The world's last non-porn website

Television offers the appearance of meaning to everybody who watches. You might even say that the variety of shows available offer us nearly every single aspect of a life. Do you want to feel the rush of competition? There are plenty of sports available. Do you want to fall in love? Enjoy many romances, identify with the characters, live through them. Do you want to laugh? Fine programming offers humor, delivered to your brain pre-made that you needn't come up with your own. Do you want to be sad? Watch the drama, watch the perfectly timed and continuity-helpful deaths. Do you want to be a moral crusader and a defender of society? Watch crime shows by the dozen, watch as murderes and rapists get caught, families get redeemed, victims get justice. Do you want to experience the natural world? Watch nature shows; see the flora and fauna of the planet from up close, from up high, from the tops of mountains to the bottom of the ocean. But, I ask, do you yet feel just a little bit unsati...

I am terribly ill today. Sitting here the computer is about the limit of what I'm able to do. I suspect I ate food that was off. Truth be told, the food I suspect was chicken! I just moved into a new place to house sit for acouple of months, and the owner said there were a few leftover bbq chicken wings in the fridge. I decided to eat them on the reasoning that such a decision doesn't actually support the meat industry in any way. But the vegetarian gods were watching, and decided to punish me with a great deal of... unpleasantness. I'm going back to bed now.

Compromise is very difficult to reach, especially with oneself. I've been pondering career paths for some time now, and the idas have narrowed fairly specifically toward law school and eventually lawyering (even judging) as a career. But, truth be told I'm somewhat ambivalent about the prospect. It seems, in many ways, too practical a career; the operating tool of all law is practical languae and terminology. It offers a purely structural world to be worked within. Imagination, as someone like Northrop Frye might say, doesn't play the kind of role I'd like to have it play in my career choice. But then I don't really have the passion to pursue philosophy at a graduate level. I'll likely never stop reading, talking about, and contemplating philosophical matters, but I don't see it as a viable acedemic and professional pursuit. The things I like most in life are not things I'll ever be paid to do, so compromise is necessary on some level. I am genuinely tem...

I just finished Sam Harris' book "Letter to a Christian Nation." It is a good book, short, easy to read, and something I'd generally recommend. Anyway, on the back of the book is a review quote by Richard Dawkins: "I dare you to read this book... it will not leave you unchanged. Read it if it is the alst thing you do." Woah, wait a second. The book defends atheism, a position (or non-position mroe accurately) from which belief in the soul's mortality typically follows. That is, when you die that's IT; no heaven, no hell, no anything. So, logically speaking, if you're about to die and you only have time to do one more thing, then there's really no point at all in reading a book defending atheism, is there? Maybe Dawkins was joking. If he was, it sure as hell is an esoteric joke.

I hate it when I'm going into a public washroom and someone comes out of the door at the exact same moment as I try to open the door. It's always really awkward, because you usually come within just a few inches of accidentally kissing the person. The boat last night was a reasonable success. It floated well, the candles stayed lit; the only problem was that the wind blew it inside the breakwater (out at james bay) rather then out into the ocean or toward the harbour. Another shall be made. But my next craft project will be a hot air balloon. My hope is to construct one out of rice paper and balsa wood, with a candle basket at the bottom. If it works I'll have it tied to a long string perhaps letting it off at Mt Doug's peak. The string is so I can bring it back in, that it won't start any forest fires.

Today a date and I built a small cardboard/wax paper boat, catamaran style, about 2 feet long. It was my idea for a date; the concept was to set up tea candles on the boat and set it out to sea. Anyway, I have to go right now, so my observation today will be very short, a pet peeve. I just hate when I'm taping stuff, and I can't find where the tape starts. It is infuriating. Cheers to all!

I have terrible radar with women. No matter now obvious the signals are, short of clothing removal, I just never manage to pick them up. On occasion back in high school girls would come up to me, as friends of another girl. "She has a crush on you, she's been making it so obvious!" "Huh? I didn't notice anything." "She's been sooooo obvious! How could you not notice??" "Seriously?" "Seirously!" "I have no idea what you're talking about." And so forth. But the strangest thing is, I have good radar when it comes to noticing if a girl likes a guy other than myself. I can see the signals just so long as they're not directed at me. And of course the reverse has happened as well; on occasion I've asked out women who I was absolutely positively sure liked me, and have ended up rejected. "Hey, I was wondering if maybe you've like to go out sometime?" "Um... I'm really sorry, but that'...

Sometimes I come across a debate in the public sphere whose right outcome is almost unbelievably obvious. Look at the privatization of health care. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I do have some understanding of capitalism and the corporate maxim of growth or death. No compay, ever, would specialize in creating consumers who no longer need its products, for that would ruin the company. Pharmaceutical companies can't make a corporate strategy arund producing healthy independent people, for if they did, they'd run out of consumers to purchase their products. Health care, therefore, cannot by its very definition align itself with the profit-centric world of capitalism.

I'm fully willing to suspend my beliefs and knowledge about the world in order to get into the plot of a movie. The fact is that adventure and action flicks wouldn't be all too interesting if the characters weren't at least superhuman to some degree. We're such fragile creatures; a slight bump against the funny bone will leave a person cringing, a stubbed toe or small cut will turn one's focus away from very important matters. So in the movie, none of that can be true anymore. People need to be able to take serious beatings, fall out of cars, get shot, cut, bruised, burned, and all the rest, while still going ahead with their heroic quests. And I understand this; removing certain human characteristics is a necessary condition for a traditionally entertaining movie. Aside from being to withstand or ignore tremendous amounts of pain, movie characters are very good bullet-dodgers, they never have to stop and take a shit, the women never happen to have their periods whe...

Well it finally happened, I forgot to write a blog yesterday. I easily could have, in fact there was a point where I sat down to do so but put it off for lack of any ideas. Then at 2am, half-asleep it just suddenly hit me that it never got done. Oh well. Anyone who knows me should be shocked that I made it 140 consecutive days given my penchant for forgetting things and being generally disorganized. But the writing shall continue! If I were to stop now on account of missing a day, that would mean the purpose of the blog was merely to say something, anything, daily. And that's only peripheral. ------------------------ Sometimes we make small-sounding propositions that actually carry with them other much larger propositions. Have you ever become completely comvinced you're just unluckier than other people at playing Risk, or that you get more green lights than average, or something similar? They sound like very plausible little propositions, mundane even. But the ...

One might say that OPEC has done more for the environment in the last few years than has Al Gore, albeit only incidentally so. I am of the mind that the shift to renewable energies and low-emission vehicles will happen no sooner or later than the energy merket will demand. Environmentalism will make only a peripheral difference, at best, because the bottom line is always money. Eventually, fossil fuels will become less financially viable on the whole than renewables, such that cars will go electric, or hydrogen, and energy production will make its move toward renewables and probably more nuclear power. Take solace, for this may happen sooner rather than later. Oil is hitting new highs weekly, and people may begin to clamour for the more expensive hybrid and (possibly electric) cars en masse even if the vehicles themselves are more expensive. Oil will at some point simply run out; this point in time will become more accurately predictable the more is used, since nearly all the world...

Apathy is as prevalent to individuals as it is uninteresting to others. There is this disconnect between us and the stories we read, and the movies we see. The plots are fantastical, the timing is perfect, even the 'imperfections' of a story are carefully designed. The drive home from the theatre always gets to me; I just see buildings and lights and people walking about. The world of the movie I just left tells me that this real world isn't interesting or worth watching. But then we find big ideas in very small things. Watch two rams butting heads over a female, or watch an ant carry a dead bug back to its colony with determination. There's something just massive in there, a push for the continuation of life that every creatures has in common with every other. The methodologies, strategies, and levels of consciousness may be different, but the one property that every living thing has in common is also the most important property. And I would love to have a look at the ...

Last night was one of the most interesting evenings I've ever had at a job, and quite possibly the most difficult work-wise. The former champion of hell shifts was one particular denny's graveyard shift in which I was asked to stay past 7am (until 9 or 10) to help with the sunday breakfast rush. Yesterday was a 430pm-230am shift, there were four of us serving a wedding party of 80 from sit-down at 5 until the end of festivities at 1am. But what made this wedding extra special is that it was a couple from Lethbridge, who decided to marry in Victoria for the hell of it. The night started well. Appys went out, plates came back. Dinners went out, plates came back. People at weddings like to switch seats around with each other, and this makes plating very tricky because of course everyone has ordered a specific item (chicken, fish, steak, vegetarian) and has their name to a specific seat. But dinner went well. I quite enjoyed the "break" period of wedding catering. Speeche...

To continue from yesterday: But perhaps soldiers should not be held responsible for their actions. If we push hard enough at what I'll call a 'social determinism argument' we may be compelled to release some people from their moral obligations. Most soldiers are young, male, poor, relatively uneducated, and live with few prospects. They join the army precisely because the army offers the best or only meaningful prospect for a good life, an education and so forth. Furthermore, the army constantly releases propaganda about how honourable and great and fun and exciting the work is; the reality is that you'll be driving around Afghanistan in a lightly armoured car in shifts, just waiting for the moment an IED buried in the road hits the front wheels. A solid third of US troops home from Iraq suffer from psychological illness, specifically PTSD and depression. Contrast this with the commercials you see. So we send young, poor, uneducated, desparate young men - boys really - ...

I don't support the troops. There I said it! The "just following orders" plea is no excuse for Hitler's concentration camp staffers and military men, and nor is it an excuse for individual soldiers fighting for or against any country when it comes to war crimes. We seem to live in this weird political climate (in Canada and below the Border) when it comes to war. We're allowed to criticise or even reject policies on the highest levels of government, but we mustn't say a word outside of praise for the people actually doing the killing half way around the world. Shouldn't it be the opposite way? Shouldn't our anger, outrage, and democratic voice speak out against the people who are actually, literally, committing the bad actions? I believe we are living a thinly veiled lie when we "support the troops but oppose the war." We come up with every excuse in the book for why the troops are nonetheless great men, patriotic folk defending their nation...

It is a trying feeling that occurs, when one spends one's life relying very heavily on strong intuitive judgements of others, only to find that one's intuition is about as reliable as the weather channel. Like most men, probably my biggest problem when it comes to relationships is plain old cowardice. I'm plenty confident when it comes to meeting women, to dating, and, ahem... etcetera. But once things get serious I lose that confidence in one or two crucial ways. Problems go fully identified but unresolved. I've stayed in relationships far, far longer than I should have on account of fearing the inevitable train wreck of a break up. I look to emphasize the qualities in partners that I find noble, or attractive, or generally good, and seek to ignore or explain away the rest. And to this there must be a certain kind of merit. But there is the key drawback: problems, or deep character flaws, go unnoticed and they eventually surface in irreconcilable ways. So then w...

whyitTo continue from yesterday's entry: Freedom, though, has been called an illusion. To put it simply, if we're to follow the physical, natural, mechanical worldview to its logical end, the brain is no different from any other deterministic system other than in its complexity. This complexity is still beyond (and may forever be beyond) our capacities to understand, quantify, and qualify fully. Is it the case that when a system reaches some particular level or point of complexity that suddenly free consciousness emerges? Hell yes, reply many philosophers, and fanboys of the computer age. We all fantasize that at some point, some immense complex computer will click into being, and ask why it is the way that it is. Others reply with a resounding no. In virtue of constituent parts (namely physical matter), nothing can ever be free in any meaningful sense. Susan Blackmore is a controvercial Memeticist ( The Meme Machine) who pushes the thesis that the so-called conscious mind is ...

I don't imagine that the moment after my death will be any different for me than will the moment after death for any other human, creature, or even plant. And there it is, my answer to the so-called problem of evil. When we about when bad things happen in completely arbitrary ways, when the most innocent of all children die by painful starvation or natural disaster while the heavens look on with arms crossed, if we ask why, we're asking the wrong question. There is no metaphysical truth to the matter: tragedies are often unpreventable, and as far as we're existentially concerned, random. The right question is how do we cope? I see nonsense when I'm confronted with the 'problem' of reconciling a benevolent God with the world's evil. But there is meaning in asking how we reconcile our freedom with the fact that the rug may be pulled out under us at any moment. The more one is willing to push, the more one is able to understand just how constrained we are;...

Though I'm not a believer in Karma in any strong sense (i.e. I don't think there's any kind of real pre-destined equality to human actions and reactions the way you might say there is in physics), but it sure seems that the smartest and best decisions increase your odds of positive reward. Likewise, the wrong decisions often lead to suffering. When I look back I cannot help but notice that a lot of the actions I regret most ended up biting me in the ass. And the weird thing is, often the action and the unintended consequences are only indirectly related. Small things make big differences. Four years ago I was wait listed for the music program at UVic. I came very close (in the top 5 or so on the wait list, out of dozens of applicants and only a few positions to fill). Had I made it into music school I'd have different friends today, because most of my current friends I met directly or indirectly through philosophy. This blog probably wouldn't exist. I'd not know...

I admire and envy all those people who have a true command over their language. Poets especially, have a knack for the word in its sound, rhythm, and meaning that I sincerily wish to share. When I pen a paragraph or even a sentence, I so often run into little blocks; the right word either doesn't exist or I don't know of it. The right structure of the sentence eludes me. And this is why I tell everyone I know, when asked what I think they should do with their spare time. "Read more," I say. The truth is, the more one reads the greater a command of the language one reaches, and ultimately the greater command over one's own thoughts. Often I run into people, especially younger people, who are very smart and quick witted. But they have trouble expressing their thoughts in a way that doesn't reduce them to the platitudinous, or to aligning themselves with movie characters, music videos, transitory fashion trends, and other glass pillars of the pop-cultural zeitgei...

An alternate view on religion(s), contrary to Day 128. This isn't meant as a counter-argument, but rather an equally prophetic sermon (har har) with a different perspective: Religion has carved out a seemingly permanant niche within human culture taking advantage of our desire for knowledge and explanations for the workings of the world. Historically, religion was humanity's first attempt at a science; it was a way to explain why random natural injustices (floods, earthquakes) occurred, why the planet, the weather, the tides, the visible cosmos, and the self-propelled body operated the way that they do. There was a time before knowledge of physical process, of micro-organisims, of evolutionary mechanisms, of astronomy, when the supernatural was the only explanation to be grasped. Religion has since been relegated to the so-called mysteries of the mind, of emotion, of intellect, for want of mysteries in the natural world to snatch under the umbrella of the supernatural. In leiu,...

First day of work today. It went well; unions have a certain air of camaraderie to them. And the money is good. On the way home I stopped by the harbour to take in some of the ocean breeze. A girl my age approached me candidly with a a request that I listen to a pitch about why I should donate to a cause. "Have you got a moment for Unicef?" she asked. "Unicef? I'll pass. Thanks anyway." My response was polite, but terse. She was a very pretty girl; she had brown hair, no makeup, and an outgoing disposition to her. About three paces of mine later she called out "Have you got a reason?" In a tone still friendly, but also more honest and forward than one would ever expect from a stranger, even a solicitor. I was taken aback on account of this, and on account of the fact that I take pride in having real reasons for the things that I do (even if the reasons are bad, self-awareness counts for something). So I turned around and walked back a pace. "Yes. ...

A guest post, by Jordan, on religion. This was a response to the Day 126 entry. I'm hoping to respond tomorrow or the next day. Have a read!: "...religion cannot 'thrive' by exploiting human weaknesses (it universally seeks to remedy them), in the same way that governments do not thrive by way of constant fear mongering and Marshall Law. One might call that 'surviving', but 'thriving'? Thriving by way of others' weakness is a purely Darwinian endgame that manifests on the frigging food chain, not as a human social ideal. More importantly, it is totally unclear what ideas are and are not embraced by the phrase "weaknesses in our minds". Do these weaknesses include 'succumbing' to an environment of mutual trust, faith, and friendship between people who hold a set of shared values, thereby fostering our oft-impeded desire to relate to others on a level higher than that selfish want and malicious impulse? What about providing a commun...

I've found employment. It is always a treat to know that one will be making money and not just spending money. The wage is $11/hr, and the tips range from $5-12/hr, closer to the 12 than the 5 over the summer, or so I'm told. Essentially the job is part time (for now) up at the Coast Harbourside Hotel setting up banquet events, serving, bartending, and then taking everything back down. Said events are mainly wedding receptions, so the people I'll be working with shall presumably be happy people for once! It is a far cry from my original stint at White Spot serving mental patients from the Eric Martin facility next door, or at Denny's serving... well... basically every horrible person Victoria has to offer. There is something appealing about working in hospitality at the higher level, hell, even as a career. The people are happy, everyone has money to spend, and one's wage is determined very much by job performance. You're on your feet, so the work (unlike a...

When confronted with an argument we often attack the person who is making the argument as an alternate means. Remember how a few entries ago I mentioned being criticized by the feminist class for having my opinions only on account of being a white male? Ad Hominem, I say! The implication was that I'm used to privelege, and used to being in some sort of dominate role in society, and therefore that my beliefs will necessarily be automatically biased and probably wrong on account of that. What terrible, terrible reasoning! But we do this all the time, no? We see it as a means to superiority, instead of arguing the point, to describe why a person believes it, or what kind of person he or she is. I always find the show House fascinating, as it portray's its main character's brilliance in terms of his ability to 'read' people; to cook up deterministic psychological explanations for their actions, and to predict with smugness their intentions and desires. We revere t...

Not in the slightest mood to write a word today. This is the trouble with the daily blog: not unlike a daily jog around the block, sometimes you're just in a sour mood for it. A friend commented to me her opinion that religion thrives on exploiting weaknesses in our minds. My retort was to observe that there is scarsely an institution in existence that doesn't do that, and that we shouldn't go so hard on religion for just trying to keep up. Modern marketing is designed to pinch our primal desires. Government exploits people's weaknesses and ignorances on a daily basis. Essentially every product and service purchasable is either to alleviate a weakness, or alleviate a made-up weakness that marketers have convinced us we have. So let's not give religion all the credit!

The bus to the ferry was fairly busy; every seat taken but also everybody had a seat. I sat around the middle, stuffy and sick from the motion. An elderly Sikh man got on the bus, and as he made his way through, not one person got up to offer him a seat. He approached the middle where I was, making his best effort to be polite - most elderly folk would give a sneer or two, in some sense proclaiming their right to a seat. I normally always offer my seat to anybody who looks like they'd be happer in it than I. But suddenly in this case I felt an overhwelming social pressure not to stand up. It was as though the rest of the passengers were watching; I feared striking either contempt, or guilt, into all of their hearts by doing what they knew all along should have been done long before the elderly man got to where I was seated. Such fear is irrational at best, but it dug deep. After a moment's hesitation, I stood up and offered the seat; he declined politely, I insisted, and...

Apparently I am girl crazy. This is what more than one friend has told me in the last few days. But it has always been that way to a cartain extent; I'll go and buy groceries, or whatever else, and develop a huge crush on the cashier for all of five minutes, only to completely forget by the time I'm half way home. This, with the one exception of the cashier at the British sweet shop. I contemplate quite often the truism of our culture that the good looking are somehow more difficult to attain, or in some sense more intimiadting. I just assume prima facie that some particularly beautiful girl won't ever date me, but this is a weird assumption for multiple reasons. The foremost of these, I believe, is the forgettence that beauty is purely transient in more than one way. We all grow old, wrinkly, decrepid, and so forth. But more quickly, we lose a sense of the physical beauty of people once we are able to have them physically. You all know what I mean here: no matter how much ...

Off to Vancouver today for the weekend. I very much enjoy the ride on the ferries, particularly if the weather is good. On one occasion several years ago I had a letter to the editor (Times Colonist) published in response to multiple complaints about some of the inadequate services on the Coho route. I noted strongly that the ride is a mere 90 minutes, and all this business of restaurants, gift shops, arcades, massage chairs, state rooms (i.e. beds), and cafeterias that we have on the Tsawwassen route is quite unnecessary in the first place! Take the Coho, I wrote, which is nearly identical in travel time, and you'll find people reading, conversing, looking out at the ocean, and (God forbid) spending actual time with their children. Is this such torture that we must cry out in anguish to the local news? So, as always, I shall bring with me a trusty book (currently plugging away at Great Expectations) and perhaps a water bottle & granola bar, since the trip, with bussing times i...

Perhaps the most well-known moral maxim is the golden rule: treat others as you would wish to be treated by them. It is more popular than, for example, the Utliltarian principle that we ought to maximize happiness. It is more popular than Kant's imperative to "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." And it most certainly more popular than my personal favorite by contractualist Thomas Scanlon: "An act is wrong if its performance under the circumstances would be disallowed by any set of principles for the general regulation of behaviour that no one could reasonably reject as a basis for informed, unforced, general agreement." Note that the length and complexity of the maxims are inversely proportional to their popularity. But it would seem upon observation of how people behave in daily life that the Golden Rule has a rather rusty antithesis, in the form of "you did it too" reasoning. ...