|
|
|
Global Disarmament ...,
Signs in the Sky ...,
Free Will, etc. ...,
Danielle's Garden ...,
Golem (Serbs and Jews) ...,
Determinism, Time, Free Will ...
Dear William,
A thought came to mind this morning.
It seems to me that there is a lot of "over kill" capacity in the world. The US far exceeds its legitimate needs for minimum effective deterrence. Other countries have stocks of weapons that can never be deployed if our species is to survive. So, what rational sense is there in globally maintaining stocks of weapons that can never be used?
The resolution to this problem is that the initial mad rush to war by the Bush administration can now effectively be opposed by a global call for the disarmament of all nations. What sense is there in carrying on like this, to then have crisis after crisis. Levels of weaponry based on a globally approved system of ¡°minimum deterrence" is a starting point for a movement as supports the concept of "global disarmament".
If you think that there is something in this idea then pass this e-mail on.
Sincerely,
Courtenay Barnett - Attorney-at- Law
(communicate at:
barnet46@hotmail.com)
The project is sympatico but, in my opinion, hardly realistic. I remember an anecdote about Pancho Villa: In negotiation, the authorities offered him amnesty, privileges, on condition that he disarm. In answer, Pancho Villa took the watch from his pocket and said to his interlocutor, "Take my watch." Surprised, the other asked, "Why?" "Just take my watch!" The man took the watch. Then Pancho Villa handed him his gun, saying, "Take my gun." The man played the game and took the gun. Next Pancho Villa said, "Give me back my watch." The man complied and Pancho Villa said, "Will you give me back my gun? -- Never!" No comment. WM
What's striking to me about the Space Shuttle tragedy is A. It happened, when it did, over Texas and B. the map showing scattered debris featuring Palestine, Texas. It's as if in the skies above George Bush's state (of mind) an explosion occurred which should tell him something. In the days of old wouldn't an oracle be consulted about why this event happened where it happened? Doesn't the fact that Palestine, Texas received debris from the Space Shuttle flight carrying Israel's first astronaut raise a question?
With all this talk about nuclear strikes being approved, the Pentagon project called 'Shock and Awe' (800 Cruise missiles hitting Iraq in the first 48 hours of the war), and the general 'mood' of marching blindly into a questionable war filling our thoughts; perhaps we should stop for a moment and reflect on the synchronicity of this tragedy. Is the universe telling us something?
"Steve McCabe" stevenmccabe_art@hotmail.comThe concidences are, as you say, striking. Still, for a believer, would a moral God sacrifice seven innocent lives for a sign in a sky? WM
Ce que j'aime dans ta réponse à Paul Bruce c'est ce côté tangible de ta pensée, celà permet de te lire comme un roman.
Visit www.daniellesgarden.org and read the "WORLD JOURNAL."
The next edition of the World Journal intends to publish papers on the following topics:
Issues concerning the Kyoto Treaty
Global warming
Stem cell research
The ethics of bio-technology
The use of plant extracts in pharmacology
Our Editorial Board would give careful consideration for publication of any suitable papers submitted on the foregoing topics. Interested parties should send e-mail to Journal@DaniellesGarden.org
Sincerely,
Courtenay Barnett, Curator
Danielle's Garden
barnett46@hotmail.com
Hi William,
Thought you'd be interested to know (though I'm sure you already do) that someone posted your piece "Golem, Serbs and Jews" on the Free Republic website. If you haven't seen it, here's the link:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/810907/posts
Hope all is well with you. Keep up the good work!
Andrew RoblesThanks Andrew, I didn't know, though undoubtedly many visitors came from this source, WM
Dear William Markiewicz,
Leon Felkins says,
> "And finally, the most challenging of all philosophical paradoxes --
> the concept of free will (and determinism, I suppose). I seem to
> have "free will" but to believe that is to believe in magic. To
> believe in that I have to abandon the most fundamental scientific
> belief -- cause and effect. Either I am under the jurisdiction of
> physical laws or I am not. If I am then I can't have free will. If I
> am not, then I must give up the belief in the principles of science.
> If I accept magic, then to me that is like saying "I give up, I haven't a clue"."
I am a poor humble soul who is clueless when it comes to "free will". Perhaps I am incapable of understanding. I see so many people whining as, "If I can't be God, then I don't have FREE WILL". Now, poor little old me, being an observer of nature, I see things that cause me to draw some apparently very erroneous conclusions.
The white tail deer will always root for wintergreen berries in the fall. Sea otters will break clams (or is it sea urchins?) with rocks on their chests. And whales make music.
However, no dolphin has flown a jet faster than the speed of sound, no eagle has mined diamonds 1600 meters below the surface of the earth, and no hand-signing gorilla has promulgated new rules for computing compound interest.
Am I missing something? I consider man to have free will because he is able to choose to do something else than turning over rocks with a stick, looking for a fat juicy grub to eat.
Apparently, I do not understand the concept of "free will". If I can't wiggle my nose, Samantha style, and cause all the Canadians to be my loyal servants, apparently I have no "free will".
Now, if I were a child molester, a bank robber, or an insurance underwriter, perhaps it would be convenient to say that all my actions were pre-determined. Therefore I am not at fault. I can't help it.
Fortunately, millions of people go through life every day without creating misery, mayhem, and murder. I choose to attribute that fact to the possession of "free will". They have a choice.
But, alas, I see so many folks who think I am a simpleton. And, perhaps I am. If I have to be God to have "free will", do I really have it? Or am I at the mercy of the creator of God, who may have pre- determined all my actions?
I see so much on the subject that makes me think, "Yeah, It's pretty much turtles all the way down".
Aha! I have it! If it's turtles all the way down, then they have no "free will", and the world they support must not have it either! Ay! Caramba! It is so simple! Genius shall prevail! I have the answer. I shall commit the rest of my life to the brotherhood of the turtle.
Or.... is it possible that I still don't understand?
No response is required. Sometimes if have this overwhelming feeling that I must rebel against gobbledygook.
Paul Bruce
Confused in Michigan
pfbruce@i2k.com
We're sensitive to the objective circumstances that make us part of the crowd, and to personal urges that make us individuals. In both we obey our genes. We don't perceive their existence, we don't feel how they operate meaning, we don't perceive the causes, only the effects -- ourselves. Many of the causes in us remain hidden in order to function well; heart beating, digestion... Maybe we don't know because we don't need to know. This ignorance is the organism's self-defense against the excess of information. A little Polish poem for children tells about a donkey, victim of an excess of information, that starved to death because it couldn't choose between two equally appetizing snacks. Was the donkey a victim of freedom of choice or of exterior strings pulling, in his case, with equal force in opposite directions (his sort of determinism)? We will never know, maybe because it doesn't matter as it doesn't matter if the Chinese philosopher dreamt about being butterfly or the butterfly dreamt of being a Chinese philosopher... When you get pleasure or pain, what is more important -- the sensation or the machinery that makes it possible? Dumas says of Porthos, who died because instead of running away he got tangled up in the question: "how do legs run?" Gratuitous investigation is not always bad; curiosity made us what we are. But those investigations that touch our most intime core will never be accessible to gratuitious curiosity.
PS In my view, bigger potential increases the scope of performance without necessarily playing a role in the question of free will. WM
Back to the index of the Vagabond
William Markiewicz