What of predictability?

May 10, 2006When I first began my phuseboxing, I posted nearly every day.  There was always something to complain or brag about, and I always seemed to find (or make) the time to post.  These days, my posts are much more random.  Why?  A couple reasons.

Life has gotten less... stable.  During school, my schedule was relatively predictable.  I had school, and then other stuff around the house.  Now, days fluctuate between nothing to do (so nothing really to post about) and crazy dostuffiness, leaving much to relay but no time in which to do it.  This puts me in a position to always do a recap, which is much less enjoyable for me than giving you a review of the current day.  So... I'll recap.  :)

I've been trying to take care of some random business floating around.  I have to tell financial aid that I'm going on a co-op and get my scholarships put on hold, which is now all complete.  I spent some time today on the phone with Toshiba fixing a records error and talking about what I need to do to get some work done on the tablet.  Some dust has gotten caught under the screen, and the keyboard is sticking occasionally, so I am going to get it fixed.  It's still under warranty, but I have to make a 2hr drive to Bowling Green, KY to get it fixed.  I'll call 'em tomorrow and see what kind of time frame we're talking about.  I don't want it finished while I'm in Colorado (whitewater rafting trip) and sitting there useless.  Liz would appreciate having it to play with... uh... work on, so I'll have to see if they think they can get it done before I leave.  I somehow find it unlikely.  Other random business includes confirming some info at Tech, and... other boring things.

[Baby] - And he weighs in at...

It's a good thing we don't grow like babies do.  If we did, I would have gained 125lbs in the last 8 months and grown 2ft.  As it is... I didn't quite gain that much weight, and I'm no taller than I was.  Back to the point, though, Daniel continues to grow like one of our crazy mutant dandelions.  He gained 2lbs in 2 weeks!  He weighs less than 20lbs, so you can imagine that we were shocked at that weight gain.  He's looking very healthy, and has been SO smiley lately!  It's so easy to make him smile and laugh, and I assure you nothing is more gratifying that making your child laugh.

[Debating] - Looking Back

I find myself strangely disenchanted with the idea of debate these days.  I've found the reason why: people don't change their minds.  In all the debates I have taken part in, all the arguments on forums, all the ticking people off, it never seemed to do any good.  And why is that?  Because people don't use logic.  Sure, they think they do, but it's just not so.  If everyone were completely logical, there would be no deviation in beliefs.  I find again and again that people (to avoid a debate, I suppose I'll say 'most people') first decide what they want to believe, and then use 'logic' to back up that belief.  Basically, they twist rationale, make logical fallacies, and stop further consideration at convenient times just so they can create some sort of 'logical' construct so they can feel justified in what they believe.  They need what they believe to make sense, so they do what must be done to make it so.  For some people, it is obvious.  You ask them why they believe something, and the answer they give you is completely ridiculous.  Others are more stealthy.  What they say seems to make sense, but there are some problems with their thinking.  When you point them out, though, it's like talking to a stone wall.  People think just hard/far enough to justify their beliefs, and any further thought won't help them back up what they already believe.

And there's fantastic evidence of this.  Let's take homosexuality.  People say it's not natural, so it's wrong.  You can point out that some animals exhibit homosexual behavior.  You can also point out that modern medicine is largely unnatural attempts to cure humans.  But still, homosexuality is wrong because it is unnatural.  This is not to say whether homosexuality is right or wrong, it just demonstrates how people refuse to think hard enough to reconsider their beliefs.  More evidence?  What about interpretation of the Bible?  I know, I know... tread lightly.  Many of the people I know are deeply offended by the suggestion that parts of the Bible should be put into context.  But EVERYONE I know puts parts of the Bible into context.  How many people still stone prostitutes?  Who thinks women should not be allowed to communicate verbally in a church building?  Who thinks it is wrong to call my Economics professor a teacher?  In general, all of these ideas are dismissed by explaining the situation or what was really meant-in other words, this was put into context.  So don't pretend that everything in the Bible should be taken literally and applied to today.  If you believe part of the Bible should be taken literally and applied to today, recognize that you believe this because you think it is proper for THAT part, and not because  it's a sin to put parts of the Bible in context.

Anyway, this could ironically turn into a debate, but it shouldn't.  Debates don't work.  People listen to logic that supports what they believe.  They ignore or demonize logic that goes against what they believe.  Everyone thinks just hard enough and just clearly enough to reach the conclusions they want to reach, and then their brain shuts down.  I used to think that debates are useful even people don't change their minds because they provide clarification for both sides, but I find this outcome to be rare.  Usually, both parties just throw pieces of illogical logic back and forth until some recognizes the futility and the debate suddenly ceases.

De-absent-ification

May 05, 2006I return victorious!  Sorry I've been out so long.  As many of you know, we just concluded finals week.  I had only one real final, though.  The rest was spent cleaning, taking care of some random business, explaining why it was NOT my fault that the Honors Program Assistant Director will not be getting a raise next year.  Ugh.  And of course, a little fun involving baby, wife, comp, and/or sunshine.

[School] - Victory!

As indicated above, I return from semester number 6 victorious.  I got a 92 on that huge Thermal Design paper (second highest group grade was only 84).  This makes up for the less than stellar interim report grade.  And I got a 97 on the final!  So, rockin' the A's.  I had to
throw my systems lab report together at the last instant, but I seemed to do okay.  So where does all this leave my final grades?  Well, they're all reported now, and I am happy with the results.

I had this (reasonable) fear that my grades would drop this semester.  Daniel is taking more constant attention and sleeping less, and Liz enrolled in a few classes.  Combine that with my Thermal Design class, which, as I'm told, is the most demanding class in the MechEngring curriculum, and I had a hard semester.  Babies definitely make things more complicated, but I won't say that I wish I didn't have him around.  I wouldn't trade the little guy for anything.  As it relates to school, though, I makes everything a little more difficult and a little more necessary.

[Baby] - Onward and Upward... and Outward

Daniel continues to grow.  Ever since he figured out how to move his hands and knees together, he has been showing how easily he can go from playing on the floor to chewing on the coffee table to chasing the cat to.... wait....  ...  Sorry about that, I had to go get him away from the stairs.  Wow... and I'm not joking, either.  Apparently Daniel has very good timing.  We're at my parents' house, and they got a gate for use if necessary, and I think it might be necessary now.  He just keeps getting stronger and faster.  Ahh, my son.  He looketh west and it calls him.  And he answers.  With passion, with desire like a burning fever, he crawlingly goes.  Though pile of laundry be in his way, he goes.  Though row of strategically placed toys be in his way, he goes.  Though 5 foot drop be in his way, he... tries to go.  Alas, my young one.  You may be tigger in your bouncy seat, but your top is not rubber enough, nor is your bottom springy enough.  Be it bed-floor, couch-floor, stair-floor, or highchair-floor, we must stop you.  Someday, you'll probably thank me.  But today, you'll just smile at me as you eat the box for the baby gate, unaware of your imminent falls and your salvation therefrom. 

And we got him a pool!  And a spiderman bathing suit!  Granted, the pool only holds about 3" of water, and the suit is size 12months, but we couldn't help ourselves.  He loves the water, and the bathing suit is the smallest we could find.  Well worth it, I think.

 

Logical Faith, Part II

April 29, 2006Let me clear up something and take my post down to the main point.  I think there may have been too much... fluff.

My post was not intended to convince people to believe in God or to reject him.  I'm not telling anyone what to believe.  In fact, the last statement ("Believe the truth") was rather tongue in cheek, as the post was about how difficult it is to know the truth.

Here's the point: science is a search for natural explanations for natural phenomena.  The first step to this search is observation of the particular phenomenon.  We see something, and then try to explan it.  We make conjectures, test evidence, and draw conclusions all based on observation, some of which is natural and some of which is created experimentally.  If I want to find out how an unladen African swallow flies, I first see it flying, I then do a series of experiments and observe the results, and I finally make a conclusion about how it flies.  There is a fundamental part of the scientific process which is faith.  This part is observation.

When we observe something, we choose to believe it is true.  I think we are largely unaware of this choice to believe our perception.  Have you ever had a very vivid dream?  I've dreamt I can fly, and I remember the details very well.  Somehow, though, I know that this is not reality.  I experienced it, I saw (observed) it, but I know it was just a dream and that it isn't real.  I have also seen a man cut a woman in two, but she seemed to survive the ordeal quite well.  I know it was just an illusion, and that this wasn't real.  I am also sitting on my couch typing on my laptop.  I know this is real and that it is truly happening.

How do I know these things?  How do I know that what I call a dream is observed but false, and what I call real life is observed and true?  I know I'm using a lot of examples, but I want this to be very explicit.  I saw a show recently where a man was trapped in a damaged submarine and began to hallucinate.  He saw a friend of his, and he knew she wasn't real.  He suddenly realized, though, that he could not trust his perceptions.  How did he know that the sub wasn't already full of water?  How did he know he wasn't already dead?  He had to consciously choose to believe what he saw, even though he couldn't prove that what he saw was true.

Every person lives their lives based on the belief that what they perceive is true.  If traffic looks clear, I pull out.  What if it isn't?  What if I somehow misperceived the truth of the situation?  I have to make decisions every moment, and the basis of these decisions are perception.  I can't make decisions unless I believe that what I perceive is true.  How long will I sit there waiting for a pause in traffic?  I'll never pull out if seeing a break in traffic isn't enough for me to believe that there is actually a break in traffic.  What else could possibly convince me?  What is more basic to the human experience than our senses? 

We choose to believe.  You choose to believe that you aren't hallucinating.  Maybe you haven't thought about it.  How do you know this post is real?  How do you know you're at a computer?  You have faith.  You have faith that what you see and smell and hear and taste and feel is true.  Without this faith, no observation can be accepted, no hypotheses can be formed, no experiments can be accepted, and no conclusions can be made.  We accept observation as absolutely true because to question it questions everything.  Nothing means anything if what we see is not what is true.

So, the foundation of every logical construct, every scientific proof, is a faith in the infallibility of human perception.  We ignore the possibility that we are hallucinating, dreaming, or seeing an illusion.  Belief is the foundation of everything.  Sure, science has a large layer of logic and reasoning on top of this faith and religion has more faith on top of this faith.

People choose to believe.  Some choose to believe in perception and then use logic, analysis, and experimentation to draw conclusions.  Others choose to believe in perception and then use faith, intuition, and hope to draw conclusions.  Science versus Religion is not Reason versus Faith.  It is a matter of degree of faith.

The basic idea here is that no one lives devoid of faith.  How much you use faith is a choice, but no person can live with decisions only based on logic and reason.  I love science and am a strong advocate of evidence and the search for the natural before the supernatural.  I can not ignore, however, the fact that I must accept some major assumptions on faith before I can make any claims.

Logical Faith

April 29, 2006I just thought I'd share something.  I had a discussion lately with someone about how they were agnostic because they did not think that the existance of God could be proven.  When they said this, I caught a sense of them equating the ability to prove with the ability to know. I present to you, then, the possibility that one can know without proof. Consider, for example, the man that 'knows' that race X is inferior to race Y. Though his belief may not be based on any scientific evidence, he may claim to know this to be true, and defend such a contention vehemently.

You may then say that someone can think they know, but it is not truly knowing without proof.

You might alternatively say that, for your personal search, you will only claim to know when you can prove.

I spent a lot of time (years, in fact) trying to prove a set of beliefs. Something I believe to be true is that all proof is based on a foundation of faith. Proof, then, is more a matter of degree of faith than of an ontological distinction between the two.

Allow me to give you example I gave myself. Consider a proof that birds can fly. Perhaps you would put them in a wind chamber and observe their ability to remain suspended in air for extended periods of time.  Perhaps you would simply step outside and observe birds flying. If birds are flying, then birds can fly, yes? I would say yes. But what of the element of faith. There are assumptions you don't even consider to be questionable. Consider the second proof of simply observing birds in flight. Do you consider the possibility that the birds aren't flying? Do you consider the possibility that they aren't birds you are looking at? Do you consider the possibility that you aren't even looking? We hold these truths to be self evident, that all of our perception is a direct byproduct of truth; that we have the ability to comprehend what we perceive. And what if these truths aren't true?

Understand that I am not saying that what you see is not what is
happening (though, I could). For the purposes of this topic, rather, I
am challenging you to prove that what you perceive is correct. I
submit, now, that most would agree that our most basic beliefs are
accepted solely on faith, and that without this foundation of
faith-based knowledge, no logic can be constructed and no conclusions
can be reached.

And so we're back. When you say "prove something about God", I
shall say "prove something about anything." And what does this mean?
Likely something different to each person. To me, it means that several
things:

One person's claim that God exists is as logically infallible as another person's claim that birds fly; namely, not at all

That to find what is true, logic is definitely insufficient as a starting point and likely insufficient as an end.

So what should you believe? Which faith/religion/ideology should you accept? Well, the answer is clear. Believe the truth.

Reflection

April 28, 2006What a crazy week.  I have been running nonstop for almost a month now, it reached its peak this week, and now I'm just brining it home.  I basically have (had) 4 classes this semester: Thermal Design, Energy Systems Lab, Speech, and Micreconomics.  Monday marked the end of Energy Systems with the submission of our final lab report.  Tuesday ended Speech with a final presentation and a quiz.  Today closed down microecon with our final.  I'm still waiting for most grades, but I got a very solid grade on the microecon exam, so I have an A in that class.  I'm expecting an A in the others.  Next week brings only a Thermal Design final exam (academically speaking, that is).  I can now breathe deeply, knowing that much of the craziness that was Spring '06 is behind me.

[Lawn] - New and Improved

A friend of ours, James, has given us a bush and some flowers.  The bush will replace a pine-like tree on the corner of the house, and the flowers will be planted around our mailbox.  Unforunately, this will require removal of an established pine-like tree (which is as healthy as it is ugly), which will take some serious shovel and saw work.  We also got some plastic border stuff for the area around the mailbox.  I'm hoping I can transplant some of the grass from there to a couple bare spots, but I don't know if they'll take.  Those spots are bare for a reason.  But not today, friends.  Today I revel in academic freedom.

[TV] - Newer and Improveder

The cable guy ... hehe, cable guy... came today and installed a fancy black box that turns tv into super tv.  We now have many more channels, a fancy digital guide, and cheaper service.

[Baby] - What I know you've all been waiting for

So, daddy-hood gives you spiderman reflexes.  Jonathan can attest to a lightening catch with my foot, saving Daniel as his head came within inches of the coffee table.  I've also caught him numerous times as he began to tip from a stand.  Well, I'm fast, but not always fast enough.  Daniel was in the bathtub the other morning when the performed this fantastic tip-roll-spin maneuver that left his tumbing just out of reach.  I know it all happened in less than 0.5seconds, but the moments between the water touching Daniel's face and me pulling him out from under it was an eternity.  He sputtered, looked up at me, grinned, and resumed playing with his frog and fish.  Geez.

In related news, I think we'll be a pool for Daniel.  You know... one of the inflatable ones.  He loves the water and he loves being outside with the breeze and sunshine, so we expect he'll have a great time.  He has also figured out proper crawling procedure.  It seems things finally clicked when he took off across the room for the kitty.  He tried moving his hands and feet at the same time, and that made the whole operation much more fluid.  Now, it's all polish.