Paul’s Blog

I’m certainly no expert on population genetics, but some things just seem logical to me, yet are apparently completely lost on others. It’s when something so obvious, is so easily overlooked that I’m tempted to imagine that perhaps human Ostriches marry positions, and abandon honesty inquiry.

For instance, the word “Species” is a human invention, made up to explain phenotypic and reproductive functional differences created by GENES. Within or between species genetic differences have the same general properties of INFLUENCE over phenotype as they do over function (correct me on this point, if I’m wrong). IF (big if) that is true, then it’s perfectly logical to also assume that if specimen A and specimen B have large differences in phenotype, but share the same (or very similar) experiences, environment, and nutrition, it makes no difference whether they are the same species or not, in causally attributing those differences to genetics, rather than to some Ostrich philosophy of being “born equal”.

I am a discerning critic of rare, philosophical, taboo, experimental cinema, foreign and independent films.  I’m not above typically popular main stream flicks but much more enjoy dogme, verite, noir, art & documentaries.  For reasons that follow, I have recently taken to the practice of writing movie reviews on Netflix.  Being a huge movie addict and fan, over the decades I’ve also gradually become a serious critic of movies as well.  Just choosing one to watch on Netflix can be quite a difficult task though, for my discriminating tastes.  Often times, I am totally dependent on good reviews by others in order to decide whether a larger investment of my time is worth it.  For me, a movie can sometimes be like a really good book, in the sense that I will talk about it with many people I know, sometimes write about it, and think about it a lot.  The time spent watching can be just a small beginning of a long and philosophical quest.  Not only do reviews save you from crappy wastes of time, they can also lead toward more full-filling ones.

Writing a review is one way of joining a community of people who use them and find them useful.  But more than that, it is in some way a means of documenting and recording your thoughts about your own life, and your experiences.  Movies are both fantasy, and part of our experiences, they shape our beleifs, values, and personalities.  They become part of who we are and what we represent.  If you consider all of them together that you may watch in a lifetime, what would they say about you?  Reviews can help you choose this part of who you are becoming, and what you represent more carefully.  Learning the art and science of wine-tasting and palette training does not make wine taste less good, it enables you to more fully enjoy the good ones.  In fact, when I lived in Jacksonville, Florida, I had a close friend who was quite a scholarly film critic himself.  Together we set aside one day every single week to get together and watch one, sometimes pausing it in order to make a quick remark, but usually waiting until the end and then engaging in contemplative discussion or debate.

Recently, I wrote a review about a video of a stand-up comedy show I watched on Netflix.  The fact that I sought out and watched such a comedy show should be one clue that I wasn’t just seeking out some pseudo-intellectual crap to brag about at cocktail parties.  Nevertheless, my review prompted one of my friends who does not know me too closely, to ask “How can you enjoy humor when thinking this much about it? If it is funny I laugh. It is not I don’t.”  This is of course an excellent question, and deserves some response.  The observation can be made that “the life unexamined is not worth living”, but that is assuming the ‘living’ part has been engaged already.  Everyone including myself is tempted at times to introspect and reflect on past experiences, including movies that we loved.  But there are some instances where I have been known to find myself making “meta” level observations or mental annotations for later critique, even while watching a movie.

I’ve never really considered why it’s so pleasurable for most people to intentionally avoid cognitive effort.  I’ve seen smart successful people spend significant amounts of money and time avoiding reading some small amount of material.  Yet stranger still (as you point out), why would some people derive such great pleasure from cogitating about crap, in precisely the moments when others are avoiding cogitating?  When I and my friend Brian Hopkins went camping and scuba diving in the Keys, we had a tough time finding a gym where we could do some weightlifting for that week, but we finally did.  It was a tiny near-empty local place with no females to look at, and undoubtedly many guys would have passed on that ‘fun’ — those who are there for purely social or other reasons.  Maybe it’s sort of a delayed gratification/achievement type of thing?  Part of me wants to believe that there’s no conceit or shallow pride involved, but that cannot be ruled out completely and is definitely an motivation for some folks.  Perhaps hedonism and sloth are not the only kinds of pleasure?

First, there are lots of times when I think I naturally do shut the CPU down in order to “experience” the moment without the ‘interference’ that cogitation can cause.  There’s a great pleasure that comes from beer drinking and bar-fights, from “mano-a-mano” challenges to manhood (and infantile versions of courage) which I dearly enjoyed as a young man.  In a way, that’s party why I enjoy weightlifting so much, because it’s one of the few activities that somehow forcibly shuts me down mentally, and I enter some other state of primal raw emotion.  But even without the endorphins or adrenaline of “fight or flight”, I assure you that I do have a keen imagination and frequently exercised “fantasy screen”.

Imagine the difference between watching a totally ridiculous, low-brow flick, and one which pulls you in, grabs your heart, and make you (yes, and other men too) shed a tear.  They probably result in different levels of involvement and immersion.  There are plenty of movies custom tailored to shallow or unintelligent adults, or to children — without the modern Disney invention of double market appeal — which are probably directly analogous to long lines of people standing in line, where there’s a definite opportunity to use one’s mind or not.  Some will pause and rest their tired mind, others will turn and chat about people, places, and things although a few (such as me) will talk or silently think about ideas, concepts, and principles.

Not everyone who power lifts in the gym is an ego-addict, faking enjoyment or lying about why they enjoy it.  The vast majority of my thoughts are never seen or heard and I still enjoy them, analogous to the person scaling a mountain all alone.  It’s probably a little more fun though, sharing them with others too, as long as I’m not ridiculed too much for it).  I’m most eager to share them with those who will join me in considering them, elaborate on and extend them.  But I also want family, loved ones, and friends to be aware of or know that I have them, so they understand me more, in many cases even if they don’t see eye-to-eye.  You mother may not ride a ride a motorcycle or relate to it at all, but you may still be eager to show her your new bike.  And therein rests the single distinguishing characteristic that separates ‘enjoyment of cogitation’ from those various handicaps which prevent one from enjoying life.

There are clinical conditions (flat affect, depression, etc.) which will generalize to all of life decreasing one’s overall enjoyment of life.  There are also emotional disturbances (insecurities, fear of intimacy, etc.) which will cause some people to over-analyze literally everything, even when their own private and natural instincts are telling them to just let go, relax, and breathe a little.  But in those cases, the symptoms I think are fairly evenly spread over their lives.  We need not doubt though, that there are folks who would be completely content to zone out and “enjoy” movies typically spoofed or made fun of by highly intelligent people (for example, “Mystery Science Theatre 3000”).  In both cases, people are attempting to find a ticklish spot where some fun can be had.  There is no reason to doubt, that the sharper tool needs denser material to cut a rug. It’s those who never seem to be able to cut a rug, who may be missing out.  Trust me when I say, that I am often among the first few brave souls, eager to run out and “cut a rug”.  I laugh often in life, and sometimes very loud.

To the casual observer, it can be truly difficult to understand why someone would enjoy some things which we may not.  If someone is dressing up as a dominatrix and whipping a man on ‘all fours’, or if we watch a grown adult prancing around on a public stage at the local theatre and singing some song we think is humiliating, we may ask, “how can THAT be fun”?  Some will scoff, and some will simply presume the mystery to be a dark and impenetrable black box.  Others will look closer and begin to find slight differences between those on stage.

I think that some of those on life’s stage are emotionally “damaged goods” but otherwise normal, some perhaps clinically ill in some regard, and some are just very uniquely wired AND still really healthy.  In all cases, there may be a temptation for us to presume that they are ‘acting’ or ‘faking’ enjoyment of their activities.  When you hear of skydivers describe their elation and joy, do you not in some small way think of the same type of people who describe the joys of some other dangerous practice, which resulted in the ‘scars’ they show off like red badges of courage?  I think we all feel that skepticism.  But it’s not always correct and it may be that we are just being mentally lazy, and just going out of our way to avoid the cogitation required to seek deeper understanding.

• The Communist Control Act of 1954 was passed with overwhelming public support
• Many conservatives at that time equated the [first] New Deal (ND) with socialism or Communism
• How do you get OVERWHELMING PUBLIC SUPPORT?  Should you appeal to their altruistic nature?
• No.  There must be an evil enemy, upon which we can blame our problems, direct our hate toward.

Finding the Invisible Devil (aka, the Inquisition)

• New Deal 3 Rs: Relief to the unemployed, Reform of business and financial practices, Recovery of the economy
• Roosevelt believed severity of Depression due to excessive business competition lowering wages/prices
• New Deal instituted banking reform laws, work relief programs, agricultural programs, and industrial reform
• Roosevelt rejected spending cuts believing big business were trying to ruin the New Deal
• This would cause another depression that voters would react against by voting Republican
• 1939 Gallup poll asked, ‘Roosevelt administration … delaying business recovery?’
• American people responded ‘yes’ by a margin of more than two-to-one (FUD >> intellect)

Who are the true believers in this devil?

• Many (perhaps most) historians say the effects of Roosevelt’s work restored hope & self-respect to millions of desperate people
• A 1995 survey of economic scholars asked whether “Taken as a whole, government policies of the New Deal served to lengthen and deepen the Great Depression.” Of those in economics departments 27% agreed, 22% agreed ‘with provisos’ (what provisos the survey does not state) and 51% disagreed. Of those in history departments, only 27% agreed and 73% disagreed
• Fortune’s Roper poll found in May 1939 found that PUBLIC opinions on the issue were much different than the academic opinions (against New Deal efficacy), and were highly polarized by economic status and occupation.

The Inquisition

• McCarthy dropped out of junior high school at age 14, but thanks to 61% support from Republicans, was elected Senator.
• Primary targets of McCarthyism were government employees, entertainment industry, educators and union activists.
• Suspicions were often given credence despite inconclusive or questionable evidence
• The level of threat posed by a person’s real or supposed leftist associations or beliefs was often greatly exaggerated.
• Conservative politicians referred to liberal reforms (child labor laws, women’s suffrage) as “Communist” or “Red plots”
• Executive Order 9835 authorized firing federal employees believed “disloyal to the Government of the United States”
• Once a person lost a job due to an unfavorable loyalty review, it could be very difficult to find other employment.
• Review Board chairman said “No responsible employer would be likely to take a chance in giving him a job”
• After the Hollywood mass firing, private loyalty-review boards and anti-communist investigators began to appear.
• From 1951 to 1955, the FBI operated a secret “Responsibilities Program” that distributed anonymous documents with evidence from FBI files of Communist affiliations on the part of teachers, lawyers, and others. Many people accused in these “blind memoranda” were fired without any further process
• The Alien Registration Act or Smith Act of 1940 made it a criminal offense for anyone to teach anti-US government material.
• In the film industry, over 300 actors, authors and directors were denied work in the U.S.
• The number of people imprisoned is in the hundreds, and some ten or twelve thousand lost their jobs.
• Suspected homosexuality was also a common cause for being targeted by McCarthyism.

• Importantly, Joseph McCarthy though now the poster boy, was NOT alone in this viral infection of paranoid ill-informed ignorance.

• McCarthy, as a senator, had no direct involvement with the House Un-American Activities Committee and many other groups.
• William F. Buckley, Jr., the founder of the influential conservative political magazine National Review, wrote a defense of McCarthy, McCarthy and his Enemies, in which he asserted that “McCarthyism … is a movement around which men of good will and stern morality can close ranks.
• (Search YouTube and watch Noam Chomsky shred Buckley in a debate on politics, where Buckley’s command of historical knowledge proves weak)

The Ethics of Pro-Social Altruism

For all those who have exited the stone age of dog-eat-dog tribalism, and are ready to catch up to 2,000 yr old ethics, please stop waving your bible and read it.

First read: Acts Ch 2 verses 42, 44, & 45: (about the early Christians)

42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.43 Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. 44 And all that believed were together, and had all things in common; 45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. (King James Version)

Next read Acts 4:32-37:

32 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. 33 And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 34 Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, 35 And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. 36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, 37 Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet. (King James Version)

And Luke 1:49-53: (Mary describing the GOOD works of God:

52 He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree. 53 He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away.

Matthew 19:16-24 (the same event is also described in Mark 10:17-25 and Luke 18:18-25):

20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? 21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. 22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. 23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

The phrase “love thy neighbor”, repeatedly spoken by Jesus, is rather well known. Christian communists point out that Jesus considered this to be the second most important of all moral obligations, after loving God.

And in Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus identifies himself with the hungry, the poor and the sick, and states that good or evil done upon “the least of [God's] brethren” will be counted as good or evil done upon God himself. It is argued that Jesus is saying that nations, rather than individuals, would be judged according to the characteristics of their societies. If that is the case, this could imply that political and economic systems were being heavily critiqued

Leviticus 25:35-38: “If one [...] becomes poor [...] help him [...] so he can continue to live among you. Do not take interest of any kind from him, but fear your God [...] You must not lend him money at interest or sell him food at a profit. I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt to give you the land of Canaan and to be your God.” and Acts 4:32-35, “All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had [...] there were no needy persons among them [...] the money [...] was distributed to anyone as he had need.” As well as Acts 2:42-47, “They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching [...] to the breaking of bread [...] everyone was filled with awe [...] all the believers were together and had everything in common [...] they gave to anyone as he had need. Every day they [...] ate together with glad and sincere hearts [...] ”

Historical Christian Socialism

There is in fact a rich history of Christian socialist teaching throughout the history of the church. In Catholicism, the Rerum Novarum encyclical letter of Leo XIII (1891) was the starting point of a teaching on social questions that was expanded and updated all through the 20th century. Though avoiding the word Socialism (as the Socialist movements of the day were anti-religious) the encyclical promotes a kind of corporatism based on social solidarity among the classes with respects for the needs and rights of all. In the more Catholic countries of Europe the encyclical’s teaching was the inspiration that led to the formation of new Christian-inspired Socialist parties.

A number of Christian socialist movements and political parties throughout the world group themselves into the International League of Religious Socialists. It has member organizations in 21 countries representing 200,000 members.

For more on this theology, read Frederick Denison Maurice (The Kingdom of Christ, 1838), Charles Kingsley (Water-Babies, 1863), Thomas Hughes (Tom Brown’s Schooldays, 1857), Frederick James Furnivall (co-creator of the Oxford English Dictionary), Adin Ballou (Practical Christian Socialism, 1854), and Francis Bellamy (a Baptist minister and the author of the United States’ Pledge of Allegiance). You can also simply reference the teachings of Liberation theology or of the Christian Socialist Movement (CSM).

The British Labour Party and Australian Labor Party have both been influenced by Christian socialism, and some figures from both parties could be considered to be Christian socialists, depending on the definition of “socialism” used. Former British Labour leader Tony Blair is a member of the Christian Socialist Movement although his adherence to Christian Socialist ideals is highly disputed. Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd identified himself as an “old-fashioned Christian socialist” in a 2003 interview with the Australian Financial Review, later writing in 2006: “A Christian perspective, informed by a social gospel or Christian socialist tradition, should not be rejected contemptuously by secular politicians as if these views are an unwelcome intrusion into the political sphere.” However he also described socialism as an “arcane, 19th century” doctrine and stated that “I am not a socialist. I have never been a socialist and I never will be a socialist.”

But if you have graduated to context-relevant ethics created in this most recent century, and instead revere those Europeans who first settled America, or just prefer a more “American” (patriotic to the US) you need only look to the Plymouth Colony. They were a community practicing communist-like principles used by the “primitive” Christian Church as described in the Acts of the Apostles (”all things be held in common”) was used as a basis for the contract agreed upon by the venture and its investors. Although each family controlled their own home and possessions, corn was farmed on a communal plot of land with the harvest divided equally amongst the settlers. In fact, before Karl Marx ALL communism was rooted in religious principles. His only revelation was basing his theory on logic and historical science rather than 2,000 year old religion.

The Essence of Christian Socialist Ethics

In short, the views of these Christians can be summed up in three quotes:

1. If we all came of the same father and mother, of Adam and Eve, how can they say or prove that they are better than we, if it be not that they make us gain for them by our toil what they spend in their pride? (John Ball)
2. Socialism which means love, cooperation and brotherhood in every department of human affairs, is the only outward expression of a Christian’s faith. I am firmly convinced that whether they know it or not, all who approve and accept competition and struggle against each other as the means whereby we gain our daily bread, do indeed betray and make of no effect the “will of God.” (George Lansbury)
3. Capitalism is the way of the devil and exploitation. If you really want to look at things through the eyes of Jesus Christ–who I think was the first socialist–only socialism can really create a genuine society. (Hugo Chávez)

Conclusion?

What does all this mean? I am personally averse to most religions, including Christianity. But there is definitely some grain of logic in the Christian socialist quotes above (at least, in their end result). If you are a Christian, and you are content to “join the crowd” in frenzied paranoia, essentially behaving like a mindless puppet under the hand of greedy rich business owners and bankers, then you should at least know that they are NOT actually promoting ideas that are consistent with those of Jesus and the early Christians.

If you are like me, and have already stepped away from the “opiate of the masses” bong, start watching videos by/about Noam Chomsky and exit Plato’s Cave completely.

There’s a definite bias toward your own small bubble of experiences, and this is true of IT departments as well. If you are in a school environment which is mostly Unix/Linux/Solaris with a smattering of PC/Mac, then the “cool” guys all know that only losers waste time with PC/Mac. When I was a grad student at NC State University (home of Red Hat), there were perhaps a few niches like this among the departments. The reverse situation can also be found on some school campuses and is expressed in equally strong attitudes.

For instance, I also worked at the School of Communication Arts in Raleigh for a while (when it was still pretty small). I taught networking, security, web design, and also helped run the IT department occasionally. However, the majority of the courses taught covered animation, graphics, digital film, and artsy stuff, and so naturally, Mac’s were preferred, and far outnumbered PCs. Networking hundreds of Macs wasn’t easy back then (for me at least), and so at one point I had a huge Mac OSX server shipped to me there, because I was considering allowing all the mac clients authenticate to it (rather than the NT servers). But despite my efforts, I knew that the really mad “props” would always go to the mac guys first, and their creative works.

And now to bring things full circle, I have been working for the last few years at a college on campus at TTU, which is probably like 95% windows, both server-side and client-side. Once again there’s a temptation at times to feel that my underutilized prior experiences (and skills) with Linux and Macs are drifting away like distant memories of some other culture I once lived in. For most people, I imagine this is the case for them too when integrating into a new workplace. It can be very difficult to resist and you are liable to be perceived in slightly negative standing if you do not ‘conform’ or cannot adapt. Some may revere your fierce independence, but ultimately, many more will (unspokenly) see you as stubborn, or inflexible, or XYZ (bad trait). Personally, I didn’t make much effort to resist, and I’ve enjoyed whatever was popular at the time where ever I happened to be, as a new learning experience. That probably had less to do with a desire for improved productivity and was more because I really like playing with new tech stuff.

Beyond the cultural issues, and personal biases, there’s another barrier between the camps that is controversial, murky, and seems to defy authoritative answers. In fact, there have been very few peer-reviewed economics articles I’ve come across which purport or attempt to settle the question of total financial costs and returns. The problem is that traditional business value strategies don’t apply equally well to these unique cultures because they are so very different. Like apples and oranges, these cultures include unique and only slightly overlapping sets of variables which can be compared, measured, and studied. In addition, they typically correlate with radically different kinds of business objectives which might be used to measure success. Nevertheless, I’m fascinated by comparisons of their financial and operational models for internal IT departments, and particularly for those IT departments who are transitioning between these radically different cultures (those moving to an all Linux server side shop).

As I alluded to before, there may be a bias against “foreign cultures”, even when a new (possibly superior) economic or business model will fit for the IT department and context. Often times, this can prevent people from being open to simple numerical measures of actual material facts. For instance, University PC shops might be surprised to learn that as of June 2009, Linux powered 88.6% of the world’s most powerful supercomputers, compared to Windows’ 1.0% (http://tr.im/wAaA) or that in December 2008, Linux powered five of the ten most reliable internet hosting companies, compared to Windows’ one.(http://tr.im/wAaH) Although Windows (and Apple) have spent a lot of money to help market, project, and create their culture, there really is plenty of room for debate over “core doctrines” such as TCO. For perhaps less frequently heard opinions on this, see the below further resources:

The Register: http://tr.im/wAbG
eWeek: http://tr.im/wAbY
RedHat: http://tr.im/wAea
Novell: http://tr.im/wAes

In some cases, the cultural barriers are geographic. Each community seems to have it’s own strongholds — Hollywood, for instance, in the case of Apple, and much of Asia in the case of Linux. Like teenagers listening next to a fence, when less and less is heard from opposing camps, they may be too quick to proclaim their “enemy is dead!!”. That was the feeling among many PC users on several occasions during the 1980’s regarding the health of Apple. But then Apple would ’sneak up from behind’, and each time it seemed with a killer new product (media players, routers, and now the iPhone).

Similarly, if you are in the majority (a PC user) you may have noticed over the last few years decreasing volume level of rabid evangelists proselytizing the superiority and power of Linux. This is most true on the internet where nearly every service, tool, and product now has windows or mac GUI interfaces with giant Tonka Toy buttons and icons. But dare we ask across that fense, whether there could be a comeback? What if Linux could somehow leverage it’s advantages on mobile computing devices and their more limiting hardware platforms? Under such circumstances the importance of the operating system size, memory usage, and speed are still high ranking. This is where Linux could make big inroads — where fat bloated lazy “modularized” code is still having trouble.

But you aren’t likely to hear this ’sneak attack’ unless you get closer to the fence. One place to look for these sorts of developments is at the conferences where “Platinum Sponsors” seem to increasingly include telecoms and computing corporations, side by side. With the LinuxCon 2009 (Sept. 23-29) just days away now, I would personally really like to see who else sees what I see. Netbooks, PDAs, and cell phones are ripe for Linux. Although the Platinum Sponsors currently show HP, IBM, Intel, Novell, QualComm, and Dell, I am left asking myself why Android isn’t more prominent? Doth these behemoths not know that Google art full of smart cool guys?

RESOURCES:
Linux Adoption (Wikipedia Article): http://tr.im/wA8J
Linux Conferences (Wikipedia Article)http://tr.im/wAel
Android OS (Wikipedia Article) http://tr.im/wCze

The Background

An particularly objective journalist at Arkansas Online recently posted a report here: http://tr.im/tCJn regarding homosexuality and conservative Christian denominations (via the popular blog ‘BibleBeltBlogger.com‘).

The report shows that there has been a dramatic increase in membership of Assemblies of God churches, accompanied by a dramatic decrease in membership within the Episcopal church over the last few decades.

What really makes this topic interesting is that the Assemblies of God take a fairly strong stance against homosexuality, where as the Episcopalians are accepting of it. See this entry at Biblebeltblogger for more info: http://tr.im/tCQf

My Reactions

Wow, this is very interesting data.

I wonder if researchers could ever somehow find a way to conduct anonymous survey research, which is conducted in such a way as to be statistically valid, sampled via a representative cross-section of those included in these reported attendance numbers. I wonder what sorts of information people would report.

Some interesting questions I would like to ask are:

1. Provide a ranking from most to least influential in attending ‘this’ church, rather than some other church.
   • This could actually get much deeper. Factors could be grouped according to all kinds of cultural, demographic, political, philosophical, and of course, theological categories.
   • Some possible factors could be rather mundane such as style of music (full ‘rock’ band, with guitars, drums, and progressive style), attraction to “mega-churches” (which are like entertainment extravaganzas), versus humbler much smaller churches.
   • But the real MEAT of this type of survey would be a deconstruction, and possible attempt at inference based on the ‘official’ position, and unofficial practices of Churches on moral issues, such as: members with addictions, mental illness, evangelism versus purely humanitarian activities. If answers are vague or black-and-white, if the atmosphere is more liberal or traditional, permissive or conformist, personal or formal, etc. These factors may reflect changes in society or culture as a whole where they are strongest.
2. Do you believe that higher attendance or other types of success are caused by holiness, resulting in God’s favor? Or alternatively, does God choose his servants, and choose who will be blesses, according to his own mysterious ways? Success here can mean many things, such as financial growth, new converts, media coverage, community penetration (provision for private church run education for children of members, in-home support groups, etc.).
   • This question relates to the question of whether moral good exists independently of God, and then God complies. The alternative is that moral good, is perfectly synonymous with God’s will, and that God will’s something is what makes it good. Did God choose the Israelites because they were upright, holy, and good? Or did he choose them first, and that conveyed a special status to them, a dispensation as holy people? If there is no good outside of God’s will, then it is IMPOSSIBLE to be good outside of God’s will. If good exists as part of how God created all the Universe, then that is essentially the same as the good always being at all times, created and existing as such, only as God Will’s it, continually, and subject to change if God so decides. Recall, those evil doers who refused to kill every single last woman and child in the conquered lands (after the 40 yrs in the desert). How wrong they were to suppose they could reason out morality on their own, and still be good, when that conflicted with God’s will.
   • If this research proved useful, you might even decide to study these questions within other religions, and other cultures. Do cultures that are rich and powerful, view God as rewarding the ‘chosen’ one’s, here on earth with victory in war, riches, and power? Consider for instance a culture where far more people live in poverty, without ANY medical care, with much shorter life-expectancies. Would it be logical to expect such a culture to believe in a God (or create their perception of God) as one who is vengeful, who will rescue those who suffer, and bring down the evil powerful rich guys?
3. Lastly, I would like to attempt to include sections which measure attitudes. For example, you might investigate attitudes toward prejudices. Such a survey should avoid forced continuum’s which require a response between extremes (such as one end being “blacks have just as many opportunities as whites, if not more”, and the other extreme being “descendants of slaves deserve reparations”). Instead, each of these individual attitudes (and some double negatives) could be carefully crafted into “degree of agreement” likert scale prompts, from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”. But you could study all kinds of attitudes, such as whether “poor people deserve to suffer poverty, because they are lazy”, or “learned helplessness is a myth, monkey’s in cages are faking it because they are too lazy to jump when the shock hits”. Could the proclivity to empathy be related to emotional maturity? How might one’s capacity for moral reasoning be related to a need for simpler, rule-based, black-and-white doctrine, over a more complex, context dependent, more relative set of interpretations?

Could one somehow get away with such comparisons between denominations?
Has any type of research ever really been conducted on a large scale?
Just curious.

I presume that as we move forward in time along experience data, broad classifications of initial impressions (internal value attributions, beliefs, interpretations) become increasingly detailed, as with an anisotropic filter.  Radial branches from the event origin map more or less with other event origins like twigs off main branches, according to similarity algorithms.  But when we discover dissonance or correct ourselves, do we begin a new tract, or simply veer?

So how (??) does that relate to the finding (from the Journal of Neuroscience*) that…

A voxel-based whole-brain level linear regression analysis was performed to relate fractional anisotropy to indices of true and false memory recall and recognition. True memory was correlated to diffusion anisotropy in the inferior longitudinal fascicle, the major connective pathway of the medial temporal lobe, whereas a greater proneness to retrieve false items was related to the superior longitudinal fascicle connecting frontoparietal structures

* The Journal of Neuroscience, July 8, 2009, 29(27):8698-8703; doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5270-08.2009

THE RESEARCH AGENDA:

“Development of A Theoretical Framework for Multi-User Virtual Environment Learning”

The videos below demonstrate some excellent ideas for how to use the Second Life environment for various educational purposes:

1. http://tr.im/rqOz
2. http://tr.im/rqOS

If anyone is interested in a taxonomy of pedagogical principles which differentiate the many specific instances of how to use SL, contact me! With general case models to classify each of these scenarios, it will be easier to be more inclusive in categorizing them, without merely making an exhaustive list. That will require deconstructing example usages conceptually.

Once characterized descriptively, each general case model could be tested for success under various conditions, and eventually guidelines established which fairly accurately prescribe a match between model-objectives-content-audience-techniques. Finally, with good correlations and predictive validity, these models could facilitate more fruitful research into (and possible experimental/mathematical isolation of) statistically significant effects due to highly specific psychological, or at least broad demographic as well as instructional design factors.

If anyone is aware of prior work on deconstruction of the psychological and pedagogical principles with direct relevance to MUVE’s, please email me any info, or leads.

• Want to run a study in a school setting?
• Tired of hearing that software can’t be installed, permissions loosened, configuration changed?
• Boot into an operating system on USB sticks (about $5.00 each), then store data on the stick, or a server!

Just announced as of today: June 24, 2009

Sugar Labs™, nonprofit provider of the software that runs the “One Laptop Per Child” (OLPC) computers (over one-million children worldwide got one thus far), is giving away a version that runs on a USB Stick (works with standard flash memory USB drive) = “Sugar on a Stick” (version 1, aka, ‘Strawberry’)

“Sugar on a Stick” can be loaded onto an ordinary 1GB USB flash drive and used to reboot any PC or netbook directly into the operating system on the USB stick. It can (if desired) also work with a School Server in order to provide content distribution, homework collection, backup services, Moodle integration, and filtered access to the Internet. Today’s Strawberry release is meant for classroom testing

Sugar on a Stick is a great way to try Sugar without touching your computer’s hard disk. It is also well suited to slower, older PCs and low-powered netbooks.

• Video: http://tr.im/pC51
• FREE Download: http://tr.im/pCaB
• Storyboard: http://tr.im/pCbg
• Screenshots: http://tr.im/pCcd
• Announcement: http://tr.im/pCfX

Chimps have been observed by many to try and increase their social status/rank through service to others in the clan. Is it prejudiced to believe we are morally superior to primates who express such a phenotype less, who have been less successful reproductively (presumably due to lack of organizational effectiveness and cooperation).

Geneticists (in the last 2 years) have discovered several genes and cofactors which are believed to strongly correlate to intelligence.  Instantly, all the “educated racists” rejoiced, because they felt they would finally be vindicated.  They love to make claims about the validity (now in doubt), about intelligence measures between the races.  They are prone to make claims about how African American slaves were bread to be not-too-smart (politically and philosophically at least), strong, and obedient.

However, no person not mentally ill would believe that children (or persons with mental disability) are morally inferior simply because they are less intelligent.  Even if there are differences in certain types of intelligence between certain races, this is not an argument in favor of moral racism.  Although some atheistic (or even some ignorant religious racists) believe that intellectual differences between races, constitutes a significant case for whole race inferiority, most philosophers (and scientists for that matter) would not accept such a value statement.  Although in practice, natural (or material) value is placed on such shallow and temporary variations, the very definition of value throughout history has been a matter of determination of what is most important, and that has always been the moral good.

In fact, many atheists do believe in a system of ethics which is pro-social and altruistic in nature.  All such mature people would naturally (if they are enlightened even slightly) have a tendency to judge others based on the quality of their character and whatever virtues they live by, rather than on superficial (and largely accidental) characteristics such as skin tone, body shape, financial net worth, intelligence.  Thus, it is of no consequence if the new intelligence genes and cofactors are being found to exist unequally in persons of different ethnic (actually geographic) descent.  As we all know, smart people are just as likely to be morally repugnant and evil as stupid people.  Intelligence (just like body shape, hair color, etc.) has very little to do with morality, I personally think.

But what if scientists are able to locate genes and cofactors related to altruism?  I think the average scientist will agree that aggression can be expressed in positive or negative ways — such as high contact sports, or in certain professions meant to protect others, etc..  We have known for decades now (for instance, by extrapolating from large subject samples of identical twins raised apart) that many of the aspects of a human personality (the big 5) are genetically determined to some degree.  But again, those personality factors (like intelligence) have been assumed to have little to do with moral character, and this is especially true if you have reserved some hope or faith in a “free will”.  However, if there is a gene for altruism (or some related construct) would that somehow confer moral superiority?  Isn’t that racist?  For that matter, what need have we anymore for a belief in “free will” if our moral inclinations are largely determined by genetics?

http://tr.im/nUiB

EVERY USA UNIVERSITY FACULTY MEMBER should read this. This is crucial, and not just in some tree-hugging-save-the planet-way (a criticism STUPID faculty have been using for years, to prolong their techno-IGNORANCE). This is crucial because if you CLAIM to support (at least in principle) the VALUE of learning, this represents a quantum leap forward for educators, available NOW, but still being resisted by MORONS!