Free and Wandering Thought

Moving!

2009-06-18T19:35:00.001-05:00

This blog has moved to http://www.keepsharp.wordpress.com .

Gluttony

2008-05-21T21:10:00.002-05:00

Since I got back from the University to Stillwater, gluttony has been a sweet sweet sister to me.

I got together with Brent yesterday. We decided lunch at Marx would be a good idea. We walked along main street passing all the new condos and chatting. Walking into Marx was a little different from the last time I had been there. It had a new room, creative bathrooms, a arched full bar, and the noise diminished some from what I remember. Brent ordered a Fettuccini with scallops and a white wine cream sauce. I ate a fettuccini with pork tenderloin and a coconut milk, curry and cumin sauce. We each liked the other’s better.

Afterwards we came back to the condo I am living in for the summer and drank far too much and watched Juno. Dinner was at my parents house and my dad made veal with a cream sauce, a simple pasta, and Brent and I brought a fruit salad because my dad was not expecting him for dinner.

This morning dad came down. We made eggs benedict and ate some leftover fruit salad. After a trip to the cities, a bike ride around Stillwater (I came down the Myrtle Street hill and was going 38 miles per hour once I hit the bottom), and a stop off at Starbucks to enjoy an espresso and read (assuming humans and apes have 80,000 genes, we share all but 710 of those with chimps – and the difference between chimps and gorillas is greater: 1045 genes), I’m back at home prepping another meal for the parents. I’m making burgers. But these burgers are packed with shitake mushrooms, topped with gruyere cheese, caramelized onions, garlic aioli, and a drizzle of white truffle oil.

Oh gluttony, how you please me.

Disaster Relief

2008-05-13T09:04:00.007-05:00

The disasters
are mounting right now. I can't believe that aid to these happenings is slow, and the aid is more likely to go to China than to Cyclone victims. Not that I think China doesn't need it, but their victim numbers pail in comparison to the cyclone victims. The Frontal Cortex has a good article about why funding might be slow.

Lehrer says:

Paul Slovic, a psychologist at the University of Oregon . . . . found that when people were shown a picture of a single starving child named Rokia in Mali, they acted with impressive generosity. After looking at Rokia's emaciated body and haunting brown eyes, they donated, on average, two dollars and fifty cents to Save the Children. However, when a second group of people were provided with a list of statistics about starvation throughout Africa - more than three million children in Malawi are malnourished, more than eleven million people in Ethiopia need immediate food assistance, etc. - the average donation was fifty percent lower.

I wish I had money to donate to these causes, but because my accounts reflect my full time student with no job status I regretfully cannot. But what I can do is make you all feel guilty that you haven't donated, or donated enough. Please, if you can, do so.

You can donate to the cyclone victims here.

I couldn't find a good site for earthquake relief that didn't have ulterior motives. If you find one, let me know and I will post it here.

To the red cross disaster relief fund here.

I guess my misanthropic attitude isn't really showing here, maybe I should go do some human disservice.

BOOM! Headshot!

2008-05-11T21:46:00.003-05:00

OK, watch this, then click the read more, below. It a spoof on people who play First Person Shooters (FPSs) too much.

You can check out a bunch of these bills here.

Encountering Individuals

2008-05-08T14:21:00.003-05:00

5.1.2008 3:30PM CMU The Cube Beth: I had an easy in, there were no tables so I asked if I could sit with her. I read quietly for a moment then asked her what she was studying. She's getting ready for med school and we spoke about how physics applies to med school. (+)

5.1.2008 5:30PM 15th and 4th Bus stop Cassandra: She's in my biological psychology class and we talked about that and med school again (it has been on my mind a lot). We also talked about being an EMT and CNA the schools training for that. Then somehow we got onto the topic of Texas and how messed up of a state it is (Austin v. The rest of the wasteland) and how she got her name (her mom named her after a newscaster - weird, but ok). (+)

5.1.2008 5:45PM 15th and 4th Bus stop Juan: He is graduated and working at the U recruiting Hispanic students. He is headed to grad school for architecture pretty soon and just got back from his internship in Argentina. We also conversed about the failing downtown area - a lot of places aren't doing well in downtown MPLS. (+)

5.2.2008 6:20OPM Espresso Royale Downtown Tony: I had just come from seeing Ironman so we talked about all the movies that are coming out soon and finals coming up. He is a student at Minneapolis Community and Technical College, so we talked about finals coming up too. (+)

5.2.2008 11:15PM Solera William and Devon: A few high school friends and I went to Solera because they have $2 sangias from 10PM-12AM. I went outside to bum a smoke and met these two. We talked about bowling and billiards and how sad it would be to be someone who dedicated their whole lives to a skill like bowling, like in kingpin or the Big Lebowsky. (+)

What's Attractive?

2008-05-04T14:00:00.002-05:00

In my biological psychology class we did an activity where the men and women named different attributes they thought were attractive in the opposite sex (sorry to the queer readers, this one was a little heterosexist). Two things happened that I think were of great interest: the guys were somewhat quiet, though not as quiet as I have previously experienced with other classes doing the same activity (intro psych and human sexuality); the women named mostly alpha male and classically masculine traits.

It seems like before a male can comment on gender issues he has to add some caveats, so here I go. In the sense that I believe women and men should be paid the same, treated equally, and beliefs about sexuality should not be different for each gender, I am a feminist. I also think there are obvious differences between men and women: to deny them is willful ignorance, and to make one more valuable over the other is subjective egotism.

Back to the classroom. Why would men be quieter during this exercise? My theory is pretty simple: men are ridiculed for not appreciating women for the qualities women would like appreciated when they express what is attractive to them. When you ask, “What do you find attractive?” the immediate ideas are more concrete (appearance), then we get to the abstract things (personality). Also, I think men are likely to respond differently when they are with a woman than with a man (this could be interesting to research – it is a hypothesis that could be operationalized). I would guess men to be more crass with other men (more physically and sexually oriented) and more gentle with women (more personality and emotionally sensitive). Anyway, the main idea was that I think it is more ok for women to express what they think is attractive in men than for men to express what they think is attractive in females. The next step is another “why” that I do not want to delve into right now.

The second interesting thing was that while the men’s list of attractiveness was more physical with some personality traits later, the women’s was more personality and wealth oriented (with hygiene and older age in there – but those are also indicators of health/wealth). At one point:

Girl: Dominance
Me (raises hand): Can I say submissiveness?
Class: (laughter)

The class laughed after I said submissiveness, not after she said dominance. I suppose that is partly wrapped up in our culture of independence, but . . .

I thought it was interesting that the feminist movement has asked men to find new things attractive in women and that it is offensive, almost, to find the classically feminine things attractive (what if the men had said, “submissive, raising our children, and being a homemaker”?), but men are asked to stay classically masculine: alpha male, breadwinner, and emotionally quiet.

We ended up talking about gender issues in my counseling class. People in that class were more sensitive to the issue. It may have been the way the discussion was framed: it was more “what are the different things that men and women have to deal with?” rather than something more opinionated as “what is attractive in men and women to the opposite sex.” To loop this back in with the heterosexist thing I mentioned above, I would be interested to hear from some homosexuals about some of the stereotypes they feel pressured to uphold from within the community.

It just makes you feel so small; People

2008-05-01T19:48:00.001-05:00

OK, who else has those moments of perceiving infinity? I just thought about how odd it is that the universe took 14 billion years to evolve humans, how we are on one planet of one average star in a space that takes us months/years to travel to our nearest planets (and in our most advanced technology), and we are proud of lining up stones in the longest chain known (great wall) and some pointy triangles in a desert. I mean, come on! And, probably, in 100,000 years – the blink of an eye evolutionarily/universally – whatever being is here will wonder why all these stacked piles of rusting steal are here (because I gotta tell ya ladies and gentlemen, I don’t have a whole lot of faith that humans will keep on keepin’ on – even though those rust piles will probably not be there in 100,000 years).

Alright, I’m done hitting you with that moment of stupidity. Here are some people that I met (that the universe will never know existed)(here: for the mission):

4.28.2008 9:30AM MCTC Bus stop Isaac: He is a mechanical engineer who has an internship in Edina that he really likes. He got to climb the corporate ladder there while he was in school. It got a little awkward at times, but over all (+).

4.29.2008 11:30AM CMU Student Group Offices Jillian: Only really spoke with her for a moment, because a friend was with her that I needed to have a few student group business words with. I mentioned that I had seen her around a lot though. (0)

4.30.2008 12:00PM Outside Walter Lib Joe and Kaylyn: Talked a bit about camping and the coming stress of the next two weeks when we bummed a smoke from his friend Kaylyn. Kaylyn. They made an odd duo, Joe was a real down home chill guy who had a more hippy-ish appearance, and Kaylyn is a sorority sister.(+)

4.30.2008 12:15PM Walter Library Computer Lab Laura: She was working on some statistics work and I asked her about it. She’s studying health sciences. Then she gave me the papers I was printing and I complemented her on her hair (gorgeous dirty blonde hair that came to her mid-back). (+)

Dining, First Encounters, and Book Worms

2008-04-27T11:43:00.009-05:00

A friend and I made crepes with a rhubarb and strawberry sauce for lunch on Saturday. The rhubarb and strawberry sauce had star anise, cloves, and cinnamon in it, too. We also had to hand whip the whipped cream - tired arms. It was delicious though. My parents recently went to Mexico and brought back some amazing vanilla that we put in the whipped cream.

This picture is less remarkable because I started eating it too soon. It's doro wat and baby red potatoes. Nothing too spectacular, but I hadn't had my fill of good Mediterranean food lately, so I had to make something. This recipe did kind of depend on the spices to make it pop: cloves, cinnamon, nutmeg, cayenne, tumeric, and cardamom.

* * * * *

I met some odd ones this weekend.

4.25.2008 1:15PM Coffman Memorial Union Shancie and Ada: They woke up from a nap on the chairs in the union and we talked about the ghost in Shancie's apt, rock climbing, DNA, sudoku, and the Schizophrenic people in the biomed library. (+)

4.26.2008 1:00AM Ashley's (a friend's) House Mark, Amir, and Jacob: Played some Fuck the Dealer and sat in the hot tub and watched Mark pass out, apparently he drank far too many pulls off the bottle of Jack. I arrived at about 12:30, so I was a little out of the loop. (0)

What's this about? Check it out.
* * * * *

I am adding one more book to my summer library: The Ancestor's Tale by Richard Dawkins. I have wanted to read it for some time, but it kept getting put off for other things. Finally, my ignorance of evolution got to me, I went out and purchased it. Sadly, Dawkins name in biology is not what people know him for, despite his major contributions to the field. His voice in the atheism debate precedes him instead. I actually knew about Dawkins before the whole atheist world exploded because I tried to read The Selfish Gene. I didn't get to far, admittedly.

The Ancestors Tale is more focused on the evolutionary process and the trees of ancestors and "concestors" (where, say, humans and chimps meet, that would be a "concestor" - Dawkins coined the word for use in this book). Dawkins picks up on the way Chaucer told The Canterbury Tales in this book, telling a few species from present to past. Each species on a pilgramage back to its primordial cousin. Apparently there are forty concestors for humans back to abiogenesis. Sadly, I will not really be able to dig into this book for another 2-3 weeks. But that is not too long to wait, I guess.

People I Met and a Heartbreaking Comparison (Godwin's Law)

2008-04-24T22:12:00.007-05:00

The lighter side of today:

4.24.2008 10:30AM Outside Coffman Union [Anon]: We spoke about the display which compared abortion to genocide, for more on this see below the fold. Despite the topic and our sheer disagreement, I have to rate this a positive because I believe in good discussion – it’s the basis of democracy. (+)

4.24.2008 12:35 Outside Rapson Hall Kevin: Returned my wallet after finding my number on the student registry and calling me. You’re a good man, Kevin. A definite positive. (+)

4.24.2008 3:50 Outside Fraser Hall Kristina: Talked about this project and biological psychology and our killer (as in awesome) instructor since we were just going into class. (+)

4.24.2008 3:50 Outside Fraser Hall Rachel: As above. Though with both of these I ended up doing most of the talking – they kept asking me questions! Geez! (+)

What's this about? Check it out.

The heavier side of the day:

Today there was a display outside the student union depicting aborted fetuses in the first trimester right next to a picture of a mass grave, the next panel was a similar picture of a fetus but next to an Black American being lynched, the next was next to a picture of a child from the Cambodian genocide. The main boards said "genocide awareness week," not "pro-life awareness week." I cannot go through the arguments I had with someone while I was there because it will make me so upset - but these letters to the editor from the college paper provide a pretty good argument. It broke my heart to see the lives and struggles of so many millions of people cheapened like that. If you are still curious why I put Godwin's Law in the title, check this out.

The People We Meet Pt. 1

2008-04-23T22:14:00.004-05:00

I am going to start a new installment called "The People We Meet." A few reasons I thought about this: I am horrible at remembering peoples' names so I thought it would be a good idea to write it down with a note as to what we talked about after each encounter; the other reason is more psychological, I think people (maybe just me) have this impression that meeting new people is hard and intimidating for fear of our interaction being rebuffed. This fear is largely unfounded.

People want positive interactions and will do almost anything to keep a conversation positive. If you happen to say something abrasive, they might correct you or express their belief about the topic - but most of the time they will just stop the conversation with the "horrid" result of awkwardness. And how bad is that, really? It proves nothing about either of the participants’ characters. It might prove something about the situation (fundamental attribution error) and it may aid in someone’s confirmation bias that they are poor at interpersonal interactions.

Albert Ellis is known for doing something like this.

Albert Ellis had exaggerated fears of speaking in public and during his adolescence he was extremely shy around women. At age 19, already showing signs of thinking like a cognitive-behavioral therapist, he forced himself to talk to 100 women in the Bronx Botanical Gardens over a period of a month. Even though he didn't get a date, he reported that he desensitized himself to his fear of rejection by women.

I am going to include the persons real name (unless we end up talking about sensitive information – which probably won’t happen since they are first meetings); the place we met; the date and time; a very brief summary of what we talked about; and a symbol indicating whether I thought the interaction was positive (+), negative (-), or neutral (0).

Eventually I want to analyze the kind of interactions I have and see where I need to improve, what gender/age differences there are, and what common topics arise for me on first meetings. I want to make clear these are strictly people I have met for the first time – no one I have met twice or more or friends I got together with for dinner, etc. Those are my goals and here are the people I met today.

4.23.2008 1:55PM Outside Walter Library UMN Sylvia: I began the conversation by asking her what her tattoo said. It said “chance.” I thought this was interesting because I have never seen a “chance” tattoo, but many “fate” tattoos. (+)

4.23.2008 2:45PM Northrop Mall Grass Danielle: I saw a friend, Ricky, playing Frisbee with someone and thought I would join in. We had sick minds and made many sexual jokes. (+)

4.23.2008 5:20PM Walter Library Study Area Sara(h): She was writing her senior paper in Spanish as well as being a pre-med student. Which is where her paper and med interest crossed over – she was writing a 30 pager on medicine in Spain around 1850. (0)

4.23.2008 6:00PM Northrop Mall Grass Rodrigo and Mike: They were juggling a soccer ball with an acquaintance of mine, Matt, and I decided to join them. We exchanged pleasantries and they made fun of Rodrigo because he was white with an Hispanic name calling him Juan and Dominique. (+)

Food me

2008-04-22T19:13:00.002-05:00

Dinner:

Lentil Soup (a little sweet for some reason)
Basmati Rice
Latkes (but these did not have any potato and did have cottage cheese)

Postsecret Lucky Bastard

2008-04-20T22:51:00.008-05:00

For some reason I can't post this picture, but holy crap! That person is lucky! (via Postsecret)

Here is another one that is good.

Someone wrote in a message that Frank (the postsecret guy) put up:

Your father's success was raising four children who can think for themselves.

That is spot on.

Summer Library

2008-04-19T17:45:00.004-05:00

The end of the semester is coming far too quickly, but at the same time never sooner. Why? Because I have a bookshelf to read and a wish list on amazon that I want to diminish to zero. Here are some of the books on my to do list:

The Paradox of Choice: This book sounds engaging. I have been engaging the ideas of free will, determinism and choice lately. This book follows in that vein and discusses whether too much choice actually gives us less freedom. The author (Barry Schwartz) has a TED talk about the issue that got me fired up. The major point being that there is an optimal amount of freedom of choice, anything beyond that amount actually paralyzes our decision making process.

EDIT: Ah! The beauty of science. Dan Gilbert has an opposing opinion.

Aside: If you haven’t gorged yourself on TED talks yet, take some time and do it – you might just end up talking like an Englishmen drinking port at the next party you attend.

Genome: Matt Ridley has written a few books. I read some of The Red Queen (wiki) but at the time I hardly had any idea what evolution was, so it was a little hard to understand. An instructor told me Genome is a bit better and more easily understood. Apparently Ridley takes one gene from each chromosome and talks about it as well as the social aspects and attitudes of genomic research, which will give me more knowledge to discuss the topic.

I have many other books on my wish list, but to be realistic I think I should choose just one or two more. So I think I will focus my attention on Head Cases and Leisure: The Basis of Culture. Head Cases is written by a neurologist who goes into a few case studies of people with brain damage and how it has affected their behavior. Of course, since I am studying psychology and am loving my biological psychology class, I am infinitely interested in this book. Leisure: The Basis of Culture, well, I think I will just quote from an amazon reviewer:

“It's message is simple: Western culture has taken upon itself a disposition toward life--and an outlook upon the world--of total work; of work-for-work's sake. . . . In so doing, so Pieper suggests, we threaten to loose [sic] our very souls, both culturally and personally. We must make time for contemplation and reflection, and to, more generally, bask in the truth, beauty and goodness that is available to us in every facet of existence.”

I have not read it yet, so I cannot judge what that reviewer has to say – but he certainly makes it sound interesting. Apparently the book itself has been something of a cultural phenomenon: my parents, just after a horrible description I made about leisure time being involved in things like science and inquiry recommended the book to me and said it used to be hugely popular.

So there is my library for the summer hopefully.

The Ethics of Genetic Testing

2008-04-18T18:06:00.003-05:00

This week has been busy. Two papers and one test all on very disparate subjects. It’s hard to cram all that into your brain sometimes – to wit: I think I bombed my biopsych test, which is a little disappointing considering how hard I studied and how well I have been doing in that class.

I’ve been paying more attention to some new and interesting topics lately that got me thinking. I want to talk about mental health, genetics and genetic testing, and what that means ethically and lawfully.

But first! An extremely basic lesson in genetics: on DNA there are four different nucleotides: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). These are repeated in different orders and a given sequence of them makes up a gene that codes for a specific protein that the cell will then produce. A sequence of three alleles (or three nucleotides) is called a codon. Since there are 4 nucleotides, there can be 64 (4x4x4) codons in genetic code.

Huntington’s Chorea is a degenerative brain disorder that is genetic. It is a repetition of CAG. If you have 11-35 repetitions of this you are probably safe, but if more than that, you could develop the disease. The more repetitions the greater the risk. Two facts to keep in mind: I say “could” because it also depends on your environment and stressors, and people can be genetically tested for this disease. Many people do not get tested because if one of their parents had it, they are likely to too, but they may not. Can you imagine the stress of getting the results from the lab that say you are highly likely to develop a disease that makes parts of your body uncontrollable, speech difficult, unable to learn new movements, memory impairment, hallucinations, delusions, etc, ending in death? I think ignorance is bliss in this case.

Scientists have also recently developed an objective test for bipolar disorder I (formerly: manic depression). This is interesting because the mood disorders can be hard to diagnose, but an objective test like this could be a big step forward, especially in preventative treatment. Apparently the following numbers, though not perfect, are not far from similar tests.

The predictive value of the BioM-10 Mood panel was tested on the initial group of study subjects and found to have an 85 percent accuracy in predicting high mood and 77 percent accurate in predicting low mood.

There are ethical problems that come from these kinds of tests though. And these tests are only going to become more available as the human genome project and others work on these problems. What happens when insurance companies find out you are XX% likely to develop a disease? I had a friend with diabetes who had a hard time finding insurance because of his “pre-existing condition,” what about conditions you might have? Do we test fetuses for diseases, and if they have the genetic code to make them likely to have a disease, abort it? Is the latter responsible citizenry (as it would reduce medical costs in the long run), eugenics or inhumane, or giving up on hope (since they are only likely – not positively going to develop the disease). Where do we draw the line: do we test everyone for Huntington’s disease but not bipolar disorder? Once we have the tests for them: Schizophrenia and criminality (Antisocial Personality Disorder – psychopathy)? Many of these things are influenced by nature, but none of them is 100% determined by one’s genes.

Someone foresaw this problem. Paul Wellstone drafted the Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act that is working its way up the ranks right now. It passed in the house in early March and is now waiting for senate approval. I think I read that the white house supports the bill, so there is hope. The bill has two parts: insurance companies would have to insure mental health the same way they insure physical health – by the doctor’s standards, not what the insurance companies deem worthy of their time and money; the second part recognizes the genetic testing issue and states that insurance companies would not be able to discriminate who they insure based on a genetic predisposition an individual might have.

Overall I think the genetic tests are a good thing. But legislators will have to recognize the need for new laws regarding the tests and how their information should be used. Wellstone was right to bring this to their attention. The disappointing part is that while 98% of democrats voted for this bill, only 24% of republicans did. Their argument is that this will raise the cost of insurance and force more people to live without it. While there may be some truth to that, the cynic in me thinks it’s simply an issue the insurance lobbyists getting what they want: to not pay out anymore money than they have to.

Davis and IQ/Empathy Update

2008-04-12T10:14:00.008-05:00

Well, Monique Davis, after her inane comments, has apologized to Rob Sherman. Rob accepted her apology but . . . (damnit! Why did Sherman have to go and do that?)

My research project for my research methods class has finally turned some results! All I am going to say right now is that my group got a significant correlation (p<.05, my actual p-value was .034). What that "p" letter means is that, if our sample of participants is from the general public, there is only a 5% chance that we would have received the results we did if there isn't actually a relationship between the variables. This is the general standard that psychologists go by in the research, but it can go all the way down to p<.001.

I'll be writing the results and discussion section of my paper today - so you'll be able to see the strength and direction of the correlation when I put that up here. It's kind of surprising.

Some questions I am interested in as follow up research: Men are socialized to feel anger and happiness more than any of the other emotions, are they more likely to empathize with only these emotions than with sadness, disgust, fear, and surprise? Also, since this is only done with one measure of verbal IQ (admittedly not a great one), and one measure of empathy, would this correlation still hold true with other measures? I had one other, but I can't remember it at the moment.

Illinois Rep Monique Davis (D) - RESIGN!

2008-04-08T22:36:00.005-05:00

I don't know if you all have heard all the hub-bub about this recently (it's been all over the atheist blogs - I have been slacking on the atheist community) but Democrat Representative Monique Davis flipped her shit on Rob Sherman - an outspoken atheist and first amendment activist in Illinois. There is a video about it below the fold.

There are some atheist organizations now calling for her resignation. I'll let you make up your mind about that. But it is a little surprising that a black democrat is saying this isn't it? I mean, African Americans have had to fight tooth and nail for their rights and democrats are supposedly a little more friendly to the first amendment.

haha, try googling her name now. She will live this one down in infamy, I guess.

(via Friendly Atheist and Pharyngula)

Public Vandalism

2008-04-06T00:31:00.008-05:00

On the bathroom stall in Walter Library's 2nd floor restroom:

God . . . (another's writing) saves humans and liberates their souls
diseases
humanity

Thought it was funny that all someone had to do was scratch out "li." And apparently some Christians are just as bad when it comes to public vandalism as the non-religious.

Shellfish and Saffron Risotto

2008-03-30T21:07:00.004-05:00

Jenna and I ate a fantastic meal tonight. I don't want to explain it, so you can just gawk. Enjoy.

Ok, since you seem so desperate:

The mussels were steamed in white wine and garlic. The sea scallops and shrimp were cooked in the risotto. The risotto was saffron and Parmesan. And the bruschetta (pronounced broo-sket-ah) was not really a classic - it had dried chipotle and cucumber in it.

The only thing I am disappointed about was the texture of the risotto. It always seems too creamy.

But aren't the colors glorious?!

Some recent food

2008-03-29T12:50:00.005-05:00

I made some other food we didn't take pictures of. So you won't see the shepherd's pie or the dishes I made and posted before (I made that Tomatillo Chicken Soup again and some eggs benedict - of course). But the pasta below was one I got out of I'm Just Here for the Food and the Dolmathes were out of a Jewish cookbook. Other than thinking about The Curious Cook while making them, I didn't need a cookbook for the pork chops.

The green stuff is Swiss Chard (the latter link is the better one). The most amazingly healthy thing you can eat. Try it, your body and immune system will love you for it.

The yogurt looking thing is actually cucumber, sour cream, Labna (this stuff tastes like nothing you have ever had before - you must try it, the consistency is what really makes it though), and dill. Pretty simply recipe, but it made something nice to dip the dolmathes into. If you have a Mediterranean Grocer in your area (if in MPLS you can get it at Bill's Imported Foods on LynLake) you can probably get some Labna there instead of making it.

Philosophy of Science/Psychology

2008-03-29T12:41:00.003-05:00

I talked a little bit about the philosophy of psychology a while ago. I keep encountering it this semester. My counseling psychology class talks about the different assumptions that varying approaches to therapy make: psychoanalysis (very deterministic), existential therapy (compatibilistic – also, the concept of existential anxiety, which I am fond of), and many of the other therapies simply state that personality is one thing we can control, though with struggle. My research methods class brought up the cause and effect relationship between behaviors, which is a fairly deterministic idea. Behavior doesn’t NOT have an antecedent (I say it with the double negative to emphasize that chance is not involved). We do not act out of a vacuum, we respond.

So I went and spoke with my professor after class about it. He gave me two articles to read on the topic and I have worked my way through one of them (the stuff I want to read never gets done as quickly). More context for this discussion came from a book I read over spring break called Dark Ages: The Case for a Science of Human Behavior. I lent the book to a friend (who is doing social psychological research) the moment I finished it – I hope he enjoys a good polemic. In any case, I will not be able to quote from it here.

In the natural sciences there are six basic assumptions we make: (1) “nature is orderly . . . events do not just occur”, (2) “we can know nature . . . the basic conviction that human beings are just as much a part of nature as any other object,” (3) “all natural phenomenon have natural causes” (no supernaturalism), (4) “nothing is self evident . . . claims for truth must be demonstrated objectively,” (5) “knowledge is based on experience . . . we must rely on our [sensual] perceptions, experience, and observations,” (6) “knowledge is superior to ignorance . . . [this belief] is diametrically opposed to the position taken by approaches based on absolute truth” (footnote).

The article assumes these are true for the social sciences as well as the natural sciences, as well they should be. But Dark Ages points out that we have nicety ideas about humanity that we need to rid ourselves of before we can make much progress with the social sciences. He lays out five arguments, I will report the few I can remember (all of these being reasons social scientists put forth for not being able to study humans well): (1) humans have free will, therefore we cannot predict much behavior; and (2) humans cannot be objective when studying other humans, resulting in inaccurate results from the studies.

McIntyre has written another book on this topic and has basically come to the conclusion that the arguments are so weak that he does not even think the people who use them believe them and that they were excuses for being afraid to find the real answers. Free will is an empirical question. We can test it – so why not try? Humans are a part of nature, and we have stayed empirical and objective about it, and we have had some small victories in the social sciences, so let’s up the ante and do it better.

I do not know if many of the things McIntyre says are true at the UMN. He accuses social scientists of approaching theories as if they should validate the theory instead of test its validity. I feel like the scientists I have met have all been good at what they do. That does not mean they were always right, it just means they are honest scientists.

Also, McIntyre does not really address the ethics involved in testing on human subjects – we cannot raise humans in our labs controlling their environments; we cannot instigate riots to see what were the triggers that tipped it over the edge; we cannot ask humans about illegal activities without some of them having to be reported; we cannot get accurate responses from participants because they (1) try to responded affirmatively because they want to help the researcher, (2) if you are asking them something that social norms say you should not ask about – they may respond with lies trying to portray themselves more positively, (3) they may not understand the task (4) etc etc etc. There are whole books written on simply how to reduce these factors in experiments.

This post kind of evolved into a discussion on experiments rather than the philosophy of psychology. To tie the themes together, I would say there is a deterministic nature about the natural sciences and that psychologists would like to recognize that in their science as well, but I do not think they recognize that directly. I think a philosophy of science course would be a good required course for all those entering an empirically based degree, and it would be totally fun.

1. Frankfort-Nachmias, C. & Nachmias, D. Research Methods in the Social Sciences 7th Ed.

Austin Cline comes to CASH

2008-03-08T03:06:00.003-06:00

I mentioned Austin Cline in the past, he blogs insanely and has an indeterminable amount of hits on his site (ok, that was supposed to be a pun, he actually can’t say how many hits his site gets per about.com’s rules). Well, CASH got him to come and speak at the University of Minnesota this past week. He spoke about unethical science and pseudoscience (and their relationships to belief and ethics in some cases). He called it a “back to basics” lecture.

(This is an old video of Michael Shermer - the author of Why People Believe Weird Things)

He described unethical science as anything that looks like science, but is not. Unethical science is not "science as applied in the real world that leads to negative or inhumane outcomes." At this point it becomes philosophy, not science. The scientist’s job is simply to test a hypothesis, not to judge what should be done with the acceptance or rejection of the hypothesis after testing it.

He pointed out something interesting about the relationship between science and every weltanschauung (I admit, I learned that word from a thesaurus – but it is a good word). We’ve all seen it before, everyone would love to have science confirm their hypothesis about the world and how it works, but they have some contempt for it when it challenges their ideas.

The problem is science does not take sides. Scientists test a hypothesis and say it was or was not supported by the data they gathered. Then another scientist tests it. Then another. Then, once this has happened many times with the same answer coming in consistently, we generalize it and say the hypothesis is either unsupported or the evidence suggests the world works in the hypothesized way. But it does not prove the world works in such a way – it leaves it open for further testing and new methods of testing (it is very important to test the same hypothesis in many ways – if the hypothesis is true, it should be able to stand this scrutiny).

Given the information above, Austin mentioned that it is the most ethical thing we can do to come to our beliefs using the best means possible and available to us. Like I said, this is back to basics, but it is important. We need to remember that many of our conceptions about how the world works are not based on fact, but on our own anecdotal experiences. It is unethical of us to make a decision based on uninformed ideas we have about the world. I guess I had not heard “unethical” put in that context before. I had heard that it is best to make informed decisions, but not that it was unethical not to.

Another bit about Austin Cline’s visit forthcoming.

Obituary: Dr. Steven Feinstein

2008-03-05T21:09:00.003-06:00

I used to be a student in the Jewish Studies department. Since I started looking at all the different religions with a more critical eye, I always praised Judaism for its willingness to be critical of its God and teachings. I also recognized and had a sympathetic mind for them having suffered the most of any people in history. It seems foreign and infinitely depressing to me that humans should need such a scapegoat, and that they should choose one people so consistently.

Yesterday, Dr. Stephen Feinstein died. He was the Director of the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies at the University of Minnesota. He came to CASH to speak to our group about the problems that the holocaust presented for all Abrahamic religions, not just Judaism. He was very informal and welcoming of the CASH members and their questions. He sat in the front of the room with his legs crossed and cracked jokes with the members.

An email I received about Dr. Feinstein said he was known in much of Europe and the U.S. for the world class research facility about the Holocaust he had established here at the U of M. I wish I could remember more besides his anachronistic use of transparencies and a projector from the stone age, it seems hardly worthy of his stature and accomplishments to just remember this.

Ethical Considerations

2008-03-02T21:13:00.004-06:00

Last week I was presented with two occasions where I could play the therapist role. I am better equipped now than in the past (since I am taking a counseling psychology class) and I know the limits that I should put on myself. Of course, one class is not enough to be a psychologist (whole PhD programs are based off that), but I know better than the average citizen how to counsel. The limits my class imposed are hard to follow when you see someone suffering though.

I gave advice to someone close to me about counseling in the hopes it would help a person s/he was in contact with. The problem was the individual did not like the institution's psychologist. While the psychologist should recognize this and in the spirit of beneficence and non-malfeasance (ethical principles in counseling psychology, and just good human traits) change his/her approach to this person's therapy, I still wanted to provide the person I was with the best advice I could.

I had more context than I am presenting here (I feel some obligation to keep this as vague as possible). But I suggested displaying "unconditional positive regard" for the person, and empathizing with the person's situation. The personality of the individual is fragile, so it is hard to treat him/her with the same harshness we treat those around us in everyday life (we are unusually terse with people, I think).

"Unconditional positive regard," a dimension of person-centered therapy, does not mean you do not challenge the person. It just means you do not have (that is the key word, you must be congruent with this emotion) resentment for the person you are counseling. When the person acts discordantly, confrontation to change the behavior the person sees as destructive (it must be something s/he perceives as destructive – not the counselor) is still used.

But there are the ethical considerations I ran into with this situation and the one I did not write about. I have actively been trying to be more empathic. By helping someone with his/her issue, am I serving myself (which is not what a therapeutic personality should do), or am I just being myself and trying to help this person? Also, I probably should not try to help this person with his/her struggles if they are seeing a counselor because I would not want to affect any progress between psychologist and patient.

The best I can do, I think, is simply to be a friend. Be there to talk if s/he comes to me, but only when s/he brings it up am I allowed to talk about.

I remember in high school I got a phone call from the father of a girl I knew. He told me she tried to commit suicide again and was in the hospital. I had been through this many times with her (statistically, women try more, men are more successful). I remember crying because I wanted to help her not feel so . . . whatever was making her depressed, but powerlessness was more what I felt.

Well, that was really dramatic. It's different this time, though. Powerlessness is not really the emotion I feel. It is actually a sense of obligation to only be in touch with the person so as to positively affect him/her, and if that means just being a friend and nothing more, than that is what I do.

Opposing Videos

2008-02-29T15:36:00.003-06:00

I got the first one from Phayngula and stumbled upon the other. They aren't exactly opposing, but the first is about evangelists and the second is about artificial selection creating some really beefy cattle.

vs.

They're both pretty fucked up, huh?

Weekend Quisine

2008-02-25T01:10:00.006-06:00

Eggs Benedict. Again. Because it is so good, and I had bacon this time.

French Potato Salad. Doesn't look pretty in that container, but the idea is to make my life easier in the coming week.

Pork Roast stuffed with rosemary, garlic, and a shallot. It turned out too dry. Don't click that ---> I told you not to click it, there is no more to read this time.

PKU; IQ and Empathy

2008-02-23T21:07:00.003-06:00

Phenylketonuria (PKU) is a disorder that has come up in almost every psychology class I have taken thus far (with the exception of counseling psychology). My guess as to why it comes up so often is because it is one disorder for which we know what causes it (generally), how to find it, and how to treat it. No cure yet, but what is there a cure for? The problem is that PKU patients do not have the gene which codes for phenylalanine hydroxylase which breaks down phenylalanine.

PKU is tested for at birth in the U.S. And the test turns out a positive about 1 in 15,000 births (but this varies widely in different populations – Africans who carry this gene are so few we might as well say they don’t). PKU can cause some major problems if it is not treated. When phenylalanine reaches a high enough level is can cause brain damage and mental retardation. But this can all be controlled by diet.

The diet is not fun, but I would guess it is better than mental retardation. PKU patients cannot eat foods with lots of phenylalanine (meaning meats, starchy foods, dairy products, and NutraSweet). But here is the thing I actually wanted to talk about. Phenylalanine is something we need in our diet. It helps in the production of dopamine, norepinephrine, and epinephrine. Because all of those are so important, you have to get them some other way.

In this instance, it is lucky that phenylalanine is in a distant chain of reactions that lead to the above neurotransmitters. Phenylalanine interacts with phenylalanine hydroxylase to make tyrosine which interacts with tyrosine hydroxylase to make L-DOPA. The chain keeps going on until L-DOPA becomes dopamine which becomes the others above. Since dopamine does pretty much everything (involved in depression, eating, memory, sleep, it is even involved in which way you turn more – left or right) it’s pretty important to have. So people with PKU have to eat more food high in tyrosine to replace their lack of phenylalanine.

In research methods my group is studying the link between empathy and IQ. I guess I was not sure what we would find, and like I said earlier, the research on it was slim to nil. But we finally found one study that mentioned it. Someone at Cambridge came up with an empathy scale and decided to measure it against a short form of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. It turned out that there was a weak (about .2) correlation between the two, but it was only one study, so I am eager challenge or support those results.

Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D.P. (2006). Development and Validation of the Basic Empathy Scale. Journal of Adolescence, 29, 589-611.

Sappy Will

2008-02-19T23:11:00.004-06:00

For my research methods class, my group is researching whether there is an association between IQ and empathy. So far . . . we have no idea. Probably because the debates over whether IQ is a real construct and the trouble with finding a test that actually taps Empathy (cognitive and emotional) take up enough time.

I am reading an article now where the researchers try to validate the empathy tests. And I had an "AHA moment." Probably not to huge of a thing for most people, but I place a huge value on the spectrum of empathy and desire to feel it more. I typically have my misanthropic attitudes where I dismiss other's troubles as "glad it's not me."

So here was my "aha!" Empathy is the associating of one’s emotions with those of a target other. Sympathy is empathy with associated feelings of concern for the other. Finally, Compassion is empathy and sympathy with action to alleviate the adverse feelings or situation of the other. Meaning we can feel empathy but still think a person deserved it, or feel sympathy and still not desire to do something about it. But compassion encompasses it all.

I have compassion tattooed on my arm because it includes the action part. There is just a lot of work before people come to that compassion place. But I think we should all try.

Cold Diuresis

2008-02-16T14:06:00.002-06:00

Minnesota is ass cold. Yesterday it was -6*F. Enough to make your nose bleed, and also to make your have to pee, often. I have been observing this for a while: whenever I go outside with no knowledge of pressure under my belt, I suddenly need to reach a bathroom, LIKE NOW! It's called Cold Diuresis.

Apparently your body is constricting its blood vessels and sending more fluid to your kidneys (and possibly sending more vasopressin from your posterior (back part of) pituitary gland to your adrenal gland on your kindey - making it tell you it's time to pee). Your body does this in order to keep your temperature regulated. It wants you to urinate because otherwise it has to spend energy trying to keep your urine warm when it should be spending that energy trying to keep your organs warm.

How cool is that? Your body is actually predicting hypothermia (not really - it's more like it is just regulating its temperature) and making you have to pee because it's a good way to preserve heat. Maybe I'm odd, but I think that is awesome.

Slow Down

2008-02-11T23:21:00.000-06:00

OK. I think I finally have a few minutes. I am sure you all know that the messiness of your living quarters is directly proportional to your level of stress. And let me tell you, my place looked worse than a frat house basement on Sunday morning. I have not even written for myself. The only words I have written in the past two weeks are "Happiness is not a competition." Good thing to remember, that.

(Evolution changes my world. This is from the Field Museum. Click to enlarge.)

I took an adventure to Chicago with some friends. Chris, Dave, Amy and I decided to go to Chi-town for a little R&R. We paid the $45 for the Megabus(TM) ticket down and hopped on with all the overweight mothers with screaming babies and enjoyed a nice, relaxing ride down.

We ended up two hours late because of a snow storm in Chicago. But we saw the Art Institute (where I was not allowed to bring a minicooler of food, so I buried it in snow near one of the lions outside), the Field Museum, the Baha'i Temple, and the historic library downtown, ate Gino's Pizza, and Lou Mitchell's pancakes.

(The Baha'i Temple. Click to enlarge.)

The bus ride home yielded a different outcome than planned. We sat at Union Station for three hours before someone from Megabus(TM) told us the bus was canceled. Our bus schedule stated 10:30 for the depart time, at 2:00 we departed to a McDonald's. We rode the next bus out of Chicago at 1:00PM the next day (Sunday).

Right when I got back the hustle started. I danced from the bus station all the way back to my apartment. A crowd of people joined in when I passed the Gay 90's and the song "Do the Hustle" boomed. MC Hammer gelled with the group well, but his moves atrophied since his bankruptcy. OK, I lied. But that would be cool.

(Watch at 35 seconds in. Hilarious.)

The hustle began to get the debate ready for the CASH crew. PZ Myers and Loyal Rue were coming to talk about the compatibility of Science and Religion. I don't want to write a whole lot about it, but I will say it was interesting because it spoke more to the differing perspectives of Atheism. They both generally agreed the two were incompatible, but Loyal thought we should come up with a new story (mythology) that included science (granted he knows this is unlikely) and PZ wanted stories (myths) to die and just have science take its place. If you want to read more about it Greg Laden wrote about it, and PZ had a short commentary. It's kind of cool to be the guy who made it happen - Greg Laden and PZ Myers are both heavily read bloggers and great scientists/science educators.

/end.

Para-Science: The Mozart Effect

2008-01-30T20:27:00.000-06:00

So . . . this is kind of cheating, because I wrote this for class, but it's about the Mozart Effect and whether Mozart can truly affect us in the many ways this article claims it can.

An overview of Campbell’s article might make one suspect that the Mozart Effect music has become a cure all, even for things that have no conscious mind. Campbell opens his article with a cultural and historical perspective of music. The examples he provides are meant to strengthen the idea that music is therapeutic and is more instrumental to our lives than language. Campbell then proceeds with an anecdote about a French actor who overcame his stuttering from the Mozart Effect. Along with other anecdotes and some “evidence” he presents the Mozart Effect as being able to affect one’s IQ, yeast growth, milk production in cows, along with other unrelated subjects.

Included in the “evidences” above is a story about Mozart playing in the presences of yeast for sake and making the best drink. I certainly hope it was not simply a good batch of yeast. Given that yeast is also particularly finicky (I cook a lot), the temperature, humidity, and moistness may have been better this time than others. Also, given we have no source, stories do not add up to laboratory evidences with many trials.

Campbell also seems to attribute the gain of clear speech and faster learning of English in Laotian and Cambodian people to the Mozart Effect. As the former is an anecdote and, any research on it would now be retrospective, it would be entirely inappropriate to attribute the results to Mozart’s music. The latter is also hard to substantiate in that I see no mention of control groups.

The story of “Krissy” jumps out at me as retrospective research completely misappropriated. In an incubator, and given a slim chance of survival, she listened to Mozart. She survived the low birth weight and nearly terminal condition. Campbell is quick to attribute the survival and later strong interest in music to Mozart. He seems to forget other possibilities for her survival (being in a NICU with constant attention/monitoring) and music interest (possible genetic propensity for music, possibly her parents exposed her to more than the Mozart in the NICU – as he stated in the article, they did).

Campbell’s prominence on the Mozart Effect website would suggest he manages the site along with gaining from its sales. He has published many books on the subject (non peer-reviewed, from my perusal) and sells Mozart’s music on the website. Sure to gain kickbacks from these sales, his objectivity on the research and stories he provides are called into question. He also frequently speaks to various organizations – the more he provides his perspective, the more likely he is to gain from it as advertisement. Campbell stands to gain enormously from the propagation of the Mozart Effect idea. The sense of something “miraculous” in all aspects of Mozart’s music laces all his writing on his website and in the provided article.

In order to be less skeptical of the Mozart Effect, laboratory conducted and peer-reviewed articles need to be provided. With claims of cows providing more milk, yeast making better sake, and newborns making full recoveries, strong evidence is needed. Campbell’s retrospective and uncritical approach leaves much to be desired, but may provide us with areas to research and myths to debunk. In the only study that provided a control group, the sample size reported was six: far too small to conclude anything (though maybe worthy of conducting further research). A study including a placebo effect should also be incorporated. It is a possibility there is an effect on people (and cows?) simply because of relaxation.

HOLY GHOST!

2008-01-29T07:26:00.000-06:00

This game is ridiculous! You get to choose which prophet you are and fight all the other prophets. The last prophet is a surprise and is totally hilarious. It fits well.

The other hilarious part - you know how in street fighter the karate guy shot balls of fire, or in Mortal Kombat Sub Zero shot balls of ice? Well, Jesus shoots balls of "HOLY GHOST!" It's hilarious.

Brains and Bad Laws

2008-01-26T17:47:00.001-06:00

School Supplies:

I have a brain. Well, actually . . . two. And since we are going with fake brains, we might as well go with the metaphorical second brain males have. So I guess that makes three brains. The more the merrier? But I can only pick one apart. It would be really bad news if I tried to pick either of the others apart (though I have seen both done in pictures and videos).

(Paint sucks as an image modifier)

Biological Psychology is going to require me to know many of these brain areas and their functions so I thought I would learn a little better if I had a toy to play with instead of just pictures. Besides, it’s just cool! Who doesn’t want a toy brain?! Ok, so I’m a freak, but I knew that already.

Some Freethinking:
If we learn about the influences that make this a deterministic world, does that give us more free will? Or is it like a kink in the deterministic timeline and after that kink it is determined again, but in a different form? I have been starting to think that we may have free will at points in our life and only over certain aspects of our life.

You know that prayer, “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change what I can; and the wisdom to know the difference?” Most things in life we cannot change, others are extremely hard, and nearly none are easy. But we can, to an extent, change our personality. About half of our personality is genetically determined – the other half is up to where, when, and how you grow. But people can gain insight into their personality and decide something needs changing. I think it takes a courageous person to do this, but I think this is a point where we actually can control our fates. Which is what I might call free will.

Of course, this could all be because I would like to be a psychologist too. Helping people find beliefs and encourage behaviors congruent with those beliefs is something that helps people become happier. I could be biased.

Some UMN Law:

(Something I might send in to The Daily as an editorial)

(Look how hot and cool she is! I don't even need it to be in English to know I want to smoke Philip Morris and Philip Morris alone!)

I would like to thank The Daily for printing Post's article about the smoking ban. I had no idea the University was contemplating such an inane ban on smoking on all university property. It smacks of a few overly sensitive Smokey Bears getting ahead of themselves.

The ban would do little to reduce the nicotine habit that people have formed for years. Even as freshman entering the U, it is likely a smoker has been at it for a year or two. It would however make smoking students living in the dorms cross the street to the hospital grounds, where smoking is probably more detrimental to patients coming out for some fresh air – or to have a cigarette of their own. Or would patients be banned from smoking unless they cross to the river side of East River Road?

A campus wide ban on smoking amounts to not liking the smell of a passer by who happens to be taking a drag. Maybe if smokers pulled off strawberry Swishers or Cognac dipped cigars there wouldn't be an issue. The amount of smokers on campus is minimal – try going downtown and walking a few blocks; the difference is clearly noticeable. The intoxicating smell of some overzealous perfume wearers distracts me when I am trying to study in the library – that harms my education. Can we ban perfume instead?

Like Post said, statistically cars and McDonalds are more dangerous than cigarettes. But the University is all too eager to make deals with Baja Sol, Chic-Fil-A, and Starbucks. Have you seen the calorie and fat counts on those foods and pastries!? You know that Classic Coffee Cake? It's barely a hundred grams. 22 of those are fat and it has 450 calories. Or maybe we should get another ethical company like Phillip Morris to give money to the U, then we could even smoke in our classes.

(And yes, I am a little biased here too – I smoke sometimes. But it is a stupid law)

Firsts

2008-01-23T20:22:00.000-06:00

(awkward . . .)

The first day of class came and went, but not without uncomfortable moments and fun moments. Italian irked me and made me nervous. Taking it pass/fail makes it less worrisome, but I want as much I can get out of it. Languages aren’t my strong point though. The positive: Holly and Eric are in the class too (classmates from previous Italian courses).

Counseling Psychology was a fine event. Nothing special. Biological Psychology presented with some fun. “The Hard Problem” deals with the issue of consciousness, how we have it. What makes a three pound ball of tiny neurons produce consciousness? We read about it in our books a little bit and our professor asked us about it in class. A brave student came forth and answered:

“Well, I am a Christian so we believe the spirit is in contact with the brain and makes consciousness. The spirit and consciousness make consciousness.”

I turned to Jenna, who is in my class (awesome!), and rolled my eyes immediately after I heard the word Christian. I rolled them again when he said the last sentence, hoping he would realize how small his circle of logic was (it is a direct quote). Normally this would be an over-reaction, but in these classes, when someone says the first five words above, expect dogmatic conservative Christian spouting.

The professor indulged and challenged him a little bit, but stopped him when he brought Jesus into the conversation. A very thoughtful response came from the next student, but I can’t remember it because I was still in shock that this Xian just said all this in front of 120 people in an academic setting. I wanted to respond with a simple, “I think it is fine that scientists and the public don’t know the answer to this at the moment, and I would argue that given enough time and research we may know this answer. But that is far off from where we are now.” Too bad shyness gets the better of me when a hundred eyes are on me.

Other firsts: I made lasagna (with fresh mozzarella and Italian sausage – I needed some meat in there) and a spicy Thai soup. The Thai soup turned out extremely hot and limey. But it is good. The lemongrass stayed firm – which is really annoying me.

Ingrediets: water, lemongrass, ginger, garlic, jalapeno, shrimp, kaffir lime leaf, fish sauce, lime, cilantro, and shallots.

My Knees Are Shaking

2008-01-22T07:05:00.000-06:00

Well, here it goes. The beginning of another semester. I am excited and a little nervous. I don't think my classes should be any harder than last semester, and I have one semester of being the Activities Director for CASH under my belt, but I am still sweaty palmed over looking into the future.

The classes: Biological Psychology, Counseling Psychology, Research Methods, Italian, and Classical Guitar. I am most excited for the first and second classes. I am only auditing the Guitar class, so I don't have to feel pressure from it if my other classes are demanding more time of me.

I am confident the classes will provide me with plenty of interesting topics to write about and philosophical issues to roil over.

And here is the rest of it.

Pork Fat Compound

2008-01-13T18:43:00.000-06:00

I gotta come up with a better name than that. Pan Roast Pork (I didn't really pan roast it though)? Pork Piatto ("piatto" means smooth or tranquil in Italian - because after eating all that fat you might want to rest a little)? There might also be a popular recipe very much like this and I am just showing my ignorance.

Here's what I did. . .
The bed is made of steamed spinach, caramelized onions (more like burnt onions), and 3 cloves of roasted garlic.

I bought a boneless pork chop from the butcher at Lund's. It was three bucks and a whole meal, so what the hell? I rubbed it will a touch of olive oil, Kosher salt, and fresh ground black pepper. I seared it in my beautiful cast iron pan (thanks for that, dad!) for 1.5 minutes on either side.

I took it out after that delicious brown protein crust was made and had three pieces of bacon ready for it. Between the bacon and the chop on either side I put thin slices of garlic and sprigs of thyme. I wrapped it up and pinned the bacon in place with toothpicks. I put the chop with its dressings back in the cast iron for about 4 minutes over medium heat on either side.

Once I took it off I had the bed of spinach, onions, and garlic ready and put the "Pork Piatto" on top. Then, just to make sure I had enough fat and garlic, I added two tablespoons of a compound butter I made last night: roasted garlic, fresh ground white pepper, a little white wine, and fresh basil chiffonade.

Holy crap that tasted good. I was going to put some rosemary in there too, but I didn't have any fresh, and I forgot to use the dry stuff. C'est la vie. Why Jews and Muslims deprive themselves of such a beautiful meat eludes me (actually, I do know why, but it isn't a good enough reason).

Eggs Benedict and Ranch Dressing

2008-01-10T14:14:00.000-06:00

Breakfast! I made eggs benedict this morning.

It's easier than I thought it was. It's just all that whisking that wore my arm out. Hollandaise takes a lot of that. I was talking with a friend and she said she wouldn't touch the stuff because it was too fatty. It is egg and butter, so I kind of understand. But her statement did endanger our friendship somewhat.

There were a few things I didn't have so I had to make do with what I did. Sadly, I didn't have any bacon. Canadian or otherwise. I thought one aspect of the bacon was to make the dish a little saltier, so I added just a pinch of Koscher salt. I also didn't have any English Muffins, so I just cut some ciabatta thick and toasted and used that.

My hollandaise turned out dececnt. I made some a while ago, but it just wasn't tangy enough so I called my mommy and asked her exactly what she did. I just made a third of her recipe and it turned out well. I guessed it before I called mom, but I wanted to make sure: I just needed more lemon, and more time whisking over the heat. I wish they served hollandaise this good in restaurants.

I also want to chew people out a little bit about ranch dressing. I hate it because everyone puts in on everything like they were the Picasso of food. And they rant and rave about how good it is. IT'S FUCKING SALAD DRESSING!!! If you want to eat salad dressing then eat salad dressing, but please don't ruin that wood stove margherita pizza with your overzealous use of a cream based lettuce sauce.

Imagine how gross it would have been had I put Ranch Dressing on my Eggs Benny. Blech!

A little about Multiple Sclerosis and the CNS

2008-01-09T17:36:00.000-06:00

So here’s how dorky I am: I am reading my textbooks for next semester. And liking them!

I am taking a class in biological psychology next semester. So far the textbook has been mostly review (I took a bio class a while back). I have read the first two chapters. But it got me thinking about Multiple Sclerosis. There’s lot of big words in this post that I am not completely comfortable using yet – so feel free to correct me.

The second chapter deals with neurons and their different properties and the different kinds of neurons. There are two systems that perform similar functions called the Oligodendrocyte and Schwann Cells. The Oligodendrocytes build up myelin on the neuron’s axon in the brain and spinal cord (central nervous system). The Schwann Cells perform the same function in the peripheral nervous system.

The myelin sheaths that wrap around an axon in a neuron are like the rubber that we put around electrical lines. It protects the signal from diffusing into its surroundings rather than traveling to the presynaptic dendrites and relaying their information. What happens to people with MS is they eventually lose control of certain things. Function can be regained in relapse-remitting MS, but secondary-progressive MS is more insidious.

The section in the book didn’t talk about Multiple Sclerosis, but I remembered that it was a demyelinating disease. I wasn’t sure how it did it though. When I read this I thought maybe it was something that attacked the Oligodendrocytes or Schwann Cells, or a genetic dysfunction that harmed reduced their production, or maybe it was something that directly harmed the myelin, or maybe myelin or its builders had some intimate relationship with certain nutrients that a lack of caused MS.

Without taking hours out of my life to read through the journal articles on the issue, wikipedia told me they aren’t really sure why people get MS. It also pretty much said that all of my ideas were things they were investigating, but that the idea with the most adherents was that the immune system attacks the nervous system because of a virus or retrovirus that resembles something in the nervous system. Lack of vitamin D during childhood might also be a factor.

I think I will look into this more later.

You're not Special.

2008-01-05T13:23:00.000-06:00

(Icarus and his wings - Click to enlage - go here to learn about Icarus)

There were some things that we were all told when we were youngsters: “You’re unique,” “You’re special,” “You’re different from everybody else,” “You can do anything if you put your mind to it,” “You could change the world.” Personally, I think these are very damaging. If not damaging, they don’t help a child develop into a well adjusted adult in any way.

I was at the Kitty Kat Club (a faux-swanky bar in Dinkytown – not a strip joint) with a few friends and we had this discussion. Most of them virulently disagreed with me (though I was more arguing that it was harmful).

When people tell children “You’re unique” or “special” (sometimes as in to a class of students, “You are all special in your own way”) they are receiving an inflated sense of self-worth without accomplishment. It can give them a sense of entitlement without actually accomplishing anything. When they have this sense of self-importance without any real reason they have been set up for their wax wings to melt. It’s an empty balloon of hubris. Ask them why they are important and they’ll get angry at the question rather than giving an answer.

(My personal philosophy – peoples’ value is not inherent, but that isn’t to say some people are valueless. If they love or are loved they have some value there, and the must be loved for a reason. But love does not entitle one to anything.)

This idea that each of us is “special” or “unique” also creates an atmosphere of individualism. It becomes more about “what can I do?” rather than “what can we do?” In the end, the individual is weak compared to the impact that many can make. Try changing something without the help of a group. Democracy is a funny thing: yes it is about being able to pull yourself up by your bootstraps, but, in contrast, it is also about changing your community with popular support.

It is not a bad thing to congratulate people on a job well done, or to point out to them their strengths. This is basically conditioning: you are giving them praise for something they accomplished, hopefully making them want to accomplish more. Maybe they will even learn to praise themselves. This will give them a sense of entitlement also, but they can actually tell you why they are entitled to a certain thing with good reason, not simply because they are a human raised by someone who told them they were special.

I spoke to my dad about this for a little while and asked him if it was generational. He said he thought so. It wasn’t something that was popular in parenting and schools until around the ‘70s and ‘80s. He also said that he saw it fading in current teaching, but that he had to deal with this kind of attitude from students and parents a lot. The students would wonder why they were receiving a poor grade and my dad would tell them: because you didn’t do your homework. The students and the students’ parents would argue with him! What right do they have? He didn’t call the student stupid, he just said the student didn’t put in the time required to receive a better grade, but a sense of entitlement to a better grade made these people argue.

In short: you aren’t special, but you may be good at something. And that is something to be proud of, but don’t get carried away, Icarus.

I Spoke with a Christian at Borders

2008-01-03T10:37:00.001-06:00

I hang out at the Border’s downtown frequently. It’s free to sit and read and it gets me out of the house on a walk every day.

(All us atheists are so depressing aren't we?)

Two days ago now I was reading my biological psychology book when I saw someone reading The Little Book of Atheist Spirituality. There were about 10 other books on the table with he and his wife. “Mere Christianity” and “Miracles” were just a taste of the nine other books on Christianity. I got the idea from three of the other books that these two might be having some marital struggles too (but trusted Christian marriage counseling books more than psychologists’ books).

Since they were most likely Christians I decided I would ask him what he thought of The Little Book. He told me he liked it better than the Four Horsemen’s books because this was less antagonistic. It was more a philosophical argument against religion (while I like these kinds of conversations, something more heavy handed is needed in the end). He also said he thought atheists needed to recognize they are steeped in a Judeo-Christian western world. I didn’t get to retort to this, but obviously I have some objections.

Then he asked me what it was I believed. I told him I was an atheist and that I came to it by sincerely being involved in a few religions and finally decided I couldn’t believe them. His response was, “So atheism was kind of all you were left with?” I told him it sounded negative when stated like that. It was more like I started out as an atheist (I remember doubting my Catholic teachers at a very young age) and I was always postulating these outside-of-the-natural-world beings but eventually came up short on all of them, so atheism was the default position where I receded to.

After our little talk he invited me to his church with John Piper. I kindly declined saying I’ve done it all. I also didn’t want him to waste his time trying to convert the unconvertible. It sounds close-minded, but I am willing to change. I just need some evidence that god exists before I do. I don’t want to put myself in a position where I might be swayed by poor logic.

Determinism kills (or makes useless) God

2007-12-29T21:15:00.001-06:00

So it turned out that the truffles were a hit. I brought four of them out with me tonight to the bar and gave them to a few friends. They were totally into them. I love being able to provide something that, when given, creates visible delight on peoples’ faces.

Other than that, I wanted to recount a little conversation that Dan and I had at the hobbit hole. It involved free will/determinism in relation to god and religion. It seemed to us that if one stopped to think about the issue of free will and determinism for any amount of time, it really does serious damage to a belief in god, or at least a belief in religion.

(I purposely spell god with a lower case “g” – it’s my somewhat silent protest)
Free will is a foundational belief of any religion that believes there is a heaven and hell and that we are judged by our actions on Earth. It allows us to be held accountable for our actions and makes us realize that we are the controllers of our destiny. If we are to go to hell, it is because we knowingly chose that path rather than the path to heaven. While I have serious issues with the previous statement (let’s think about pluralism for a second), I will work of with it for the sake of being sympathetic to Christian arguments. Determinism in the context of religion can work (Calvinism), but it is generally denied by Enlightenment thought. But there’s the rub.

The other statement that is generally followed by the religious is that god is omniscient (there is also the school of open theism which a very intelligent friend of mine falls into – rightly, I think, considering some bible versus like Gen 6:6 - but eventually I think it is a cop out). If god is omniscient then he must know everything about the future as well as the present. I have heard the exercise of imagining yourself looking down on a timeline in a book. You can see everything on that timeline yet you are objective to it. This is how god views time (again, I have serious problems with this: if god is interventionist then he is a part of the natural world and cannot be separated from time; if god is not interventionist, then he is not caring, just or omnipotent).

I hope you can see that these free will and omnipotent god ideas are confounding. If god is omniscient then he knows exactly how you will act in any given situation. But if you have free will, then god should not know these things. A Christian argument has said that god is omniscient to the present (which works well with open theism), but I don’t think this is a popular opinion in Christianity.

The other problem with god’s omniscience is an Epicurean issue:

"The gods can either take away evil from the world and will not, or, being willing to do so, cannot; or they neither can nor will, or lastly, they are both able and willing. If they have the will to remove evil and cannot, then they are not omnipotent. If they can, but will not, than they are not benevolent. If they are neither able nor willing, then they are neither omnipotent nor benevolent. Lastly, if they are both able and willing to annihilate evil, how does it exist?"

If god knew from the beginning that this is the way it would turn out, then we have to assume that god is not benevolent (or he is determined by some greater force). He was omniscient to the fact that Adam and Eve would eat from the tree, that I would be writing this right now, and that you would be reading it, but he thought it would be a good idea to do it anyway. If god is omniscient then we have to accept determinism as true and we are left with the idea that god is some freak with a chemistry set predicting the worst and greatest moments in human history with 100% percent accuracy. Frankly, I don’t think the good outweighs the bad.

The other Christian argument is simply that god knows us so well that he knows every decision we will make for ourselves in advance. I hate to say it, but I am guilty of using this. It is a horrid argument and an epic copout. By saying this you are tacitly admitting determinism. Just think about it for a minute. It shouldn’t take you that long to realize that you are saying that, given a situation and all facts about a person you can predict an outcome. Thank you for defining determinism.

I have a really hard time arguing for free will. I just don’t see how one can solidly believe it. Dan actually said last night that he feels like to be an atheist you also have to be a determinist. I somewhat agree. I think he would revise his statement to say that most atheists are determinists, but it is obviously not required. A random decision making process just isn’t something that sounds reasonable, and I think it is actually something to be feared. Think how much more often we would make the wrong decision given two options if it were random (50:50) than if we had informed decisions and how devastating that would be to any life circumstance. It would also remove any authority a person had since they are exactly as likely to choose the wrong choice as we are.

I can here people arguing that free will can still be an informed decision making process. Again, this is a tacit admission of determinism. You are still saying then, that given the options and the information the person will make the correct decision. And again, that is all that soft determinism is stating.

The Hobbit Hole and Truffle follow-up

2007-12-22T05:50:00.000-06:00

Last year one of Chris' and Dave's high school friends was allowed by his mother to build this in their back yard. I helped lay a few cinder blocks.

So I spent my Friday night out with a few guys there. They smoked some pipes, I had a few rollies, and we drank some of Dan's beer (he makes his own). Dan is the much hairier fellow than I in the picture. We are all growing our mustaches and beards out for a New Years party coming on . . . well, New Years.

There's three of the thirty Chocolate Truffles I made. They're rather labor intensive. I made 15 of them with a Kahlua and 15 with Grand Marnier. Hopefully the flavors will come through. Also, if you could just imagine a sprig of mint in this picture I would greatly appreciate it. Just place it where you think it would be most aesthetically pleasing. I was thinking above the truffles and to the right of the orange.

And here's a little something from The Goonies for ya: The Truffle Shuffle

It'll make me rich!

2007-12-19T21:01:00.000-06:00

Or I can sell the idea to Dean - for free (I think he's got enough on his plate right now without dealing with alcohol and truffles). I was at home scooping some ice cream and putting some creme de menthe on it when I had an amazing idea: make chocolate and mix in some Creme de Menthe, Irish Cream, Kahlua, Grand Marnier and cool them and make them into chocolates!

I am more just writing this here so I don't forget the idea. Good thing I already told Jenna. We're gonna work on it over the break. I've just had all these really good liquors sitting around for too long. It's time to do something with them. Maybe we could also find some amaretto to do this with.

Jenna and I already thought of one of the hang ups too: the alcohol may not let the chocolate harden at room temperature. Jenna saved the day though. We take the softer chocolate and use a melon baller to scoop it and dip it into a harder/darker chocolate to coat it! Then we have Grand Marnier Chocolate Truffles! Oh Man! I am so excited!

Edit: Oh, how naive I am.

Brown Chicken Broth; Meat Glaze; Tomato, Chicken, and Tarragon Soup; and Broiled Salmon. Another really long cooking post. And title.

2007-12-15T00:31:00.001-06:00

That's what I ate for dinner tonight. It was pretty good, but I ate the garlic rubbed toast first and that was really powerful, so I had a hard time getting the subtle flavors in the Tomato, Chicken, and Tarragon soup.

The hardest part of this was peeling the tomatoes. I didn't know how to do that, but I learned. You have to plunge the tomatoes in boiling water for 30 seconds or so and then put them into a cold water bath. After that you just have to peel them with your fingers. It took a little longer than I would have liked.

I made the soup with the brown chicken broth I made yesterday. I reserved about 3 cups of it and made this soup and made a meat glaze with the rest (about 2 quarts).

With a brown chicken broth you start out by roasting the chicken and the veggies.

(that's the explanation of a bouquet garni behind it, from James Peterson's book)

After roasting the meat and veggies, put them in the pot with 3 quarts of water (I did a little more). Boil some water in the jus from roasting for a short while and put that into the pot.

Then add the bouquet garni, a mixture of certain spices that gets added to broths. Mine was leek greens, fresh thyme, fennel stalk, and bay leaves.

Then simmer and step away for a while. Peterson says an hour and half skimming the foam and fat off the top every fifteen minutes. So I did. Plus a half hour.

Then strain it so as to get all the broth and let it cool to room temperature for about an hour. Then put it in the fridge. Then I skimmed the congealed fat off the top of the broth. I had never made broth before so I was a little surprised when it was kind of a jelly. I called pops and he told me it was all g. Just like that, "All g, Will. Don't e'en worry about it."

OK, so that's a lie. But he did say that that happens. Relief. I didn't screw up my first broth.

So after daddy told me it was cool, I reserved the three cups and boiled the other two quarts down into this much:

I think that is about 16 ounces. So 8 cups of broth turned into 2 cups. That's the meat glaze. It should have been boiled down even more, but I was feeling impatient and wasteful by boiling it down to one fifteenth of eight cups (about six ice cubes).

What am I going to do with the meat glaze? Well, I was thinking about putting it in a beurre blanc when I feel like frying some chicken boobs. But if you have a suggestion of two I would be happy to hear them. Dean makes a killer demi glace too. Which is a fancier (and better) version of the meat glaze.

This was just something I threw together a while ago. I can remember the exact recipe, but I think I just broiled the salmon until it was rare. I want to say it was inside an aluminum foil wrap with the onion and tomato on it and glazed with a butter sauce that had parsley and garlic in it. And then I had some rice. I remember really liking it.

Dolmathes, Beurre Blanc/Rouge, Lekakh (Honey Cake), and Chili

2007-12-05T15:18:00.000-06:00

Well, it seems it's been a while since I have posted anything about cooking, and that's not because I haven't been doing it. Tout au contraire! AW! CRAP! I just got capsaicin up my nose! No joke, I just picked my nose after I made some chili with a jalepeno in it. That was a rookie move! Most things I don't have the pictures for, but I'll tell you the happenings.

So . . . those aren't my dolmathes, but Jenna and I made some recently and they turned out pretty well. See below the fold for more.

We made the Dolmathes late the night before Thanksgiving and each brought some to our respective dinners. Apparently they were a hit. I thought they were a little dry. So I think next time I make them I will put more oil and lemon into the stuffing. I also think I am going to find some larger role for the Labna to play. Dolmathes are really good when dipped in this tangy yogurt/cheese. It's somewhat like ricotta, but a with more of a yogurt bite to it. I would like to make some kind of dipping sauce out of it though.

We stuffed the grape leaves with a basmati rice, mint, scallion, cumin, cardamom, greek yogurt/cheese (Labna) and garlic mixture. Then we steamed them for about 40 minutes in a rice cooker.

This is some chicken I made for Jenna. All I did was seer the chicken and cleaned the pan out and made the buerre blanc. We had a bit of it left over so I put it on the rice too. I kind of messed up on the buerre blanc, though. It should have been thicker, I think. It still tasted good.

I also made some steaks for Chris and Dave a while back with some buerre rouge. That was really good. Even Chris, who doesn't like onions, liked it (though it is made with shallots, which are infinitely better than onions, in my opinion).

Ginger being worked on for something delicious.

Mixing bowls - if you couldn't tell.

I also made a honey cake a while back. I never reported back on how that turned out. I really could tell the difference between the cake I ate right when it was done, and the cake I ate when it was aged for a few days. Much better. But there was a slight problem - I burned it. I ended up cutting about half the cake off so I could eat what was in the center - hence there being no picture of the finished product.

We have a joke in my family about my mom always burning things. I must have gotten that gene. I just hope I don't end up burning cutting boards like her (love you, Mom!).

Tonight is for Chili. It's been snowing the past few days here in MN (like I have any readers outside of MN - haha) so I decided Chili would be the way to go. I didn't feel like looking up a recipe and I had a bunch of ingredients that really needed using so I chopped up some carrots, celery, red and green bell peppers, half an onion, a jalapeno (which is still burning my nose because of a stupid urge to pick it), and the chili spice medley. There is also a pound of hamburger, three cans of black beans, and tomato sauce. Hopefully it will feed me for a few days.

There is the final picture. This is most of my reading material for when I get done with finals and maybe a little before. My brother, Dean of Alchemy Organica, recommended the Peterson book to me. I'm looking forward to reading it this break. Hopefully I can get through a good portion of it. There is so much I want to do over break and I only get a month to do it. We'll see what happens.

Discovery Institute at the UMN (A little . . . LOT frustrating)

2007-12-01T14:00:00.000-06:00

The Discovery Institute’s discussion of eugenics, titled “Darwin’s Dangerous Idea” (also the title of a book by Daniel Dennett who is an amazing philosopher – I would love to read this book).

Here are the facts you should know before we start: the Discovery Institute (DI) is a creationist (sorry: “Intelligent Design”) think-tank; they will present any idea that will slander scientists and run with it; “eugenics” means the controlling of populations by reproduction by negative (sterilizing people with supposed negative heritable traits) or positive (having people with supposed positive heritable traits reproduce more) means; John West is a “scientist” for the DI (Ph.D. in PoliSci); PZ Myers was there.

Now that we have all that out of the way, this was a complete sham. A showcase for ipsedixitism (I've wanted to use this word for a while - heh). Sam Harris recently said that atheists should go under the radar (disband and not call ourselves anything) and simply destroy illogic at every place we find it. This is how I felt tonight (though I didn’t go as a wolf in sheep’s clothing – I wore my wolf’s clothing, but was more a sheep).

If this had been a talk on the history of eugenics, I might (and yet not) have been O.K. with it, but it was clearly more than that. For the life of me I couldn’t find the (logical) argument West was trying to put forth.

I feel kind of bad saying this, but I don’t have many of the facts that West put forth. I was so shocked by the format of his arguments that I sincerely felt like giving him an earful at the end of the speech about how guilty he was of shutting down critical thought in his audience. But of course, that was his goal.

(I am finding it hard to write about this because I don’t really know the thesis of/where he was going with his lecture).

I’ll just bullet-point the things he said about implementing eugenics:
- Sterilization laws
- Marriage laws
- Dehumanizing the Poor
- Nazism and the Holocaust (special mention to the handicapped in one form or
another – Godwin’s Law anyone?)
- Anecdotal evidence . . . aka heart wrenching single stories of sterilization

He did say during his lecture that eugenics was a popular opinion at the time it was carried out, but it is no joke that there was not one person of religion that was quoted in his entire diatribe against science. The leading proponents of eugenics would compare the “feebleminded” with animals, but the beautiful touch “Dr.” West added were the sounds of cows mooing or sheep baaing in the background. Just in case we didn’t get the point that individuals were being compared to cattle. A quote that spoke of the “parasitic” relationship between the “feebleminded” and society showed a tapeworm behind the words. Very subtle.

These comparisons infuriated me as they effectively shut down critical thought about what is being said, turned the lecture into propaganda, and make the audiences hearts well up. As well they should! But in a manner that allows them to critically analyze whether the argument being made is coherent – not one that blocks our ability to use the very standard that eugenics was based on.

The other subtle thing that West did with his talk was that there was not one mention of a religious person associated with eugenics until . . . can you guess when? I bet you can. Until it came time to say, “So how did eugenics end?” Well, it was Pope Pius XI of course! Oh, and Billy Sunday. No mention of any biologists who opposed eugenics. It was started by the scientists/secularists and ended by the religious. It all makes sense now. Thank you Dr. John West.

Dr. Borrello had 10 minutes to respond to the hour long lecture. He did well in the time he had pointing out that it was popular opinion (66% according to a TIME magazine poll) that we should sterilize the “feebleminded” and criminals. He also mentioned that it is wrong to implicate only biologists and scientists in this argument – these kinds of things aren’t “monocausal,” as he said. Everyone is to blame. It was also at the same time that anti-evolution bills were being passed in congress – so it can’t be that this was due to simply Darwin’s idea. Apparently there was an explosion of ideas about evolution after Darwin (I had no idea, really) that were more conducive to eugenics.

By the end of West’s lecture, I didn’t know what he was arguing. I came to the conclusion that the lecture was a history lesson and a “how to” in demonizing science. The unsaid goal at the lecture was to demonize evolution by means of natural selection in order to make its evil-ness seem an argument towards it being false. Well, I got news for you, West, the philosophical applications of scientific facts do not make the scientific facts false (I am saying here that eugenics is an (horrid) application of misunderstood Darwinism).

Thank you (for the entertainment), come again (when you have a real argument).

I'm Just Here for the Food

2007-11-18T15:55:00.000-06:00

So I want to admit: I know nothing about cooking. I know how to look at a recipe and do exactly as it tells me. But even then I run into problems (brine it? What does that mean?) then I have to go and look it up on wikipedia or something. I didn’t really know how to season a cast iron pan until I just looked it up. Hell, I didn’t even know that cast iron pots were still silver when you bought them (I guess I should have assumed, though).

(OK, so I'm not this bad, but close)

So I purchased a book yesterday that I thought might teach me some of the basics. I want to be able to look at a list of ingredients and say, “hey, I have an idea what to do with those,” rather than, “I have a recipe, I better go buy the ingredients.” The book is “I’m Just Here for the Food” by Alton Brown. It looks kind of cartoony, and I am sure there are better books out there, but so far I have learned a lot from it and I am only 10 pages in. If you know of any other books that would be good, I would be happy to hear about them (or get them for Christmas *wink wink*).

Aside from learning how to cook, I did bake something today. I made Lekach. A traditional Rosh Hashanah Honey Cake. It has cinnamon, nutmeg, cardamom (that I had to grind on a cutting board with a bread roller. I don’t have a stone and pestle), allspice, honey, orange rind, orange juice, ground ginger, and grated ginger. When it comes out of the oven (it’s still in there now), I am supposed to let it sit for a couple days to “let the flavors mature.” I think I will try a little bit of it now and a little bit of it in two days and see if I can tell the difference.

I also made Panzanella last night. It’s panzanella. It was good, though nothing too exciting. Just different from my normal diet.

(This one is a little prettier than mine)

Other than that, the weekend was filled with enjoyment. On Friday I went to Taylor’s Falls and had a little picnic (we ate a baguette with brie and prosciutto, chicken wings, wine, and some tomato salad) , went hiking (for a very short while – it was getting dark), had a fire, came home and watched "Fracture" (good movie, you should check it out). Saturday I just took care of some chores during the day, but got to go to A Prairie Home Companion in the evening with two of my Aunts and Uncles and Jenna. They bought us dinner and I got to keep the Stella Artois glass that my beer was served in. I also watched the best zombie movie of all time Saturday night: Army of Darkness. Today, I made cake and pancakes. Very lazy day.

The University's Mixed Goals

2007-11-14T10:14:00.000-06:00

This is hopefully my next guest column in the Minnesota Daily. It's written as an open letter to Bruininks, hopefully it will catch a few eyes. Let me know what y'all think.

Dear President Bruininks,

The University of Minnesota has given me so much. I came to this institution as a transfer student into General College. I am now a junior in CLA with a minor in Religious Studies pursuing my bachelors degree in psychology. I have been involved with student groups on campus and have had the opportunity to assist with research in the psychology department. I have many friends with similar interests that I feel I will have the rest of my life. Many of these friends share my passion for, and are, more often than not, better at reasoned critical thought.

But this university would not have given me those things had I approached it five years later: my ACT score was not above average, my high school involvement was paltry, my community involvement even more insignificant, and my ambitions low. This university was the only school I applied to from a community college, and it has made me a much better person. I fear that will not be the case for future applicants.

We are in a time now, when the general public would rather spend their time watching Grey’s Anatomy than reading classics like Huck Finn or The Age of Reason. The voters would rather know the statistics of their favorite football player than their Bill of Rights. My peers are choosing ignorance and apathy over freedom and justice (e.g. choosing video games over protesting atrocities at Guantanamo Bay). And like a virus, the problem is spreading. People no longer truly appreciate the contribution the United States offered this world: democracy and the opportunity to pursue a life better than the one they have.

The University was a place where this pursuit could take place, and to an extent, still is. Unfortunately, the worthy goal of becoming one of the top three research facilities in the world comes with a lofty price: we will be removing the gift of critical thought from so many who wish to pursue it. By becoming a fantastic research facility we are sacrificing a gift to Minnesota that the university has been better equipped to give in the past: a well-informed citizenry.

We will no longer be training a populace of critical consumers of daily information. We will become an ivory tower where a select few may exercise their already developed reasoning abilities. In ‘07 the university students now average in the 17th percentile rather than its ‘99 standard of students in the 22nd percentile on their ACT scores, how much higher do we go? We have gone from yearly tuition cost of 3,794 dollars in ‘97 to 7,950 dollars and about a thousand dollars in fees, thus removing the less well educated and the less monetarily fortunate (not entirely under the U’s control, I know). I think the university’s goals are positive, but other goals are more honorable.

At a time when people are so fearful they are willing to “give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety” critical thought is desperately needed. The citizens of the United States are, in fact, safer than they have ever been (from a peak in ‘93, violent crime rates have dropped from about 4.25 to under 2 million offenses per year, the lowest they have been since the Bureau of Justice Statistics started these measures in ‘73). The university has an opportunity to teach tens of thousands of individuals each year how to be more critical and thoughtful citizens, rather than simply rewarding those who already are.

I admit, pitting the University against such a large scale phenomena as the intellectual climate of our nation is humbling. But we are a part of it, and this university can provide an opportunity to huge numbers of individuals. As the president of Minnesota’s university, you are supposed to represent the interests of Minnesotans in their educational facility. With people so willing to give the President of the United States more power than any president has previously had, I would prefer an institution that taught citizens rather than aristocrats.

Are You a Sex Addict? Apparently I am.

2007-11-14T09:44:00.001-06:00

Wanna take a completely bunk test to see if you are a sex addict?

Did your parents have trouble with sexual behavior? How do you mean? Did they have trouble in their sex life? Or do you mean they had trouble with their children having sexual lives?

Have you ever sought help for sexual behavior you did not like? Well, that could range from ED, to premature ejaculation, to being attracted to children. Some of these have no reflection on “sexual addiction.”

Do you ever feel bad about your sexual behavior? If I say yes it could be because I have done something bad and I justifiably feel some remorse, and if I say no it makes me sound like some sociopath when really I just think my sex life is pretty natural.

Has anyone been hurt emotionally because of your sexual behavior? So if I have slept with more than one person in a short time span I somehow and a sex addict?

Have you made efforts to quit a type of sexual activity and failed? What if I just wanted to cut down on my masturbation because I want to watch porn less, but I find that, oh, I really like to masturbate? Does that qualify me as a sex addict?

Do you hide some of your sexual behaviors from others? If yes you assume I am doing something wrong, but I guess I hide all my sexual behaviors from others. Being that I don’t really have sex in public or masturbate in the park. But if I say no then I am pathological in that I do do those things.

Have you purchased services online for erotic purposes (sites for dating, pornography, fantasy and friend finder)? What if I just want to legally view porn or get the whole porn video instead of the 2 minute clips you find everywhere you get it for free, or I am older or unsavvy with computers and don’t know how to download entire videos for free?

Have you used the internet to make romantic or erotic connections with people online? HA! Even romantic connections are in this question? Who hasn’t at this point. Online dating is one of the most popular ways of meeting people now.

Have you subscribed to or regularly purchased or rented sexually explicit materials (magazines, videos, books or online pornography)? I didn’t know buying a playboy made me a sex addict. Good thing I don’t purchase or subscribe to my porn, it’s all free online baby. Just gotta know the right places to look (ok, that does sound a little creepy).

Did you notice all the grammatical errors in the test? You know that's a sure sign of a test that is valid and reliable.

I'm a College Newspaper Celebrity Lately

2007-11-01T09:37:00.001-05:00

So my response got printed yesterday (the third letter down). Usually the daily's editing is god awful, but they did a decent job this time.

Then I also got a call yesterday from someone doing a piece on the expansion of the religious studies program on campus. I'm upset at how he twisted my words a bit but the article seems alright.

Here's the section I don't like:

"Martin said CASH, as a group, is very interested in violence and conflict that stems from religious differences. He feels that could be expanded on within religious studies but is available through different programs."

I guess I just don't like the stress with which he said this, and he kind of led me into making this statement with questions like:

"The religious studies department is thinking about adding classes that include topics of religious violence, do you think this is appropriate?"

My response was something along the lines of, "I know there are classes in other departments dealing with issues like the Israel/Palestine conflict, but I don't see why those classes couldn't also be included in the Religious Studies program also."

Also, he overemphasized the interest that CASH has in religious violence. Yeah, we are having a speaker about it, but but we also have speakers about sex, philosophy, extra-biblical accounts of Jesus, skepticism and critical thinking, etc. It's just one aspect of our group.

Response to the Reponses

2007-10-29T18:37:00.000-05:00

It seems that I have angered more than one person with my article about pornography and its real effects on our society. I have actually received emails on facebook from people I have never known saying they were deeply offended by my article. This was not my intent. My intent was to dispel some of the conclusions that we so easily jump to when we think about pornography and its effects.

I thank those authors who wrote in to discuss the issue and to challenge me to think more critically about it. I would like to say what I agree and disagree with them about.

When I wrote that misogyny and pornography were not correlated I felt fairly confident in saying so. Then I read Hathaway's response. I was concerned that I got something horribly wrong when he stated that "there are actually countless studies that do show a statistically significant increase in misogynistic behavior in relation to porn viewing." I looked the psychological journals again and found another article in the Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality published in 2004. Simply put, it stated that the evidence is inconclusive at best (therefore needing more research).

After looking through the psychological journals for an hour reading one abstract after another I found a study that said there was a high correlation between viewing pornography and high sexual aggression. The study then went on to say that the men who viewed pornography compulsively had previously been "classified (based on their other risk characteristics) at relatively high risk for sexual aggression" (not my addition in the parenthesis). Meaning these viewers were sexual aggressors for other reasons, and pornography was some sort of outlet for them. Pornography was not the reason for the aggression; it was a habit they developed aside from the aggression, or possibly because of it.

Hathaway also wrote about the commoditization of sex and the capitalistic aspect of it. He seems to equate capitalism with conservatism and something else with liberalism (socialism?). While I think that is a mistake, it is not the core of the issue that I want to talk about. If we are to talk about the commoditization of sex we have to talk about much more than the porn industry. We have to talk about any media, even the radio (sexy voices). Maybe this capitalistic aspect of it is wrong, but we are fighting a much bigger animal than pornography then.

Lichtsinn's article gave me a little more credit. She spoke about the violence of the porno industry from within. I can't say that I know much about this except to say that I have heard these stories about women being abused and they are anecdotal. I completely agree that if these stories are true it is inexcusable and highly unlikely in any other profession. If they are common in the porn industry, then action does need to be taken. Unfortunately, I couldn't find any studies that dealt with this in a cursory look.

Tired of Sam Harris

2007-10-29T00:05:00.000-05:00

The more I listen to Sam Harris, the more I dislike him. I had a little talk with another C.A.S.H. board member in his car while he gave me a ride home the other tonight and I think we agreed. Sam Harris has little to offer, though he does it eloquently. He is pursuing a Ph.D. in Neuroscience, but he isn’t there yet and doesn’t bring much neuroscience to the table in debates (there has to be some material there he could use).

Really, Sam’s arguments are heavily weighted with violence that he says strictly comes from religion. I have to say that I am guilty of following his lead for a while, but I just don’t think that Harris is on track anymore. I’m tired of people believing ridiculous things just as much as the next atheist, but I’m also sick of every religious person being painted in blood red.

(This is the cover of the book that Hector Avalos is coming to speak about on Thursday for C.A.S.H., so we'll get to learn about the issue a little more).

Religion isn’t the only variable that violence could stem from. So far as we know, as ubiquitous as violence is, it is a human trait, not a religious trait. I am a firm believer of this. I sincerely think that humans are simply a killer species, and not because of religion (though beliefs can exasperate the problem, like Harris says: look at the Jains v. the Abrahamic religions). To temper that, I also sincerely believe that when we are face to face with a person of another set of beliefs, we may not respect them, but we want to get along with them. The general tendency of the person is to love, even if the general tendency of tribes is to kill the other one.

He implicates the religious moderates for creating a climate in which the fundamentalists can flourish. While I somewhat agree because the “that’s just how they believe” rhetoric is fairly common amoung the moderates, I think he goes too far. His favorite Gallup Poll is one asking:

“Some people think that suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets are justified in order to defend Islam from its enemies. Other people believe that, no matter what the reason, this kind of violence in never justified. Do you personally feel that this kind of violence is often justified to defend Islam, sometimes justified, rarely justified, or never justified?”

When asked if it was ever justifiable, anywhere from 20% to 82% of the respondents say “yes” (Turkey and Lebanon, respectively, Turkey has the lowest numbers). Now, I think those numbers are far too high and they disgust me as they should you, but Harris takes it too far. It seems to me that Harris understands the question as, “would you ever be a suicide bomber to defend Islam against its enemies?” When he does that he makes a huge leap. The difference between the ability to understand suicide bombing’s use and the ability to carry out a suicide bombing is a monstrous gap.

I'm in the Daily

2007-10-25T17:09:00.000-05:00

My article got in the The Minnesota Daily today. Now I just have to keep my fingers loose for the rebuttals. Hopefully someone has enough thought to respond in an intelligent manner and doesn't just argue on the basis of religion or something.

Sex Bloggers Suck Ass (Unless You're Into That)

2007-10-24T22:26:00.001-05:00

Cory Silverberg (the article titled: "Searching for a Better Sex Blog) talked about it a little bit, but not in the way I would like to. And I know I have mentioned it before. But I am feeling a little abandoned by my fellow sex bloggers and writers.

Actually, I'm fed up with Silverberg too. He panders a lot and write on topics frequently that are blatant "come to my site more" requests (the "Cruelty to Animals" article). He also doesn't show a whole lot of critical thinking that his degrees would presumably warrant. Sorry Cory, you lost in my book. Also, try to quote someone other than Marty Klein. He's good, but I am sure there are others out there, and you should know about them being a prominent blogger.

It makes sense that we pander to the wants of the culture. It makes sense that we write what gives our sites hits and get people to read our mentions of sex. I want people to read my blog, as I am sure many sex writers do. So, we end up writing on abstinence only programs (which I deeply care about – because I know they don’t work). We end up writing about homosexuality. FOOEY! I’m tired of it!

I’m sick of hearing about the top one or two topics in sexual culture. I want (need) (and you should too) there to be more to the world of sex. There is so much going on. What about transexuality, transgender, sexual ethics, premarital sex, extra-marital sex, sexual assault, pornography, sexism, and bisexuality. Do we want kids? Can adolescents have enjoyable sex? What’s the reason for sex to begin with? What do we do once we know kids are on the way? All of these are issues that deal with sex. LEARN THEM!

(Why is it censored? We can assume it's gay pornography, but we could just as easily take it as two people loving each other.)

Why don’t sex bloggers do more real research? I want real information about sex. Not pop culture dainty kiddy info where we can hardly mention the word “masturbation.” I wish I could get across how unbelievably dissatisfied with sex writers I am. And with how dissatisfied with my own blog I am. I want you all to understand the sex issues that are out there. We have such a hetero-sexist culture that it sickens me. URG!!!

I'm not a genius, but I'm smart enough to know when I am being fed bullshit.

Porn Ain't Evil

2007-10-19T23:58:00.000-05:00

I am hoping that when I send this article in to the Daily they will publish it. But we'll see what happens.

On September 6 an article was written which reviewed a book titled "Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity" by Robert Jensen. It summed up, in a pseudo-scientific right-wing manner, the objectionable qualities of pornography: pornography objectifies woman and causes appreciable harm to our society.

I can’t say that I dispute that it objectifies women, except to say that it also objectifies men. It objectifies sex. Not just the person. That is what porn is. This is the real issue I feel the article should have dealt with. What happens when we objectify sex? What happens when a person watches pornography regularly? The article claimed to have wrestled with this issue, but lacked any research or critical thought by the author.

It turns out that the answer is . . . not a whole lot (with mixed evidence). I took the time to look up a meta-analysis of the research on pornography’s effects on viewers (Bensimon 2007). It may make a person like more aggressive sex (in other words – more uninhibited sex compared to passionless missionary position making babies sex). It may make a person enjoy their sex life more. There is also no real evidence that males who view pornography are more misogynistic (Sheila 2004).

In a survey of 97 sex offenders it was found that pedophiles were actually less likely to view child pornography than a control group. In another survey of 561 sex offenders only 17% said that they had used pornography and masturbated before assaulting a victim. This may show a causal relationship for these people, and that is not to diminish its importance for future research. But we are still left with 83% of sex offenders having some other reason for their assault; I’d say that needs some attention.

Pornography is also intimately entangled with another aspect of sex: masturbation. In a study of 305 college aged males 92.4% of them had viewed pornography sometime in their life (O’Reilly, Knox, and Zusman 2007). 43.1% of them viewed it regularly (1-2 times/week). These college aged males are healthy males who have a healthy sex life, whether with themselves or with a partner. These are not all males who are sex offenders and deviants. That 92.4% of them have viewed pornography at some point makes it somewhat odd that the other 7.6% hasn’t (maybe they haven’t viewed pornography for the reason of a very low sex drive or religious reasons, they lied on the survey for self-image reasons, or another of a multitude of reasons).

Tied in with the latter statistics is a study in 1996 of German men and women. The sample was about 8,500. They found that by the time males were 17, 90% of them had masturbated. Of the females, about 65% of them had. By the age of 21: 97% of males and 80% of females had. I would imagine that many of these people had viewed pornography. Had there been a causal relationship between pornography and sexual assault we would have a molestation and sexual violence epidemic.

The measurable appreciable harms that coincide with pornography would be the occurrence of sexual assault with the amount of pornography viewed and types of pornography viewed. Though the religious, morally strict, (some) parents and anti-porn feminists would like to claim that pornography causes appreciable harm, there is simply no conclusive evidence that shows this is the case. Once the appreciable harms are measured and shown to be false we are left with abstract ideas like “objectifying sex.”

If this “objectifying sex” is the only argument left, we are left stranded. This argument carries no weight if no appreciable harm is seen to come from it. To go further, nearly every person has had a sexual fantasy at some point. These fantasies are sex objectified and are considered healthy to have by psychologists.

Until the research gives us some strong reason to believe that viewing pornography does some appreciable and measurable harm to our society, then I will be unconvinced. But research must continue on this subject. It’s not an easy topic to research given that response bias can be so strong. Until then, I choose to follow this information: pornography may help individuals more fully express their sexuality in a healthy manner and couples might also get a benefit from viewing pornography as a source for sexual spontaneity.

Hitchens Fucks a Koala and Expects Everyone to Applaud

2007-10-14T22:52:00.000-05:00

My guess/advise . . . quit the gin, man.

I don't know the details, and I can't wait to see a transcript of his speech, but at the Freedom From Religion Foundation's annual convention he received the "Emperor Has No Clothes" award for his plain speaking on religion. When he gave his speech, I guess the first third of it was actually his normal banter about religion being a destructive force. The second and third parts were a little different.

Apparently the (ex-)humanist went on to talk about the best solution to the world's violence issues with religion. And the solution (drum role for his stupidity, please). . . is to go into Muslim countries and kill them until they are too beaten and bruised to want to fight back (sounds like Ann Coulter *cough*bitch*cough*). Bomb them. As PZ Myers put it, "I disagree entirely with his proposed strategy, which seems to involve putting a bullet through every god-haunted brain."

The man is an insane alcoholic. Please, if you hear anyone treating this speech like Hitchen's represents the atheist community, remind them that we are primarily a group of humanists and violence would be the last resort of any atheist. Education would be our weapon again religion, not guns and bombs.

I hope to write more about the topic if/when I find a transcript of the speech. I am sure the atheist community isn't the only one that heard this speech. I bet it will be all over the airwaves soon. I also hope the atheist community's response will be on the airwaves too. It will most assuredly be, "We do NOT endorse Christopher Hitchen's hateful ideas."

Hey, what do you know, I used my Ridiculous Ignorance tag once again. Sad that I had to use it on this.

Here's the first part of his speech:

I will be reviewing it more extensively later.

Body Modification and Feminism

2007-10-13T18:31:00.000-05:00

Hallelujah! I’ve been thinking this for over a year now. I know a young woman who recently got breast implants. They made her feel more like a woman and more attractive. I think that is great. I can’t say she didn’t do it because of social pressure or our “big boob” cultural, but how much does that matter. It made her feel more like a woman.

Dr. Klein compares it to changing your body in any modification to make your appearances more attractive. I entirely agree. If a woman feels so compelled she should allow herself to do with her body what she likes (as should a man, in that case). If it makes her feel more like a woman, more attractive to her partner, or any number of other reasons, then let her do it. I think that is true feminism, not this, “you’re body is natural, so you mustn’t give in to pressure (from yourself or others) of any sort and change it.”

I agree that our bodies are natural and beautiful, but men also shave their faces and crotches and women shave their legs and crotches. Dr. Klein makes all the arguments I would make on this issue, so go check it out. I’m gonna finish with a quote from Dr. Klein too:

“For centuries, American men said women couldn’t think clearly. While not entirely gone, this idea is much less accepted today than ever before. We don’t need self-righteous women picking up this archaic idea, criticizing other women because their sexual choices discomfort the critics.”

Harris on NPR

2007-09-16T22:43:00.001-05:00

My mother called me after she heard this on NPR. If you get the chance, take the time to listen. It's Sam Harris. He's very articulate and very intelligent. It's a little long, so make sure you can sit and listen. I can't do more than one thing at a time, so I really do need to sit with a drink and listen. I suggest you do the same.

The First Weeks of CASH

2007-09-13T23:14:00.000-05:00

I started out with Campus Atheists, Skeptics, and Humanists this year as the Activities Coordinator. I have to admit, during the summer I didn't like it. I spent my days in a cafe writing emails to electronic voices I had never heard and faces I had only seen pictures of. The emails would fly instantaneously back and forth between two accounts, and only days later would I finally get a response (or none at all). Surprisingly, the hardest people to get ahold of were on my own campus.

(It was national free hug day, but we put a twist on it. That's Aaron and I outside Smith Hall in Northrop Mall)

In the first week we had a business meeting that went two hours longer than planned. We had a returning members meeting with about 20 people I had seen the year before (and I few I hadn't). Tonight we had an Intro to CASH meeting. The room we were originally in was way too small. It felt crowded. It turns out it would have been fine, but not nearly as elegant or comfortable as the Mississippi Room that the Student Activities Office moved us into.

We handed out about 20 new member packets and got a donation of $6.66. We played with the idea of making that the official membership fee. We had a total of about 45 people at the Intro to CASH meeting and 28 of them came out to eat with us afterward. The crew was great! We had tons of fun. I want to say that this was one of the largest Intro meetings we have ever had, but I can't say for sure.

27 people joined us for pizza afterward and two more who couldn't make it to the meeting came for the food. Campus Pizza loved us and we tried to leave them a generous tip; we kinda surprised them when we told them there was going to be 20 people coming and nearly 30 showed.

(Jenny with welcoming arms and me hugging a passer by. This was so fun. I can't wait to do it again. We made so many people's day.)

The demographic changed from last year, too. If you are at all involved with the atheist community you know there is a serious lack of females. For whatever reason this is, it's true. Tonight, approximately 1/3 of the people who showed were female. Amazing and awesome. We need as many women leaders as we can get.

I have to say, it's so much rewarding being a part of CASH when you aren't just looking at a calender trying to fill slots with names and event types. It's awesome to see so many people wanting to be involved and wanting to meet people like themselves. The atheist community isn't cohesive, and I hope I can help add some cohesiveness to that community this year. I am much happier with it now than I was over the summer.

Filet Mignon Tartare

2007-08-18T04:15:00.000-05:00

(Click to Enlarge)

Wow! If you all haven't already, you have to try Filet Mignon Tartare. Holy Fuck! So what you have above is some of the aforementioned and some salsa that I made and ate as a salad. The Tartare has capers, red onion, garlic, lemon and some cracked pepper. Then I shaped it and put it on some toasted bread. They look like little turds, don't they?

The salsa/salad has black beans, corn, tomatillos, cilantro, red onion, jalapeño, garlic, capers, lemon juice, and a little juice from the caper jar. And damn is it good.

If y'all are lucky, I'll make it for you sometime. It's super good, and easy to make. It's just a little spendy.

Here's a carpaccio that looks amazing and sounds delicious.

Regrettable Sex

2007-08-17T17:06:00.000-05:00

Since a lot of studies have focused on non-consensual sex, and many have focused on consensual sex and everything that it involves, I thought it would be interesting to talk about one that deals with sex that is consensual, but one or both of the participants later regrets it (run on sentence? Anyone want to be my editor?).

Let me say up front that some of the conclusions the writers of this study come to I don’t agree with. “Regrettable Sex” is one of those topics the religious like to pick up on. They don’t say it like that, but they like to talk about the bad social and psychological implications of premarital sexual relationships (for debunking of these ideas and some showing of the positive aspects read Harmful to Minors). Sex can be enjoyed by consenting adolescents and it is normal for adolescents to have sexual desires. That said, there is a percentage of adolescents (and everyone for that matter) who do regret a sexual experience they have had.

(Click to Enlarge)

The literature review for this article was small. It had two articles: one talked about ages 12-17 and the other was by U.S. Catholic which I don’t really even understand why it was included. There was a lot of “might” and “maybe” language included in the discussion of that study and no numbers.

The first study did give some useful information though. Namely that 55% of males and 72% of females between the ages of 12-17 who had engaged in intercourse wish they would have waited longer to do so. While I am not one to argue with the numbers I would say that these have a lot to do with our current sexual environment and opinions of premarital sex.

I believe they would change considerably if we taught our children that they can have healthy sexual encounters (of varying kinds, from touching/kissing to intercourse), and that they were not naughty to do so. We just need to teach them that it is healthier to take these activities when they feel they are ready for them, and when they have appropriate protection from disease and pregnancy. I am really stressing this because I have read other people’s “sex ed” blogs and info sites that claim to be fairly liberal, but they still seem to frown upon sexual activity among youth (or at least don’t mention the positive aspects).

(Click to Enlarge)

On to the method and findings of the study. They took students (n=392) from a Human Sexuality course and had them submit their stories of regrettable sex. They found that 73% of the stories were of females regretting a certain encounter and the rest were from males. The six major reasons: It was a disappointing first time (25%); It was unprotected sex (22%); I was cheating on my partner (17%); It was a one night stand (17%); I was drunk (16%); It ruined our friendship (11%). These percentages total 108% because peoples responses fit under more than one category sometimes.

The researchers are good to note that in 49% of the cases alcohol was involved, but in only 16% of them was it the reason for regret. They quickly jump to the conclusion that in all the other 33% of the cases alcohol was clouding the judgment of those involved. While this may be the case, there are also other possibilities: it may the subjects way of saying, “we were at a social event” or even, sadly (at the other end of the spectrum), “It was hardly consensual.” But to say that alcohol is the all ruining evil in these cases goes a little far I would say: clearly the study shows you can have regrettable sex without alcohol. Actually a small majority of the cases were without alcohol (51%).

The researchers mention in there discussion that some of this information should be taught in sex ed courses. I might agree with this, but only after we have removed abstinence only and the religious undertones of it. Like I said above, this information could quickly become, “most people regret a premarital sexual experiences” which is not what we can conclude from this. What we can conclude is simply that most people will regret a sexual experience at some point in their lives, and I think that is fair. But that they can prepare themselves for sexual experiences so that they are less likely to feel regret afterwards, and that they should take their personal situation and beliefs into account when faced with a decision to be sexually active.

All statistics and information (unless I was extrapolating or disagreeing with the researchers) was taken from the following article: Sandra, Caron L., and Moskey G. Eilean. "Regrettable Sex: an Exploratory Analysis of College Stundents' Experiences." Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality 14 (2002): 47-54.

Big Girls! You Are Beautiful!

2007-08-14T04:44:00.001-05:00

I really like Mika. I was introduced to him by Josh and Josh. Time to get rid of that media induced image of beauty (and yes, some genetics are involved, but have been hugely exacerbated by the media), guys and gals.

Kinsey Institute Sex Survey

2007-08-13T14:17:00.000-05:00

If you all are comfortable taking a survey about your sex lives the Kinsey Institute has a new survey they would like you to fill out. It is pretty short and shouldn't take more than 15 minutes. You also have the chance to win $50, if that's incentive for you to do it. But take it seriously, we're talking research here people.

(via The Countess)

Don’t Worry, Be Happy . . . Often! (Levin Cont.)

2007-08-12T22:40:00.000-05:00

There have been quite a few studies that have shown some relationship between mortality and number of orgasms, but they haven’t been without their flaws. One study showed a relationship of low heart disease with high orgasmic frequency, but the idiots didn’t adjust for the energy expenditure of intercourse. Doesn’t that like something you would obviously do? Actually, the energy expenditure of sex is minimal. I guess the amount of oxygen it takes your body to have sex is about the same as climbing two flights of stairs or taking a leisurely walk. So don’t listen to all those people telling you, “Sex is great exercise!” ‘Cause it’s just better than no exercise, really.

(Click to Enlarge)

Apparently there is a gender difference in the amount of orgasms and longevity. For men, it is more simply the amount of orgasms; but for women it’s about how satisfying those orgasms were. Because of this Levin digresses into a discussion of sexual satiety.

He talks about prolactin in the resolution phase and uterine contractions. Prolactin is a hormone that is somewhat similar to oxytocin (it aids in breast feeding), but the idea is that men and women also have a release of prolactin at orgasm that makes them experience sexual satiety. The idea was shot down because they manipulated the release of prolactin in males and females with drugs and found no difference. The other sexual satiety idea was that women experience intense uterine contractions at the final and most satisfying orgasm, but not at the previous orgasms. This would signal when women sexually satisfied. Remember all this was because women’s mortality rate was more related to quality, not quantity.

The relationship they found between prostate cancer and ejaculation was that men who had more ejaculations at a younger age were less likely to develop prostate cancer (this study was of about 30,000 males, that’s fricken huge!). The study didn’t discriminate between intercourse and masturbation another study was undertaken showing that men who had more sex under the age of 50 were less likely to have prostate cancer. There is also some evidence that orgasm in men actually increased the number of leukocytes (contrary to those player haters who say sex is bad for your immune system).

While not related to mortality, specifically, orgasm has been shown to reduce dysmenorrhea, pelvic cramping, and back pain associated with menstruation. Apparently about 9% of women will masturbate every three months in order to relieve these symptoms (that is a really random statistic, isn’t it? and really inaccurate probably, people have a hard time admitting they masturbate, even on anonymous surveys). I kind of wonder what that number would go up to if it were in the past 12 months.

The final and largest section of the article talks about the benefits of exposure to semen for females. This section really is benefits, not mortality issues. Women are about 15% more likely to have an ovum implant if seminal plasma are regularly in the vagina. So beyond the benefit of just having more sperm in the fallopian tubes, semen, for some reason, makes the female’s body want to implant the egg. Another benefit was that women who had sex without condoms were found to be less depressed than women who absorbed no semen/sperm vaginally. Vaginal contact with sperm also makes ovulations happen earlier and generally with a fertile egg rather than sterile ovulation. Oral consumption of sperm (people, this is evil information, don’t use it against your significant others) reduces the risk of preenclampsia (a risky condition during pregnancy). As you can tell these are just beneficial things not relating to mortality, unless you take into account that if you get pregnant you could experience difficulties.

I hope you made it all the way through it, hopelessly dry as it may have been.

Again, all information in this blog entry was provided by the article reviewed (below) or the links provided in the text.

Levin, Roy J. (2007) 'Sexual activity, health and well-being - the beneficial roles of coitus and masturbation', Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 22:1, 135 - 148

Levin on Masturbation and Coitus

2007-08-11T18:36:00.000-05:00

Because of the previous blog post I decided I would go into the journal articles the University so lovingly provides me with (for seven grand a year) and try to give you all something a little fresher. So here you go:

A short history of the morality of masturbation:

According to Levin (2007) masturbation started out as the evil hairy palm and blind eye maker in 1712 with the publication of “Onania; or, the Heinous Sin of Self-Pollution.” I looked it up and found a pdf copy. I haven’t read it yet because it’s 112 pages long. Quite a lot of pages to condemn a simple act of pleasurably moving one’s hand until your body scrunches up, don’t you think?

Levin notes that somewhere in that 112 pages they say the loss of one ounce of sperm is equal to the loss of 40 ounces of blood – just so we’re clear, that’s 2.5 pints of blood. I think the latter would be a little more harmful than pulling on the little man for a short time (or a long time). Males would also suffer impotence and gonorrhea. By the way ladies, you aren’t exempt, you’ll get jaundice, enuresis, epilepsy, hysteria, and start speaking with a fowl tongue (OH, NO!).

Not until almost 200 years after “Onania” was published did someone dare to say, “hold on a second, I like masturbating!” That man (of course it was a man, you think women could say anything about this?) was Havelock Ellis in 1897. He actually said it was a normal part of human sexuality, that it was healthy, and that recreational sex was just as important as reproductive sex.

I remember Albert Ellis saying in his book Sex Without Guilt In the 21st Century, that he had the hardest time even finding a publisher that would put out his book because of his mentions of masturbation. I wonder how this Havelock Ellis got his word out.

I don’t know what happened in the gaps, but Levin mentions that just in 1994, because of political pressure, Clinton had to can his Surgeon General because she said that masturbation was normal and students should learn about it in sex education class.

After the history lesson Levin goes on to talk about the inverse relationship of mortality rates and number of orgasms. He mentions nuns having higher mortality rates than married couples. He also mentions people who stay single having higher mortality rates than those who marry. Of course, like any good scientist, he does say coitus, masturbation, and orgasm aren’t the only things that are involved here, but they are a factor given that married couples will generally engage in far more sexual activity in their lives compared to nuns and unmarried couples. He notes that nuns have a 20% greater risk of developing breast cancer than the average US female. He doesn’t mention this, but I would venture that this has something to do with the Oxytocin release that women have then they are breast feeding their children (see this blog entry for more info on that).

The article isn’t over, but it gets more complicated and I hate reading things off a screen. I am going to print it off and write more later. Have a good weekend y’all.

All information is taken from the following article unless otherwise noted: Levin, Roy J. (2007) 'Sexual activity, health and well-being - the
beneficial roles of coitus and masturbation', Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 22:1,
135 - 148

Nothing New

2007-08-11T14:24:00.000-05:00

The media is so repetitive. I think we all know that, but especially with sexual research. It’s an echo chamber for the same damn information I find everywhere. The only place I have found some decent information is from Cory Silverberg at about.com. But seriously, can we get off the effects of marijuana on sexual performance, or drugs in general? Can we move on from abstinence only and into something more original? I have heard that housework done by the husband will get him laid more hundreds of times, do we really need to say it again? I know that people with abnormal IQs tend to have less sex, can you tell us why now?

Can’t we look into the hormonal reactions that sex has in the human (I know a little is done on this, but like all hormonal research what we can learn from it is nearly inexhaustible)? Can’t we find out more about the sexual response cycle?

I know this is kind of cheap because I just echoed what the other people were saying, but I just wanted to show what the heck is going on with sexual research. We can’t get grants to research much unless it is fairly mainstream. If the topic is considered taboo by anyone in the government we pretty much can’t get any funding from them. Private groups who are giving out grants are more interested in discrediting abstinence only (or, if they are religious, hiring people to find evidence that it does work AKA pseudo-science).

I really want to get involved with some of this stuff and help produce something new. I think once the engine gets started it will really flare up, but it’s like trying to start the lawn mower after it’s been sitting in the garage all winter with gas in it. Such a pain in the ass.

The Pointless Conversation

2007-08-07T17:12:00.000-05:00

I still see it as a somewhat pointless discussion, but the idea of free will and determinism has been of interest to me lately. I am a determinist. Maybe it has become of interest to me because I see it as somewhat foolish to believe that one’s choices are not directed by socio-cultural, psychological, and phylogenetic influences. Also, I haven't read anything about the Determinism/Free Will debate because I think it is incredibly dry (what does that say for what is to follow, haha), but this is what I have come up with on the topic.

(Click to Enlarge - This proves no point and is a horrible representation, but its randomness makes it kind of funny)

A recent example: a group of friends were sitting around a table at a local bar. One of these friends is a very atypical friend behaviorally. She was feeling antsy and decided to stand while the rest of us sat. Immediately we all took notice. Two others joined her when she revealed her slight insecurity of standing alone. All three of these people were visibly uncomfortable with their “chosen” behavior. It was unacceptable, socio-culturally, to be standing while the rest of us sat. Some at the table verbally told them this in a joking manner trying to get them to sit again. After a very brief period of standing they did all sit again.

The first girl who stood did so because she felt antsy, has generally atypical social behavior (though it isn’t bad), and was less uncomfortable than others would have been doing the same thing. The other too people stood because they felt empathetic. (Some speculation here) They had probably been conditioned over time to care less about what non-persons (see definition one and the footnote below) think of what they do. Combine this with a sense of empathy for the feelings of a friend and some social boldness and they would feel inclined to move. Others of us were not so inclined and it reflected in our verbal behavior with words of criticism trying to correct the inappropriate behavior of others. I would contend that had we known sufficient information about the conditioning of each of those individuals in the past, we could have accurately predicted their behavior.

The person that believes in Free Will has to argue that psychological conditioning (cultural conditioning included), previous choices, and previous memories, have little bearing on how/why we make our current decisions. In fact, our current decision is entirely based on the influences and outcomes of previous decisions. They also have to do with stubbornness, empathy, hate, love, fear, anger, rashness, etc. whatever emotion the decision maker (DM) is feeling at that moment. Also, how well the DM can control his/her anger or the wisdom to pause before making his/her decision, then it will be much more rational of a process.

Determinism is the elephant in the room. We all talk about our world as if it is determined. When you meet a person you form an impression of them so you can more accurately predict their behavior and more accurately respond to it. When someone asks you how you might respond to such and such a situation you already have a decent idea because of similar situations you may have already responded to.

How horrible would it be to live in a free will world? Where previous experiences, memories, tales and myths, genetics, socio-cultural norms, and endless other influences have little to no bearing on making a decision? How clumsy and random it would be. Our brains categorize things on the predictive nature of humans and the world we live in. We call it wisdom when people do this well. We all know the world is determined, but we are all too afraid to say that we don’t have much control over how our lives work. I’ve created a habit of drinking coffee, and no matter how much I would like to fight this urge I am on the way to the café right now.

Footnote: We tend to make people into objects when we are in crowds so our brains don’t have to process all the information that goes with creating an impression of an individual.

Maybe I shouldn't categorize this under "Freethought" but "Determined Thought." God, I have a dry sense of humor.

Man Arrested for Bringing Woman to Hospital

2007-08-07T12:03:00.000-05:00

Here is the source for this article, I want to say the ignorance of those it speaks about is obvious enough I don't have to comment on it. Wow, I am actually really angry at this.

"(CNSNews.com) - Members of Saudi Arabia's controversial religious police have arrested a Nigerian man who converted to Islam for being alone with a woman he was not married to or related to. It happened after the African man helped the sick woman by taking her to hospital.

"The incident, reported in Saudi media, comes at a time when the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice is under unprecedented scrutiny over abuses committed while enforcing the kingdom's strict Wahhabi interpretation of Islam.

(Something Orwellian for you)

"Arab News reported that Ibrahim Mohammed Lawal, a Nigerian student of Islam in Riyadh, learned that his 63-year-old neighbor was in need of medical attention and took her to hospital.

"While checking on her condition several days later, he was arrested by members of the plain-clothed vice squad, known in Arabic as the muttawa or muttaween.

"The reports said the man, who had been in custody for "50 days and counting," said all he wanted to do was to return to his home country.

"The U.S. government considers Saudi Arabia a key Mideast ally, although the State Department's scrutiny of the kingdom's religious freedom practices -- a requirement of the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act -- raises serious concerns each year.

"The muttaween and its methods feature prominently in the department's annual reports on international religious freedom. The sections on Saudi Arabia recount harassment, raids on private residence, and arrests for such "violations" as possessing non-Muslim literature, holding non-Muslim worship services, or promoting interpretations of Islam more moderate than that promoted by the kingdom's government.

"In its most recent annual report, covering 2006, the State Department said there had been fewer reports of abuses than in previous years. It cited a government decision in 2006 to "put into place policies to limit harassment of religious practice and curb violations" by members of the force.

"Abuses by muttaween members also have received more prominence in Saudi media, as a result of two recent deaths in detention court cases, and calls inside the country for reform are growing.

"Last week a court acquitted three members of the force charged in the death of a man who was in custody, accused of associating with a woman who was not a relative.

"Arguably the most controversial incident involving the muttaween occurred in 2002, when 15 schoolgirls died in a fire after members of the force prevented them from fleeing their burning school, and interfered with rescue workers, because the girls were not dressed modestly enough.

"The case caused an outcry, but a subsequent government investigation cleared the muttaween."

P.S. I have created a new topic just for this article: Ridiculous Ignorance. I hope I won't be putting that many articles under this topic, but I have little faith.

Crostini, Tomato Salad, and a Chzbrgr

2007-08-05T18:05:00.000-05:00

There were lots of plum tomatoes, basil, mushrooms and bread in my fridge that were getting on the edge of needing to be tossed out, so I came back home after reading at the cafe and decided to make myself dinner. I made Crostini, a tomato salad with mushrooms, basil, onion, garlic, too much balsamic, and some olive oil. I also just made a cheese burger because I knew the veggies wouldn't carry my appetite too far. The Crostini is super easy and tastes amazing (as is the tomato salad, but the Crostini feels more exotic), so if there are any cooks out there who haven't tried this yet check out the recipe and give it a shot. OH! The fun part about the Cheeseburger was that I toasted the bread in this really old toaster that burnt my bread, but I felt classy while I did it. haha. It's just like this toaster except black and actually looks like it's from the forties:

Eventful Days

2007-08-04T15:27:00.000-05:00

I spent the last couple days being serendipitous. Thursday night I was supposed to be studying for my Italian exam, but I became bored with studying and decided my bike needed riding. I took it down Washington and rode past The Loft, a school for aspiring writers. Inside was a poetry reading with a very small audience. I hit my brakes and found my way inside to a chair after locking my bike to a “no parking” sign.

I came in on the middle of a woman’s five page poem. I remembered my distaste for many poetry readings because everyone has the same tone when they stand behind the mic reading their poems. Poets are not orators. The next poems were by a young black man, his tone and rhythm were good and his poems made me think more. I liked them very much.

My reaction to his poems about God’s influence in his writing:

I write without spirit,
But not without passion.
Soulless is my pen,
But strength? It has that.
I invoke the known
So you feel the point (of my pen)
Penetrate.
I leave the speculative
So your thoughts don’t leave
The real.

I don’t pretend to be a poet, but invoking god as the absolute to a poet’s skills irked me. The poetry night ended and I pushed the peddles on my bike quickly looking for somewhere cheap to eat. I was feeling healthy and didn’t want to eat something greasy and meaty, so I stopped at Sawatdee and ordered a vegetarian dish and a beer.

I took the food to go and wanted to eat it under the lights on the Stone Arch Bridge, the only park well enough lit at 11PM to eat at. I quickly found it blocked off by reporters repeating the same information about the 35W bridge collapse we had been hearing the past 36 hours. Frustrated, I rode my bike back up the hill to University Avenue and back to my house and ate.

Friday I took my exam and jumped on my bike again. I headed down to the Fine Line to buy a few tickets for the Rodrigo y Gabriele show on October 25th for a person as yet unknown, Chris, and myself. They are a Latin Cover band that plays Led Zeppelin and Metallica and many others, it should be fun show.

Pro-Life Atheist Response

2007-08-02T18:57:00.000-05:00

It seems some people may have misunderstood what all I meant by my last post. What I certainly didn't mean is that I thought you should all join me in the pro-lifer camp holding signs with pictures of late term abortions on them screaming condemnations at the people walking into planned parenthood. I also didn't mean that I was now going to do this, even if I had switched my stance to pro-life, there is no way it is my decision to make for someone else. I would still want to allow them the freedom to do as they see fit in such a position.

I apparently didn't think this through well enough before posting it. I should have asked myself if the "desire to live" point applied to anything else, like the fungus that causes athlete's foot, or a tapeworm, or any other unconscious being that we would have no hesitation of snuffing out. These things have the desire to live in that evolutionarily they are designed such that survival is a natural function of their DNA given certain circumstances. It's the same way for that blastocyst that implants itself on the females uterus. It has no conscious desires like you or I until about the 6th month when it develops a central nervous system.

I knew when consciousness began according to science, but I was arguing more abstractly in the last post. Do infants have thoughts? That is closer to where I was going with "consciousness in my previous post.

Pro-Life Atheist

2007-08-01T01:32:00.000-05:00

Honestly, I am not sure where I stand on this issue right now. If you read some of my previous posts you will notice that I was pretty adamantly pro-choice. I still sympathize with that position and I don’t think I am at the point now where I would vote to have pro-life legislation enacted. But a non-religious friend who is pro-life and I spoke about it and it was a very interesting conversation, I wish I had it recorded.

I found myself making all kinds of caveats to my rules about pro-choice. I had to move my marker for what it meant to be human too often while my friend presented one thing: the fetus, whether conscious or not has the desire to live. The way I worded it was, “the very fact that this unconscious bundle of cells has implanted itself on the uterus shows it has some desire to survive.” The bundle of cells may not have a conscious being, but it does carry potential life and it obviously wants to be birthed as it will try to survive that smoke you inhale, that alcohol you ingest, or worse.

(Posts including abortion here, here, and here)

I found myself arguing that it was only bad to harm developed and conscious life, but where does that start. It’s hard to argue then that it is wrong to harm an infant, and I think we all agree that it is wrong to eat babies (delicious as they may be).

I would be very interested in hearing what others have to say and if there are any other pro-life atheists out there and what their reasoning is. I want to make clear that this was not a militant conversation or religiously inclined on either side. That's why the conversation was so unique, I think.

(In)famous Sexpert Dies at 93

2007-07-29T18:41:00.000-05:00

One of my heroes died this last week. Albert Ellis was a crazy bugger (and he would take no objection to me saying that, I don't think) who was outspoken and blunt about sex and therapy. He would confront you head on and beat you out of your depression, unrealistic beliefs, and other debilitating behaviors in a hardcore session of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) which later developed into Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT).

Ellis died of kidney and heart failure according to the NY Times, but I would rather just call it old age since he was 93.

A quote from the Times:

"Dr. Ellis had such an impact that in a 1982 survey, clinical psychologists ranked him ahead of Freud when asked to name the figure who had exerted the greatest influence on their field."

Ellis' REBT ignores all that Freudian shite that we hardly ever see any results from and goes straight to the problem. It focuses on people's reaction to situations and their personal mental process. It isn't the situation that causes the distortion of emotions in the person, but the person's thought process of the event. Therefore, we can change that thought process and the interpretation of the event so as to get more positive (or neutral) results and emotions. Ellis' idea that irrational ideas create more cognitive dissonance has been studied and supported by many researchers.

Some examples of interpreting the problems differently would be: "What evidence do you have to support this belief? In what other ways could this situation be interpreted? What is the worst thing that could happen? If this happened, what could you do?"

CBT developed from it and told us to stop using critical self-talk like, "I'm such and idiot!" or "I'm so fat/out of shape!" When we make these comments they have a similar effect on us that they do when other people say them to us. CBT teaches us to instead of saying "I'm such and idiot" say, "Whoops, now I know how to do that for next time." Or "I can't deal with this problem" to "How can I deal with this problem?" CBT is now the primary form of therapy used by psychiatrists.

Ellis is also credited with some great work on sex research and has tons of books out there on the subject. I will end this with a clip from his Sex Without Guilt in the 21st Century, it's a good book (though I wish it had a bibliography and notes to the text). I would still recommend it to others.

“On an individual basis, there are several things which you may do to overcome any irrational and destructive fears of sex that you may have.

“First: admit that you are sexually fearful, and do not try to hide you fear beneath a mask of false sophistication. You can honestly acknowledge that you have sex problems, instead of cavalierly attempting to dismiss them.

“Second: you can obtain considerable factual information about sex, particularly in relation to your own fears. You can learn from modern sex manuals and from talks with a physician or therapist, some of the facts about masturbation, sexual inadequacy, sex deviation, and other aspects of human sexuality which you may ignorantly fear.

“Third: You can do some of the sex acts of which you are irrationally afraid. Experiment with coital or extracoital techniques which you ‘know’ are normal and healthy, but which you still bigotedly believe are ‘bad’ or ‘wicked.’

“Fourth: You can begin to consistently indoctrinate yourself against some of your senseless sex fears instead of continually reinforcing yourself with them. You can show yourself, over and over again, that acts like masturbation are not wrong, childish, or harmful. You can tell yourself that sex behavior that does not needlessly and definitely harm yourself or others is good, harmless, and beneficial, and should preferably be practiced as you want.

“Fifth: If you try the foregoing techniques of helping yourself overcome your anxieties and you still have them, do not hesitate to go for psychological help. The chances are, in such a case, that they are neurotic and may be significantly alleviated by psychotherapy.”

(via Cory Silverberg)

The larger quote is from Ellis' Sex Without Guilt in the 21st Century

The information about REBT and CBT came from a former textbook of mine, What is Psychology by Pastorino and Doyle-Portillo and from the Wikipedia articles linked above.

The Scarlet Letter

2007-07-29T11:31:00.000-05:00

Richard Dawkins along with some others have an idea for the "Out Campaign." The idea is that atheists should have a symbol just like the Judeo-Christian religions, the Eastern Religions and everything in between. I think it would be kind of cool to have a symbol that could be used to reference atheism, but I am not without concerns:

1. The symbol chosen by Dawkins is a large letter "A" in red. Inspired by "The Scarlet Letter" by Nathaniel Hawthorne. In the book the letter was a Sisyphus-like burden for Hester Prynne. It was also a mark of sin in the book, we're atheists, we don't "sin" though we can do unethical things. The large letter "A" carries negative connotations, not positive (though a reclaiming could happen - it would be especially hard with this letter worn on atheists who already have a pretty poor reputation).

2. I just want to be. I want people to see that I am another normal person who just happens not to believe in the supernatural. Not that I am an unbeliever in the supernatural, then make a judgment about me. Though I am proud to be an atheist, I don't necessarily want to showcase my beliefs as the first thing a person should know about me (think about how you judge people when you see a cross around their neck, or a burka on a Muslim woman).

I have one or two other concerns, but they could really make it sound like I am chastising my peers. I don't want to do that. This isn't my movement. It's ours, and with the freethought movement, the only one thing we can (maybe) all agree on is that the existence of god is doubtful.

(I mean, I'm pretty loud as it is, don't you think?)

The above concerns were after my initial reaction: "Man! That's awesome! I want one!" I do want one of those t-shirts. It would be cool to be wearing these shirts while planting trees on earth day, or on the "Freethought Coming Out Day" that CASH is planning. If we could be seen doing good things in these, maybe it could help our image.

Some people have other ideas for symbols (see below link), but I would guess that since Dawkins has the advertising power and the t-shirts, bumper stickers, etc. already made his symbol will win out.

(via Pharygula)

Arguments From Jesus Part Tre

2007-07-27T13:03:00.000-05:00

My debate partner and I have slowed on writing our emails back and forth, but I have some from a past email. She asked me about the creation and order of the universe. I responded thus:

(Again, a disclaimer: I am no scientist, these facts are things I have learned from my scant reading. If something I say makes you curious, please find out more - and report back to me if you would)

(Again, I didn't respond with a video, but this is a decent video about the big bang)

"The order of the universe argument is also called the "Anthropic Argument." I say this just so I can refer to it more easily later. The Anthropic Argument (AA) is misunderstood by many people. It can be used as an argument both for and against the existence of god, but I think it makes more sense as an argument against his existence. The AA says that were the universe any other way, no intelligent life could exist (I think you agree here). Because of this we can also conclude that we are observing the universe and imposing our interpretations on it because it just happens that the universe is tuned in such a way that humans do exist (I don't think I am explaining this very well - besides that, it kind of assumes that you believe in the big bang, possibly the multiverse (which I don't see any evidence to believe), and possibly a pulsating universe. All these things would create universes that have various conditions, given infinite time a universe would eventually arise in which intelligent life could form - and here we are).

"If I may share a Bertrand Russel quote with you:
'I think belief lost whatever rationality it once possessed when it was discovered that the earth is not the center of the universe. So long as it was thought that the sun and planets and the starts revolved about the earth it was natural to suppose that the universe had a purpose connected with earth, and, since man was what man admired most on earth, this purpose was supposed to be embodied in man. But astronomy and geology have changed all this. The earth is a minor planet of a minor star which is one of any millions of stars in the galaxy which is on of millions of galaxies. Even within the life of our own planet man is only a brief interlude . . . . It is difficult to believe that omnipotence needed so vast a setting for so small and transitory a result.'"

(Click to Enlarge)

"Then we can bring in Occam's Razor and ask, "Which explanation for the physics of the universe is simpler, God or Infinite Time?" And while it may be simpler to SAY "God," this assumes that the existence of god has been proven, that god is a loving, benevolent creator, that god has a vested interest in the lives of humans, and the list goes on and on. Saying "god did it" in this regard is much more complicated than asking science to answer the question. The vast majority of science's answers are quantifiable and you and I can both see the same test results that have been conducted using the scientific method. But when we answer with "god" all the answers are subjective and no two people can see the same results.

"The order of the solar system is another thing that is brought up sometimes. You know the different colors of light, right? Like when light hits a prism and breaks into a rainbow? Well, that also exists in space (maybe you have heard of this) and the earth just happens to be in the corrects color zone to be able to support life. Very lucky of us. But again, given time this would naturally happen. The sun has a life cycle and that light shift used to be farther out in our solar system and at the time earth couldn't support life, but after millions of years the sun cooled and the light shifted to have earth in the zone where it could support life. But all this is meaningless if you believe in a literal creation."

On Sex and God (also combined)

2007-07-24T19:12:00.000-05:00

(Click to Enlarge)

My two favorite topics are combined today thanks to Pharyngula. You know that bone that God took from Adam's body to make Eve? Well, let's just say it isn't the bone that the creationists tell you it is (according to these people):

"Deletion of the gulonolactone oxidase gene on 8p21 is a genetic disease that affects 100% of humans. Lack of the enzyme causes severe connective tissue disease and makes humans dependent upon dietary supplements of ascorbic acid; see 240400. Gilbert and Zevit (2001) pointed out that another genetic condition, affecting 100% of human males, is congenital lack of a baculum (os priapi; os penis). Whereas most mammals (including common species such as dogs and mice) and most other primates (except spider monkeys) have a penile bone, human males lack this bone and must rely on fluid hydraulics to maintain erections. The size of the rodent baculum is regulated by the posterior members of the HOXD (142987) set of transcription factors (Williams-Ashman and Reddi, 1991; Zakany et al., 1997). Gilbert and Zevit (2001) suggested that it was not a costal rib but rather the penile 'rib' or baculum that God removed from Adam to create Eve (Genesis 2:21-23). Genesis also states that 'the Lord God closed up the flesh.' Gilbert and Zevit (2001) suggested that the raphe on the penis and scrotum was thought to be the surgical scar."

How's that for news?
_________________

This article talks about the development of an LA reporter from a religious column writer trying to reflect the positive sides of religion to a non-religious man as the ugly side of religion crept up on him. It's pretty long, but it's a decent read. My favorite quote from the article:

"I understood that I was witnessing the failure of humans, not God. But in a way, that was the point. I didn't see these institutions drenched in God's spirit. Shouldn't religious organizations, if they were God-inspired and -driven, reflect higher standards than government, corporations and other groups in society?"

_________________

CASH tried to get this guy to come talk at the university, but it turns out he is on sabbatical:

I've made contact with a few other atheist voices that I am very excited to have visit the university. I may tell you more later.

The Worst Meal (for me) I Have Ever Made

2007-07-23T14:00:00.001-05:00

But it was so delicious.

(Click to Enlarge)

I wanted to make something like an Alfredo Sauce, but I wasn't sure how to, so I improvised. I made a White Bechamel and added my own ingredients. Once it thickened up a bit I added some garlic, onion, fresh basil, paprika, a cup of Parmesan and a about a half pound of shrimp that I fried with olive oil, garlic and a little Tabasco. Oh, and I didn't have any milk, so the Bechamel was made with half & half. Pretty intense. Think any Italian chef would hire me? Who cares, it was fucking delicious. I suppose I could have just gone to Epicurious for that recipe, huh? Oh well, my little adventure was fun and turned out well.

Arguments From Jesus Part Due (I've been studying Italian all day)

2007-07-22T23:45:00.001-05:00

The person I have been debating with and I have, or course, hit the hot topics first. I don't think that is surprising to anyone. We talked homosexuality (where she mentioned God said that it was wrong - so we should follow his word Leviticus 18:22) and I responded thus:

(Click to Enlarge, and no, I didn't respond with a comic, though that could have been interesting)

"I strongly believe that every human has a right to happiness here on earth, but that cannot be upheld for some when others are oppressing their rights to live as individuals who do no appreciable harm to others or to the society in which they live.

. . . .

"Homosexuality does no appreciable harm to anyone involved in the relationship or to the society in which it exists. No homosexual has ever been militant about acquiring their rights (meaning employing violence to further their agenda). Homosexuals actually have a lower rate of sexual deviance than straight males (percentage wise). Homosexuals have been proven to be as capable parents as a straight couple. Homosexuality is not abnormal to humans: apes, dogs, and many other species engage in homosexual acts also. The only harm that has come from homosexuality is from hate crimes that have been committed against the homosexual community largely due to religious inclinations."

Then we hit abortion. Now, I have to say some of my facts may not be exact, but I tried to present the best argument I could without doing a ton of research. She argued for adoption as an alternative and for the unborn babies rights to be born and to (in the future) make it's own decisions. She also offered a quote from Corinthians 6:19-20 about our bodies being God's, not out own, and our bodies housing the Holy Spirit. I can see that it would then be horrible of us to destroy a life if that life did indeed contain some essence of God. My arguments are below:

(Click to Enlarge - Oh man, this is awful, you all see the coat hanger in there, right?)

"On abortion. Women should be able to choose if they want the fetus they are carrying. Not until late second trimester can the fetus feel pain. This is the same time that the fetus becomes aware that it is a living being (we know this because of the development of the central nervous system in the late second trimester).

"Also, you asked about the rights of the child? That is a good thing to take into consideration. What about the right of the child to grow up in an environment where it won't be tempted into alcohol and drugs. What about the right of the child to grow up in an environment where it can be financially supported? What about the right of the child to grow up in a family that loves it?

"The would be mothers of these children are taking these things into consideration when they go to the clinic. They know they cannot provide the correct environment for the child to grow up in, so they survey their options. Adoption is a hard process that costs thousands of dollars (plus the cost to the mother of actually having the child and considering only about 50% of this country has health care that can be enormous), if the mother is already a poor woman (the poor tend to have more children than the rich) then this is not an option for her. If she decides to have the child but is unwilling to adoption she then has to take the care of the child, this option will cost her tens of thousands if not (at least) a hundred thousand dollars over the child's life. Of course there is always the rape case, what to do with a child of a man she doesn't know?

"Why are women put in the situation where they need an abortion? Actually, about 60-70% of abortions are from married women who have already had at least one child. They didn't want to have another child for various reasons (money, bad husband, lifestyle choice, etc.) but whatever form of contraception they were using failed (almost 100% of abortions are because of failed contraception (or no contraception because of lack of education) - very few are actually because of rape). I have even talked to a doctor who saw a religious protester outside his clinic whom he had performed an abortion on. Her claim was that she needed it, but the other women don't because they were using it as a form of contraception. Pretty expensive contraception ($100-$500)."

I'll leave it at that for now. But there is already more. My abortion and homosexuality arguments were actually provided before the arguments she gave. I decided not to respond further to those because I knew where we both stood, and these are not the root of the believe in god, the belief in god is the root of these beliefs. So I asked her to provide evidences for the existence of god and the bible being his book. We'll see what happens.

Here's a little video on Birth Control Methods. It's a little boring, but there are a few points where she gets a little flustered by what she has to say. The effectiveness rates she gives are ideal effectiveness rates, so actually assume that they are about 10-15% less effective than she says (which is why you always want to combine more than one form of contraceptive).

Arguments From Jesus

2007-07-21T00:51:00.000-05:00

(Click to Enlarge)
Lately I have been receiving a few emails from people trying to bring me back into Jesus warm arms (warm = Love Me or BURN!). It's a little late for me considering I have committed the unforgivable sin:

". . . whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin" - Mark 3:29

(Click to Enlarge)

I have done this many times over, so Jesus isn't going to take me into his fold and love me long time. But I enjoy the debate. I think I am going to do this in snippets because some of the emails I wrote were way too long to include in their entirety. I'll just quote a few introductory sections to the tone of the emails that I am hoping to continue (for privacy purposes I will not include the names or information my corespondents provide unless they allow me to):

"I am on my way to work right now so I don't have a lot of time to respond, but something caught my eye. You said that it scares you that many people don't even give a chance thought to the possibility of "G"od. I grew up a Catholic, went to Catholic elementary school, attended a Lutheran Church for a while, and became a Jehovah's Witness after high school. I learned that everyone had a different interpretation of who "G"od was and and whose "G"od he was. I learned that subjectivity while claiming objectivity is the only truth in religion.

"I don't know where you received my email, but you probably found it because I am a fairly outspoken atheist. To say that someone who is an outspoken atheist hasn't thought about the possibility of a god (an objective god especially) is somehow missing the point of screaming "ATHEISM." A person who hasn't thought about the possibility of god is more likely to be "non-religious" than claim harshly "atheist." It is precisely because I have thought about the possibility of god that I deny the existence of such a being. I have seen no credible shred of scientific evidence that points to the existence of a god."

At one point I did say something offensive and inappropriate and I apologize for that, I continued with this:

"I didn't mean to offend when I wrote earlier about the projection issue . . . . But, if we are to continue writing these emails back and forth, it is going to happen that we will offend one another on occasion, you too have offended me and my human based ethics several times already, but I will try to respond to what you have said with reason. If the religious and the non-religious are to get anywhere in their communications both sides must keep a cool head.

(Click to Enlarge - hehe. Homer Playing Ring Toss)

. . . .

"Am I willing to study with you? Sure. But only if you agree to a few things: I am able to ask as many questions as I need to to be at peace with the answers; we agree that in this studying we will offend each other by the very nature of what is being discussed; and you formulate your arguments in such a manner that logic is the basis and not faith. I believe those are fair criterion on which to base further debate."

I will post more later, but I think this gives a good introduction.

Crock of Shit? (I feel like FOX news)

2007-07-17T19:53:00.000-05:00

I won't say I know a lot about ethanol production and use, but this article has got me thinking.

I read the article and found out that it takes an exorbitant amount of water to produce ethanol. For every gallon of ethanol you burn in your engine it takes about 3 gallons of water to produce that. Plus all the energy that goes into growing the corn (corn, wheat, and sugarcane are pretty much the worst things on this planet for the soil - leaving it without nutrients to grow crops in the future), transporting the corn to the conversion plant, and transporting the fuel to where you and I can use it.

(Click to Enlarge)

Though little research has been done on the issue, there is some concern that we will be depleting thousands of year old aquifers for a little extra distance in our cars (those damn things). The plant in Granite Falls, in the last year, reduced the aquifer below it by 90 feet. I would say that's cause for concern.

If you ask me, ethanol is a hip way for the masses to feel good about burning a fuel that may not produce as much CO2 in itself, but the messy set behind the scene is another story.

Be Spiritual, Not Religious

2007-07-16T00:36:00.000-05:00

“Spirituality” has gained some popularity since religiosity has lost some. Frequently I hear people say something to the effect of the title. Be “spiritual,” not “religious.” I understand that what is intended by this is to be part of a spirituality that you can discover yourself, not part of a religious organization that shows its followers the correct path. But there is also an element to disclaiming the religious organizations as foolish that is involved in being spiritual. One denies the religious because of some perceived flaw.

The perceived flaw that the spiritual see in religion is many of the dogmatic edicts (Jesus’ and Mary’s assumption into heaven, the immaculate conception, Mohammed’s being spoken to directly by Gabriel, Moses splitting the red sea, etc. etc.). Of course those things are hard to believe, that’s why the church frowns on people questioning them, and that’s why they are called “dogma.” We are supposed to believe them by fiat. But isn’t that partly what the so called “spiritual” people reject?

I think it is awesome that the people who label themselves as “spiritual” are skeptical of those dictates, but they end up making the same mistake themselves often. Many spiritual people adopt eastern practices without the religion, but the practices themselves have very little to no evidence supporting their usefulness.

Meditation, while I love it for stress relief, relaxation, and some simple time to be with myself (the first two have empirical evidence supporting them), has no evidence to show that it creates a connection with anything beyond our bodies. It also has no evidence showing that it creates compassion in a person (I would argue that the vegetarian diet of the Buddhist does more to foster that). Much of this is true for Yoga, Tai Chi, and any other Hindu or Buddhist practice.

The spiritual belief that there is also a higher being is a belief based on faith. That ugly word that simply means to believe something without evidence. The spiritual person may believe in a god of some sort (whether it be a mass of free flowing energy that we are all a part of or an omnipotent sky wizard), but the simple fact is they base this off personal experiences (which are not evidential for example: a person is praying to god and experiences a sudden freezing chill and an emotional high and claims this is evidence for the existence of god – I would beg to differ). But isn’t this belief just as dogmatic as the edict that Jesus blood had to be shed for all our sins to be forgiven (being omnipotent God could have just said “I forgive you,” right?).

Basically, I am trying to say that when one says “Be spiritual, not religious” s/he walks a very fine line. To hold some belief sacred, like a belief that meditation can bring you happiness or that some creator being exists, is just as religious and dogmatic as to belief any of the canon of the religions themselves. I am going to bed now.

lol . . . Virgins

2007-06-23T14:07:00.000-05:00

A new study was released by the CDC yesterday. It deals with sex and drugs. My first question is why the two were paired, I know they area so similar being harmful, destructive, forces or evil . . . um . . . whatever.

They found out that only 4% of adults over the age of 20 are virgins. I guess that means some of those Southern Baptists are engaging in illicit activities before they are married. Surprise, Surprise. Over at about.com the median age of marriage for women in 2003 was 25.3 and for men it was 27.1. Which means some people are being naughty. I say: hell yeah (with the devil horns in the air: see picture below).

While I was looking up marriage statistics I found this. Pretty interesting. Haha. Apparently if you are a college educated male living in the city with a college educated female, you have a 95% chance of getting a divorce and of being unhappy.

The CDC survey also recorded how many partners a person had. Guess what? The males reported having more partners than the females. 50% of males and 30% of females reported having seven or sexual partners in their active sex lives. Someone in here is lying, but I can’t say that it is only the men. Women may be reducing their numbers while men are inflating them. It is a male pride issue to have slept with more women while there is still a somewhat conservative attitude that follows women in their sexual partner numbers.

As I have said before there is always the problem of self report error in sex studies. I wish surveys were more accurate, people were more honest with the took them, and people could identify their emotions better, but that's the way it goes. Scientists have also devised clever ways to get more accurate results some of the time also.
__________

"Where are the children living (with one or two parents) due to divorce? Children living with only one parent has increased from 9% in 1960 to 30% (29.52%) in 2005. Of those 83% of the children live with the mother. This is creating a society of bastards."

I laughed hysterically when I read this. Look at the source, it is just in the address bar (like you couldn't guess just from reading the material).

Sperm Wars and Richard Carrier

2007-06-22T19:25:00.000-05:00

I decided to take another look at Sperm Wars, by Robin Baker. I thought I wrote something on it a while ago, but apparently I forgot to. I read the first half of this book skeptically, then I just put it down. The book is really interesting. It provides some erotica with explanations of what the science behind the behaviors are. Like a woman cheating on her husband, then coming home after her coitus with another man and having sex with her husband again. He explained that the woman was actually ovulating and while ovulating (this part is true) woman tend to seek a more masculine man, (back to speculation) so she had sex with an ex, but came home to have sex with her husband so if fertilization and implantation occurred her husband wouldn't be suspicious that it wasn't his child. All this explained by an unconscious process that women go through while ovulating.

The book provides some interesting suggestions (and some exciting reading, heh), but when you are reading it you won't notice any superscript numbers, footnotes, endnotes, bibliography, appendices, indexes, references, or suggested readings. He writes as if everything is as solid based as evolution itself, but it is hard to take him seriously with so little scholarly work mentioned. So I decided to read up on the book on EBSCO Host, a scholarly journal database provided for students by the University of Minnesota.

I found a couple of reviews of the book. A review by a New Zealand Psychiatrist author lauded it (with not one critical thing to say - that makes me nervous right there), while Scientific American showed the same skepticism I did above. I also looked at Amazon's reviews of his other books and noticed a few professors that reviewed his books. They didn't have many kind things to say about his work and mentioned a few other things one might choose to read instead (I have not read them myself, so I am hesitant to mention them with my own critical review). If you would like to read this book, go ahead, it's fun, but don't take it too seriously, the research is outdated and apparently falsified by other scholars.
____________

I am reading some of Richard Carrier's material right now. I hope to respond to some of it soon. Be patient my precious readers.
____________

Austin Cline put an article up by Isaac Harris. It is a really fair article on the Jehovah's Witnesses. I mention it given my history as one. I personally didn't have to deal with what he mentions in the article, but I know those who did have to, and it was talked about often with the people I was in contact with.

Nonverbal Communication: Haptics (Touch)

2007-06-21T14:58:00.000-05:00

Before I began recording my touches for the touch journal I assumed I would have lot. My friends all consider me a very affectionate person, overly affectionate in fact. So I thought my touches would be high and more toward Heslin’s “Friendship/Warmth” classification. As I am a single male who is not necessarily seeking (and unemployed at the time of the recording), I expected social/polite to be the other classification that rose higher. What I found was quite different, but somewhat ambiguous.

The only interaction that involved touch that day was the meeting of a friend of a friend, and no touches were shared between the mutual friend and myself. Upon greeting the women at the cafe I stood up out of my seat and offered my hand to shake. Over the course of talking the new acquaintance apparently accidentally touched my knee with her hand twice, and I accidentally bumped her foot with my foot under the café table twice. I am not positive of its accidental nature, but for lack greater knowledge I must classify it this way. Finally, there was a hug at our parting ways which she initiated. This took place in about two hours before class on a weekday.

The notice-ability of the touches is something I would like to discuss as the text seems to downplay it. Obviously, the first social/polite handshake that I offered I noticed, but was not aware of the manner in which I shook her hand (firm/dainty, etc.), I also wasn’t aware of how she shook mine. All five of the later touches, both accidental and friendship/warmth I took special note of when they happened, vocally brought attention to them when I was the toucher, and I can still remember my physiological response when they happened.

My adrenaline pumped, my heart picked up its pace, low level anxiety came, and emotionally I was happy that this person even accidentally touched my knee. The hug was more awkward. I wasn’t expecting it. She initiated it. I was surprised, anxious, glad she did, and I notably felt a warm emotion toward her afterwards. All of these touches completely stopped my thought process and I am sure she noticed (as my speech stopped momentarily). Maybe I am not practiced enough at female/male touch, or maybe I am a typical male but allow it to be noticed more, but I feel I am highly sensitive to touch unless I initiate it.

On examining the touches I participated in, I found that regular touch is not as common in my life as I supposed. Had I not met the mutual friend’s friend, I would not have touched anyone for 48 hours. I still hold that touch plays a more friendship/warmth and social/polite role for me, as exhibited by the handshake I initiated and the welcomed hug from the new acquaintance. I can’t go without saying my friendship/warmth supposition comes from being called “homoerotic” by friends many times. It is too hard to forget this and not involve it here. While it may seem homoerotic to them, I see/feel nothing erotic about the touches I give my male friends.

After reading the text I would like to change the amount of touches that are involved in my daily routine. A reason I am studying interpersonal relationships is that I feel I am not that great at them. While I tend not to be too sensitive to people not caring for me (I don’t need people to like me), I also feel it is a human want to have people appreciate your presence. Since touch is such a minor activity in my life as it is, maybe I could include appropriate touch more to make people feel more comfortable with me. This would take practice though. As the book said, touching can amplify emotions that are already being felt, so if used in the wrong way it can make a person extremely uncomfortable, especially in a low contact culture. While cognitively I would say that I would be less hesitant about touching a female, I think once it came to the situation, I would find myself having a hard time touching anyone I didn’t already feel comfortable with.

Mein Kampf at Border's

2007-06-17T21:11:00.000-05:00

To Border’s Booksellers,

I have recently been doing a lot of research on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It purports to be the minutes taken from a secret meeting of Rabbis in the late 19th century. It is a forgery, most likely by a Russian anti-Semitic author. The book was a large part of the anti-Semitism that took place in Europe (esp. Germany) prior to and during WWII. Hitler was fond of this pamphlet and had many of his soldiers read it as it gave them reason to kill the Jews.

I recently called around to many of your stores to find a copy of A Lie and A Libel or Dismantling the Big Lie or any other book that argues against the Protocols and shows the fallacies therein. None of these books were held in stock at any of the stores I called and were made to be an “On Order” basis. I understand that books are kept on the shelves due to the frequency of selling, but I feel it is insufficient to have these books only on an on order basis, especially when Hitler’s own book, Mein Kampf, implicating the Jews is consistently showcased. It is simply inexcusable not to offer the defensible viewpoint.

In an era when pseudo-science, false history (Holocaust denial), and many other unreasonable beliefs so easily taken as reality, it is imperative that the factual viewpoint be represented. Mein Kampf is poison, but I do not disagree with it being in Border’s Bookstores. I simply argue that if Hitler’s undeniably hateful book be in Border’s Bookstores, the next natural thought is to have the Jewish defense provided nearby.

Thank You for your time,
William Martin

All Vegetarian Tonight and Help Darfur!

2007-06-15T18:25:00.000-05:00

Pretty disparate topics, no?

(It's a little blurry, but click to enlarge)

I haven't put one of these posts up in a while. I have been cooking, but I just forgot to take a picture before I eat the food. Ah, well . . .

So tonight I made a pasta salad because it is too damn hot to eat anything hot.

Pasta Salad:
Sun Dried Tomatoes
Sliced Olives
Corn
Fresh Basil
Parmesan
Olive Oil
Red Wine Vinegar
Fusilli Noodles (I used a fun organic colored type)

Mint and Parsley Tahini Salad:
Mint
Parsley
Cilantro
Cumin
Turmeric
Cardamom
Garlic
Salt
Cayenne
Tahini
Lemon
Olive Oil

Homemade Hummus:
Garbanzo Beans
Lemon
Tahini
Garlic
Olive Juice (I just put opened a jar of olives and put some of that juice in it)

Enjoy the previous two on top of pita bread.

Also, pick up your copy of Instant Karma. All the proceeds go to an Amnesty International fund to help with the conflict in Darfur.

I forgot . . .

2007-06-14T18:13:00.000-05:00

In the below post I forgot to mention the major thing that is wrong with that picture: it implies that all of those "evil forces" they have included in the little drawing are purposefully trying to kill Christianity. I already said something about their little persecution complex didn't I?

Hot or Not?

2007-06-13T19:09:00.000-05:00

Collecting data on what men and women think is attractive in one another based on personal report is like asking why white is white or black, black; they don’t know, they just are. Luckily, I have thought about this a lot (too much?) and was able to assist my interviewees through the process somewhat. I will comparatively analyze the tables for similarities, differences, and generalizations (stereotypes that were played out or otherwise). Afterwards I will analyze this information in the context of the scientific findings on attractiveness presented in the text.

Of the four columns, both interviewees, as well as myself, had the most trouble identifying what men find attractive in other men. The male interviewee was thoughtful in trying to include different subcultures in his comments, but this also made it hard for him to come up with more nonverbal cues because they would always be ruled out by another subculture. He also tended towards making the male/male; female/female columns with the queer subculture in mind.

(I just thought this was amusing)

The interviewees agreed on more characteristics when compared with one another, but my list had different characteristics on it (I was too general, I think). Another part of the issue with my responses was that I tended toward more environmental cues that could be read from the way persons carry themselves in a particular setting. I also stayed away from comments on breasts and butts because I have never heard any general consensus on this topic. Many of my responses I later found in chapter six of the text. All three of us agreed on the following:

(Interview Question: What does the first gender find attractive in the second gender on this table?)

(Click to Enlarge)
It is interesting that “well-groomed” crossed three columns, but not the column I would think it most obviously to be in (female/male). The idea I got from asking the interviewees to clarify on this topic was that they preferred someone who purposefully looked a certain way. It didn’t matter what subculture a person belonged to, just that they visibly take care of their body (I am somewhat reminded of “suicide girls,” an alternative adult entertainment with extensively tattooed women as the models).

A stereotype that was played out in all the respondents was the male taller and female shorter idea. Evolutionarily, I would say this has to with male dominance issues. It could make a male feel inferior to be shorter than his partner, or a female to feel like her partner doesn’t have as much environmental dominance. The perceived experience of the other person speaking to a shorter male may be that of the “Napoleon Complex” (Knapp & Hall, 2006). Perceived is the key word, my understanding is that the “Napoleon Complex” is not well founded.

Below is a table of the things the interviewees agreed on without my input:

(Click to Enlarge)
The most agreement was found between all of us when the topic discussed was what men find attractive in women. I suppose this is because of the media influence on this subject and because it is a large focus of men in our culture. The least agreement was found when speaking of what men found attractive in other men. This may be because of homophobia and because men generally don’t think about what physical characteristic they like in their friends, which could be a highly sexualized activity. Perhaps if I had interviewed a gay male he would have been able to pinpoint these nonverbal cues much better. I also found it curious that they agreed that tattoos are attractive to males on females, but not vice-versa.

My responses were more issues of status for both men and women. When thinking of straight men, I thought they would be more attracted to men who had attractive women hanging around him. I applied the same thought to women with attractive men. This idea seems to be truer for the men than the women according to Knapp & Hall (2006), although they didn’t write about any research done on the issue of women being attracted to women with attractive male friends. Men who are seen with attractive women gain perceptions of higher status (more money, occupational success, intelligence), while unattractive women gain no such status indicators when with an attractive male (in fact, I would argue, they lower the status of the male they are with) (Knapp & Hall, 2006).

The characteristics of symmetry, physically fit, fair/healthy skin, waist/hip ratio (hour glass), and flat stomach all tend toward the mesomorph body type. Other characteristics were mentioned on individual lists that didn’t receive consensus also. It is somewhat interesting that the woman I interviewed named mesomorphic characteristics even though her fiancé has a more ectomorphic body type.

(Top: Mesomorph, Bottom Right: Ectomorph, Bottom Left: Endomorph; Mesomorphic characteristics are considered ideal and the most attractive)

Some stereotypes were upheld through the interviewing process, but I believe the stereotypes of height and symmetry are also scientifically founded and evolutionarily based. More indicators of body health and good genes may have been reflected if I was more specific in the answers I gave to the tables. The influences of modern cultural biases were also seen in the reports of tattoos and shaved legs. Overall the agreement was lower than I would have anticipated, but higher than coincidence and personal preferences would allow.

This is Legit. No Joke.

2007-06-06T20:40:00.001-05:00

(Click image to enlarge - Click here to see the accompanying article)

How many things are wrong with this picture?

1. The strategically placed hand of the "Militant Homosexual." Because gay men abuse young boys all the time. Pretty much all pedophiles are gay, didn't you know? Just to be sure no one took that seriously, the vast majority of pedophiles are in fact heterosexual men.

2. "Militant Homosexual"??? When was the last time we heard of a homosexual blowing up a Christian thinktank and telling them they must be gay, OR ELSE!?

3. "Atheist Critical Thinking" - I think a little critical thought should have gone into the making of this picture. And when did critical thought ever create something that we later found was evil (examples like eugenics are not valid since they were the epitome of bad science and UNcritical thought on the behalf of scientists)

4. Apparently people who feel they are another gender but are trapped inside the opposite gender's body are instruments of Satan? I guess I wasn't aware that when "God" makes you a certain way you are supposed to suppress and change it (oh, wait, yeah I was, homosexuality).

5. Wicca is also an instrument of the devil. Pay no heed. Disavow sorcery and Harry Potter NOW!

6. Why is the Islamic man playing craps? Islamic people aren't allowed to gamble according to Allah (or some psychedelic man in a 7th century Arab desert - that would make me see hallucinations too).

7. The ACLU? Why are the civil rights people always oppressing us? I just want my religious right to hate gays, atheists, the CA Dept. of Education, the National Education Asso., sorcerers, trans-people, Muslims, and critical thinkers. I mean, come on, is that so much to ask?

8. "Atheism Rules" . . . well, I guess I don't really have anything to argue with there.

9. Wasn't Jesus practically (or was he, I really don't remember) naked when he was stapled to that 2x4? Maybe I shouldn't go there is this case. haha.

10. Monkey? Is that evolution? I don't get it.

11. The Wolf. Um... ok?

Aren't Christians a majority in this country? I don't really get this persecution complex these people have. When did this country start PERSECUTING Christians? I am pretty sure Christians live in a favorable light in the United States. Just keep your dogmatic ideas out of schools where critical thinking is supposed to be the focus and keep your religion away from civil rights and I'm cool with you.

Sorry if the writing was poor today. I am a little out of it.

Highly Sexualized America

2007-05-30T21:45:00.000-05:00

Now here is a commentary on highly sexualized America. I think its pretty funny that they absolutely polarize what people want in a relationship/sexual experience. Apparently a quarter of women want Shakespearean love (I don't, people always die with Shakespeare, or they have some huge maddening drama happen) and to do her husband's laundry, make his food, and do his dishes. The other three quarters of women just want to romp . . . all the time (wouldn't that be great. OH! Caveat! Men must wear AXE). It is also absolutely hilarious when the video switches back to the bus scene. You'll understand when you watch it. Oh, and you may not want to watch this at work. There isn't any nudity, but they get damn near and the lyrics are a little risque.

Slow Blogging

2007-05-27T14:53:00.000-05:00

A whole week without posting anything? I feel like I owe my vast audiences some attention. I wouldn’t want to lose my fan base to Pharyngula, Austin Cline, This Week in Evolution, The Raving Atheist, The Atheist Ethicist, Mickipedia, Cory Silverberg, Between the Sheets (I just found this one), or any other of the sites I like to check out. I mean, I know I outnumber them in sheer number of hits per day (probably by about (negative) 100,000), but I just want to keep the love in the room, so to say.

The reason for the low post number is threefold: I don’t have a job that allows me all the free internet access I can handle while I serve a customer every 30 minutes, I am taking a May term course here at the UMN-TC, and I am now the Activities Coordinator for the largest, oldest, and probably most active atheist student group in the nation (Campus Atheists, Skeptics, and Humanists-CASH).

I lost my job as the “cute boy behind the counter” just in time. It’s ok though. I am getting financial aid from school in a few weeks and I can’t forget to thank my mommy and daddy for so lovingly helping me out (thank you M&D!!). I also picked up another job. I was offered a bouncer job at a tiny local bar called “Downtime.” Now, I’m not a fighter since my brother’s pretty much made me submit to their 275 lb bench presses daily when I was 12 and under, but I do have a few years of Tai Kwon Do and I also have reasoning capabilities. Hopefully I can just talk people down a bit (I’m also 6’2” and can have a commanding presence when I choose to, especially when I don’t know the people).

The course is Nonverbal Communication and it takes up a minimum of six hours of every weekday. Class is three hours long and the professor said she didn’t reduce the workload from what she teaches in a full semester. Though it’s a ton of work, I am happy to have it. I would feel a little gypped had she cut some out. Some of the people in the class actually whined when she said that. They were all boys. I wanted to smack them upside the . . . but then I regained control and decided they may have other things going on in their lives. I shouldn’t judge them. Yeah, right.

(These two are enjoying themselves, the woman in the background is clearly disgusted.)

CASH is going to involve a lot of work for me, and in the last week I have already put in some laid back work (about 10-12 hours). It’s not going to be easy during the semester, but I am really glad to be a part of the atheist activist community. I was speaking with the Finance Director and, the affectionately named, “Propagandist” about what the lifetime achievements of this generations atheists will be. We suspected that removing the stigma around the word “atheist” is going to be our lofty achievement. And really, it is one worth being a part of. Once the stigma is removed, the freedom to be largely who you are in public will come. Think if no stigma was attached to “homosexual.”

I’ll share a couple of the ideas we came up with for the weekly CASH meetings in the coming year: Baptize the Atheist (an atheist in a dunk tank), Is Atheism/Humanism a Religion?, Religion and Dating, “Bible Study” (have a local scholar come in and talk about the origins and cultural influences on the bible), Freethought Coming Out Day (come out of the closet as an atheist/agnostic/skeptic), and many others. Some of them are publicity stunts to get the University students to recognize our presence, but we have lots of lectures, debates, discussions, and panels planned, too.

Working Class Hero: Willy Loman

2007-05-21T10:51:00.001-05:00

I heard the song “Working Class Hero” on the radio yesterday. The version I heard was Green Day, but I later found out it was originally John Lennon (like I have said, I am a child of my times). I didn’t find the song especially poetic or even that good. I think that’s for two reasons: John Lennon made it and his songs are more like talking with a guitar and different tones in the voice, and it reflects the kind of people the song is directed towards.

Don’t misunderstand me and think I am calling the blue collar workers boring. They live their lives and I am sure they don’t see them as boring and unchallenged. Willy Loman of Death of a Salesman could tell you all about that and feeling the burden of heroism even though he is no king. In the end of Death of a Salesman you feel similar for Willy as you do for Oedipus. Willy challenges the classical Greek idea that a tragic hero must be a king or a god, a hero can just be a person struggling with life. That fact may make him more of a hero because more of us can identify with him.

(Lyrics at the bottom below the line)

The burden of heroism isn’t left to kings alone. A high school friend of mine dropped out of college (not out of laziness) and decided he was going to help his girlfriend who had a child by another man. He got a job and has been climbing that ladder ever since. That is heroic. A measure of self-sacrifice goes with heroism and choosing a nobler life, but that isn’t the reason for choosing it, it’s a byproduct. If it was the reason for choosing the nobler route the pride in it would remove the heroism and eventually wear thin for the hero. S/he would regret the decision and begin to feel animosity toward the other.

I wonder, is humility intrinsic to nobility? The inner struggle and defeat of the baser instinct is part of what I see as heroism. That inner struggle is where the later humility comes from: the knowledge that you chose the higher road, but you almost ran away, taking the easy way out. The hero can’t be entirely happy on the noble road because their baser, self-interest desires almost seized them. It’s what should keep a person from taking pride in their right decisions, it was too hard to make the right decision. Our altruism is a farce, we don’t want to be altruistic when it means we are the ones sacrificing, but that makes a hero. Doing the right thing doesn’t warrant vanity and reward.
-------------------------

As soon as your born they make you feel small,
By giving you no time instead of it all,
Till the pain is so big you feel nothing at all,
A working class hero is something to be,
A working class hero is something to be.
They hurt you at home and they hit you at school,
They hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool,
Till you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules,
A working class hero is something to be,
A working class hero is something to be.
When they've tortured and scared you for twenty odd years,
Then they expect you to pick a career,
When you can't really function you're so full of fear,
A working class hero is something to be,
A working class hero is something to be.
Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV,
And you think you're so clever and classless and free,
But you're still fucking peasents as far as I can see,
A working class hero is something to be,
A working class hero is something to be.
There's room at the top they are telling you still,
But first you must learn how to smile as you kill,
If you want to be like the folks on the hill,
A working class hero is something to be.
A working class hero is something to be.
If you want to be a hero well just follow me,
If you want to be a hero well just follow me.

Starlight

2007-05-20T15:58:00.000-05:00

Wanna hear a weird story? I was laid off. From a coffee shop.

The cafe I work at is on campus and in a basement, so we don't get many customers during the summer. The boss decided he would temporarily fire all his employees and work by himself for the next however long. As for temporarily firing me: I think that temporary is enough for me to call it quits and find a new job. I am having a little trouble though people. So if you have a job you think I might like and want to recommend it to me I would appreciate all the help I could get.

I feel so worthless. I mean, who gets laid off from a coffee shop. Seriously.

Respect of Religious Beliefs

2007-05-17T12:23:00.000-05:00

I am a strong atheist. I hate when I must staple my mouth shut because I am at work and someone on the other side of the counter just spouted some religious nonsense. I don’t respect other’s beliefs. But should I?

I understand that our constitution allows everyone to believe how they want. I value that, and I sincerely want to uphold that. Before the United States it was a rare goal to propose that all people should be equal. Though I may be a child of my times, it makes me overjoyed that such a goal is closer than ever to being within our reach. I can’t say that we had the goal mastered when Jefferson wrote it down, but we gradually awakened our conscience and came to where we are (with still a long way to go).

That being said, I respect people’s right to believe what they might. Often though, I do not respect the beliefs themselves, and I do not consider it something I must do. Dawkins talks about the willingness (almost desire) of the mind to jump to supernatural conclusions. He presents the cargo cults of the western Pacific. These cults saw the new white immigrants coming with scads of material wealth that the people didn’t make, they just appeared off the boats (and the boats from a horizon they had no idea had land on the other side of it). They never saw white men do “work,” only “sitting behind a desk shuffling papers . . . [as] some kind of religious devotion.” They concluded that the cargo had supernatural origin. It’s a little bit more complicated than this, but you get the point.

Now, I doubt anyone would say we must “respect” this belief. Any person in their right mind would consider it the duty of the wiser to educate the ignorant (wow, that came off really arrogant. The arrogance goes both ways though; the religious consider the non-religious ignorant as well). I know all who came upon this belief would call it silly and wish these people wouldn’t waste their time and energy worshipping something so blatantly false. Sam Harris calls “atheism . . . simply an admission of the obvious.” I think the admission of the falsity of the cargo cults is simply an “admission of the obvious” along with the admission that we truly have no evidence for the truth of the Abrahamic religions or a supreme being.

More Here

The difference is huge. I respect people’s right to believe whatever the may, but the beliefs themselves are worthy of respect or they are not. A belief that martyrdom will give you a direct pass to heaven with 70 virgins and a pick in who can join you when they die is not worthy or my respect. A person flying to Africa to educate people that having sex with a virgin doesn’t cure AIDS, but that a condom can prevent contraction and spread of the disease is worthy of my respect. A belief that we shouldn’t bother ourselves with global warming because an invisible sky god is going to cure it in the next fifty years is not worthy of my respect. But time spent trying to help scientists gain funding and political backing so they can carry on research with stem cells (which has already produced groundbreaking results) is worthy of my respect.

I have said in the past that my hope in discourse about religious beliefs is not to change their belief so much, but to change their vote. Of course I would be happy if they change from a dogmatist to a rationalist, but the vote and the funding are what count in this country. When I say this I skate on thin ice with most people, understandably. But isn’t the point of any political, philosophical, or scientific discourse to change the opinion of the one who is less informed or wrongly informed? Why then must we shy away from this one realm of our lives where, because it is someone’s belief, we cannot comment on it to them (sounding a bit like Harris and Dawkins here)?

This is never to say we shouldn’t enjoy the good religion has produced. I very much enjoy the symbolism of religion: Buddha’s eyes as symbols of understanding and the oneness of all things, the Crucifix as a symbol of the ultimate sacrifice a person can give, each letter of the Hebrew Alphabet carrying a different meaning behind it, or an ankh as a symbol of life. Religion inspired so much art that would leave the world soulless if it weren’t appreciated. But we can “see that the garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too.”

Footnotes:
1. "Cargo Cults" is from Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion on page 202
2. Harris' quote is from Letter to a Christian Nation page 51
3. The final quote is Douglas Adams

Boy Severs Mother's Head

2007-05-16T00:03:00.000-05:00

In a shocking story of extreme self control, a boy of 17 in Japan held out for nearly 15 years after he realized his mother was insane. Finally, as we would all understand his circumstances, he decided it was time. So he lopped her head off.

His mother was an abusive woman. She called him lazy and always asked him to do the dishes when it was clearly her turn and he was playing “Day of Defeat,” a world war two first person shooter game. She would constantly rag on him about his homework and ostracize him in front of his siblings. On occasion, when he was around the age of ten, she spanked him with a bare hand on the bottom.

One a weekend night when the boy just wanted to go out and “hang out” with his friends she wanted him to be home around 11 o’clock. Arguing with his mother he told her he would see her that night. After a night of “LAN”ing with his friends and drinking the energy drink “Cocaine” the boy went home. While his mother was sleeping he brought the hatchet from the fireplace up to her bedroom and decided her time had come.

He brought the severed head of his mother to the police in a paper bag and told them he had killed his mother. After hearing his story they gave him a slap on the wrist and released him. They understood his pain as a child of emotional and physical abuse. As my friend Lindsey said, “if it were a movie you would be like ‘FINALLY....dumb bitch.’”

Seriously though, what is this world coming too. The whole story is fiction except for the sentence where he brings the head to the po-pos in a paper bag.

Real Story Here

Atheist Synonyms (Anti-American)

2007-05-11T11:16:00.000-05:00

Austin Cline responded to this drivel, but I feel I must, too. There are a few other things that I would also like to address.

As the Canadian Sentinel said, "Atheism and anti-Americanism go hand in hand." That statement isn't bold. I wish it were. It is bold in the Atheist/Freethought community, but according to the American Mosaic Project 39.6% of Americans agree. That the largest percentage of any other group they put on the survey of roughly 2000 American citizens. The next largest group to be singled out was Muslims with a 26.3% vote of non-confidence. So what the Canadian said was accurate according to popular opinion. But I disagree.

How am I not American? I agree with most of our constitution, especially the Separation of Church and State and Freedom of Speech and Press. I also agree with the Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness part of the Declaration of Independence. Because of those beautiful statements (especially pursuit of liberty and happiness and freedom of speech) I also choose to disagree with "In God We Trust" as our national motto and "Under God" in our pledge of allegiance. Oh, and the exclusive private funding of our government to the evangelical right.

I am reminded of the bumper sticker and Jefferson quote: "Dissent is Patriotic." It is my patriotic duty to uphold our constitution and attempt to amend it when it is no longer sufficient. Americans must not take the same approach to the constitution as the religious take to the Bible. In America patriotism doesn't mean obedience. It can and must be amended at times (as the Bible was - but we no longer acknowledge that: see Friedman's great books, he's a knowledgeable and respected scholar)

Another comment the Canadian made that bothered me was, "neither God nor America is oppressive." Could someone please explain this to me? If these two things aren't oppressive, I'd like to know what is. I suspect my choice of saying America is oppressive will need to be defended more than saying God is oppressive. To rattle off a quick few things America has been on the oppressive end of in the past and currently: Non-white landowning Protestant males (with gradual steps toward inclusion), women (I suppose that is part of the above), and homosexuals.

And like Cline said, why is a Canadian making these comments?

Trinity

2007-05-09T21:55:00.000-05:00

How in the hell does this work? But isn't that the point? I'm confused.

Current Events

2007-05-08T23:16:00.000-05:00

I hit play on my iTunes and Gwen Stefani's "Hollaback Girl" came on. That shit is bananas.

(sorry, all I could find is the clean version. I know you are sorely disappointed.)
------

The energy hit me and I decided my roommate and I should take advantage of the rainy weather and play frisbee in God's piss. He must have been bowling too, because the thunder was raging. It made me happy.

------

Earlier tonight I went to see the Julie Puppets in concert. I had a few beers with some of the band and some of the people I serve coffee to were there.

------

The hits just keep coming. I had a string of shitty things happen, today the string was all happy (especially if I delete that one conversation with that one guy).

The God Quiz and Smiling Atheist Part Due

2007-05-07T15:25:00.000-05:00

I was looking at Pharyngula and he had a "Which God or Goddess are you like?" quiz posted. I decided it was about time to find out which realm I reign over, so I took the quiz. It was entertaining. I especially liked question 3 "pick an answer: yes, no" because it made about as much sense as godhood does.

Which God or Goddess are you like? Your Result: You are your own God or Goddess Sorry to say, i have no answer that fits you. You are your very own person, and you like to do things your own way. You have stumped me this time, but i will soon make a quiz that will have your answer, just you wait...
Budha
Goddess Sekhemet
Jesus
The Christian God
Goddess Bast
Satan
God Zeus
Which God or Goddess are you like? Make Your Own Quiz

In my Smiling Atheist post I said I would come back and report on my experience at Inver Hills Community College. I should report on these things right after I do them so I remember more. August (of Minnesota Atheists) and I went to the school and presented to a comparative religion class. I know there were a couple atheists in the classroom which made me a little more comfortable. There were also some clearly Christian people and one Muslim woman. Those were the people I could easily identify because of outspokenness or garb. I think there was also one Apatheist because she kept falling asleep and picking her nails while August and I spoke.

What did I hear while I was there? One student brought up the strength in numbers thing that religious people must be right. Counter example: racism. August talked about the different way Atheists and Theists think about the world. Basically that theists start with the conclusion that god exists, then they use a confirmation bias to filter everything to fit that rubric. Atheists use the information available and come to the conclusion that god does not exist, then gather other information to inform their ethics and so on. Top down versus bottom up.

No one asked the question about how an atheist raises their children. I kind of wanted them to. I would have answered: "Just like a theist would, minus the belief in a supreme being. I would raise them with ethical values, to feel compassion for other humans and animals, to be concerned about the direction our political and environmental atmosphere is taking, and to be good people. I just wouldn't tell them that someone is going to give them a prize or punishment at the end."

Related to this, I was reading The Power of Now and he said something to the effect that by imagining a blissful afterlife that isn't now, you necessarily make a hell out of this moment. I think that is very true. You immediately compare this moment to an orgasm and it becomes less than it could be. I was introduced to the book by someone at the Vipassana Meditation center I went to in March. It is kind of self-helpy, but it is an interesting read for anyone who is inclined toward Buddhism (see above: I am most like Buddha apparently). Also, we all need to get over ourselves and realize everyone needs help sometimes.

Confession and Memory

2007-05-06T17:00:00.000-05:00

(This is an abridged version of a longer story.)

This particular memory is extant (unlike much of my life which passed in routine and boredom) but it has a haze over it like it grew a skin (seeing its results, but only barely perceiving the cause of its life). Many of my childhood memories appear like this. Someone says the right thing and the memory’s skin opens under the cutting words, then the blood and puss come up. I think about that memory for a few days, but ultimately the cut heals and I go back to living without it. Sometimes the memory is so horrid it makes my face wince. There is no metaphor there; I do wince at my past idiocy. I find those memories with miasma, not fog. This memory stuck around far longer. I do not wince at this memory; it’s a proud moment for me now. Maybe pride in my former self gave it reason stay. It bolsters my ego.

I always dreaded confession day at my Catholic school. Because of the film over the past I don’t recall how often we students went to confession. Once a week sounds like a good estimate, but I remember telling the priest, “Forgive me Father, for I have sinned. It has been one year since my last confession.” The shame associated with saying “one year” is why I remember. Friends of mine went to confession everyday; they were so good (and for the same reason bad, why else would they go to confession everyday).

I often think about going to confession at a Church near my current home, more for anthropological reasons than any other. I would say, “Forgive me Father, for I have sinned. It has been nine years since my last confession.” I would remember it the rest of my life, not for the associated shameful emotion, but for the look of pity (and therefore arrogance) on the priest’s face. I would tell him I am sorry I let the Catholic Church make me feel guilty for being human and having human desires. I may never do this. It’s a fantasy I might never live up to.

I wondered what my classmates’ sins were. I asked David what he was going to confess. He said swearing, not obeying his parents, and some other minor miscellaneous things. All things Jesus spurted blood on Roman hands for, so I guess we should confess them (does their triviality matter?).

Sitting in the pews before confession was suffering because I brought all the guilt to the front of my mind, I was just trying to remember why I felt guilty and then recount some of those things to the priest so he could absolve me.

In the confessional there is a wicker screen. Everyone is given the choice to sit behind the screen or sit in front of the priest. In a class of 25 when the priest is the also the principal of the school the wicker screen is useless. He knows the voices well enough that when the fifth grade class comes in he knows who is sitting behind the screen. I sat in front of him when I went to confession. I might as well look at him. It showed definitive shame if you hid your identity behind the screen (besides, the wicker screen doesn’t protect identity, it isn’t a curtain, it’s a holey and incomplete security blanket).

I confessed my sins to a man in a black suit with a weird white collar. I told him every trivial thing I could remember, much of it similar to David’s sins. He told me to bow my head and close my eyes as he held his hand over me. I didn’t close my eyes. I watched him put out his hand and close his eyes while he said some boring words to someone I couldn’t see. I felt that, too. I thought him a fool because he spoke to himself. At the same time I felt ashamed because I sinned and I just told an authority figure how bad a person I was. He told me to go back to the pew and say some “Hail Marys” and “Our Fathers.” I left the confessional, kneeled at the pew, hands folded, facing the bronze crucifix and started:

“Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou amongst women . . . damnit, what’s the rest? Why can’t I remember this? I always say it fine when everyone else is saying it with me. OK, let’s try again. Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou among women . . . oh well, I’ll move on to the Our Father. Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on …Earth as it is in hea…ven . . . damnit. I can’t remember this one either. Whatever. I tried.”

That’s how it went.

The teacher rounded up all the students after we all made ourselves depressed telling some guy we barely knew everything we did in the last year that was supposed to make us feel bad about ourselves (according to him and those like him). The school wasn’t attached to the church, but it was very close. We walked around the back of the church and into the back of the school.

Going up the stairs to the back door the teacher said to me, “Doesn’t it feel great
to have all that weight lifted off your shoulders?”

The way she phrased it and the tone she used made it rhetorical. I knew what she wanted to hear, “Yeah, it does,” I said heartlessly. My words betrayed my thoughts. I should have said, “No, I don’t feel any different. In fact, I feel worse. I don’t like confession.”

I said pride in my former self is why this memory stuck with me for the past months. I am less proud of myself for not telling the teacher what I thought, but proud nonetheless. How many people can say they doubted their religion when they were in fifth grade? Besides, who’s to say if I told my teacher those things I wouldn’t now be a staunch Catholic because they would have found a project in me? I am proud of that young Will for at least thinking what he did. That was enough.

Smiling Atheist

2007-05-01T00:18:00.000-05:00

Tomorrow, or rather, today at 8:45 I will present a five minute speech to Inver Hills Community College students on what my campus' SSA group, Campus Atheist and Secular Humanist (CASH), is all about.

Just a few things I am going to mention:
CASH began in 1991 and is the oldest, largest, and most likely the most active (at least within the last year) of the Atheist Student groups in the U.S. We have won best Atheist Student Group from the SSA, and this year we won "Best Website" from SSA as well as a Tony Diggs Award for Innovation in Publicity and Advertising.

Our mission statement included three things: Community, Advocacy, and Education. We hold special events that are inspired by these goals. This year we had pizza parties and discussions on evolution and the first amendment among many other events (check out the Garrison-Martineau Project, I just participated in this as a non-theist rep.). All our events are open to the public.

That is a short version of the list. I am excited for tomorrow because there will also be a question and answer period and I only really have to answer the questions I know the answers to and that I want to answer. The other person who is attending will be able to answer the hard questions while I can just answer the questions like, "How do you plan to raise your children?" and "Do you think you could ever marry a Christian?" or "What do you base your morals on?" All pretty easy if you are a thoughtful atheist at all. Anyway, I am excited. I wonder if I will be able to sleep tonight. I will be sure to report back tomorrow.