Dude, Where's My Alma Mater?

The once and future great institution, Columbia University, has been hijacked. I have fond memories of CU dating back to the wild and woolly 60's, though, at that time, my agenda comprised mostly serious items, including graduate degrees and bridge. Four decades later, I am saddened to acknowledge that my alma mater has been pillaged by ignorance, antisemitism, political-correctness lunacy, rabid leftism, and depraved indifference to common sense.

One of the oldest institutions of higher learning in the Nation has fallen victim to the scourge of the new millennium: virulent self destruction. This new cancer pandemic must be eradicated before it consumes the rest of the civilized world. Until a cure is found, we must rely on radical excision of the malignant c*nts. Cut to the chase. Invoke the Implicit Commandment. Do it.

Entropy; Timshel; Life

{ « Post #1 in Series » Post #2 in Series }

The rest is the explanation; go and learn. -- Hillel the Elder

Big Al quipped, "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." He also posited that, "One seeks the most general ideas of operation which will bring together in simple, logical and unified form the largest possible circle of formal relationships." These two statements, one jocular one not, both prescribe the guiding attributes of a generalized truth.

In seeking a simple (i.e., concise) general physical description for life, it seems plausible to me that I must ascribe to it a compatibility with basic natural law, as well as some spark of the sublime, so as to differentiate the essence of what is animate from the inanimate. In so doing, I propose to define life such that it does not violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and also incorporates the concept of free will, in the sense of an innate ability for making willful and, potentially, creative choices. The former aspect of my definition incorporates natural science, acknowledging that life exists within the 4-dimensional fabric of spacetime. The latter introduces the divine or, if you prefer it, sublime ingredient — that which differentiates living from inanimate objects.

The Second Law specifies that entropy, the measure of randomness in a closed physical system, increases with time. Entropy is that physical phenomenon responsible for the inexorable expansion of the universe toward a state of complete dissipation of useful, creative if you will it, energy. This, crucially, does not obviate the possibility of temporary localized reductions in entropy, however.

Consider the possibility of a temporary and localized reduction in entropy. Such a physical possibility is ordinarily designated a physical potential. Thus, let us consider the physical potential that serves to quantify a realizable (but as yet unrealized) reduction in entropy. Bearing in mind that a realized reduction in entropy implies a realized reduction in dissipated or useless energy, it, correspondingly, implies a realized increase in available or useful energy. At this point we have a plausible candidate for a physical description of what we know to be life, when we see it: a potential reduction in entropy. I will now address the need to incorporate a qualification that imputes a certain something, which will give the definition a spark of the sublime.

Timshel is a transliteration of the Hebrew word that means "thou mayest." It is a succinct exposition of the philosophical concept of Free Will. 'Timshel' memorably appears as the last quote in Steinbeck's East of Eden, and is, arguably, the principal theme of that novel. 'Thou mayest' suggests a divine (or from an as yet unknowable source) grant of potential. If we define an adjective "timshel" as a contextual extension to mean 'Thou mayest cause', it gives us the means to express, in local spacetime (i.e., in local 3-dimensional space and also temporarily), that aspect of potential for a reduction in entropy, which offers a possibility for an increase in useful, and conditionally creative, energy.

Thus, entropy and timshel give birth to a definition for life that incorporates both a natural potential and the philosophical concept of Free Will:

Life is timshel entropy reduction.

The rest, as they say, is left as an exercise for the student.

Extra Napkins

Get a life. Strive for more. What else is there? Whether you envision a bowl of cherries, a bowl of Cheerios™, or just a toothpick, the festival of life is process, and more process is its raison d'etre.

If you accept the above premise, it behooves you to implement an optimization strategy. But first you must ascertain your preferences, which comprise a personal profile for a life worth living. There are two overarching disciplines available for guidance: natural science and philosophy. The former concerns the four dimensional framework of reality as we know it. The latter concerns the fifth dimension, the spiritual, the wholly other, that which can only be approximated by the real component of its fully unknowable complexity.

Through the millennia of intellectual discourse, a few general guidelines for a worthy fifth dimension have been distilled. These include the Decalogue of Moses and Hillel's Golden Rule. A further distillation provides the quintessential fifth dimension for a quality life: the Golden Rule and the preeminent social imperative of the Decalogue.

As for the four dimensional spacetime of perceived reality, centuries of scientific research have produced the ultimate survival guideline: natural selection. The concept of fitness is central to natural selection. And, although modern evolutionary theory defines fitness in terms of individual reproduction, fitness is sometimes colloquially understood as a quality that promotes survival of a particular individual, as illustrated in the well-known phrase survival of the fittest.

So, one's optimization strategy reduces to an appropriate fitness plan, of which there are many. But, again, there are two overarching schools of thought, which I will anthropomorphize as the School of Hearts and the School of Minds. The former subsumes all the fitness plans that stress the importance of physical and emotional fitness. The latter acknowledges the importance of intellectual strength, which is arguably the fitness edge responsible for human preeminence among the species.

I submit that most of the proven fitness plans from the School of Hearts will provide an adequate fitness base for survival. Choose components from every food group, including a sampling from food for thought.

But for crisis management, you must arm yourself with a carefully chosen regimen from the School of Minds. This then is where extra napkins come in. It is my whimsical characterization for a backup plan, a so-called Plan B for any occasion having significant downside consequences.

I was a Boy Scout for only several weeks of my childhood, but I managed to come away from the experience with an important insight: be prepared. My parents, survivors extraordinaire both, taught me many lessons, not the least of which was to have a rainy-day fund. And so, for a litany of good advice, we have: drink milk; begin planning for retirement when you begin your career; remember the cornerstones of investing (asset allocation, diversification, cost averaging, and rebalancing); don't gamble the rent money, and that goes for the health and liability insurance premiums too; backup your hard drive; don't drink and drive; etc.; etc.; etc. You've heard the drill many times. You need a backup plan just in case winging it doesn't work out. Are you listening?

There are those who relish the liberating thrill of living on the edge. I have known some, and that is a legitimate modus for life. Greater risk but a chance for perceived reward. Quality versus quantity. But every choice involves a risk/reward trade off, and 'strive for more' suggests greater weight be assigned to quantity (i.e., time) for there is no recovering from the point of no return, by definition. Moreover, risk without expectation of reward is analogous to 'hitting yourself on the head with a hammer because it feels so good when you stop'.

Even Big Al got one wrong, because the Omnipotent One does roll the dice of quantum fluctuations. To the best of our knowledge it's all about process and probability. That is why I choose extra napkins.

The Implicit Commandment

Hillel's "Golden Rule", the passive statement of the ethic of reciprocity, anticipated it:

'What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow.'

Tolstoy's Epigraph for Anna Karenina alluded to it:

'Vengeance is mine; I will repay.'

Little Boy and Fat Man were its metaphoric expression. It is the Implicit Commandment:

'Thou shalt not f*ck with America.'

Housekeeping

There is no reasoning with children. There is no reasoning with bluffers. There is no reasoning with morons. Give them what they say they want; within an inch of total anarchy. Then, when the stench of Holyshitwood has permeated the Land, declare martial law until National elections can clean the slate.

By virtue of the Twenty-Second Amendment a "lame duck" President of the United States is ideally positioned to accomplish a much needed housekeeping task for the Nation. Since its ratification in 1951, roughly half the Presidents (6 of 11) have been lame ducks, providing 20 years (Truman's, as well as Nixon's, "lameness" lasted only 2 years) out of 58 years (through 2008) for National housekeeping.

The process is straightforward. Today, for example, President Bush should be guided by polls that reflect the collective wisdom of Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Barbra Streisand, George Clooney, Sean Penn, the Daily Kos, etc., and implement by Executive Order whatever these worthies advocate for the Nation's well being. Pull all American troops out of Iraq. Raise taxes. Open all borders to all comers. Fix gasoline prices at 99 cents/gallon. Free health care for everyone. Not one but two cars in every garage, a chicken in every pot (make it turkey for a more festive atmosphere). Then, when all such actions have been implemented, check with Noam Chomsky to make sure nothing of importance has been overlooked. Perhaps we could have Hugo Chávez address a joint session of Congress.

I have faith in America. When all else fails, and the hand basket has descended to the gates of hell, the Benevolent Giant awakens from its temporary insanity and Americans get busy. The drunks hit the bottle. The imbeciles go back to making movies. And the holier-than-thous talk to the hand. The rest go to the polls and elect the likes of Lincoln, Washington, FDR, Truman, and George W. Bush. Then all becomes well in the Land, until it's time for another round of housekeeping.

Survival; Indifference; Postponement

If I am not for myself, who will be? If I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when? -- Hillel

This sage tripartite principle, together with the Golden Rule, comprises the essence of ethical living. And the first part of this essential tripleton may be redacted to a colloquial version of the Patriarch's allegorical precept for survival: 'Get a life. Strive for more.'

In a recent post I referenced the foremost among the human-relationship moral imperatives of the Decalogue, as I believe it to be a reliable prescription for living a good life. What I termed, facetiously, to be a modest prescription is only modest by virtue of its brevity. It is at least as consequential as the ethic of reciprocity. My purpose in this post is to elaborate what I believe to be some implications of such a prescription.

If one takes the Commandment to 'Honor your father and your mother' to its natural finality, it implies compassion for a dying parent. Sometimes, however, a parent dies suddenly, and one might think that such compassion can not be universally experienced. Certainly not if, perish the thought, a child predeceases a parent? But everyone is dying. Having compassion for a dying parent, therefore, is an appropriate expression of honor, always.

If a parent has a fatal illness, the subordination of one's compassionate feelings to common self absorption is the province of narcissism. And taken to its limit, such subordination constitutes indifference. To my mind, indifference to a loved one is the ultimate prescription for an unhappy life, for everyone but a sociopath; though even Stalin understood this, as he famously remarked, "A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic."

Finally then, 'if not now, when?' For as sure as God made little green apples, postponement is a one-way street to the house of regrets, with incomplete refuge through Atonement.

Do Not Miss This! I mean it!

Explore life through time.

Frans Lanting "LIFE: A Journey Through Time"

Skip the intro if you're in a hurry, but do not miss the slideshow! It is a Web of Art. By comparison, the stuff on YouTube comprises a Web oF arts.

MSM: Not only moronic, but also oxymoronic

As neatly summarized by Oliver Kamm,

[L]iberalism as a modern political movement - in which I include parties of the social democratic left, which long ago acknowledged the failure of socialism - has certain consistent traits. Its central principle is that, while we may belong to groups, our primary identity is as citizens who are equal under law. Many characteristics of the liberal outlook, as we now understand it, follow from a common citizenship: the rule of law exercised disinterestedly; the promotion of human rights internationally; separation of civil and religious authority; rights to freedom of expression and association; a measure of economic redistribution that enables citizens to exercise autonomous choices; sexual equality; reproductive freedom; the right of same-sex couples to marry and inherit.

But the liberalism of today's mainstream media (MSM) is a perversion of its traditional traits. Instead of championing the rule of law exercised disinterestedly, the MSM revels in the circus antics of mob mentality. Instead of championing the promotion of human rights internationally, the MSM seeks justification for the homicidal destruction of civilians. Instead of championing the separation of civil and religious authority, the MSM formulates apologia for theocratic fanaticism. Instead of championing the rights to freedom of expression and association, the MSM now champions the consensus of vociferous crowds.

In effect traditional, that is "mainstream liberalism" is not the "liberalism of the mainstream media". The latter is an oxymoron.

If your mind makes no sense, change it

That's what Big Al would have done. That is in fact what he did do when Newton's theory of gravity, a product of one of the greatest minds of all time, did not quite compute for him. Which led to a product of another one of the greatest minds of all time, Einstein's general relativity. It makes sense to me that one can do worse than be guided by great minds in our mortal everyday efforts to make sense of the mostly irrational world around us.

In reading today's normblog profile of Peter Ryley, I was particularly gratified by his response to the standard question 'Can you name a major moral, political or intellectual issue on which you've ever changed your mind?'

I have changed my mind on most things, but the most important one is on international affairs. I used to have a fairly orthodox, anti-American, leftist viewpoint. To my horror, I used to read Chomsky approvingly. However, I had doubts that I kept pushing to the back of my mind. I came to a slow realization that the reason for my misgivings was a simple one. The position I held was wrong. Reading Nick Cohen's journalism was important in confirming my revised views, as were the books he recommended in his columns. Then I discovered the blogosphere when Steve Davies, my PhD supervisor, recommended normblog after I had commented adversely on 19th Century anarchists' apologist attitudes to terrorism. It was with huge relief that I found solidarity in blogs.

I used to subscribe to the liberal viewpoint that was fashionable at Columbia University in the 1960's. Then, gradually, a pernicious form of insanity characterized by self loathing invaded this view, spearheaded by the likes of that besotted disgrace to the great liberal family tradition of Jack and Bobby. By now this onetime great liberal view has devolved to full-blown insanity, with celebrity status galore in HolySh*tWood, the current majority in Congress, and among many adherents of a philosophical stance that has become a self inflicted paraplegic.

What made sense to me in the 1960's still makes sense: democratic government is the best form this world has ever produced. Alas, the best of the liberal viewpoint has vanished from the earth.

Pardon my ignorance, but ...

A sampling of some of the reactions to President Bush's VFW speech today includes the following:

"Invoking the tragedy of Vietnam to defend the failed policy in Iraq is as irresponsible as it is ignorant of the realities of both of those wars," Senator Kerry said.

With all due respect to this United States Senator, which is much more than he seems willing to extend to the President and Commander in Chief of the United States, his remark has the odor of halitosis emanating from a mouth full of sour grapes chewed by someone greatly invested in the concept of losing.

Confessions of a Bladdict: #2

I can quit any time I want (as if you've never heard that one before). I hasten to add that there is a 48% probability that I really can. You see, according to the same bladdiction test that Norm took, I am only 52% addicted to blogging, whereas Norm is much more addicted at 75%.

If you take the ratio of Norm's degree of bladdiction to mine, you can see that Norm's exceeds mine by 44%. So if Norm can relax about his condition ("With plenty to spare"), surely I have nothing to worry about. That is why I have chosen to display proudly on this page my bladdiction badge (a "bladge" perhaps?), along with a couple of other bladges at the bottom of the sidebar.

A Modest Prescription For A Life That Is Good

As the saying goes, 'Life is just a bowl of cherries.' But what about those pits?

In any case, I want to discuss a prescription that is available to everyone, and sadly not everyone can have a bowl of cherries. Which immediately also eliminates from consideration fame, fortune, beauty, health, etc., which everyone may hope and wish for, but none of which is entirely within every person's control or reach.

How about a heroic death? That certainly qualifies for a death that is good, but not necessarily a life that is good.

What then would qualify for life that is good? A life of pleasure? Comfort? All such relative and variable conditions? Must one have access to them always? Clearly none of these are available to all. Not in this world.

Perhaps the qualification comprises an absence of a negative condition? Something everyone has a chance to avoid? At least a fighting chance? There are lots of things people can try to avoid, but can not always succeed in doing. Can't always avoid making a bad choice without hindsight.

Well then, what about regrets? Can one always avoid them? I suppose not. Sometimes, like bad choices, they are not avoidable, except in hindsight. But, I believe regrets can serve as guidance for the avoidance of bad choices and lamentable behavior. We can strive to avoid having regrets when all is said and done. And the ideal to strive for is to have no regrets at the end of a life that is good.

Which brings me to the prescription, presented to humanity by the great prophet Moses: Honor your father and your mother.

If you do not, you will have regrets.

Soft response; hard response to follow

OK Norm, now you've done it. You have managed to respond with equanimity to obnoxious irrationality. Bravo. But how do you do it so gracefully?

Perhaps I may be permitted to paraphrase, as best as I am able:

America is the land of the free, the home of the brave, and it beats the sh*t out of every other society on earth, in any category you may want to compare. Bar none.

If you (yes you) disagree with my assessment, what the f*ck is preventing you from festering where you are? And why the f*ck do you keep trying to convince yourself that you are sane? And why the f*ck do you call America for help every time the Hun comes crawling up your mass? And why the f*ck don't you just go f*ck yourself?

Strong letter to follow.

Have a nice day, y'all.

Let's cut to the chase ...

It pains me to pun about such an issue, but in a dispute about circumcision, a cutting remark may not be the unkindest cut of all. Once again, I refer to a post, with which I am in basic agreement, at my favorite normblog.

The legal dispute concerns a 12-year-old boy whose parents are divorced, and who are contesting the issue of circumcising their son, all the way to the state supreme court. If I am not mistaken, the tradition is to circumcise a healthy infant boy on his eighth day. Since this boy is 12 years old, he is way past the point of being not conscious of what such a procedure might entail in terms of physical and psychological effects.

If the boy is not legally mature enough to be the arbiter of this dispute between his parents, he is certainly the person who must endure a preponderance of the consequences of its resolution. The only reasonable resolution, as is abundantly obvious to me, is to postpone the issue until such time that the boy is legally of age to make this decision without interference by either parent.

To the best of my knowledge, circumcision is an irreversible procedure. The father, who is in favor of the procedure for his son, is a convert. Many converts are highly susceptible to holier-than-thou syndrome. I say, if the father can't wait for his son to make this very personal and painful decision without any coercion from him or the courts, let the father undergo the procedure as proxy for his son, even if, nay especially if, he has undergone the procedure before. F*ck him if he can't take a joke.

What the World Needs Now

Wikipedia attributes this observation to Robert Kennedy, 'This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind, a temper of the will, a quality of imagination, a predominance of courage over timidity, of the appetite for adventure over the love of ease.' I am quite confident Bobby was right when he said it. It may even be an apt observation today. I believe, however, other "demands" may be more apropos, including a reassessment of Bobby's premise concerning the qualities he attributed to youth.

Today's youth is roughly two generations removed from the youth familiar to the rather youthful Bobby Kennedy and his clan. Having been a youth during Bobby's campaign for President (and enthusiastically planning to vote for him) I have the experience to make a comparison, albeit not an infallible one, between the youth of the '60s and today's youth. I readily admit that my memory is not as good as it used to be, however. And I am obliged to limit my unscientific and very broad-stroke comparison to middle class American youth.

I will, moreover, impose further limitation on the scope of my comparison, befitting a blog post analysis such as this, by acknowledging that 'a predominance of courage over timidity' and 'the appetite for adventure over the love of ease' remain enduring qualities of youth. Furthermore, the quality Bobby referred to as 'a temper of the will' is much too difficult to assess because it lends itself to a wide spectrum of interpretations. Thus, only 'a quality of imagination' remains, and that is where I do observe a noticeable difference.

I have the sense that in my day, we relied much more on our imaginations in dealings with the world around us. This was undoubtedly true in entertainment, from childhood to adulthood. Toys, games, sports, in fact all manner of play had imagination as its primary ingredient. Today's toys, games, sports, and all manner of play require first and foremost a goodly supply of extra batteries. And it is not much of a stretch to conclude that besides the so-called brain drain, there has been a significant concentration of the finite supply of human imagination into the electronics and computer technology industries.

Today's youth, it seems to me, requires imagination as much as any preceding generation did. The difference, as I see it, is that our generation's supply was largely self generated. Today's youth shops for theirs.

Re: Daily Dose of Wisdom #1

In reading one of Norm's posts today, concerning views on liberty, it occurred to me that liberty may be one of those concepts that lends itself to adjudication.

As a natural scientist by training, I favor adjudicating the laws of natural origin using the scientific method. If philosophical theories are to be adjudicated, however, alternative means must be employed. As a scholarly discipline, philosophy, in my layman's view, is more akin to jurisprudence than to physics. Perhaps liberty can be adjudicated as per the most famous opinion from Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964), decided by the United States Supreme Court.

Liberty. I knew it when I saw it.

Only One Issue Matters

It is not surprising that the forest is obscured by the trees. The mediacrity, fueled by a blizzard of smoke, mirrors, and sundry bullsh*t emanating from every Tom, Dick, and Harry (mostly Dicks), diverts attention from the only issue that matters in national elections.

Health care? It's a tree, albeit a Redwood. Immigration? Tree. Crime? Tree. Education? Weeping Willow. Taxes? Money tree. Social Security and Medicare? Ditto. Iraq? Woodshed. Separation of Church and State? Burning bush. Supreme Court nominees? Tree of knowledge. Congress? Dogwood.

The name of the forest is Survival. And the only questions that need be answered by the electorate are, 'Which candidate for President of the United States understands that America must be protected from those determined to set the forest ablaze? And which candidate is capable of preventing such a forest fire?'

If the integrity of the forest is assured, the trees comprise the agenda, to be dealt with using all the wood chippers in place at the T[h]ree Branches. The Forest Ranger in Chief has a [wood] Cabinet to do the heavy lifting for the Executive wood chippers. Congress does whatever. And the Supreme Court resolves the hopelessly deadlocked issues. But nothing matters if Job One fails.

The greatest Ranger of all said it for all time: '[T]hat government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.' In national election campaigns, it's the forest, stupid.

Cocktail in a Styrofoam Cup

Over at my favorite normblog, Norm offers up a political cocktail with an irony twist. If, however, I had served Norm's cocktail in a Styrofoam cup, which Norm would never do, the not so subliminal message would have been: p*ssy sells.

My second favorite piece of political wisdom (the first is Lincoln's Gettysburg Address) is Churchill's famous dictum: 'Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.' Lincoln and Churchill were speaking about a form of government, and democratic government of the people, by the people, for the people beats the crap out of all the others, to put it less elegantly than those two of my favorite political heroes.

But elections, most especially American elections, are not a form of government. They are the quintessential form of selling. Each candidate for the Presidency will require about a 9-figure advertising budget! And all those candidates' debates are nothing more than a precisely orchestrated dog and pony shootout. If you really think anyone is ever saying anything other than what their campaign management team has determined will win, rather than lose potential votes, then I invite you to call me about some very reasonably priced beach front property in Arizona.

Ultimately, a thinking (as opposed to a shopping) American voter needs to divine what the principal (careful, NOT principled) candidates would do in a crisis. Would they act as Lincoln, Washington, Churchill, Truman, and George W. Bush had? Or do some other, lesser "leaders" come to mind? Good luck shopping for an answer to that question.

Confessions of a Bladdict: #1

Before you dismiss as a throwaway my 'Get a wife' response to Norm's 'What would be your main blogging advice to a novice blogger?' let me elaborate. Blogging is a self-feeding addiction. Without a caring wife to intervene, a bladdict will lose his sense of space and time; and everything else, including bladder contents, will fall through the cracks, so to speak.

A wife, if you are lucky, will drag you from your bit-induced stupor into the real world of atomic delights: eating, drinking, and merrymaking. Of course, sooner or later, the lesser delights of laundry, garbage disposal, and shopping will remind you of your other existence, which, as luck would have it, is but a desk chair away. Dude, man, it doesn't get much better.