Thursday, February 26, 2009
Maria... The greatest daughter a man could have
my dad usually tells me an my sister we could be better children meaning more dutiful o our family... and after being told the story of Maria Celeste (Virginia) Galilei, Daughter of Galileo Galilei, I really understand what duty you ones family means.
From the Beginning of their lives Maria had always helped her father out... as an apothecary she created her fathers medicine exclusively, and took care of him by cooking and doing his laundry for him. After her father moved away they kept in touch through mailing letters many of Maria’s can still be seen today. Maria was a huge part in Galileo's Book she proofread them and allowed them to be published checking her fathers use of words and censoring what she thought would get him in trouble. She always had her father on her mind on her daily convent duties and always found a way to take care of him. Even during the Plague she made for him a bacteria killer so he could go on with his research. Without Maria Galileo may not have been known today for all that he had done. Because he simply would have died...
So I think we should have an official daughter’s day in honor of Maria Celeste (Virginia) Galilei for died at the age of 34...
St. Thomas Aquinas
Let me begin this by saying my parents are about to turn of my internet and I still have 1 more Blog to go after this so... procrastination sucks bootyy!!!... Anyways let’s skip the witty jokes and just get into this one shall we? yes sir.
Let’s get to cracking! Literally I got to disprove some old proofs right now...
Mr. A believed that he could prove the existence of a supreme being (God) by stating a few scientific theories and other forms of nonsense! (Sorry it’s late)
First way:
He believed that an object which is in motion has been put into motion by some other object or force. Therefore there must have been an unmoved mover (God) who first put things into motion. So nothing can move it, if ever object in motion had a mover; the first object in motion needed a mover. The first mover is the unmoved mover called God....
That was a mouthful...
Well, If I were to stand up right now and jump I would be moving myself... so it is not necessarily true that nothing can move itself... for unloving objects this theory is true. because a rock cannot move unless I pick it up and throw it but the reflexive action of me picking it up and throwing it was not destiny and did not occur due to the fact that something ells moved me first. Now let us say that this whole idea is true... then who moved God? if no object can be moved not heir own there had to be something who moved God.... the wording off this first way is not very well done leading to it not being a great proof for the existence of a supreme being.
... So I really don’t understand any of the other proofs but number 3 so let me do that one too...
Contingent beings are caused not ever being canned be contingent. Therefore there must exist a being which is necessary to cause contingent being this necessary being is God.
The same idea applies here who was the being who came before God...? Did God one day pop out of his gene lamp and start talking to Abraham and making covenants?
Let’s get to cracking! Literally I got to disprove some old proofs right now...
Mr. A believed that he could prove the existence of a supreme being (God) by stating a few scientific theories and other forms of nonsense! (Sorry it’s late)
First way:
He believed that an object which is in motion has been put into motion by some other object or force. Therefore there must have been an unmoved mover (God) who first put things into motion. So nothing can move it, if ever object in motion had a mover; the first object in motion needed a mover. The first mover is the unmoved mover called God....
That was a mouthful...
Well, If I were to stand up right now and jump I would be moving myself... so it is not necessarily true that nothing can move itself... for unloving objects this theory is true. because a rock cannot move unless I pick it up and throw it but the reflexive action of me picking it up and throwing it was not destiny and did not occur due to the fact that something ells moved me first. Now let us say that this whole idea is true... then who moved God? if no object can be moved not heir own there had to be something who moved God.... the wording off this first way is not very well done leading to it not being a great proof for the existence of a supreme being.
... So I really don’t understand any of the other proofs but number 3 so let me do that one too...
Contingent beings are caused not ever being canned be contingent. Therefore there must exist a being which is necessary to cause contingent being this necessary being is God.
The same idea applies here who was the being who came before God...? Did God one day pop out of his gene lamp and start talking to Abraham and making covenants?
St.Augustine and Gothic Architecture
Not to brag or anything but I’ve actually but I’ve actually been lucky enough to visit a Gothic Cathedral. While staying in Vienna, Austria for 4 months as a refugee we spent a lot of time visiting beautiful landscape, riding trains, and not eating Mc Donald’s cause of the "Mad Cow Disease". Now it turns out that we were just too poor to afford the awesome big Mac so our parents led us to think other wise by blowing up the mad cow disease in my head... I can still hear the cows laughing today.
St. Stephen's Cathedral in Vienna is what my family and I used to visit on a weakly basis so I’ve actually seen the amazing architecture used in building this cathedral first hand...
Let's get back to topic!!!!
St.Augustine had a very interesting philosophy he believed that a true Christian should be self restraint of worldly pleasures and should not enjoy the rubbish of the world. He believed that the world outside was dark, simple, plain and sinful. but on the inside of a true Christian there lay a burning light a bright light of righteousness the Holy light and the light of God. Simply put Outside bad inside GOD (oh I mean Good ;) )
The same rules and ideas went to the building of Gothic Cathedrals, if you look on the outside it is not very plain and simple but vastly dark. Although beautiful on the outside it really doesn’t have much of God's light but what if you go in, is God present inside these churches? Yes, yes he is!! The architects of this time were amazingly smart using mathematics to keep the cathedral together they did not even need to use glue to put things together. the church, funded by patrons, ordered the creation of stained glass windows which were place on the church (in the way of the sun) so the colors would illuminate the darkness which lied in the church. These amazingly mysterious colors of the rainbow mystified the visitors and worshipers and allowed them to see "light of God". Just like St.Augustine's Philosophy the Gothic churches of the time were amazingly dark on the outside but Godly lit on the inside.
St. Stephen's Cathedral in Vienna is what my family and I used to visit on a weakly basis so I’ve actually seen the amazing architecture used in building this cathedral first hand...
Let's get back to topic!!!!
St.Augustine had a very interesting philosophy he believed that a true Christian should be self restraint of worldly pleasures and should not enjoy the rubbish of the world. He believed that the world outside was dark, simple, plain and sinful. but on the inside of a true Christian there lay a burning light a bright light of righteousness the Holy light and the light of God. Simply put Outside bad inside GOD (oh I mean Good ;) )
The same rules and ideas went to the building of Gothic Cathedrals, if you look on the outside it is not very plain and simple but vastly dark. Although beautiful on the outside it really doesn’t have much of God's light but what if you go in, is God present inside these churches? Yes, yes he is!! The architects of this time were amazingly smart using mathematics to keep the cathedral together they did not even need to use glue to put things together. the church, funded by patrons, ordered the creation of stained glass windows which were place on the church (in the way of the sun) so the colors would illuminate the darkness which lied in the church. These amazingly mysterious colors of the rainbow mystified the visitors and worshipers and allowed them to see "light of God". Just like St.Augustine's Philosophy the Gothic churches of the time were amazingly dark on the outside but Godly lit on the inside.
Hitler...
Heyyy low key Hitler is still alive kicking it on some island with Tupac and Biggie...
Real Talk.
Ok so after having my freekin' Hitler blog deleted by my self in copy pasting accident... I was pissed of and decided to go procrastinate for a few hours... I really don’t like Hitler for Deleting on me but I have to do this or ells ill have an F in Basinger's class... and i really don't want that so here were go...
Take #2
"Even the most superficial observation shows that Nature's restricted form of propagation and increase is an almost rigid basic law of all the innumerable forms of expression of her vital urge. Every animal mates only with a member of the same species. The titmouse seeks the titmouse, the finch the finch, the stork the stork, the field mouse the field mouse, the dormouse the dormouse, the wolf the she-wolf..."
The above is a hasty generalization what Mr. is trying to say is that all species breed only and I repeat only amongst their own species... right off the bat this is a false assumption, as we know mules are a horse and donkey Hybrid animal and also there exists ligers and other Hybrid species due to interbreeding. Right off the bat this whole part is WRONG!!!
For this next part keep in mind the difference between the term "race" and "species"
"Any crossing of two beings not at exactly the same level produces a medium between the levels of the two parents. This means: the offspring will probably stand higher than the racially lower parent, but not as high as the higher one."
What is racially lower? Why justifies this term right here? So if a person of the Aryan race, who is amazingly poor and dirty, has a child with a rich Jewish woman, the child is still considered higher than the Jew?? I feel that the child is as equal as the parents. No matter the color humans are all created with the same rights and at the same status (in the eye of God......) also this is not even a right for of syllogism... the A,B, and C status quo is disturbed due to the fact that species is changed to race. Hitler uses false authority to boost his speaking, justifies his actions through bad fallacies and is an overall turf (excuse my language I was mad I had to write it again).
Real Talk.
Ok so after having my freekin' Hitler blog deleted by my self in copy pasting accident... I was pissed of and decided to go procrastinate for a few hours... I really don’t like Hitler for Deleting on me but I have to do this or ells ill have an F in Basinger's class... and i really don't want that so here were go...
Take #2
"Even the most superficial observation shows that Nature's restricted form of propagation and increase is an almost rigid basic law of all the innumerable forms of expression of her vital urge. Every animal mates only with a member of the same species. The titmouse seeks the titmouse, the finch the finch, the stork the stork, the field mouse the field mouse, the dormouse the dormouse, the wolf the she-wolf..."
The above is a hasty generalization what Mr. is trying to say is that all species breed only and I repeat only amongst their own species... right off the bat this is a false assumption, as we know mules are a horse and donkey Hybrid animal and also there exists ligers and other Hybrid species due to interbreeding. Right off the bat this whole part is WRONG!!!
For this next part keep in mind the difference between the term "race" and "species"
"Any crossing of two beings not at exactly the same level produces a medium between the levels of the two parents. This means: the offspring will probably stand higher than the racially lower parent, but not as high as the higher one."
What is racially lower? Why justifies this term right here? So if a person of the Aryan race, who is amazingly poor and dirty, has a child with a rich Jewish woman, the child is still considered higher than the Jew?? I feel that the child is as equal as the parents. No matter the color humans are all created with the same rights and at the same status (in the eye of God......) also this is not even a right for of syllogism... the A,B, and C status quo is disturbed due to the fact that species is changed to race. Hitler uses false authority to boost his speaking, justifies his actions through bad fallacies and is an overall turf (excuse my language I was mad I had to write it again).
What is this we live in?
What it do my readers!!!
Let’s talk about Creationism and Evolution and how the earth came to be why don’t we!!
A few questions come to mind when this topic is raised and we really don’t have an answer for it, here are a few of my questions: Did we start off as particles, and revolutionize into being the humans we are today? Is Darwin’s Idea of natural selection right? Did some sort of divine creation (God) create us? Or is it a Hybrid of both ideas?
Let us Begin by a quick definition of both of the given topics of this debate:
In biology, evolution is change in the inherited traits of a population of organisms from one generation to the next. These changes are caused by a combination of three main processes: variation, reproduction, and selection. Genes that are passed on to an organism's offspring produce the inherited traits that are the basis of evolution.
Creationism is the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe were created in their original form by a deity (often the Abraham God of Judaism, Christianity and Islam) or deities. In relation to the creation-evolution controversy the term creationism is commonly used to refer to religiously motivated rejection of evolution as an explanation of origins.
(Wiki definitions)
It is believed in my Household, my father being the Christian Protestant Pastor that the Creationism idea is the way our universe and everything came into play. I have recently asked my father about Evolution, and he totally dismisses the idea, and links it to what was allegedly said by Charles Darwin about humans deriving from apes.
Recently I have found out, through my bio teacher that Darwin was night directly tying humans to apes, but simply pointing out our similarities. Talking to my father about anything science based is very hard; I cannot ask a question without Jesus finding him in our conversation... (Reminds me of Will's shirt) but before I digress even more, I have my own beliefs on this whole dilemma.
My Thoughts:
I believe that we have come to be on this planet through a divine creation, I actually genuinely believe in the Idea of God, I just wish he would show himself to me more often. I mean my mom is a decent cook for God sakes he can come kick it someday... Furthermore, I also believe that after God made this Universe he sat there and let everything take course. He built everything so it would in a way "update" its self. As you may know when you install ITunes the program usually updates its software on its own (this is how I have it configured)
I believe that God put the simplest atoms on this earth and after many years (BAM) here we are. So, yes there is God who made everything but then evolution comes into play as time goes by and species changed to have an easier and better chance at survival. (Although the odds aren’t truly on their side)
Seriously though... If God reads this blog hit me up dude. I got some questions for you come eat some Kabobs or something ill even wash your feet for you and offer my sister to any man trying to rape you!!!... Come get at me.
Let’s talk about Creationism and Evolution and how the earth came to be why don’t we!!
A few questions come to mind when this topic is raised and we really don’t have an answer for it, here are a few of my questions: Did we start off as particles, and revolutionize into being the humans we are today? Is Darwin’s Idea of natural selection right? Did some sort of divine creation (God) create us? Or is it a Hybrid of both ideas?
Let us Begin by a quick definition of both of the given topics of this debate:
In biology, evolution is change in the inherited traits of a population of organisms from one generation to the next. These changes are caused by a combination of three main processes: variation, reproduction, and selection. Genes that are passed on to an organism's offspring produce the inherited traits that are the basis of evolution.
Creationism is the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe were created in their original form by a deity (often the Abraham God of Judaism, Christianity and Islam) or deities. In relation to the creation-evolution controversy the term creationism is commonly used to refer to religiously motivated rejection of evolution as an explanation of origins.
(Wiki definitions)
It is believed in my Household, my father being the Christian Protestant Pastor that the Creationism idea is the way our universe and everything came into play. I have recently asked my father about Evolution, and he totally dismisses the idea, and links it to what was allegedly said by Charles Darwin about humans deriving from apes.
Recently I have found out, through my bio teacher that Darwin was night directly tying humans to apes, but simply pointing out our similarities. Talking to my father about anything science based is very hard; I cannot ask a question without Jesus finding him in our conversation... (Reminds me of Will's shirt) but before I digress even more, I have my own beliefs on this whole dilemma.
My Thoughts:
I believe that we have come to be on this planet through a divine creation, I actually genuinely believe in the Idea of God, I just wish he would show himself to me more often. I mean my mom is a decent cook for God sakes he can come kick it someday... Furthermore, I also believe that after God made this Universe he sat there and let everything take course. He built everything so it would in a way "update" its self. As you may know when you install ITunes the program usually updates its software on its own (this is how I have it configured)
I believe that God put the simplest atoms on this earth and after many years (BAM) here we are. So, yes there is God who made everything but then evolution comes into play as time goes by and species changed to have an easier and better chance at survival. (Although the odds aren’t truly on their side)
Seriously though... If God reads this blog hit me up dude. I got some questions for you come eat some Kabobs or something ill even wash your feet for you and offer my sister to any man trying to rape you!!!... Come get at me.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Affirmative Action: do we still need it?
As we know the recently on January 20Th, senator Barack Obama was sworn in to presidency as the 44th president of the united states also he is the first African American president in U.S. history, so the question is now that our president is African American do we still need affirmative action?
the meaning:
The term affirmative action refers to policies that take gender, race, or ethnicity into account in an attempt to promote equal opportunity. The focus of such policies ranges from employment and public contracting to educational outreach and health programs (such as breast or prostate cancer screenings). The impetus towards affirmative action is twofold: to maximize the benefits of diversity in all levels of society, and to redress disadvantages due to overt, institutional, or involuntary discrimination.
(copy pasted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action)
affirmative action Allows the African American Population to have more opportunities at getting jobs and other things in society, but i think we don't need this anymore, and my reason is not the fact that our president is African American, I think that everyone is capable of working in society through their academic achievements and their own experiences.
Being of color is not a short comings, just because a person is of color doesn't mean they deserve a Handicap parking spot. i believe any human being is able to achieve greatness disregarding the color of their skin. the U.S. government in a way is showing more racism by giving this "fast pass" to people of color. in a way it is telling the people that "you are still not as good as us that's why we are making things easier for you." affirmative action might be disguised as an apology but it is still racist politics. and that's why i believe we don't need it. and my argument has nothing to do with Obama cause that is irrelevant
the meaning:
The term affirmative action refers to policies that take gender, race, or ethnicity into account in an attempt to promote equal opportunity. The focus of such policies ranges from employment and public contracting to educational outreach and health programs (such as breast or prostate cancer screenings). The impetus towards affirmative action is twofold: to maximize the benefits of diversity in all levels of society, and to redress disadvantages due to overt, institutional, or involuntary discrimination.
(copy pasted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action)
affirmative action Allows the African American Population to have more opportunities at getting jobs and other things in society, but i think we don't need this anymore, and my reason is not the fact that our president is African American, I think that everyone is capable of working in society through their academic achievements and their own experiences.
Being of color is not a short comings, just because a person is of color doesn't mean they deserve a Handicap parking spot. i believe any human being is able to achieve greatness disregarding the color of their skin. the U.S. government in a way is showing more racism by giving this "fast pass" to people of color. in a way it is telling the people that "you are still not as good as us that's why we are making things easier for you." affirmative action might be disguised as an apology but it is still racist politics. and that's why i believe we don't need it. and my argument has nothing to do with Obama cause that is irrelevant
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Deductive reasoning
Syllogism
syllogisms, are where the conclusion is pulled out from the use of two premises. this idea includes a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion.
A-B the major premise
B-C the minor premise
A-C the conclusion
A--B, B--C, and A--C can these interchange? why yes they can but only in one way!
The only possible shift is a horizontal shift. it CANNOT take place vertically.You need the B to be in both of the major and minor premises, if one is missing this is incorrect and the conclusion will fail. The statement that you come up with when the horizontal switch has taken place may not be true, however, it will be a valid one. In this form of reasoning validity is what matters the technical truth is not of much worth as long as the reasoning makes sense it has been done right.
Example:
Chris is a drummer
Drummers can hold a tempo
Chris can hold a tempo.
Although not all drummers can successfully hold a tempo this reasoning follows the A--B, B--C, and A--C so it is valid.
Modus Ponens
Modus Ponens: "if...then" reasoning.
this is one of the simplest form of reasoning...
if p=q the
if p(is true or false), then q(is true or false)
Example:
If i study my Math notes, then i will get a good grade in the class
i will study the math notes, therefore, i will get a good grade in the class.
Modus Tollens
Modus Tollens: are very similar to the Modus Ponens. However, the conclusion includes a negation.
If p, then q. Not q, Therefore, not p.
If i change the babies diaper then it wont stink.
it stinks, then i didn't change the diaper.
syllogisms, are where the conclusion is pulled out from the use of two premises. this idea includes a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion.
A-B the major premise
B-C the minor premise
A-C the conclusion
A--B, B--C, and A--C can these interchange? why yes they can but only in one way!
The only possible shift is a horizontal shift. it CANNOT take place vertically.You need the B to be in both of the major and minor premises, if one is missing this is incorrect and the conclusion will fail. The statement that you come up with when the horizontal switch has taken place may not be true, however, it will be a valid one. In this form of reasoning validity is what matters the technical truth is not of much worth as long as the reasoning makes sense it has been done right.
Example:
Chris is a drummer
Drummers can hold a tempo
Chris can hold a tempo.
Although not all drummers can successfully hold a tempo this reasoning follows the A--B, B--C, and A--C so it is valid.
Modus Ponens
Modus Ponens: "if...then" reasoning.
this is one of the simplest form of reasoning...
if p=q the
if p(is true or false), then q(is true or false)
Example:
If i study my Math notes, then i will get a good grade in the class
i will study the math notes, therefore, i will get a good grade in the class.
Modus Tollens
Modus Tollens: are very similar to the Modus Ponens. However, the conclusion includes a negation.
If p, then q. Not q, Therefore, not p.
If i change the babies diaper then it wont stink.
it stinks, then i didn't change the diaper.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)