Yesterday was cold, but at -24°C, today is even colder. Yesterday, however, it was apparently cold enough to burst several pipes at the local university campus, flooding the two buildings I frequented most during my four years there. One pipe burst on the 3rd floor of the Old Main, causing water to flood down a stairwell, flooding a computer lab. I didn't even know the OM had a 3rd floor!!!
Last night as I lay in bed, I listened to our brand new house crack and bang. We noticed one of our neighbours' siding had separated from itself - had that always been this way, or was it because of the weather? I wonder if that's what I was hearing our house do. Who knows what these houses will do during their first winter?
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Monday, November 27, 2006
Weather Anomaly
This weekend, we acquired a 4.5' snow drift in our backyard. This kind of thing rarely happens in our city any more. I heard on the news this morning that if you want a taxi, it's a one hour wait, and if you want a tow truck, it's a three hour wait. Blizzare!
Friday, November 24, 2006
Occupations
I often wonder if there's a moral obligation to do the very most you are capable of. If you are a supergenious, are you doing society a disservice if you don't work in the area you are most advanced in? Suppose you have a knack for problem solving, but you spend your time stocking shelves at a grocery store. Now you're depriving someone who has capabilities to do little more than that - say, a young adult making his way through college - of that position. However, doesn't that mean that you're forcing that young man to be more ambitious? Or are you pushing him into welfare? At the same time, you're depriving the world of your mind's potential - suppose you could be spending your time figuring out a way to end poverty, but you're busy putting Eggos in aisle 6. It's like you're creating two problems.
However, suppose you don't want to do that which you are most capable of. Suppose you're not very bright, but you're really, really tall, and would therefore be suited to handing nails to roofers without leaving the ground. Should you have to because that's the most you can offer society? What if you'd really rather lay floors, and you're not half bad at it, either - should you be obligated to spend your life not fulfilling your dreams just because you have a talent or gift in another area?
However, suppose you don't want to do that which you are most capable of. Suppose you're not very bright, but you're really, really tall, and would therefore be suited to handing nails to roofers without leaving the ground. Should you have to because that's the most you can offer society? What if you'd really rather lay floors, and you're not half bad at it, either - should you be obligated to spend your life not fulfilling your dreams just because you have a talent or gift in another area?
On speaking in tongues
I read the following today:
This is fascinating. It suggests that the church believes that speaking in tongues isn't a gift from God (because if it were, who would the church be to impose rules on God?), but something which the potential speakers can control, which suggests a deep-rooted belief that speaking in tongues is nothing but an act.
This is a neurological study of what happens in the brain when the person is speaking in tongues. The findings in it suggest that people can learn to lose control of themselves, on command. This explains how it gets easier for people to speak in tongues as a conscious decision, and it even explains how, as the first article says, it is possible for churches to teach their members how. This article mentions that the activity is associated with the frontal lobe of the brain, also coincidentally the part of the brain associated with speech (link).
So, while it looks real, and might even seem real to the person doing it, speaking in tongues involves a conscious order to do so. There is also a social motivation to do so which has nothing to do with God and everything to do with selfishness.
From an atheist's perspective, this is all fascinating, because if you don't believe in God, then you don't believe that speaking in tongues is a gift from God. From that perspective, it's all an act. However, it's an act that takes some skill, which you can learn to do. It's an act that can fool even the actor.
So do these tongue-speakers learn how to do this consciously, or subconsciously? The idea behind speaking in tongues is to surrender control of yourself to God, but if God is all in your head, and control of yourself is all in your head, do you subconsciously learn to lose control of yourself, assuming that God will take the wheel? Or do you do it to fool the masses? Do you fool the masses by acting, or by displaying this skill?
Some churches refuse to allow speaking in tongues because it causes fights.
This is fascinating. It suggests that the church believes that speaking in tongues isn't a gift from God (because if it were, who would the church be to impose rules on God?), but something which the potential speakers can control, which suggests a deep-rooted belief that speaking in tongues is nothing but an act.
This is a neurological study of what happens in the brain when the person is speaking in tongues. The findings in it suggest that people can learn to lose control of themselves, on command. This explains how it gets easier for people to speak in tongues as a conscious decision, and it even explains how, as the first article says, it is possible for churches to teach their members how. This article mentions that the activity is associated with the frontal lobe of the brain, also coincidentally the part of the brain associated with speech (link).
So, while it looks real, and might even seem real to the person doing it, speaking in tongues involves a conscious order to do so. There is also a social motivation to do so which has nothing to do with God and everything to do with selfishness.
From an atheist's perspective, this is all fascinating, because if you don't believe in God, then you don't believe that speaking in tongues is a gift from God. From that perspective, it's all an act. However, it's an act that takes some skill, which you can learn to do. It's an act that can fool even the actor.
So do these tongue-speakers learn how to do this consciously, or subconsciously? The idea behind speaking in tongues is to surrender control of yourself to God, but if God is all in your head, and control of yourself is all in your head, do you subconsciously learn to lose control of yourself, assuming that God will take the wheel? Or do you do it to fool the masses? Do you fool the masses by acting, or by displaying this skill?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
About Me
- Anacredenza
- Anacredenza is a screen name I made up back when I first joined a debate forum. At that time, I was just about finished figuring out what my beliefs are, and the name, which means 'renewed belief' reflects that. I cannot claim to know everything (not even remotely close!), but I'm now comfortable with what I believe, which I discovered were my deep, though covered-up, thoughts all along, and have therefore been renewed. I may be right, or I may be wrong, but at least now I'm being true to myself. After figuring this out, I went back and talked with people who hold beliefs that I used to share, to test my new (and old) thoughts on the matter. After several years of that, I am much more comfortable with what I believe. I don't care very much about what other people believe any more, as long as they don't use their beliefs to justify harming other people. That said, I care a great deal about how people come to their conclusions - thorough, critical thinking skills are important, and if more people just knew how to think, the whole world could be a much less hostile place.