punishment--

-----------------------------------------

The Bible, the Mayan calendar, and various philosophers have decided the end of the world occurs in 2012. This has been echoed and reinforced in movies. One person whose intellect I respect firmly believes it. There's a lot to argue there - the simple fact that the references are obscure, and it's fallible humans doing the interpreting, but believers tend to use the recent natural worldwide disasters as proof. Earthquakes, tsunamis, tornadoes, storms, volcanoes - so very many recent ones.

Well, there really haven't been more than ever before. It's just that now we hear about them. They've been going on for thousands of years. We just weren't aware of what was going on in the rest of the world until recently.

What does worry me is that some religion that teaches that theory will feel a responsibility to take it upon themselves to set it off. It would take a religion to so thoroughly banish common sense.

----------------------------------

The sunscreen the friend recommended arrived today (The Naked Bee). I tried it on my arms, and it was fine, no heavy feeling, no white deposit in creases, didn't paste the hairs down. Then I tried it on my face. My nose did not break out in beads of sweat. We may have a winner.

----------------------------------

Investment advice: The FAA has ruled that all aircraft must have on-board GPS by 2020. That's a lot of devices, and probably not cheap ones. Some GPS manufacturer(s) will make out like bandits, and because they are mandated, there will be no incentive to compete on prices. Unfortunately, who knows which companies will reap the gold?

----------------------------------

Trial lawyers are complaining of the "CSI effect". Jurors expect to see all kinds of swoopy evidence. They don't seem to realize that much (most!) of what they see on the TV show simply does not exist as a technology, and secondly, for what advanced technology does exist, there are very few labs, and third, those labs are very slow and not famous for reliability. Not to mention that most local police departments are not well trained in evidence collection.

So juries are letting otherwise "clearly guilty" defendants off because they didn't see evidence that in their minds, should have been there. They figure that the police must have found it, but it didn't support their theory, so they chose not to present it?

If you expect ever to be on a criminal court jury, you should read http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/050425/25csi.htm.

-------------------------------------------

This is my own theory. Men and women have vastly different concepts of what constitutes a lie.

Men seem to believe that you have to tell something that is no way true, ever, for it to be a lie. However, a statement or answer that is in some way, some special context, true, is true enough, and is not a lie.

Jay and Obie were both the most honest and moral men I've ever known (both lovers, both deceased), but even they seemed to believe this. For example, if I asked Jay, "Did you pay the electric bill?", he'd quite honestly, honest in his mind anyway, answer, "Yes." If I asked, "Did you pay this month's electric bill?", he'd quite honestly answer, "No, not yet. I'll pay it tomorrow." Note the difference in the questions. He has often paid the bill, so "Yes, I paid the bill" is true, where "Yes, I paid this month's bill" is not.

Most men will avoid conflict at all costs, and they figure what you don't know won't hurt you. They seem to feel that if they leave things out, and you believe things that are not literally true, well, that's your own fault, not theirs. They didn't lie.

Women, on the other hand, consider being misled, being allowed to believe untruths without correction, is exactly the same as being lied to. Women have a much lower line. If you know that I think you paid this month's bill based on your statement, and you don't correct that impression, then you have allowed me to believe a lie.

It's the facts not the words that matter, guys.
.

1261 Truth 2

Monday, May 21, 2007

Well, I puttered around on the internet, looking for some insight on American philosophical thoughts on truth.
I dropped in on Philosophical Pragmatism and Philosophical Pragmaticism, cringed and pulled out. That's still the murky semantic circle-jerk I remember from college philosophy.

Besides, I'm not interested in the definition of truth. I am fully aware from my court and family mediation experiences that two people can see the same object or situation, and their truthful descriptions will differ drastically. The "real" truth will probably lie between, but the version they tell IS the "real" truth for each of them, because they believe it. I'm not interested in understanding people who tell their truths as they believe it. That's nice plain ordinary folks.

What I'm curious about is people who will tell as truth something they know is not "true", but will justify it in some way as virtuous, as being what works for the greater good. Who not only reject the truth as inconvenient, but as less virtuous. I want that justification. I want to know what goes on in their minds. Pure Pragmatism doesn't do it. I want to see how they twist pragmatism.

Wandering around a bit more, I found this short but interesting essay on the irrelevance of truth: http://www.lewrockwell.com/hein/hein150.html.

In the way that one topic leads to another and one internet link leads to another, I wandered off into discussions of situation ethics, which led to Karma, which led to Tantra, which led to this: http://billyblob.com/cartoons/, the most fun. I figured that was a good place to stop.

So, I didn't find my answer, but the impetus is gone, and I don't much care any more.

Go visit BillyBlob. It's short cartoon movies, very well done. Click on the boxes on the top.
.

1260 Truth

Monday, May 21, 2007

Harvey Cormier was on some tv show this morning, and he mentioned his book, The Truth Is What Works. He described it as American philosophy, mentioned that more people should read American philosophy.

The title is confusing. Is the implication that ultimately only the truth works, or that "truth" is defined as "that which works"?

Troubling. I know people who believe the second interpretation. I try to avoid involvement with those people. Our government and politicians seem to believe it.

This goes on my "find out about it" list. Find and read a review or synopsis of the book. What is the current "American philosophy" take on truth? Find discussions.
.