Skip to main content

Links!

My folder of things I might post about is getting full. So I'm going to just share some of them. The Maverick Philosopher has a fascinating post up containing quotes from well known scientist Richard Lewontin and philosopher Thomas Nagel (Lewontin is a well known name in evolutionary debates) in which they recognize that science does not pre-suppose naturalism, but that they personally embrace it and use their scientific background to argue for it because they judge that to be the right thing to do. Wow. Thinking about Islam is very depressing. See here, here, and here. David Frum makes a great point here:
The more children a woman has, the more dependent she is on the man in her life -- and the more vulnerable she is. Marriage laws that make marriage insecure together make child-bearing an increasingly dangerous choice for women. Many women respond by postponing child-bearing until they feel economically secure, until their middle or late 30s. But women who wait so long to have their first child are less likely to have a second -- and much more likely to find themselves having none at all.

The great American sociologist James Q. Wilson has argued that a woman who devotes her twenties and thirties to the raising of children should be seen as something like a soldier who devotes his young years to the protection of society -- and should be regarded as eligible for something similar to veteran's benefits.

There's more on J.R.R. Tolkien here. When 90% just isn't good enough. See here. Tipperography has a very interesting post on political outlooks and how they might be graphed. (the bulk of the post is a .pdf file). There is a very interesting post at The Western Standard about gays and abortion. If anyone has wondered about how I relate to gays given my opposition to SSM on this blog, worry no more: I would fight tooth and nail to prevent gays from being aborted if a prenatal test for a genetic link to homosexuality were ever discovered. Pro choice gays need to think about their postion very carefully.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reuters joins CNN on the bench

Makes room for CanWest to join the majors Kudos to CanWest for calling a terrorist a terrorist . Many, including The Last Amazon , will be happy to hear it. Reuters is among the worst of the major western news services, where I would also place the BBC and the CBC. Unsurprisingly, Reuters is not happy about the changes CanWest made to Reuters wire stories: Our editorial policy is that we don't use emotive words when labeling someone," said David A. Schlesinger, Reuters' global managing editor. "Any paper can change copy and do whatever they want. But if a paper wants to change our copy that way, we would be more comfortable if they remove the byline." Mr. Schlesinger said he was concerned that changes like those made at CanWest could lead to "confusion" about what Reuters is reporting and possibly endanger its reporters in volatile areas or situations. "My goal is to protect

Where credit is due

A good'un from Sawyer Brown . Thank God for You Well I've been called a self-made man Girl don't you believe it's true I know exactly how lucky I am When I'm gettin' this close to you It's high time I'm giving some praise To those that got me where I am today Chorus I got to thank momma for the cookin' Daddy for the whuppin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you A strong heart and a willing hand That's the secret to my success A good woman - I try to be a good man A good job - Lord I know I've been blessed I'm just a part of a greater plan It doesn't matter which part I am Chorus I got to thank momma for the teachin' Daddy for the preachin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you

A very limited form of inquiry

Real Clear Politics is carrying commentary on James Q. Wilson's WSJ article on ID (got that?). Wilson, the respected social scientist, gets it mostly right when he says that ID is not science because it can't be tested: So ID is not science. Does this mean that science, in any way, implies the non-existence of God? No. Does this mean that belief in God is irrational and that we should all be "free thinkers"? No. Does this mean that it is impossible to arbitrate between various theories of the existence/non-existence of God and come to some reasonable conclusions? No. Does this mean that we cannot say that humanity is meant to exist? No. In other words, rationality outside of science is quite possible, and has been around for a long time. How do you think humanity invented science in the first place? We surely did not do it scientifically. Science as we know it is the product of millennia of philosophical debate -- from Aristotle to Lakatos. Science depends upon phi