« May 2006 | Main | July 2006 »
[Treoblogging] From the AP:
Former Judge Donald D. Thompson, a veteran of 23 years on the bench, is on trial on charges he used a penis pump on himself in the courtroom while sitting in judgment of others.
Of course other possible titles for this post would include:
And so forth...
The Bush Administration has made FDR's aphorism operational. If you know what I mean.
[Treoblogging] New Scientist reports on a study finding that "[o]verconfident people are more likely to wage war but fare worse in the ensuing battles...."
Interestingly, narcissism is found to be a key factor.
Tony Snow recently compared public support for Bush's adventure in Iraq with that for Roosevelt's conduct of WWII:
If somebody had taken a poll in the Battle of the Bulge, I dare say people would have said, wow, my goodness, what are we doing here?
Kind of a nifty way to associate Bush with Roosevelt in the public's mind, don't you think?
Funny thing, though--turns out someone did take a poll, and support for Roosevelt at the time was at around 70 percent.
There's a moral here somewhere...
Shorter Carson Holloway:
Take I: Scientific facts should not be stated publicly if doing so would disturb the delicate sensibilities of ignorant rubes.
Take II: Doesn't Richard Dawkins know that reality is, like, a total downer?
(Via Butterflies & Wheels.)
[Treoblogging] I don't usually do this sort of thing, but it seems like it's "in," and otherwise I got nothing, so here are the 10 most recently played on my iPod:
Lux Aeterna (Ligeti [RIP])
You and Me (Lifehouse)
Mathis der Maler (Hindemith)
Tristan und Isolde: Vorspiel und Liebestod (Wagner)
Pavane, Op.50 (Fauré)
Meditation from Thais (Massenet)
Wonderful Tonight (Eric Clapton)
Trois Pieces Pour Orchestra (Berg)
The Hymn (Charlie Parker)
Synchronicity II (The Police)
Truly a weird list. It may seem preposterous, but I really do like all these pieces/songs/works. Still, I don't suppose I would suggest playing, say, the Clapton and Berg one after the other in the same sitting--at least not without a couple of carefully chosen Tom Waits tunes in between as bridging material.
[Treoblogging] A brief exchange after a recent show with a somewhat older female fan:
Fan: I want you to sign my tits!
I: (Excogitative pause.) It will be done.
Just creepy.
[Treoblogging] Theology presupposes the existence of its god(s). As such, it's no place for a skeptic; for a skeptical study of religion, you have to go to the philosophy of religion.
Similarly (it seems to me), aesthetics presupposes the existence of value in art (and I mean in the not-too-metaphysically loaded sense of art's bearing some property uniquely beneficial to the human organism). As with religion, this presupposition finds safe haven in the intuitions of true believers.
Unfortunately, and unlike the case of religion, there doesn't appear to be anywhere for the skeptic to go. Aesthetics just is the philosophy of art, and as far as I know it doesn't address arguments like this, the upshot of which is that music might be nothing but a diversion, a waste of time, possibly even a vicious indulgence.
Is this wrong? Is there an aesthetics literature that deals with arguments like Kealey's?
[Treoblogging] ...mock together.
Recent Comments