The Idea Shop

It was mentioned in the google discussion that the "islam is" was possibly removed to avoid angering people. Even if that is not the case, we've seen often in current events moments of self censorship on the topic of Islam (for example, the book the Jewel of Medina or the Dutch Muhammod cartoons). What is the significance of this?

Researchers at Harvard University have discovered that our experience of pain depends on whether we think someone caused the pain intentionally. In their study, participants who believed they were getting an electrical shock from another person on purpose, rather than accidentally, rated the very same shock as more painful. Participants seemed to get used to shocks that were delivered unintentionally, but those given on purpose had a fresh sting every time.

Read the full article: Pain Hurts More If Person Hurting You Means It

My comment on this article:

It just goes to show you, pain is all in your head!  Actually, almost everything in life is all in your head.  I truly believe that if you simply learn to control your emotions, you can achieve anything you want.  The thing is, most people psych themselves out, instead of using their self-awareness to their advantage.

http://www.pinktentacle.com/2008/12/scientists-extract-images-directly-from-brain/

Well... this all spurred with my roommate telling me the school is offering rides to the Inauguration. And I said that it'll prolly be boring... who would want to go.

He was absolutely dumbfounded. Telling me how I don't get it and that i'm being absolutely ignorant to how monumental the new president is. (He is white btw... from a majority white small town in Pennsylvania... dunno if that'll effect your opinion or anything)

I was confused at this statement. I told him that I wasn't into politics and do not care about it. He goes into a tangent about how I am a minority and how this new president should be a huge step for the country. Telling me... now people (minorities) can truly mean it when they tell their children that they can be anything they want to be. So I should be joyful in this event...

I told him... yes, he is the first African-American President of the United States... but hes gonna run the country like hes any ole democrat... so I do not see it being that important to me. If there was a white obama... hes gonna run the country the same way obama is gonna run the country... and isn't the job he runs more important than his race... that's what I think about when Obama becomes president.

This was my thought process during the discussion. But he still called me being ignorant and tryin to ignore the fact that he's African-American. Telling me how it should be more important to me than him cuz I'm a minority.

It's just something I don't worry about when I think of things... and I thought the country was in the same boat.... perhaps I'm being idealistic? or perhaps ignorant? What do you guys think? Do you still consider race to be a big factor in decisions? Any other thoughts?

PS - I gave him the argument that the country has progressed for quite some time in this area... it's just now there's some proof of it. Either way... I still consider the progress itself more important than the proof cuz my own thoughts display the progress. And it's good enough for me. It wasn't enough for him.

How happy you are may depend on how happy your friends' friends' friends are, even if you don't know them at all.

And a cheery next-door neighbor has more effect on your happiness than your spouse's mood.

So says a new study that followed a large group of people for 20 years - happiness is more contagious than previously thought.

"Your happiness depends not just on your choices and actions, but also on the choices and actions of people you don't even know who are one, two and three degrees removed from you," said Nicholas Christakis, a physician and social scientist at Harvard Medical School and an author of the study, to be published Friday in BMJ, a British journal. "There's kind of an emotional quiet riot that occurs and takes on a life of its own, that people themselves may be unaware of. Emotions have a collective existence - they are not just an individual phenomenon."

Interesting stuff! You can read more here.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/20/science/20mammoth.html?scp=2&sq=mammoth&st=cse

That's right folks. We can do it, we have the technology. Well, almost. If you were too lazy to read the article, basically the idea is that pretty soon (hopefully) they will be able to recreate a a legit wooly mammoth egg and bring it to term in an elephant.

That's pretty cool. But, if they can do that, that means they can do it with neanderthals in humans (or chimps) too.

The question is, do you think we should?

On the one hand, there are a lot of good reasons to for the advancement of science.

On the other hand, humanoid cloning might present many ethical problems. Who wins?

So, as many of you know, America (as well as many other nations) has a wide range between the very rich and the very poor. Much of the wealth is held within a very small percentage of the population. Here's how John Locke justifies it:

Back in the good ole days when cavemen and dinosaurs roamed the earth, probably back in the Roosevelt administration or early 70's for you non-history majors..., people were free and equal, nobody had any natural authority over anybody else. At the same time, this liberty was freedom to do what you wished...but only within moral limits. These limits were determined by "natural law", which meant that people had duties to respect the rights of others. This social situation is affectionately known as...THE STATE OF NATURE.

Now, in this state of nature, one of our "natural rights" is our right to private property (in the sense of property referring to both possessions and to rights). Locke's famous defense for capitalism and economic inequality follows:

God-gave the earth to humanity in a sort of communistic state, where "this land was my land...this land is your land...this land was made for you and me" correctly applies. He also owns us humans, so that if we murder another person, we have "sinned" against God's private property. How does this public property turn to private ownership? By the labor theory of value. If there is an apple lying on the ground or "the public state" if you pick it up and dust it off, you have appropriated this apple for yourself by putting work into making it ready for consumption. So for Locke, labor changes the normative property status of things in the natural world: from being commonly owned, to private. A more appropriate example is farming. Land that is wild gives not much produce, but once I put my blood and sweat into making it more productive, it becomes mine. Now, nobody can take it away from me, since I have mixed my labor with the objects.

Now, some of the greedy people on here are thinking...well I could own the whole world then. That's not morally correct according to Locke, who claims that

1.) you have to leave "enough and as good" in the common property for others
2.) You can only take what you and your family can consume- you cannot take so much that "waste and spoilage" occur.

Plus, in the state of nature, you're going to have a lot of farmland you won't work and a lotta dead deer that you can't eat or preserve (after you hunted them of course)...and a whole lot of hungry, angry people against you.

So now, for the change that allows social inequality through hoarding. Before, you couldn't hoard things in nature simply because it violated the Lockean Proviso that it causes waste and spoilage. With the introduction of money, a durable-non-perishable good, we can store the value we have created through our labor in goods. Locke claims that certain people are naturally more industrious than others, going around and mixing their labor with everything. These people now have a way of saving up the resources claimed by their labor. Before, they could not pass anything on to their children above perishable goods for consumption, but now, they can pass on their accumulated imperishable wealth, giving their children a head start. Over many generations, this will tend to cause great differences in wealth between families. However, as long as there is no acquisition by force, isn't the acquisition fair at all points? If so, doesn't it justify the economic inequalities we would have now (granted that our system is flawed because of acquisition by force)?

Especially interested in arguments that tear up Locke using his own statements...so logical fallacies or problems with his original premises (things he assumes). But feel free to discuss anything related.

Working against Locke from within his own premises:
1.) This system depends upon the existence of God for property rights to occur. Who says that's a sound premise?
2.) This isn't exactly within what I have written, but Locke claims that we are allowed to defend ourselves against people who have an intent to kill us. We are allowed to kill them in this case. Yet, what is the difference between these "enemies" and our competitors? Enemies are simply competitors to a stronger degree in the state of nature. Locke tries to lessen this effect by hinting at the belief that there is an infinite supply of goods, since resources seem to just be lying around for us to pick up and mix our labor with. However, waste can only be bad if it hurts other people, meaning that resources are not unlimited. Therefore, killing a competitor prevents the rise of a potential...or even a "mini-enemy", which is justified in Lockean terms. Therefore, this either forces him to accept the fact that we can kill others and hoard in the state of nature for our own benefit, or property rights do not come as a result of labor mixing with resources.

We all use tapes to stick stuffs, how about take an X-ray picture!

http://www.nature.com/news/2008/081022/full/news.2008.1185.html

Maybe next time we can use a home-made X-ray machine, saving our time from going to hospital....but still you have to buy the film.......haha =)

Hey everybody, many of you know or know of Matt Norton. He was one of 3 great roommates of mine back in highschool and is an extraordinary influence on everybody around him. For most, college is a time where selfishness reigns supreme: some people choose to just have fun and enjoy these college years while others study hard so that they might get themselves a good job in the future. Norton decided instead to take a year off and help those in need in Louisville, Kentucky. Before I share his first update, which can be found on his facebook account, here's some background info.

Louisville, Kentucky is home to over 550,000 people (2003) *thanks ttao for correction*, making it one of the 20 biggest cities in the United States. It's in the north-central area of Kentucky (see map) and is known for it's healthcare and medical sciences. Despite the many businesses in the city, the median household income is just $28,000 compared to the nationwide average of $50,000. This leaves an incredible 17.8% of the families under the poverty line as of 1999. It's here, in a place of the greatest need where Norton is working and living for a year with the homeless. If you would like to help, please go to the bottom of this post.

October 2008

Dear Friends and Family,

I have been here now for three weeks and I love it at Jefferson Street Baptist Center. There are two male members of the Hope team, Kerry, and myself. There is one female member, Lindsey. We work down in the Day Shelter serving the homeless five days a week. Mondays are considered our “Sabbath” which is set aside to relax, rejuvenate, and have some more contemplative time with God. Wednesdays are outreach days where Kerry and I get to be intentional about spending quality time with the residents here. This week we are hosted a coffee and game day in our apartment for any resident that wanted to come. Those are the basics of the week, but every day is unique and exciting because of the good community and conversation we have.
In these few weeks I can already say that this has been a transformative experience. I have met so many wonderful people who are now becoming the faces of the “homeless” for me. During the week, besides spending time in the Day Shelter, we spend time with the Transitional and Permanent housing residents. All residents are formerly homeless, have a mental illness, and have suffered from an alcohol or drug addiction. Kerry and I eat dinner with them nearly every night conversing and deepening our friendships. They are very open about their lives and what they have done, good or bad. One of my friends comes over at least four days a week and he tells me about his past and what he’s been up to. I quickly learned he plays board games so we play Chess and Stratego together. I am so blessed to be living in this community with so many wonderful guys.
God has also blessed me with a fabulous church community. The whole Hope team goes to a church called Sojourn. The congregation is very welcoming and loving. They receive with open arms everyone from a homeless man to a rich city dweller, all age groups, all races, whatever. This body of Christ welcomes all people as Jesus would. We are also blessed to have a teaching Pastor, Daniel, who is very passionate and Christ-centered. It is very obvious during worship that Jesus is the reason we meet every Sunday. The worship atmosphere reminds me of a giant family. It rejuvenates me and helps to keep walking down God’s path. I have already met numerous members and they are willing to help in any way possible. I’ll say it again I have been very blessed.
One thing that I had not expected when I came to serve at Jefferson Street was to be witnessed to by countless men and women in the Day Shelter. Now daily, many will come up to me out of nowhere and let me know about the presence of Christ in their lives. Every day I am humbled more and more by their words and their actions. As I learn from these Christ followers daily, it made me ask myself what does the Bible say about witnessing and testifying to God’s work in my life. I found that in three of the four gospels there is the story of Jesus telling the disciples about witnessing. He says in Matthew 10:18, “On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles.” It goes on to say in verses 19 and 20 “ At that time you will be given what to say, for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.” From this I realize that as Jesus’ follower I am going to asked to testify for Him and I need to rely on the Holy Spirit to lead me. Jesus’ words and the example shown by these brothers and sisters in Christ encourage me to share the story of God’s steadfast and patient work in my life.
One particular instance of a Day Shelter guest witnessing to me happened to me a few days ago I was in the closet, which is a big room where our guests can store two bags of their personal belongings. I don’t usually work there, so I believe that it was one of those God things where He made sure I was in the right place at the right time in order for Him to teach me and encourage me in my faith. There were very few people coming into the closet and so I was about to close up when there came this middle aged looking man. He came up showed me his ID and I let him get his bag. I asked how he was and his response was more than a common reply.
He said something to the effect of I don’t always feel well with the discomforts of homelessness, but I have joy in the Lord, my provider. He went on to tell me about his life and how God has brought him through difficult times. He told me that for the majority of his life he has been homeless. He then told me that he is 62, only had a third grade education and that God has always been a faithful companion with him. At those comments I was astounded. This man has spent decades on the streets and he is still praising God for every day he has. Everything he said, he said with cheer and peace. He said things haven’t been easy but he has made it through with Jesus, his Savior at the center of his life.
When he got his suitcase out he opened the front pocket and took out a very old battered Bible. He had bookmarks and on the pages there were countless notes he had made. He turned to Isaiah 40:13 which says, “Who has understood the mind of the Lord, or instructed him as counselor?” and then next to it he had a note that said, 1 Corinthians 2:16. He flipped there and read, “For who has the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.” As Christ is our Lord, those who put their faith in Him may little by little gain understanding of God. He said “I can use that understanding and live for Jesus Christ or I can live for myself and follow the devil. When we let the Holy Spirit lead us it is the Lord working through us for the good.” He told me this all in love and with joy. He encouraged me as the Holy Spirit led him. He reminded me to keep focused on Christ, loving people, and showing them mercy and grace. He took what he needed from his bag, was on his way, and I haven’t seen him since.
This is just one of the many experiences that I have had since coming to Jeff St. I thank and praise God for every day I have here. It is a blessing to be here and all of you are blessings to me. I want to thank all of you who have supported me with your prayers, money, and encouragement through letters and phone calls. I truly appreciate it. God is doing wonders here in my teammates and I but it is not without struggles, so again, I thank you for your prayers. Please keep them coming! I love you all and thank God that you are a part of my life.

With Christ’s love,

Matt

Besides for just watching him however, we can help! Matt needs our support to make a greater difference upon the city of Louisville. To make a donation please read the following:

TO DONATE TO HOPE | Send your tax-deductible donation to
Jefferson Street Baptist Center | Attn: HOPE 733 East Jefferson Street l Louisville, KY 40202
Matt Norton Fund ID #: HOPE-0809-MN1 Make sure to include ID in the check’s memo line
Fundraising Goal: $6,600 I Raised to Date: $3,535
Visit the HOPE website at www.hopeforlouisville.com
Visit our online journal at www.hopeblog.wordpress.com

Hope this is not old news...

The world is currently in shock over the rejection of the bail-out plan by Congress. Most people were confident of the passage of the bill and indeed, the world markets were poised on Monday in the anticipation that the bill would be passed. Yet, when the news broke on Monday, the result was heavily disappointing. Congress had elected to reject the $700 bn bail out plan for the financial sector. Almost immediately, the Dow tanked a record 7% or more than 770 points. When compared to the Great Depression, this is nothing. On Black Tuesday, stocks took a dive of more than 89%. However, the question that angers and bewilders almost all economists...is why?

The authors of Freakonomics, Stephen Dubner and Steven Levitt, have a blog that is highly interesting. In it they suggest that the reason, might actually be self-serving politicians (shock to me as well). The vote was close ending in a 228-205 defeat. Nate Silver's analysis on 38 candidates with tight re-election races shows that out of the 38, 30 voted against the bill. Odd that those without highly politicized races would be split almost 50-50 197(for)-198(against). Out of the 26 congressmen who are not running for re-election, 22 voted for the bill.

Explanation of the Bill

Why would the congressmen vote this way? Because the general populace of America are short-sighted. They see their tax-dollars going to finance this financial bail-out, have never heard of such a big amount of money before and only see that this money is being shipped out of sight. Since "out of sight" means the "financial sector" and not into their pockets, they cry "Thief". Now, this is completely understandable for those who have the same reaction. When you're wondering why the government was worried about the collapse of premiere chocolate maker, Fannie Mae, economists won't fault you for your opinion.

What they don't understand is without the bailout plan, what you have is the meltdown of the financial markets and that this means a choke for the national economy. This means no capital for investments, loans that are nearly impossible to get and high interest rates. It also means, as was shown in the market, that stocks in directly related sectors will take an immediate plunge followed most likely by a ripple effect in nearby sectors. So, in short, now with the rejection of the bail-out plan, sure you keep tax-payer dollars intact, but tax-payers lose a lot more in the long run as economic growth halts and recovery is hard because of the lack of money for investments.

A look into what may have been's Obama's best moment in yesterday's debate, brought to you by dailykos.com

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/27/03557/0386/140/612112

Cheers,

zexi

The company that you love so much is a malice-filled corporate jerk.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=536

This article takes an interesting angle on how our society and culture is developing.

Virtual is No Refuge From the Real
For children, no escape from America's car-dependent, cheap-oil fiesta

By James Howard Kunstler
Elm Street Writers Group

One of the extremely painful lessons of our time, I'm convinced, will be that the virtual is not an adequate substitute for the real. It will be painful because the notion of virtuality has become a psychological crutch for a culture that is recklessly destructive of real places, real experiences, real relationships with real people, and real notions of purposeful, decent behavior.
One of the most popular beliefs of the computer era has been that virtual places are every bit as okay as real places. This idea gained popularity in direct proportion to the spread of immersively ugly, monotonous, dysfunctional suburban environments through the 1980s and 90s. The more our nation came to be composed of crappy housing subdivisions, highway strips, Big Box fiefdoms, and parking wastelands, the more appealing the idea of virtual reality became.
For one thing, it was a way of turning the lack of something into an opportunity to sell more products. The lack of town centers in suburbia led to malls. The lack of access to either complex integral townscapes or real rural landscapes led to theme parks or, in the case of Las Vegas, fragmentary ersatz urbanism. The general impoverishment of the public realm - or the relegation of it to mere decorative berms between zoning categories - was compensated for by the exorbitant internal luxury of new private houses, with their home theaters, "great rooms," and three-car garages.
For adults the result has been an amazing amount of pervasive situational loneliness. Despite the fact that so many Americans own a car there is no place to go, at least no places of casual socializing unrelated to chain store commerce. So the chat rooms and listserves of the Internet are supposed to take the place of actually being somewhere.
For children, this trend has been catastrophic because they lack the mobility to use environments designed solely for motoring. This consigns kids either to nebulous low-grade hangouts in the left over scrap places of suburbia - the 7-Eleven parking lot, the storm sump, the wooded "buffer" between the housing tract and the strip mall - or to virtual and heavily commercialized public realms of television and the computer, which include rentable movies, the Internet, and computer games.
The most remarkable aspect of these movies and games is their violence, grandiosity, antisocial behavior, and exaltation of technology. A lone Bruce Willis potently and adroitly kills dozens of enemies and saves the world. A gamer manipulates a joystick to waste legions of invaders with virtual gunfire or death rays to save the world. The wish to save the world is obviously not inadvertent since it is based on the perhaps subconscious recognition that our immediate "world" of American culture and American place badly needs to be saved.
It's not a coincidence that the degree of grandiose fantasized empowerment provided by these "entertainments" exists in inverse relation to the loss of power that suburban children suffer in controlling their own lives. Stuck in a disaggregated habitat and totally dependent on chauffeuring to get from one part of their world to another, suburban children are deprived of the most fundamental process of growing up: developing a sense of personal sovereignty, the confidence of being able to make decisions about using one's environment, and then acting on those decisions.
The fact that so many suburban children are obese should tell us that they have also lost control even of their own bodies, a final, tragic insult on top of the developmental injuries they endure.
It has been an over-investment in technology that got us into this predicament - the wish to build a drive-in utopia. And it will be the failure of this entropic project that may rescue us, if it doesn't put the human race out of business altogether.
Specifically, the world is now facing the end of a century-long cheap oil fiesta with no real prospect of replacing fossil fuels with other things. There is not going to be any"hydrogen economy." It's a fantasy promoted by politicians and business leaders who see what is coming, are scared out of their wits, and have nothing offer besides wishful thinking. The bottom line is this: No combination of alternative fuels or procedures will allow us to run what we are currently running in the United States, or even a substantial fraction of it.
If we want American civilization to continue we will have to rescale and reorganize everything we do, from farming, to schooling, to retail commerce, to the places we live in. We will have to rebuild local networks of economic interdependence and we will have to reconstruct real communities as the context for it to happen in. There will be a lot less motoring. Circumstances will compel us to do this or the future will belong to other people in other places. It will be a difficult transition in any case. But a half century from now we may look back and marvel that we had ever become so collectively psychotic to pretend that the virtual was the same as the real.

http://www.kunstler.com/mags_virtual.html