pie's blog

Fucking Easter

2007-04-06T10:30:00.000+12:00

Every year I forget the shops all close on Easter. I am hungry. Had to have an up and go for breakfast from the service station. We don't have a state religion, there is no need for our shops to all close on this day. Absolutely ridiculous.

People can celebrate all they want, but it shouldn't interfere with my liberty to go out and buy food. Christian oppression!

haha

2007-02-03T21:08:00.000+13:00

Funny.

"According to a study by Paul Bell, published in the Mensa Magazine in 2002, there is an inverse correlation between religiosity and intelligence. Analyzing 43 studies carried out since 1927, Bell finds that all but four reported such a connection, and concludes that "the higher one's intelligence or education level, the less one is likely to be religious or hold 'beliefs' of any kind." A survey published in Nature confirms that belief in a personal god or afterlife is at an all time low among the members of the National Academy of Science, only 7.0% of which believed in a personal god as compared to more than 85% of the US general population.^[76] "

My Wager

2006-11-08T21:43:00.000+13:00

Ok I am using wikipedia for this, so my sources for everything are from there. However, I will put Pascal to shame through this faith calculator.

I will be working on the (false) assumption that every person has the same capacity for correct reasoning. However, hopefully this false assumption can be balanced out through deducting points for believers of certain faiths from idiot countries, such as South Africa, England, the Koreas and the United States.

Since various religions propose equally infinite rewards, which are exclusive of each other, I am going to have to consider any reward that is infinite to be 'x', as otherwise this is incalculable.

"As of late 2006, the world population reached 6.5 billion."

Christianity

"With an estimated 2.1 billion adherents in 2001, Christianity is the world's largest religion.[3] It is the predominant religion in the Americas, Europe, Philippine Islands, Oceania, and large parts of Africa. It is also growing rapidly in Asia, particularly in China and South Korea. It has also increased in popularity in Northern Africa.[4]"

"Most Christians believe that salvation from "sin and death" is available through faith in Jesus as saviour because of his atoning sacrifice on the cross which paid for sins. Reception of salvation is related to justification and usually understood as the activity of unmerited Divine grace.[18]"

Thus, the percentage of people who believe in christianity is 32.3% (2.1/6.5 for the less mathmatically/logically inclined). The reward I will have to consider as 'x'. However, there are damning statistics that work against this view.

Southern Africa
Christianity in South Africa
79.7%
35,342,330

East Asia
Christianity in Korea, South
30%
15,380,246

North America
Christianity in the United States
80%
236,557,785

Western Europe
Christianity in the United Kingdom
71.6%
43,276,114

The countries listed above all show signs of completely defective rationality systems, and as such work against the statistics. As such I will tally their collective population belief. This amounts to 330, 556, 475. In order to correct the original problem I had regarding the false assumption of equal rationality, I will subtract this total from the original number, giving me about 1.77 billion believers, of an acceptable rational standard. This amounts to 27.23% of the world population.

Now, this means that the figure, adjusted to suit standards of rationality, means that christianity has a (rational) probability of .2723. The rewards from adopting such a belief amount to x, working on the assumption there is an eternal life. The loss amounts to about 0.5, from the assumption that there is no afterlife, as approximately half the fun of life (excessive alcohol consumption, sexing and other activities avoided by your regular jesus lover).

So working this out on the assumption there is a christian afterlife, we have a value of .2723x, where x is equal to infinite reward, exclusive to those who give their faith towards the dude with the beard and the seemingly good moral messages. Working this out on the assumption that there is no afterlife, christians get a life value of 0.5/1. Thus, Christianity results in a gain of .2723x or a loss of 0.5 life. This must then be taken into account on the further assumptions of other faiths, in which Christians do not receive such eternal rewards, and so further calculations are required.

Judaism

"As of 2006, adherents of Judaism numbered around 14 million followers"

This results in a value of .0022x, or a loss of 0.5 life.

Islam

"There are estimated to be 1.4 billion adherents, making Islam the second-largest religion in the world.[2] "

Ok I can't find this out on wikipedia, and I'm using a 56k computer, So I'm going to work on the assumption that Islamic people don't believe that Christians get salvation (Source : Rob). All the Islam countries are pretty cool, and lots of them have beards, so they all seem pretty rational. Thus, they receive a value of .2154x, and also a loss of 0.5 life on the assumption of a non afterlife. I will slightly adjust, this, rounding up to .25x, as they receive virgins upon arrival.

Hinduism

Ok I found a graph on wiki with all of this on it, so no more need for calculations. Hinduism has 14%, however, unlike the above 3, they dont believe in an eternal reward. However, the wikipedia article is too long, so they can receive an X anyway, because it seems to have a similar equivalent. Thus, they receive a value of .14x. Also, they get an averaged loss of 0.5 life - lots of the believers seem to be living pretty shit lifes, and accepting of it as being their role for a previous bad life.

Non Belief

16% of people have no religious belief. They receive a life value of 0.1. An x value of 0 - they seem pretty fucked if one of the other lottery tickets comes in.

TaLLY

Now, to scientifically evaluate all faith. There are other religions, but this is taking too long on 56k, so I will exclude them.

Christianity - the x value here is .2723 on the assumption there is an afterlife. However, this must be balanced against the other beliefs in afterlifes that exclude Christians from entering. So, the .2723 must be divided by the sum of all x values to receive a value of relative chance of success. This is .2723/.6645, which gives - 0.4098. Thus, christianity has a .41 share of all x. Now, the non-religious view is 16%. As such, I will give the probability of there not being an afterlife a probability of .16, and so the x value must be multiplied by 0.84 to receive its final result. This gives a 34.42% chance of success.

Islam, using the same strat gives .25/.6645 = .3762x. Multiplied by .84 gives a 31.6% chance. Hinduism gets .14/.6645 = .21 x .84 = 17.7% chance.

Non-belief has no x value, we completely lose out here. we believe that we get one life and that we must make the most of it. However, our umbers are only 0.16 strong, and so we must accordingly use the methods of probability to determine we that we have a 0.16 chance of being right, and as such only get a 16% value method. This must further be halved, as all the other religions would receive a life value of 0.5 anyway, so our benefit falls to 0.08.

In the face of all of this scientific theory proving my belief to be irrational, how do I overcome such conclusive, damning evidence? By assuring myself that even taking out the believers from idiot countries, that my rationality is the best :)

wow!

2006-10-30T21:40:00.001+13:00

CONFIDENTIAL PROPOSAL FROM
MR. ABU MUSA THE CHIEF AUDITOR INCHARGE,
AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK (ADB).
OUAGADOUGOU BURKINA FASO.
WEST AFRICA.

Dear Partner,

I presumed that all is well with you and your family. Please let this do not be a surprise proposal to you because i got your contact information from the international directory in few weeks ago before i decided to contact you on this magintude and lucrative transaction for our future survival in life. Moreover, i have laid all the solemn trust in you before i decided to disclose this successful & confidential transaction to you.

I AM MR. ABU MUSA, THE CHIEF AUDITOR INCHARGE OF FOREIGN REMITTANCE UNIT of our bank and i have had the intent to contact you over this financial
transaction worth the sum of NINTEEN MILLION, THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND
UNITED STATES DOLLARS ($19,300,000.00 ) for our success.This is an abandoned
sum that belongs to one of our bank foreign customers who died along with his
entire family through plane crash disaster since few years ago. Meanwhile i was very fortune to came across the deceased file when i was arranging the
old and abandoned customers files in other to sign and submit to the
entire
bank management for an official re-documentation and audit of the year against 2007.

Be informed clearly that it was stated in our banking rules and regulations which was signed lawfully that if such fund remains unclaimed till the period of 5 years started from the date when the beneficiary died, the money will be transferred into the treasury as an unclaimed fund. As an honour and advantage bestowed to our foreign customers base on the rules guideing our bank, it was stated obviously that if you are not a Burkina Faso citizen, you have the absolute authority to claim the fund hence you are a foreigner despite your differences from the country of origin of the deceased. So the request of you as a foreigner is necessary to apply for the claim and transfer of the fund smoothly into your reliable bank account as the NEXT OF KIN OR EXTENDED RELATIVE to the deceased.

On the transfer of this fund into your account, { 39% } being ( US$7,527,000.00) will be your share in respect of the account provision and your assistance rendered during the transfer of the fund into your bank account,{ 52% } being (US$10,036,000.00) will be my share being the codinator of the transaction while the rest { 9% } being (US$1,737,000.00) will be shared to the respectable Organisations Centers such as Charity Organisation, Motherless Babies homes, and helpless disabled people in the World.

If you are really sure of your trustworthy, accountability and confidentiality on his transaction, contact me and agree that you will not change your mind to cheat or
disappoint me when the fund have getting into your account. Besides you should not entertain any fear because i am sure of the success as an insider in the bank ok.
Please reply with

the assurance, include your private telephone and fax numbers necessary for facilitate an easy communication in this transaction. As soon as you reply , call me through my private telephone number on(0022670340481) so that i will let you know the next step to follow in order to finalize this transaction immediately.
I expect your urgent communication.

Yours sincerely,

MR.ABU MUSAO

Exams.

2006-10-28T19:24:00.000+13:00

First Exam down. No more Public Law. Ever.
Now learning my Philosophy course in whole before 9am Monday morning.

Here are my notes on the death of God. Really interesting. Lots of stuff I have been thinking about over the last few years are covered by Nietzsche here. He is great.

The Death of God

For the 150 years before Nietzsche, the universe as a whole had been conceived as a large mechanism, and the development of manufacturing was leading to a condition where human beings themselves would be pressed into mechanical labour as part of the social machine that constituted the ‘factory.’ The cultural situation of Christianity was perceived to be spiritually dying, and the hoped-for rejuvenation to be attained by a return to the Greek spirit was becoming undermined by the growing realization that the Greek gods were also dead. There was a growing perception within society that god was ‘dead.’ Hegel’s view is that the loss of all faith involves the loss of all acknowledgement of universal realities, and hence, a complete focus upon the individual, pure and simple. What is at the center of the nihilistic consciousness is a sense of loss, disillusionment, and despair; it is a consciousness stemming from the belief that the ground of one’s spiritual substance has completely dissolved.

There is a general analogy between the emotions involved with the death of a loved one, and the loss of belief in God (the ‘death of God’). With such a death comes initially shock and disbelief, followed by emotional pain and a sense of emptiness. Then, the intensity of the pain slowly subsides as one readjusts and reconstitutes one’s outlook in a constructive way once one has grown to accept the loved one’s non-presence. Involved in this are a severe loss of personal meaning, disorientation and a feeling of fear. However, with the loss of God, such feelings become amplified. Rather than experiencing a ‘severe’ loss of personal meaning, one might experience an ‘absolute’ loss of personal meaning and consequently, suffer from feelings of utter emptiness. It is easy to see how, from the amplification of such emotions, the death of God if experienced by a person of previously deep faith in God, could lead to an attitude of sheer nihilism.

Such feelings of nihilism were becoming ever present during Nietzsche’s lifetime. From this, it is easy to understand why Nietzsche was motivated to discover a new source for spiritual strength. However, Nietzsche judged that ultimately the ‘death of God’ was not the core problem, but rather the very belief in the Christian God was the source of spiritual sickness. He judged the Christian culture to be in an unhealthy condition, not because it had lost its fundamental inspiration, but because such a belief in this inspiration – an all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good God – was itself unhealthy, or ‘life-negating’.

Nietzsche views himself as a Physician for modern humanity. The nihilistic condition of mankind can be viewed as a reaction of grief to the ‘death of God.’ Nietzsche’s specific diagnosis is that the belief in the Christian God is making people spiritually ill. His negative prescription to the spiritually ill people is, therefore, that this God must be ‘killed,’ if they are to recover their health. This God must be killed in a way such that people experience the grief process and live through the nihilistic outlook in full force. After all of the earlier spiritual and emotional dependence on the Christian God is put behind, then he believes that people will be in the position to adopt life-affirming interpretations of the world that can remain with them.

Nietzsche maintains that the conception of the Christian God is an inversion of the way one ought to interpret the world, because he believes that this conception draws our attention away from the very world we live in. God, as defined within the Christian conception Nietzsche has in mind, is fundamentally a spaceless and timeless being, and insofar as our lives center around the timeless realm of God, they are not centering around the world in space and in time – the realm where life actually takes place. Thus, such a conception of God is life-negating, or world-negating, and amounts to a ‘deification of nothingness’, because it is completely distracting us from the world we live in, and hence from life itself.

The Christian God is not only life-negating in this sense, but also in the sense that it undermines our life-energies directly. The Christian God is seen as an absolute moral judge, who condemns people for expressing their purely animal urges. Since a significant aspect of these animal urges involves the instinct to reproduce the species, it would seem that the Christian conception of God significantly constricts the expression of sexual energies. This restriction is expressed by the imposition of overwhelming guilt – a guilt that he believes is so extensive, that it becomes impossible ever to be in a condition where one is not guilty. The Christian conception of God, in essence, is regarded by Nietzsche as a concept that drives people mad, partly because living according to this conception has the effect of suppressing instinctual energies whose expression is a condition for the organism’s health and mental balance.

Nietzsche’s reaction to the general condition of the Christian culture is reminiscent of Schopenhauer’s adverse reaction to the qualities he perceived in the human condition in general. However, Nietzsche does not attribute this sad state of affairs to the human condition as a whole, but allows room for some hope. However, Nietzsche does perceive the human society surrounding him to be in a deeply diseased spiritual condition, and that something needs to be done, lest the entire species waste away. Thus, he takes it upon himself to spread the word that there is a prevailing sickness in society, because he is convinced that even if people do not realise they are spiritually ill at present, the time will come when they will realise it.

Part of the sickness Nietzsche associates with belief in God involves the sense of overwhelming guilt such a belief generates. This is expressed through the guilt of the ‘ugliest man’, who is the murder of God. An analogy here can be made between God and one’s Father. The wish to murder one’s Father (as expressed by Freud) signifies a drive for personal autonomy. Once one is free from the dominating forces of one’s parents, one is then free to create one’s own values and regard oneself as a unique person. The ‘murder of God’ is intended to have such an effect, but globally. Without God – so it is thought – there is no single, true interpretation of the world; without God, there is no single, true set of moral values; without God, there is no cosmic judge who determines one’s ultimate reward and/or punishment; without God, reality itself no longer can make one feel guilty and psychologically stressed from over-surveillance, as if one were living in a cosmic prison with and all-powerful warden.

Nietzsche becomes frustrated at his attempts to communicate the death of God to his patient. Like a psychiatrist, Nietzsche tries to inform the patient that there is something wrong with him, however the mental disease that the patient has prevents him from absorbing such a message. Nietzsche also becomes frustrated at the lack of awareness and spiritual depth within his culture: On the one hand, everyone is accepting the traditional moral values that are linked with the belief in God, and on the other hand, not many people are thinking very deeply about what it means to be a Christian or an atheist.

In light of the frustrations in communication Nietzsche was expressing, we can regard him as comparable to a doctor who first discovers a debilitating epidemic, who tries to inform the society at large, but who is then confronted with disbelief, denial and mockery. Confident, however, in his diagnosis, he then proceeds to develop a cure, knowing that the disease will eventually manifest itself and his assistance will be called upon. Nietzsche is concerned that the society around him is operating in accord with a religious outlook that is weakening everyone’s life energies. In response to this life-negating condition, Nietzsche develops a positive cure: an array of alternative interpretations of the world that he regards, in contrast, as life-affirming. These include such doctrines as the Will to power, the Superhuman, Eternal Recurrence and a conception of life that is ‘beyond good and evil.’ At the core of such thought is Nietzsche’s concern with the overall health of humanity.

I hate Law

2006-10-24T12:27:00.000+13:00

"The Christian conception of God - God as god of the sick, God as a spider, God as spirit - is one of the most corrupt conceptions of the divine ever attained on Earth. It may even represent the utter low-water mark in the descending development of divine types. God degenerated into the contradiction of life, instead of bei ng its transfiguration and eternal Yes! God as the declaration of war against life, against nature, against the will to live! God - the forumla for every slander against "this world," for every lie about the "beyond"! God - the deification of nothingness, the will to nothingness pronounced holy!"

3:20

2006-10-17T03:26:00.000+13:00

it's 3:20am. I am awake watching cricket. stopped studying at about 1. We are beating South Africa. I hate South Africa. As much as I hate England. Maybe more.

I don't even know why I am writing here. It is late, and seems to be a pointless thing to do, yet I am continuing to do it.

Slowly becoming more and more aware of how close law exams are. I can't believe Arts students who I hear complaining of their workload. I am doubting whether I will have time do actually commit a day's study to my arts exam, or whether I'll have to go in completely unprepared just do aid my law...

It is hilarious.

I can't believe I thought Uni last year was a decent workload. I have no idea how I am going to fit all the study I need to do in. I have only been drunk twice in the last 3 weeks. This is very strange for me. I can sense the 'B' letter coming my way for law results. Depressing.

Stacey is coming back to New Zealand for good at the end of this year. I had certainly allowed myself to think she wouldn't be back for years. The fact that she is coming back is the worst news I have heard since she i was informed that no longer would we be going out, as she was off.

Other people are probably happy at the fact she is coming back.

I had hoped I would never have to see her again.

Hm.

Such a jovial mood.

Now 3:30am, South Africa are 55/4 chasing 196. 17 overs gone. The Indians are chanting "kiwi". They obviously hate South Africa too. I now rate India as one of my favourite countries.

I have a lecture at 9. Cricket probably won't be done till 5. I could be studying, but my notes are a good 2-3 feet away from me.

Interesting things I learnt today through Human Sexuality study...

A theory of Plato's regarding homosexuality - Each person was originally a double person, some were male/male, some male/female and some female/female. Each double was cut in half by an angry God, and the expression of sexuality comes from a desire to be reunited with our other half. Very creative. It beats Freud's theories hands down. Failure to break the Oedipal phase.... pfft.

The pink triangle symbol, used by homosexuals the world over, was adopted from homosexuals sent to concentration camps who were made to wear such a symbol. Surprising origins. Rob's theory had been that "pink = gay, and nobody likes triangles."

Hmm. I don't give blood. I don't like needles. I also worked hard for my blood. I don't want it wasted on some person who I do not know, and in all probability would not like. This is a very selfish motivation. That does not worry me.

2006-09-20T14:31:00.000+12:00

Have a 30% Human Sexuality test tomorrow, so naturally, after exhausting all other, more interesting forms of procrastination, I have resorted to blogging to waste away the time. This is time that I decided it would be best to use not going to my law lectures, but rather to stay home "studying". Luckily its an arts paper, so I'll do fine...

I finally got around to replacing the keyboard in my laptop that Billy bought me about 6 weeks ago, so now I again have full use of all keys, and never have to resort to slashes for letters or the on screen keyboard.

Exam time table has given me exams on the 27th (Law), 30th (Arts) of October and 6th (Law) November. Final human sexuality test is on the last thursday of lectures, with there being no exam for that. Have a minimum 3000 word essay on Nietzche's critique of Christianity to start and finish by the 20th of October too, so I guess it will be a busy couple of months, with a probable increase of blog posts in proportion to the increase of business.

I would perhaps have some sort of comment on an interesting aspect of the philosophy of Schopenhauer or Nietzsche, but the lecturer really puts me off the topic, and I can't think of one interesting piece of information I have processed from the lectures. Maybe after I do some of the readings for the essay I'll have something to add. Nietzsche does have some humorous remarks on the nature of Christianity and the (then) modern day Christians that are still applicable today, if not more-so...

My flatmate Ryan moves out at the end of the month, and so I'll be living with my Dad in my apartment (he'll be here like 2 days a week for work) until the apartment sells and I move to albany with small James. Our Whangaparaoa house is being rented, and we move out of there early next month. Will be strange not living (at least for the weekends) in whangaparaoa, somewhere i've been my whole life. But Albany will be good, close to most of the people I know as well as Burger Fuel.

I think I am becoming increasingly racist, or maybe just foreignist. Foreign people have started to piss me off more than ever. I don't think it is that I am intolerant of them, I just generally get annoyed with them quite often. I hate the city, I hate seeing Asians spit everywhere, I hate the unfriendly nature of all of the Asian people in my apartment complex who a) throw Korean products into my garden as well as sanitary products like earbuds and condoms and b) don't even acknowledge the presence of, let alone talk to anyone else from another race. I am starting to dislike the groups of people around the city not speaking in English moreso... it never used to bother me, but I just don't like it anymore. I dislike the gangster groups of Polynesian's aswell, who walk around looking to pick fights, especially at night. I dislike groups of white people dressed as, and acting as, these gangster types, even more. Arabs don't bother me.... they can wear turbans into banks if they please. None of them have really done anything to grind my gears as of late.

It's not that I think white people are better at all as a race or as individuals.... they just seem to piss me off less at the moment.

ninja secks

2006-09-08T15:24:00.000+12:00

Sex Ninja Belt Ranking System

Obtain all Belts to become a true master!

White Belt: The easiest belt to attain and thus the lowest rank: Doing a white chick.

Orange Belt: Fucking someone with a little extra flare in their hair. Pound that fiery ginga!

Yellow Belt: Indulging in some authentic Asian.

Green Belt: Deflowering the fresh pastures of a virgin.

Pink Belt: For crushing tonsils. Giving a girl (Kiri I’m looking at you) a full on skull-fuck gets you pink.

Brown Belt: Hitting the dirt track for some backdoor action.

Grey Belt: Hunting down a milf and giving them the young cock they crave.

Black Belt: Dominating the D-floor at KC’s and bringing home the ebony. (fucking a black chick….)

Blue Belt: The woman is unable to walk the next day due to extreme bruising (Schmidt is the ruler of this belt).

Red Belt: A period is no barrier for the owners of this belt.

Purple Belt: For those who like their women in larger sizes, this belt is for any lucky fisherman who lands a fucking manatee.

Haha, Clown and his flat /\/\ade this syste/\/\ up.

beating the system

2006-08-20T23:13:00.000+12:00

if i take an existentialist approach to life between now and the time i die, but then on my deathbed choose the most ratioal religion to put my faith in then im pretty sure id be fine.

people try to justify faith through rationality... with "proofs" of the ressurection of jesus, arguments from design etc, so i see no difference between faith based on rationality and faith as a result of rationality. i cant see myself ever believing in christianity, and dont think the liklihood of its truth is worth gambling on by living a christian life (denying myself most of the things i see as fun.. ecessive drinking, eating,lusting and general humane things aswell as wasting my sundays, talking to boring people, not being able to ridicule people as easily as well as a general loss os respect for my own intelligence by trying to believe something i dont). but by not believing in anything i have no gain in death, whether or not the slight (as i see it) chance of the truth of christianity is true. so there is no point having no faith at all.

so it is rational for me to live mylife existentially doing everything i otherwise wouldnt be able to, and then rationally making the leap of faith as a gamble. i dont see much if ay of a difference (excpet in the ease of doing this) between this rationality faith and the other styles. so its a deathbed conversion for me.until then there is no need to do anything but live how i want. the faith will be just as valid as any of yours, based on self-gain and avoision (to quote kent brockman) of hell, just made in different circumstances.

perhaps (if there is a god and he is the christian one) then my approach wont work. but perhaps neither will yours. but its the only chance i have (if i am wrong) and requires very little self sacrifice. my faith will be real.. i just wont have a justified belief in it... but that is not a fault of mine.

stomach

2006-07-03T11:29:00.000+12:00

My stomach feels like something is ripping it apart from the inside. This is so lame. I better not have fucking apendicitis.

Went skiing all last week. Got back saturday, then worked then got drunk. And tried to knit.

Man this pain sucks I can't be arsed writing any more.

Haha

2006-06-20T18:25:00.000+12:00

Steve just sent me this. Brilliant.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/steveh7/171085722/

Blindspott

2006-06-18T00:07:00.000+12:00

Bought 'End the silence' today, the new Blindspott album. From what I've heard so far (2 or 3 listens) I really like it. I really liked the self titled debut, it's not the sort of music I'd generally buy, but for some reason I could just never stop playing it. And I really like seeing them live. This album so far doesn't disappoint at all - I like it more than Tool's 10,000 days which was the last album I bought.

Went to trivia night last night with McJemimatronasaurus, Dav0d, Jillian, Parents and Aunty/Uncle (not the aunty that hooked up with Charles.. the one who is actually the age of a normal aunty..) Was weird. We were certainly the best team there, but the idiot system gave way too many bonus points for trivialities like best dressed etc, which was lame. Have a bottle of Wild Turkey my nana got me from duty free though, so that ,ade the night more enjoyable.

Getting up for work at 4am this morning, however, was far less enjoyable. And I got my law mark for my opinion this morning too, which I was really pissed off with... 74%, which is a B. That's my lowest mark since my internal International Relations essay like over a year ago. Havn't had a B since then untill now (Had a couple of B+'s, but they arn't too worrying). I know I could have done better too, but meh. Hopefully law gets easier, a 76 and a 74 for my two internals so far is a far cry from my stage1 law marks, yet my stage2 Arts marks have been the same as stage 1 Arts roughly. Hmmm. So a shit start to the day, but at least I finished work early.

For anyone who has seen Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind, would you do such a procedure to yourself? Remove the memories of someone you once loved? Is it better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all, in other words. I mean without the losing of the love the happiness of the love would not mean as much. Like before you go through everything you have a general sort of contentedness, and following the "losing of love" you certainly don't feel as content as you did beforehand. But are you better off? I'm not sure, I always tend to fluctuate between the two.

But I think I would go through with the procedure of memory erasing. When I'm sober I think it would be a good idea. I'm sober as a right this. When drunk I tend to see the benefits of the other side of the argument. Maybe in time the desire to erase the memory of certain people fades. But it would be handy. One of my favourite movies anyway.

Last exam tomorrow, hopefully I manage to get my ass into gear and take my laptop USB to be fixed so I can start playing some serious warcraft too, rather than having to use dads computer. Well, I'm off to watch more Frasier. Niles is such an amazingly good character. He is certainly in my top 5 characters.

I'd have to say that list would include Niles Crane, Homer Simpson, Charles Montgomery Burns, Eric Cartman and George Costanza. Each is brilliant in their own way.

CANCER!!

2006-06-16T00:21:00.000+12:00

Hmm misleading title, I don't have cancer. Yet. I probably will someday though, or something worse, and so will you. haha.

This week has been pretty average. Exam that was postponed on monday they are letting me sit this sunday, so skiing plans arn't fucked, which is good.

Exam that I had on tuesday had all 3 questions that I prepared for, word for word, as so often seems to happen in Arts exams. They don't really seem to hide it, yet idiot students come out complaining about the exam and how hard it was. I managed to remember 29 of the 30 points i had bullet pointed in my outlines, and the remaining point I sort of covered by accident anyway, so should be a decent mark.

Why is everyone all of a sudden complaining about consumerism and materialism? It is so fucking hypocritical.

I realise I am a materialist, and I enjoy living a comfortable life. I don;t see the point of pretending otherwise. It's so fucking ridiculous thinking that one post on your blog complaining about your lifestyle will make you a better person. It's like the people who give $1 a day to a child in Africa, then tell people this, and try to hold it over them as being some sort of amazing altruistic person.

Everyone is selfish, some just wish to hide it more than others. Don't think that because you try to hide it more than me you are better. And if you are going to complain about materialism actually do something about your own situation and give what you don't need to people who do. It really pisses me off.

Had a conversation with Rob the other week about this and it really did make me think. It really does piss me off that people make such paltry contributions to causes and all of a sudden take on a superiority complex thinking they are so much better than the rest of us.

But anyway, I'm going to watch Scrubs, a DVD I hired with money I could have given to other people, but didn't, on my laptop that isn't necessary for my survival. What a terrible person.

Power Cut

2006-06-12T20:41:00.000+12:00

Was reasonably exciting to be at Uni waiting for my 9.30 exam when the city-wide power cut reared it's ugly head at 8.32am this morning.

"More than 700,000 people were affected as power was cut to thousands of homes on top of the hundreds of businesses in the CBD forced to close.
Police described some of Auckland's intersections as "lunacy" as around 300 traffic lights went out just after 8.30am.
Power began to return to parts of the city from 12.40pm."

So we arrived outside the exam room at about 8:50 waiting for the power to come back on, which it didn't. Had to sit around for about an hour waiting till some guy came and told us all exams had been called off for the day, which was a kick in the balls, made all the effort studying, getting out of bed and into the city just to have to do it all again some other day.

Exams rescheduled till the 27th, but I have already booked my skiing holiday for the 26th onwards. Applied to sit it on this sunday, which is the day allocated for people with 'work and overseas travel commitments'. They better fucking let me sit it Sunday or I will be angry.

This was kind of a good thing though, I managed only to get 1 hour sleep last night, was watching House m.d. till 4am, and couldnt sleep. And I only had 1 pen - the power cut happened as I was on my way to usb books to buy a second pen.

Still not sure whether I am glad or not. I mean I would have finished exams by tomorrow afternoor, now I have to wait until Sunday at least, but this will probably be the difference between a B-range and A-range mark for that exam, so each side has it's pros. Hmmm.

80s night

2006-06-11T21:10:00.000+12:00

This is from 80s night at my aunties house on friday. This is me in my Hot 80s clothes with a tracksuited Charles in the background. And the lower one is my in a different pose, with a purple cowboy hatted J-tr0n in the background.

Worked without a hangover for the first time in a long time today. We finished an hour and a half early, which was good. Have an exam at 9 tomorrow morning, so using this time wisely to upload photos and procrastinate.

Lucky for me it is an Arts exam, and so breadth of knowledge is frowned upon. Depth is grudgingly accepted in some cases.

218

2006-06-09T01:15:00.000+12:00

Been studying 218 for a while, for some reason I'm still not tired so guess I mayaswell study since I'll be drinking in 80s clothes for a dress party tomorrow night.

This is a pretty cool argument

Sextus Empiricus -
"Those who claim for themselves to judge the truth are bound to possess a criterion of truth. This criterion, then, either is without a judge’s approval or has been approved. But if it is without approval, whence comes it that it is trustworthy? For no matter of dispute is to be trusted without judging. And if it has been approved, that which approves it, in turn, either has been approved or has not been approved, and so on ad infinitum.
(Against the Logicians, I, § 340-1) "

So basically nothing can be deemed as knowledge, because in order to hold a belief that anything is knowledge, that belief, or the person judging that belief as knowledge would need to be justified itself, and so on. Is it possible maybe that something could ever act as a criterion for which to proclaim anything as knowledge?

Maybe artificial intelligence? Could a perfect mind ever be created? Would a perfect artificial mind need a perfect natural mind to create it? Some say that a perfect effect would have to be the result of a perfect cause, but hmm, perhaps a series or multitude of imperfect causes could result in a perfect effect? Reasonably interesting.

Where does the original criterion for any knowledge come from, and is there any way to avoid circularity? Apparently some people think circularity is fine as long as the circle is big enough. Dunno how that can be justified...

Everything that we end up believing is a result of how we interpret what is around us, yet we all admit to error and imperfection, and the possibility of deception and so forth. The same person, with roughly the same mind, can change beliefs through experience, and it must be external experiences that modify our beliefs. Perhaps ideas have gone through some sort of evolutionary cycle, with the ones most reasonable to human contentment last. Since our minds are so ready to adapt new beliefs and so forth, and cling on to the beliefs of others, possibly it is just that we consider as knowledge the beliefs we have that are most readily acceptable to us. I don't really see how anybody could be sure about any beliefs they have, especially religious ones. Even being religious, surely there must be some fear that you chose the wrong god to bow before? I mean the consequences are dire if so, yet how can you maintain as knowledge that which is doubtable?

I used to think that finding one religion would ease the mind. I don't think it would ease mine completely. I think I will always live in the fear of eternal damnation no matter what I believe, be it agnostic or some organized religion, solely through the thought that I don't know if I could ever fully believe in anything. I could have hope and faith in a particular religion, but that faith is only so far towards relief, and the only thing that can change my own beliefs is external circumstances. I don't have control over whether or not I think I know that a certain religion is the truth, the only thing I could have control over is the faith that I choose to put into a certain religion.

So really, a religion claiming an omnibenevolent, omnipotent God would do more to ease the fears of anyone who put faith in him. And so, all those with faith should not have to live in fear of choosing the wrong God. Such fear is not justifiable when so much is at stake. So anyone who believes they are in a personal relationship therefore should be able to think that their belief in God must count as KNOWLEDGE, which is unjustifiable.

But holding KNOWLEDGE in this seems to be inconsistant with free will. If there was an argument that could result in the knowledge of God, then such an argument would mean that noone would have the will to be able to not believe in God. So this apparently is not an option.

Yet, due to the fact that we have no criterion for truth, and no reliable interpretive skills of our world that are completely accurate, we could never constitute such belief as knowledge. This seems annoying. In order to get the personal relationship with God, which seems to entail the knowledge for some that they need not fear the wrath of other deities, as they do not exist, you must first shed the belief that there is no criterion for truth. But to shed this belief, the only way you can do so is through the belief that God and God's word is that criterion. But to believe that presupposes a belief in God, yet free will prevents such a belief being readily available to someone outside of a personal relationship.

It seems pretty circular to me.

Some of this might not be too clear, so ill try summarize my points

1/ We can't be sure that anything we believe in this world is accurate, our minds are not completely reliable towards data-interpretation.
2/ An omnibenevolent omnipotent God would give those who have faith in him ease of mind as to whether or not he had made the right choice, so as to not lose such a relationship.
3/ This ease of mind appears to be a personal relationship, which I think is debatable as to whether or not it constitutes knowledge, but for some apparently it does.
4/ The world gives some people the belief that nothing can be attainable for certain, and without a God there is no criterion of truth, as the search for justification goes on ad infinitum.
5/ In order to have an ease of mind, such a person would need to shed this belief, as a religious skeptic can not live without continual worry about damnation.
6/ To shed this belief provides a presupposed belief in the existence of the God, which we cannot know for certain because of a) our lack of perfect interpretation, and b) his non rationally proved existence.
7/ To become a religious person who believes he has knowledge, you must therefore have not only faith, but also you must shed your sceptical views, yet these views are held externally. they are beliefs that appealed to your sense of reason. And there does not appear to be any argument for the existence of God that compels a sceptic to shed his beliefs. The fact that I hold this belief is not something that I choose to believe, it is just something that I believe. I don't have control over this, i cant tell myself 100 times I dont believe it and then stop believing it.

So basically what I am getting at in this giant ramble is that the only way I could shed my fear of possible damnation is through either a rational argument that I cannot doubt at all, or through some divine intervention SO PROFOUND as to not possibly be a result of interpretive error.

Such a profound event would not involve dreams, feelings of contentment or spaces of good luck etc. Or even a string of good events I prayed for. This could all very very easily be put down to interpretive error, and there would be non reason to constitute such events as knowledge in God. It could make me believe he is more probable etc, but could not constitute knowledge.

Hmmm yeah.

Hume

2006-06-08T19:02:00.001+12:00

Through my browsing the internets for answers to some questions that nothing in the lecture slides seem to answer, came across this...

"The Natural History of Religion is also a history in a sense, though it has been described as "philosophical" or "conjectural" history. It is an account of the origins and development of religious beliefs, with the thinly-disguised agenda of making clear not only the nonrational origins of religion, but also of exposing and describing the pathology of its current forms. Religion began in the postulation, by primitive peoples, of "invisible intelligences" to account for frightening, uncontrollable natural phenomena, such as disease and earthquakes. In its original forms, it was polytheistic, which Hume regards as relatively harmless because of its tolerance of diversity. But polytheism eventually gives way to monotheism, when the followers of one deity hold sway over the others. Monotheism is dogmatic and intolerant; worse, it gives rise to theological systems which spread absurdity and intolerance, but which use reason to corrupt philosophical thought. But since religion is not universal in the way that our nonrational beliefs in causation or physical objects are, perhaps it can eventually be dislodged from human thinking altogether."

Will have to give that a read methinks. Also Jakes has some other book, probably quite conntradictory to this one (knowing it's source) that I need to read.

It appears that the relationship between good warcraft playing and Beer drinking is inversely proportionate. I started last night with a mean winning streak, and ended the night with 5 losses in a row. Oh well.

Back to Hume + Sextus Empiricus. Damn that is one cool name.

wine + beer

2006-06-07T15:29:00.000+12:00

Wine + Beer do not mix. I didn't even drink too much last night by my standards (1 bottle of wine + 3 beers) yet I had a terrible hangover this morning and had to have a semi-forced chuck. Was lame. Taken a few Paracetomol to fix it tho. But yeah, advice to others don't mix beer with red wine in the same night.

So still havn't really done anything except warcraft, study and drinking with pool since I got back to Whangaparaoa last thursday. Has been quite good being inactive. Going to Billy's house tonight for Beer + intensive Warcrafting. We are such cool kids.

Studying for this 218 exam which I have attended 0 tutorials and about 5-6 lectures is pretty weird. Like I'm taking huge gambles by predicting the questions. Most exams I end up doing this, and usually get it right, but have always attended most of the classes and so have a background knowledge to at least save me. Luckily the topics are stuff I can ramble on about, and even stuff that I have been posting/thinking about (ccan we know anything, what constitutes as knowledge etc..). So yeah, will be a tense while just before the exam waiting to see the questions. The past 2 years questions have been pretty random and long/detailed, so this could turn out quite bad... Especially since I get pissed off with anything below A-, this exam has the propensity to give me any grade, which is a feeling I hate.

But meh... life after exams will be sweet - we have booked the week of the 26th to go skiing, and are going to also book the week ending the 16th to go. so 11 or 12 days skiing to make full use of my season pass. And the rest of the time I'm sure will be warcraft and beer related. Need to fix my USB for my laptop though so I don't have to keep fighting with dad for the use of his computer. Stupid computers, always break.

Me skis are uber sexy 1980's Atomic Bionics that my uncle gave me. They are like 2 foot too long for me. Yet they make me the king of the mountain. All i need is a skintight 80s ski costume to completely win skiing.

Cold

2006-06-05T00:49:00.000+12:00

Called in sick for work today, I have had a reasonably smelly cold for the last few days. I was fine enough to work, but I have accumulated like 10 sick days so mayaswell make the most of them. Also I have got back into warcraft, and this gave me more time to play =p.

Came back to my parents house for study leave Thursday night, and since then I pretty much havnt left the house. For every 3 or 4 hours of Warcraft I makre sure to get about an hours study done, and I have been reasonably productive. It helps that I only have 2 exams this semester (Law exams being at the end of the year) and that they are both Arts.

Basically one of my exams is ranting about whether or not knowledge is attainable, and the other exam is ranting about whether or not naotional minoritys and immigrant groups are deserving of any special rights/representation etc. Reasonably interesting, reasonably easy.

Warcraft, however, is far more interesting. The pains of trying to deipher my CD-Key which was written ambiguously onto a scrappy peice of paper was lame. Took me over 100 guesses. And after convincing Jackknife to give me his CD-Key, only to find out he had lost it, and then having to continue guessing mine. But it was all worth it.

Reminds me of the 6th/7th form days when I would come home from school and play Warcraft till the wee hours of the morning and then spend the entire day's school half asleep.

The cold and warcraft have kinda slowed down my drinking, I've only had like 5 or 6 beers since I came back here (You have to drink beer while playing pool), and havn't felt really like drinking more at all. I can see my study leave consisting pretty much solely of Warcraft and Skiing.

The sad thing is that warcraft as a game isnt even that great... It's just so easy to get a competitive thrill out of it. Which is why I keep playing.

Void

2006-05-30T23:57:00.000+12:00

So the last few months I have been filling the void in my life with alcohol.

Don't know how much I want to get to the stage where the only thing I look forward to is the next time I am drinking. I mean already it is easily the highlight of my life, except perhaps for beating people in things. Not sure whether I would rather try find something else to void-fill, live with a void, spend my time waiting in hope for something to perhaps in the future fill said void, or just fill it with alcohol. I mean it works temporarily, but how long will it fill the void, and I am sure new issues will arise? ...

Sobriety is lame in comparison to being drunk. Hangovers are pretty mediocre by now, the body knows how to react.

I dunno, I mean I really do like drinking, and it does for a while solve the worries I have, and it has in no way affected me yet. Perhaps I'll just keep on drinking as I am until something else happens.

The deal we get is pretty average, and alcohol is one of the few things to make it worthwhile. I think that the most worthwhile things I enjoy are Drugs(Alcohol foremost), Music and Sex. Most of the things in my life, when it comes down to it, revolve around them. Getting a high paid job ensures that you have ample security to enjoy the above said hedonistic pleasures. They are the things that are within my control to acquire, and which i derive enjoyment from. Thinking is pretty cool, but it often isn't enjoyable, it's more a sense of fulfillment and is a necessity, you can't ignore what is going on inside your head. Maybe cutting down on the alcohol isn't a good idea yet. I dunno, I'll see how my hangover is tomorrow.

Hopefully non-existant :)

This rambling really didnt manage to clear my mind at all, but again is another issue on which to fence-sit, and realize it is something I probably should do, yet don;t have the desire to. Oh well. Fuckit

email

2006-05-29T23:50:00.000+12:00

Wine is my new love. Red Wine. Just had a bottle. And a lumberjack slam.

But anyway...

this is an extract from an email i just sent to a certain smelly korean, in reply to one of her blogspots re: can we ever know the truth.

Personally I don't think I or anyone can KNOW an objective truth.

"I really want to find something that can at least affirm to me that Jesus is more likely than not the son of God. I mean so many rational people believe it that it could be true.... I don't think I need it to be necessarily true. I dont think anything can be objectively true. All I want is for me to believe, on the balance of probabilities, that it is likely. That would be enough to be at least a starting stone.

I think I could become a Christian, yet not a church-going, Homo-hating, lovey-dovey (appearing to others anyway) christian. Just a be who I am and realize that this is a better meaning than agnosticism type christian, and put my faith into it from there. Not go to church and socialize with the people I hate, who are so fucking condescending, think they are so right and better than everyone else yet hide it behind a false "love" scheme dickhead type christians. Just put my faith into something, rather than nothing. I can;t see anything better than christianity to start with.

I will never believe I know it to be true though. Nothing could make me believe that.
And if I cannot convince myself as to jesus being likely the son of god, then it is all existentialism from there. Find a meaning for my life and then live that till I die. Truth really is too hard to find, and faith is a gamble. not sure if it one i am willing to take.

I dunno, it is something I have been tossing up for a while now. It's kind of a pascal's wager type equation, yet it can only work for yourself. That is why I need proof of Jesus' divinity.
I can;t bring myself into a blind faith. Yet I can substitute an agnostic faith which leads me nowhere, for a sorta christian faith that has potential. If I can convince myself."

I am sorta tossing up, at the moment, between Christian and Agnostic existentialist type doctrine thingees. I mean there are no benefits to being an agnostic. It sucks balls. The christianity version of existentialism, you realise you cannot know for sure, yet you hold faith in a better meaning. It seems reasonable, as a starting point.

Yet before I could ever commit to that, I would need to believe, on the balance of probabilities, that it is more likely than not true.

I always held my criterion of truth to be almost absolute. That is pointless, nothing is ever going to change that way, and I would always be a fucking miserable misanthropic agnostic pessimist. So now I'm just going to have to convince myself on the balance of probabilities. Which I must say i am NOWHERE near doing.

So this isn't some coming-of-age I am now a believer type post. It is just that I don't think in this world we can ever know for sure what is true. But that I would rather have faith in something rather than nothing. So Ima try find something to believe in, whether it is a this-wordly thing that makes life more bearable, or a supernatural being that I can convince myself is probable.

Well, I am off to sleep.

Jesus

2006-05-28T12:30:00.000+12:00

For those of you who read this, and are christians, what makes you believe that Jesus was the son of God? What historical evidence leads you to the conclusion?

If it does not matter whether or not someone leads a good life, as Rob seems to think, but only that they put their faith in this person, who apparently died for our sins yada yada, and if we must realise our weaknesses and imperfections etc, and that for some reason his dying allows all this to be fine, so long as we have faith in him, then what evidence suggests that he really is the son of God? I mean it's a pretty good selling point if he isn't the son of God, he gets you an almost free ride to eternal bliss in exchange for a bit of faith, obviously converting people to hold such a belief wouldn't have been too hard. So where is the evidence for the truth of this?

I mean I can realise the flaws of humanity and myself without having faith in some fantastical superbeing. Surely to justify this faith in him there would need to be conclusive evidence as to his message?

I don't see why people should have to go to so much work to find God, and why people justify this because it will "mean much more that way"... I mean I havn't been presented with any evidence that convinces me, (someone without prior beliefs and presuppositions) that Jesus was the son of God. It seems stupid, because if I can realise my flaws, why do I have to realize them in a more specific less accessible way? Not that I really know where to look for an objective view on the matter, anyone know a good source?

Interesting quote from my philosophy 218 lecture....

"It is, of course, true that we must believe in the existence of God because of Holy Scripture, and conversely, that we must believe Holy Scripture because it comes from God... But this argument cannot be put to nonbelievers because they would judge it to be circular."
(Descartes' letter to the Sorbonne)

Misanthropy

2006-05-24T03:31:00.000+12:00

It's strange that the only time my feelings of misanthropy go away are when I am drunk.

"Misanthropy is a hatred or distrust of the human race; or, a disposition to dislike and mistrust other people. It is derived from Greek, a combination of the prefix 'mis-' (meaning "bad, wrong,") and anthropos (meaning "man, human being"), thus referencing defective mankind. A misanthrope is a person who who hates or distrusts mankind.
It should be noted that misanthropy does not necessarily imply an inhumane, antisocial, or sociopathic attitude towards humanity."

I guess I'm never fully misanthropic, but when sober I often tend towards it severely. I have been happier since realising this. I definitely distrust mankind. Whether or not I hate it is open to question.

Been drinking with Ryan for a while, just had the old drunken-night-finishing feed at Dennys.

I wish I could be as happy when I'm sober as I am when I am drunk. Sobriety really is so mediocre in comparison.

Music is worse, peoples faults are more glaring, especially your own. You feel less optimistic. You feel less social. You look back at what could have been and what is, rather than looking ahead at what could be. The simpsons toasted alcohol as being the cause of, and solution to, all of lifes problems. I think maybe life is the problem, and alcohol is the solution.

If it wasnt for the need to sleep, fund alcohol, preserve some sort of liver function, and have hangovers, I would spend my entire life drunk. But thats obviously implausible.

It's not just other people I distrust, it is myself. I hate that I am a selfish fuck, but I don't really care that I am. It's not something I see a need to change. I don't know how I feel about this. There are a shitload of things in this world I love, moreso when under the influence. But there are so many things I hate as well. People I hate. Actions I hate, Events I hate. Nations I hate. Movements I hate. I don't really know where this post is headed, or why I decided to start ranting, but I really do think it is sad that most times in my life are spent looking forward to the next time where I can escape reality.

Now for the drunken slumber, watching simpsons repeats till I sleep, and awake with a dry throat and hangover. Joy awaits!

Stuff

2006-05-22T18:44:00.000+12:00

Most of this is just clips from an msn chat I had with Stace last night on a few topics. Some of it doesnt flow too well because of stuff I've left out but meh, I'm not posting everything from the conversation. I've tried to touch it up to make it sorta coherent..

Predeterminism
stace says:anyways. i dont think its god that wants to send you to hell. i mean. this is my understanding of his outside-of-time omnipotence, but every moment since the beginning of time till the end of the universe, is the present to him. its not like you're born destined to go to hell while XX down the road was born destined to go to heaven, but its that he knows what decisions you're going to make
stace says:and he knows whether you are going to heaven or hell.
...
Pie. says:if i want to do an experiment, yet i have complete control over it and know what will happen with 100% certainty, and i force an action that will cause a reaction, how could i blame the reaction?
Pie. says:our life just seems an experiment by god in which he knows the reaction of every action and he has control over the the cause of such actions. if he knows the resultant of our free will he is also the cause.

(maybe that doesn't get my point across, Stace couldn't see it from that, so if you didnt get it here perhaps this will clear it up a bit)

Pie. says:ok imagine you are God
Pie. says:you control the creation of us and the creation of our world, and our reactions within the world. you apparently know what we will choose. you know what reactions will follow by predeterminism. you send to hell all people who do not react in a way 'x'. you knew exactly who would choose x, yet you blame those who did not.if you knew beforehand, then it was not a willed choice
Pie. says:he knew what i would choose before i was born
Pie. says:that is not will
Pie. says:i cant will something before i exist
Pie. says:its reactionary
Pie. says:yet according to predeterminism my will has always existed for God knew it always, outside of time.

Predeterminism, for me, really does involve a logical contradiction with the OmniGod (omni - potent, benevolent and scient). If we have free will, yet this will have been known before we came into existence as God is apparently outside time and therefore knows what will happen, then our will precedes our existence. This seems to me logically implausible....

Ethical Egoism
Pie. says:and the only thing i really care about is what's easier or better for me
Pie. says:even for christians, they have the self-interested goal of a boarding pass to heaven
Pie. says:society works because of reciprocity, which is a self-interested goal. This is why I think we arnt over-selfish, giving to others makes us feel good, helping others does too
stace says:yeah isn't it terrible how its true
Pie. says:but you see the only reason we view self-interest as sad is because of how society has shaped us
Pie. says:Christians want us to believe that our natural state is bad, that self-interest is not what we should be motivated by but i think it is our natural tendancy.
Pie. says:if i have $2 and i want to buy a $2 drink, but a friend asks me if he can borrow $1, i will add up the value from the drink, and the value of how this will affect my friendship with the person before i make a decision. if i really respect their friendship, and this will make them happier and more disposed to like me, i will give them the dollar, not because of a fundamental desire to be a good person, but more likely through self-interest. I dont see why i should be ashamed of that. The reason I feel shame over it, I think, is because of living in a society so attuned to christian morality. But I see self-interest as a natural condition..
stace says:um. do you think that there can be a truly altruistic act? i mean..people like mother teresa were amazing and did amazing things but she was doing more than just helping for the sake of doing it. she would have a motivation. most people don't have the same sort of active zeal and commitment. i guess.
Pie. says:I think maybe it is indoctrination against self-interest? perhaps that is altruism?
not that i can KNOW her motivation. just a guess. the problem with ethical theories is that you can never know anothers motivation for sure, you can only know yours, and even then you perhaps dont know the true motivation. we arn't that smart as to how we work, and the processes in which our minds make decisions... we often deceive ourselves I think...
stace says:um. have you ever considered that the guilt from not being as giving might be some sort of inherent mechanism to prevent people from becomng overly self interested?

Which made me think... how can we tell whether the guilt is socially conditioned or inherent? How do you seperate the two? Can something become so conditioned that it becomes inherent? Evolutionary lack of self-interest? Perhaps the roots of self-interest remain, but we are learning to move away from it by having lived in a communal society for so long? It's interesting. when you do an act, even if you think it is altruistic, do you also do it for a sense of self-benefit first? I don't know anymore.

On other people's beliefs
Pie. says:they can believe in whatever makes their life more bearable i guess. as long as they dont act condescendingly towards me and my beliefs. thats when i get really fucked off lol.
hm blind faith riles me up too, but i wish it didnt, i mean if you blindly believe in something is it my place to correct you? i know it isnt but i cant stop myself from trying to. especially if that belief gives you security, i don't really have a right to intervene unless i come preaching a better way which will definitely promote a better life do i?. i dont know if i have a BETTER way, just a way that i believe is more correct. And i just cant stop myself from trying to intervene and argue though...
stace says:blind according to your standards. what if that person had all they needed through a religious experience? like someone who truly had a religious experience would probably get riled up at your views.
Pie. says:yeah of course its according to my standards, but so many people just dont question their beliefs. chucky was telling me that he thought it was a sin to question them before...and thats how many christians believe.
Pie. says:by blind faith thats what i mean, i dont see all faith as blind. i realise some people have what they hold to be a true belief, and they interpret experiences as being 100% Gods influence. thats not blind faith, it is either an actual religious experience or an interpretive error. i dont believe i would have the skills to interpret anything supernatural with 100% certainty
unless it was so profound that i could convince others of it. I just dont think I could justify it.
i have a different set of judgment criteria. All that really matters I guess is that you can justify it to yourself. but other people have different standards to me i know...
Pie. says:hm the view i have at the moment is more not that theism is not justifiable, but more that agnosticism is justifiable
Pie. says:i beleive both are justifiable to an extent
Pie. says:but i couldnt justify myself ever as a theist i dont think.

Yeah so that's where my thoughts are at the moment.

Schellenberg seems to think that a non-resistant non-believer promotes that divine hiddenness denies the existence of an omni-God. I'm still not too sure of this. If you don't resist God (as a seeking, unwilling agnostic), and cannot bring yourself to believe in his existence through reason(and thus wont make the "blind leap") then why does God not seek to form the relationship? I dont believe that would be a case of giving us heaven on a silver platter. Many Agnostics and Atheists seek answers long and hard, and God never reaches out to them. This is where my problem with hiddennes + the OmniGod comes in... if he was all-loving and all-powerful, why would he not seek to form a relationship with all those who are not hostile to the idea? I think the fact that agnosticism can, to me, be justified, does go a long way towards my believing in the unlikeliehood of a God.

Alcohol

2006-05-20T03:05:00.000+12:00

I have actually managed to get drunk every night this week.

On monday I had a half bottle (small 250ml) bottle of Rum and a few Double Browns (Dooblay Bron's with a french accent if you are saying it out loud) in order to reward myself for public law study.

Tuesday I did the same, yet did so whie watching House and Boston Legal, my 2 new favourite shows. Man how I'd love to be a Denny Crane/House hybrid.

Wednesday we went to Mole's and had a jolly good drinking. 2/3 of the way through a litre bottle of Heaven Hill bourbon.

Thursday I rewarded myself for studying throughout the day by drinking most of the rest of the bourbon while watching Alexander. The movie was so bad it was good. Not much I can say on it that hasn't already been said... But welsh/Scottish/Vampire accents all in Greece? With long flowing locks of blonde hair? wtf?

And tonight we saw the da vinci code at berkely, and me and charles snuck drinks in, then followed it up with post-drinks at Moles.

Saw the movie earlier in the day with n1 + others instead of going to an Arts lecture, it was pretty meh. The book was better. I know it's not a literary masterpeice or revelationary book or anything, but it's a page-turner and I couldn't put it down. The movie dragged on the first time. The second time I was just waiting for it to end. Spent over half the movie scuffling with Charles over the handrest that was inbetween us, whilst laughing at the similarity between the shocking haircuts of Tom Hanks and Darren (I swear it's the same hair). But it wasn't a bad movie. Just average, and could have been made better. I like Tom Hanks, he played the role ok... but it could have definitely been cast better. Gandalf the Gay was good as Teabing however. Silas was terrible. I laughed at him.

Tomorrow it is study during the day, and then my aunty is having some party at her new flat at night. So 6 days drinking in a row. Yet this week has probably been the most productive week of my uni semester, despite the constant intake of alcohol. And my body feels fine. I wish I had a few spare livers for later-life, however. Some spare lungs would come in handy too. Hmmm. Meh, I'll slow down when I leave uni, and the body can repair itself then.

Just like future self can pay off my debts. I love that guy. He's probably going to end up hating me.

Awake

2006-05-19T00:37:00.000+12:00

Why is it that the only nights I have trouble getting to sleep are before 3am work, and the once per fortnightly time that I have a compulsory 8am tutorial the follow day? Terrible.

Anyway, the fact that one person I know has a testicle infection (it's reasonably common knowledge as to who, but I'm not gonna post his/her name here, I'm sure he/she doesn't want it published online :p Yes, girls can have testicle infections. It was on House. She got testicular cancer.Well she wasn't technically a She, but there are many girls I know who could, as far as I know, have testicles. And perhaps one of them has the infection.) made me wonder why would an all-loving God inflict such an event?

I mean droughts in Africa, starvation in Africa, births in South Africa.... all terrible events, but perhaps there is a hidden purpose. But a testicular infection? Where is the purpose there? Where is the love? How could you believe simultaneously in testicle infections and God?

Well, anyway, off to lay in bed and probably not get to sleep for a few hours.

"I've learned that life is one crushing defeat after another until you just wish flanders was dead."

I think I've posted this following quote before, but it's become especially relevant to my thoughts recently... And I just re-read it in google while searching for the above quote.

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen Roberts

So if you can't provide convincing arguments both for your God AND the non-existence of all others, how do you hold your belief? And if you have the answers to the above two questions, please don't keep them to yourselves, the answers would be rather interesting/beneficial to me and the rest of humanity.

Law vs Arts

2006-05-16T18:33:00.000+12:00

Studying for Public Law test at the moment. (The test in next Tuesday.. I think)

A thought just came to my mind, and I wondered whether I prefer the Law or the Arts part of my conjoint. Both disciplines have several pros and cons. I'll weigh them up. Basically I'll do it ala Colonel Cathcart from Catch 22, and fork out the Feathers in the Caps and Black Eyes for each

Law is awesome because.... (Feathers in Law's Cap)
1/ What we learn is extremely interesting, and relevant to life in our society.
2/ The challenge of a hard, work-intensive degree keeps me interested.
3/ Everyone in my class has to have a GPA of at least 6.2 (unless there on a quota), and so stupid questions are few and far between. People there actually pay attention too, and don't anger me so much.
4/ The degree is practical, I am pretty much guarenteed a decent paying job upon completion.
5/ The more I do law, the more I want to become a lawyer. Starting the degree I really wasn't sure, but a law degree leads to quite a few oppurtunities, especially with the Arts added to it.
6/ There are quite a few characters in my lectures (Paul wearing his suits, Bruce Harris with his awesome dress style, the Dude who always asks questions that shows he has done superogatry reading just to look smart) that keep me entertained during my lectures.
7/ The assignments and tests are very challenging, and completing them is much more rewarding.
8/ You get a sort of respect for doing the degree (as opposed to Arts, where you are treated with disdain. I never ever introduce myself to someone as an Arts student...)

Arts is awesome because... (Feathers in Arts' cap)
1/ It makes me feel really smart because the class average very seldom approaches my marks
2/ Philosophy texts and ideas can be very, very interesting, and without being required to read some of the stuff I have, I never would have in my spare time. The texts also lead me on to further reading.
3/ The Philosophy department is cool, and the tutors are interesting enough and on the whole likeable.
4/ There is a lot less work involved, and therefore more time for drinking. You can finish an assignment in a night, easily.

And for the Cons...

Law is pretty lame because.. (Law's Black eyes)
1/ I have to put a shitload of work in, and therefore lose sleep
2/ Tutorials are compulsory, and at 8am or 5pm
3/ Plenty of arrogant people in my classes, although I don't really mind arrogance as long as it is justified.... so this is only a minor black eye.
4/ assignments take a long time, and if you get behind it is very hard to catch up.
5/ You have to read a shitload of boring, 10 page cases to get the points, which are usually only one paragraph.

Arts is pretty lame because.. (Arts' Black eyes)
1/ You get called an Arts student
2/ You have idiots in your class/tutorial asking idiot questions that make you want to not go to the lecture out of rage.
3/ There is little motivation to do the work... you can make stuff up and get even better marks usually.
4/ The chances of getting a job anywhere decent with an Arts degree are very low. The degree is pretty much solely for interest, unless you go on to do postgrad.
5/ The characters in Arts classes are more annoying than humourous. Many many pseudo-intellectuals.

I am pretty sure I much prefer Law to Arts, despite having perhaps favouring philosophy slightly (out of interest alone). However, I really am glad that I did both degrees, they compliment each other pretty well. Law seems to be a lot of hard work, and isnt as immediately interesting, and is a lot more work, but i still find myself enjoying it a lot more. And Arts is interesting, without being arduous, so as long as I dont really go to many lectures or tutorials for it, and take it solely for interest, I find it to be good. This probably won't interest anyone reading this, as I'm sure none of you are considering choosing between a Law degree and an Arts degree, but meh, I felt like analysing the situation.

Just never refer to me as an Arts student, k thanks.

The Outsider (L’Étranger)

2006-05-15T00:38:00.000+12:00

Spent the last few hours reading The Outsider by Albert Camus. (Stuart Gilbert translation).

These extracts are taken from a conversation between a chaplain and Meursault, who is awaiting his execution.

"And his voice was quite steady when he said: 'Have you no hope at all? Do you really think that when you die you die outright, and nothing remains?'
I said: 'yes'
He dropped his eyes and sat down again. He was truly sorry for me, he said. It must make like unbearable for a man, to think as I did."

"'No! No! I refuse to believe it. I'm sure you've often wished there was an after-life.'
Of course I had, I told him. Everybody has that wish at times. But that had no more importance than wishing to be rich, or to swim very fast, or to have a better-shaped mouth. It was in the same order of things...he cut in with a question. How did I picture my life after the grave?
...'A life in which I can remember this life on earth. That's all I want of it.'
But, apparently, he had more to say on the subject of God. I went close up to him and made a last attempt to explain that I'd very little time left, and I wasn't going to waste it on God."

"Then, I don't know how it was, but something seemed to break inside me, and I started yelling at the top of my voice. I hurled insults at him, I told him not to waste his rotten prayers on me; it was better to burn than to disappear. I'd taken him by the neckband of his cassock, and, in a sort of ecstasy of joy and rage, I poured out on him all the thoughts that had been simmering in my brain. He seemed so cocksure, you see. And yet none of his certainties was worth one strand of a woman's hair. Living as he did, like a corpse, he couldn't even be sure of being alive. It might look as if my hands were empty. Actually, I was sure of myself, sure about everything, far surer than he; sure of my present life and the death that was coming. That, no doubt, was all I had; but at least that certainty was something I could get my teeth into- just as it had got its teeth into me. I'd been right, I was still right, I was always right. I'd passed my life in a certain way, if I'd felt like it. I'd acted thus, and I hadn't acted otherwise; I hadn't done x, whereas I'd done y or z. And what did that mean? That all the time, I'd been waiting for this present moment, for that dawn, tomorrow's or another day's, which was to justify me. Nothing, nothing had the least importance, and I knew quite well why."

"It was as if that great rush of anger had washed me clean, emptied me of hope, and, gazing up at the dark sky spangled with its signs and stars, for the first time, the first, I laid my heart open to the beningn indifference of the universe." To feel it so like myself, indeed so brotherly, made me realize that I'd been happy, and that I was happy still. For all to be accomplished, for me to feel less lonely, all that remained was to hope that on the day of my execution there should be a huge crowd of spectators and that they should greet me with holws of execration."

So, if you view the world just as people serving death sentences, and hold the only real things to be those which we experience physically, should your life really, as the Chaplain says, be unbearable?

Meursault is right, he is absolutely certain of his life, and that he will die. How is the chaplain so sure of what is to follow? If you know you have your life, and that you will die, then surely you should make the most of that life?

People always seem to think that the pursuit of God and religion are the most important things in life, and I've often considered myself to hold such a view - I have always worried most over the fact of nothingness following death. But if you can actually see the plausibility of nothingness, and believe it to be likely, then why waste time on God? If we are all leading death sentences, should we really have to wait until the end to come to a realisation on the matter?

So if I see the world as meaningless, which as time goes on and as I fail to see a meaning I am more inclined to do, should it be that instead of trying to find someone elses meaning (organised religion) I create a meaning of my own? People take solace in the fact that they can attribute the meaning of the world to a God. I would like that solace. However, I don't think I could ever hold such a belief. Trying to get one would, it seems, just be a failure, a pointless endeavour, and a waste of the time that I do have before my end. So in seeing the meaningless nature of the universe, and coming to terms with it, would surely be a more suitable approach than seeking for something I don't think I could ever find.

To seek to enjoy the time I have before death, creating my own meaning from that, rather than trying to trick myself into believing there is a reason for everything. Surely a belief in the need for a meaning would be a prerequisite for undertaking a search for a specific meaning. And I can't see the need for a meaning to life, and I certainly don't see any specific meaning that other attribute to their life as convincing.

But... to hold these views I would perhaps need to be sure that there is no meaning. And just like I can't believe that there surely is a meaning, I can't be sure that there ie surely no meaning. When I look at the stars and the universe, I don't see a need for meaning. But also I don't see the need for a lack of meaning. So maybe I'll just take a sceptical approach and withold judgment for the time being. Try create a meaning for myself on the presumption that there is probably no meaning to the universe, but I really should be open-minded as to the possibility of there being some specific meaning. I don't, when contemplating the possibility of there being no meaning, feel at one with the universe. I don't feel that a man's life and the universe, both having no meaning, are "brotherly" as Meursault does. But upon imminant death would I hold such a connection? I don't know. Christians seem to feel the opposite of Meursault, a brotherly connection with the universe knowing that they both have meaning. The fact that both groups seem absolutely content suggests to me that there is nothing offensive in creating your own meaning, as holding a meaning gives assurance, even if that meaning is a recognition of the complete lack of a meaning.

Here are three entries from wikipedia regarding existentialism

Atheistic Existentialism
Sartre's dictum, "Existence precedes and rules essence", is generally taken to mean that there is no pre-defined essence to humanity, except that which people make for themselves. Since Sartrean existentialism does not acknowledge the existence of a God, or of any other determining principle, human beings are free to act as they choose; his above mentioned essay is the most programmatic and straightforward statement of this principle. Even if an individual believes that he has an essence -- such as a soul or rationality or a psychological type -- that essence is a choice that he is making rather than something pre-existing that is imposed on him.

Christian Existentialism
In contrast to Sartre's atheism stands Kierkegaard's (5 May 1813 – 11 November 1855) Christian existentialism which, according to Kierkegaard, was inspired by Socrates. He never referred to himself as an existentialist, but rather as "the unique individual". Focused on the relationship between the self and God, Kierkegaard neither posited a proof for, nor thought it possible to prove the existence of God. However, he argued that an individual could, despite one's doubt, have faith that God exists and that God is good. This leap of faith was for Kierkegaard a choice that an individual must make in defining his or her life. The leap of faith signifies an individual's choice to embrace meaning in life, a meaning that is beyond individual (subjective) and external (objective) truth.
As with atheistic existentialism, Kierkegaard's Christian existentialism does not impose a reality or meaning on the individual; rather, the individual makes the choice to take meaning in life and to define his or her life. The idea that the individual is a paradox of abstract and concrete: faith and its opposite, despair. Kierkegaard wrote that the individual person is infinite in depth, and ultimately, "subjectivity is truth" and "truth is subjectivity".

Agnostic Existentialism
The third class of existentialism is commonly misconstrued as the simplest and "safest" philosophy to adapt: embrace life for what it is (whatever that may be). The agnostic existentialist makes no claim to know, or not know, if there is a "greater picture" in play; rather, he or she simply recognizes that the greatest truth is that which he or she chooses to act upon. Like Christian existentialists, the agnostic holds that existence is subjective. To the agnostic existentialist, however, the act of finding knowledge of the existence of God has little value (to him or her), and thus is left for others to discover.

Hmm this is quite a long ramble, and is quite disjointed, but I think I get my point across. I found the book to be really interesting/eye-opening, and am trying to work out where my thoughts on these issues stand at the moment. I think Agnostic Existentialism is where I would place myself at the moment. hmm.

Thoughts?

Hot Bitch!

2006-04-29T14:22:00.000+12:00

Havn't updated for ages, but I'm meant to be writing an essay, so I guess I'll procrastinate...

Here's a hot bitch from Mole's crossdressing party.

I havn't ordered my top albums for ages, so I think I might give it a go (top25). 2 albums per band so it's not flooded by pumpkins, radiohead, floyd etc..

1/ The Smashing Pumpkins - Siamese Dream
2/ Pink Floyd - Wish you were here
3/ Radiohead - OK Computer
4/ The Smashing Pumpkins - Mellon Collie and the infinite sadness
5/ Pink Floyd - Dark side of the Moon
6/ The Shins - Oh, Inverted world
7/ Radiohead - The Bends
8/ The Arcade fire - Funeral
9/ Tool - Aenima
10/ Neutral Milk Hotel - In the aeroplane over the sea
11/ Elliott Smith - Either/Or
12/ Dream Theater - Metropolis Pt. 2: Scenes from a memory
13/ Dead Kennedy's - Fresh Fruit for Rotting Vegetables
14/ Nick Drake - Pink Moon
15/ My Bloody Valentine - Loveless
16/ Nine Inch Nails - The Downward Spiral
17/ The Beach Boys - Pet Sounds
18/ Pixies - Doolittle
19/ The Shins - Chutes too Narrow
20/ Sigur Ros - ( )
21/ System of a Down - Toxicity
22/ Iron Maiden - The Number of the beast
23/ The Beatles - Seargent peppers lonely hearts club band
24/ Nirvana - Nevermind
25/ Blind Melon - Blind Melon

Hmm the order is a little messy, forgot a couple of albums until near the middleish, but meh.

#10 certainly might end up going higher - downloaded it a few days ago and its the only thing I've been lsitening to. Right I guess I'll get back to my essay ...

"Discuss the view that the difference between Hobbes’s radical state of nature and Locke’s radical state of nature follows from their views of human nature, with Locke seeing people as basically decent and Hobbes seeing them as basically nasty. "

Fun Fun. Post your top albums in comments if you end up reading this. (I'm guessing no-one really checks here much anymore since I never update).

lumberjack slam

2006-04-05T03:46:00.000+12:00

3:45 am. Just had a lumberjack slam at dennys with ryan. was so good. had tea with it too.

Bourbon wins.

fucking dreams

2006-03-29T11:25:00.000+12:00

I wish I could control the subject matter of my dreaming.It is so painful to wake up from a dream where you were back when you were happy before your life got shat on, and then realize that it was only a dream. Why does the subconscious not just update itself and realize everything that has happened has happened, and can't be taken back?

Most nights I seem to dream about either
a) Stace never went, everything was back how it used to be
b) For Some reason she comes back, and then we either get back together, or she has completely changed and it is really awkward; or
c) She says some stuff in an email/msn/phone convo (from Korea) that really pisses me off.

It is so stupid, the last 3 or so weeks, I have learnt to deal with everything that happened. Its only when I am dreaming that all of this happens, and it is completely out of my control. And then waking up is just so arse. As you can probably tell I just had one of these lame dreams, and have just woken up. Shit start to the day, Now I am angry.

Goodbye Mohawk.

2006-03-19T19:18:00.000+12:00

Hello Shaved head.

Computer Games

2006-03-16T15:33:00.000+13:00

Man how I miss gaming.

Last night me and Ryan started playing Civilization 4 (hotseat multiplayer) at about 9pm, armed with 2 pizzas, 2 packs of ciggarettes, 1 litre 43% bottle of Wild Turkey, 1 bottle of dry ginger ale and 1 bottle of coke. Everything was consumed, we finished our last drink at around 5:30 am.

9 hours of drinking, smoking and computer gaming was just such a cool, geeky, fun experience that I miss so much. Maybe I will get back into Warcraft or something.

Tomorrow is St. Patricks Day, last year it was one of the best drinking days of the year so I have high expectations for tomorrow. Charles will hopefully get excessively drunk and do humorous, stupid things for the most of the evening. Yeah.

Monday

2006-03-06T20:36:00.000+13:00

So, starting this post, it is 8:37 pm monday night. I went to shads from 5-7pm, had a couple of jugs. Came home, and Ryan wasnt here, so I have started to drink alone. This is the first time I have been drunk and kept drinking by myself. It really is a good way to clear your thoughts.

Anyway, The first week of Uni was really good. I am glad with all of the courses I have chosen. Phil 218, Problems in Epistemology looks really interesting, The lecturer I think will be very intersting. With my ongoing slide towards skepticism, I think that it will be intrigueing to read what other skeptics have written, as I am sure they have expressd many of the thoughts I feel, but more eloquently.

Law is going pretty much as expected, everything is relatively interesting, but I can tell it is going to be a long haul, with lots of work throughout the year.

At the moment I am lsitening to my playlist of depressing music, yet for the first time in a long while I am actually relatively upbeat. there are a lot of circumstances that have gone into the relative decline into temporary depression, yet I think I actually do feel optimistic at this time.

On thursday night me Charles and Ryan went to the Kings arms to see Turnah Breaks (sp.?), and that realy was a changing point in my attitude.

Well yeah this is all pretty much drunken rambling that bears no interest for anyone bar me, so I guess I will jsut stop and publish this post.

University Tomorrow

2006-02-26T21:40:00.000+13:00

Feels like Summer School has just ended, and Semester One starts tomorrow. Will be pretty sweet, I'm looking forward to most of my papers (Public law seeming to be the exception). Went to Law Orientation on friday - pretty much the people I expected to see there (the ones answering every question in class with a condescending grin towards the others) were there. I know only two people in stage two law, so I guess I will have to make some new friends there - friends who take good notes. Summer school was awesome, it will be weird going back to Uni and having the campus so packed with people in comparison to the quiet times of the last couple of months.

Going to Blindspott at Shadows tomorrow night - hopefully they play a better set than they did at Big Day Out...

I am Sunburnt as a motherfucker at the moment, we had finals day for Summer Soccer today. Haha we didn't get the wooden spoon in our grade as expected, we finished the day with our first win of the second half of the season - a 10-2 pwning. Yeah but I have insane burn lines around my sock-line, stubbies-line, shirt arms-line and shoulder-line. And we have nothing in the house like Aloe Vera or anything to soothe it, So yeah. Funtimes.

In the last few days I have been experimenting with how to put up my hair - and have settled on the Egg Whites / Hairspray combo. The problem is that it takes two people and a hairdrier to do it, so can only really do it when I am in Whangaparaoa. Will get mum to put it up for me tomorrow. Today the egg whites all came out at the beach when we went swimming after soccer. Had white thingees in my hair haha.

Reminder to self : you are working both days this weekend.

Dark Side of The Moon

2006-02-22T23:48:00.000+13:00

Just watched the "classic albums" episode featuring Dark Side of The Moon on C4. I really can't describe in words how this album makes me feel, it has always had a sad yet hopeful feeling that I get from it. The themes and lyrics are so pessimistic and cynical, yet they are expressed in such a melodic, uplifting way.

Ever since I saw a brief segment of Rod Donald's funeral on the news, where they played "Time" in the background, the song has often sent a chill down my spine. I think if I died I would like this album played at my funeral.

I wonder if it's just me, but for most songs that I know well, they each have a particular event associated with them. I think that perhaps the event with the most significance that happened at the same time the song was playing is the event that sticks in my mind. Each time I hear the song, it reminds me of the event.

The first song that I really have a distinct memory that I can relate to, is the song "life", by some random pop artist. "life, oh life, oh liiife oh life". Yeah you would probably know it if you heard it. I am guessing it is called life. That's the only word I can remember from it. Yet I remember listening to it on the plane to Bali in form1 when I first went there. Was such a nice holiday, everything was so amazing, yet whenever I think of any part of the holiday the song "life" comes to mind. And whenever I hear that song I get a smile, just thinking about the times in the sun, markets and beaches.

The last six months have really been quite influential on my life. There are so many songs that I associate with my time with Stacey, since at the times we listened to them I was having such an amazing time. It's so hard listening to Dark Side of The Moon at the moment. It really does just remind me of so many good times. Afternoons we spent together with this album on repeat in the background, especially the first time, when she didnt know the album. Yeah it really does make me sad.

I havn't even tried listening to Wish you were here yet. The combination of the above reasons for DSoTM, the fact that I gave her the album for christmas, and the relevance of the lyrics, especially to the title track, make it pretty daunting.

But the more I listen to the music that gives me these feelings, the better I feel. It feels like it is sort of acting to help me get over it. The songs bring out the thoughts that I have been trying to keep inside me, and make me address them. Initially each song does bring me the happy memories, which in turn makes me regret that they will never be repeated. But I don't think that I want these songs to be associated with anything else. It really was a good period of my life, which I will always look back on fondly.

And just like the fact that "life" will for me, always be associated with Bali, I am sure many of these songs will always remind me of the times we had together. But as I do get over what happened, which will happen gradually (each day does get a fuckload better than the last), the songs will give me hope again. I know that the lull is only temporary, and that everything does work in a cycle. Nothing would seem as great unless you had pain to relate it to. The fact that I do have this pain is just part of a process. So yeah, the "sad yet hopeful" feeling that I have always associated to this album in particular, really has become intensified.

Yeah, this is all pretty emo, but it does make me feel better to get out what I have to say, and not being a conversationalist (this might not be a word, but I am sure you can work out what I mean by it), typing it out seems the best way to go. Maybe I will listen to Wish you were here tomorrow.

OK Moving on...

2006-02-21T13:11:00.000+13:00

first semester I am taking these papers....

PHIL 205 (15.0 points)
Community, Society and Rights
(this course can be taken if you have 30 politics or philosophy points, you should take it if you do :p that way i won't have to take it by myself.)

Calendar Description
Addresses a variety of topics in political philosophy such as: the political theories of Locke and Hobbes; the nature of rights and rights-holders; sovereignty; strategies for securing stable and just societies between people with significantly different moral, political and cultural views; and the relationship between individuals and communities. Topics will be related to contemporary political issues in New Zealand and, in particular, to the Treaty of Waitangi.

Outline
The course covers a range of topics including: the theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke as to the existence of a ‘state of nature’ and the emergence of the political state, as well as the concept of sovereignty, social contracts, and political amalgamations between sovereign units; the significance and interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi; the moral and political status of cultural claims; the relevance of ethnicity and culture to group rights; problems in and accommodating cultural claims in a multicultural society.

PHIL 218 (15.0 points)
Problems in Epistemology

Calendar Description
A study of problems in the theory of knowledge including the nature of justification and truth, and the nature, scope and limits of knowledge.

Outline
We all believe something, but do any of us know anything? Sceptics claim we know very little while dogmatists shout their beliefs from the rooftops as if they know something. The distinction between belief and knowledge was first drawn by Plato, though earlier Xenophanes claimed that even if we hit on the truth we cannot know this and we exist in a misty realm of belief. This sets the agenda for epistemology (theory of knowledge). As well as Plato’s distinction the topics covered in the course may include: scepticism; dogmatism; the claim that all knowledge is relative and not absolute; the nature of truth; justification and rational belief; the claims of faith, tradition, etc versus knowledge; perceptual knowledge; a priori and empirical knowledge; theories of knowledge; knowledge of different realms such as the empirical world, the abstract (e.g., mathematics), the normative as in ethics, aesthetics and reasoning; methods of knowing e.g., induction, and our knowledge of these; realism, idealism, constructivism, perspectivism.

Law 201: Criminal Law

This is an introduction to the principles and practice of New Zealand criminal law. The purpose of criminal law and punishment is considered, and doctrines of liability are analysed, including defences to criminal charges. A wide selection of indictable and summary offences is examined in detail, and the chief elements of criminal procedure are covered.

Law 211: Public Law

This is an introduction to the principles and workings of the New Zealand constitution. The powers, privileges and immunities of the three branches of government are considered, along with the role of the courts in controlling the exercise of public power. The relationship between the individual and the state, including the position of Maori under the Treaty of Waitangi, is also considered.

Korea

2006-02-21T11:07:00.000+13:00

So, Stace flies to Korea tonight... for a year. Such a weird feeling. Someone I never thought I would being actually saying Goodbye to. But it's done. Really don't know what to say. In the last 72 hours I have eaten only 5 peices of sushi and 2 peices of pizza. Yet I don't feel hungry. I don't feel depressed, it really did have to happen, there was no other way after the life decisions she had made, combined with the situation that we were in. Yet i still feel regret that it didn't work out. I really regret that it was basically out of our hands as to whether or not we could at least try and make it work out.

5 Stages of Grief...
1/ Anger
2/ Denial
3/ Bargaining
4/ Depression
5/ Acceptance

Stages 1,2 and 3 all seemed to come at the same time, and now I fluctuate between 4 and 5. I accept what has happened and that there is no alternative, yet it is so hard to come to terms with, especially since this has happened so damn fast. Yeah, I guess life is just a bitch.

Don't think I will have as much trust in people as I did before, nor will I be so certain of an outcome either. I guess that at least this has taught me something.

so...

2006-02-20T09:45:00.000+13:00

Yeah, basically I am single now.

2 Days ago we were completely sweet, everything was fine, I still thought we would last forever.

7pm saturday night I get a text saying that Stace was going to try being christian again. After quite a bit of talking I was pretty sure we had come to the conclusion that this would certainly still work, it would just be a little weird and harder.

10am sunday morning I come home from work to read an email from her that was a reply to one i had sent a few hours before. Basically she told me that she was feeling a lot better now with her new hope, and that her existence seemed more meaningful. Also, I had told her this wasnt going to work without an improvement in the relationship e.g. being able to see her more. She replied to this saying she didnt think that was possible, because of her parents. Basically looked pretty grim here.

5pm sunday night we talked on msn, we decided that we still did love each other and would try everything to make it work. I was sure that we had it sorted - I had regained me hope...

xpm sunday night she talked to her parents, who told her she was never allowed to see me, and that she would in all probability have to go to Korea for this whole year... leaving as soon as tomorrow....

8am this morning I get a text saying we need to talk, dont see how it can work etc...

9am we talk on msn. basically it has ended...

Havn't actually seen her since Valentines Day. All done on msn/text/email (i don't really use the phone, i hate talking on it). Yeah.

It's hard to imagine how much a person can change in two days. She seemed so sure she could never get her faith back, and that nothing could come between us. Well, it looks like her parents have succeeded in doing so. Man how I love organized religion.

em0

2006-02-19T01:35:00.000+13:00

With the thoughts of how much i feel like woe is me at the moment, all it would take is a pair of thick, black glasses and you would swear i was an emo kid.

The Christian God gives us reason. The Christian God gives us good reason to strongly doubt his existence (good reason being 1/ the prominence of other religions, who seem to feel equally strongly for their God and Christians do for their own 2/ his hiddenness to those of us not currently beleiving, but not resistant to the idea of beleiving, 3/ no strong evidence for his existence that would persuade a rational person upon presentation). The Christian God is all-loving. The Christian God wants us to therefore not use the reason he gave us, and to adopt faith? Why do we have reason? So we can reason about how shitty this situation is? Or so we can reason that all those who choose to use the reason they were endowed with are deserving of eternal punishment. Surely an all loving God would accept the fact that we are using what we were given in order to try find a way in the world? What about the poor fuckers like the sentinelese (sp?) tribes who have no contact with the western world, and no notions of the christian, theistic God. Why is this notion not inherent in them if God loves all of his children? Why does God not seek to save them? God is all powerful. If a loving relationship with him is what we should strive for why does he neglect so many? I just don't get it.

I want to follow a religion, but I cant.Where would I start? Christianity only seems natural because we live in a society where it is the dominant religion. Why is the fact that someone lives in such a society so determinate of their goodness? If a person in pakistan decides to beleive, they will likely follow Allah. Yet, according to Christians, this results in eternal damnation. Bad luck Mohammed, you got born on the wrong fucking side of the world, good game, dont bother trying again. burn in hell, while we laugh at you from heaven. what the fuck?!?

So if i was to choose a religion, I would have to, I guess, sort through all religious followings that i could find, and research their doctrines, in the hope that one of them would be convincing? But surely if one was absolutely convincing on reason, then it would be able to convert a huge majority. Yet religious ambiguity does remain. It's insane. So, since I don't epistemically beleive in the Christian God, but think that to hold such a belief would be nice, what am I to do? Why should I choose the Christian God over the other ones, what does he have that they dont, except for a prominence in the society in which I live? Even if he did seem the most reaonable choice, what am I to do? Disregard my reason and give a blind faith? Would a God really want me to worship him if I couldn't think he existed? Im not so sure he would appreciate the intelectual dishonesty there. This world really is fucked up.

I can't suspend my disbelief. In the words of Bertrand Russel, upon asking what he would say to a God, if after death he existed and he met him - "God, you gave us insufficient evidence"

Comments/suggestions?

wow

2006-02-19T00:18:00.000+13:00

your life is completely determined by the actions of others around you.

i wish i could never love anyone.

Political Test

2006-02-12T10:06:00.000+13:00

You are a
Social Liberal
(60% permissive)

and an...
Economic Moderate
(55% permissive)

You are best described as a:

Centrist

Link: The Politics Test on Ok Cupid
Also: The OkCupid Dating Persona Test

Religions are conclusions for which the facts of nature supply no major premises.

2006-02-09T15:06:00.000+13:00

Haha I love quotes...

"Religious groups should stay out of politics or be taxed."

When on a Sunday morning we hear the bells ringing, we ask ourselves: it is possible! This is going on because of a Jew crucified 2,000 years ago who said he was the son of God. The proof of such an assertion is lacking. In the context of our age the Christian religion is certainly a piece of antiquity intruding out of distant ages past, and that the above-mentioned assertion is believed is perhaps the most ancient piece of the inheritance. A god who begets children on a mortal woman; a sage who calls upon us no longer to work, no longer to sit in judgment, but to heed the signs of the imminent end of the world; a justice which accepts an innocent man as a substitute sacrifice; someone who bids his disciples drink his blood; prayers for miraculous interventions; sins perpetrated against a god atoned for by a god; fear of a Beyond to which death is the gateway; the figure of the Cross as a symbol in an age which no longer knows the meaning and shame of the Cross-how gruesomely all this is wafted to us, as if out of the grave of a primeval past! Can one believe that things of this sort are still believed in?
-- Friedrich Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human

If the Christian dogmas of a revengeful God, universal sinfulness, election by divine grace and the danger of eternal damnation were true, it would be a sign of weak-mindedness and lack of character not to become a priest, apostle or hermit and, in fear and trembling, to work solely on one's own salvation; it would be senseless to lose sight of one's eternal advantage for the sake of temporal comfort. If we may assume that these things are at any rate believed true, then the everyday Christian cuts a miserable figure; he is a man who really cannot count to three, and who precisely on account of his spiritual imbecility does not deserve to be punished so harshly as Christianity promises to punish him.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche, Human, all too Human

You know, the one with all the well-meaning rules that don't work in real life -- uh, Christianity.
-- Homer Simpson, telling what religion the family belongs to

Deism

2006-02-04T15:16:00.000+13:00

1 lecture for each course left now in summer school. Phil 102 (ethics) has been tedious. Phil 207 (Philosophy of Religion) has been very cool. One person who I have found interesting is Anthony Flew.

Flew (b. 1923) spent most of his life arguing for Atheism, arguing that one should presuppose atheism until evidence of a God surfaces. In December 2004, an interview with Flew conducted by Flew's friend and philosophical adversary Gary Habermas was published in Biola University's Philosophia Christi, with the title Atheist Becomes Theist - Exclusive Interview with Former Atheist Antony Flew.

"While reason, mainly in the form of arguments to design, assures us that there is a God, there is no room either for any supernatural revelation of that God or for any transactions between that God and individual human beings."

"I think we need here a fundamental distinction between the God of Aristotle or Spinoza and the Gods of the Christian and the Islamic Revelations."Flew also said: My one and only piece of relevant evidence [for an Aristotelian God] is the apparent impossibility of providing a naturalistic theory of the origin from DNA of the first reproducing species ... [In fact] the only reason which I have for beginning to think of believing in a First Cause god is the impossibility of providing a naturalistic account of the origin of the first reproducing organisms."

"I'm thinking of a God very different from the God of the Christian and far and away from the God of Islam, because both are depicted as omnipotent Oriental despots, cosmic Saddam Husseins."

I'd never really encountered much about deism before this course, but the idea is intrigueing....From www.deism.org

" "I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." - Galileo Galilei

Deism (n): Belief in God as revealed by nature and reason combined with a disbelief in scripture, prophets, superstition and church authority.

Deism is a free-thought philosophy, much like Agnosticism, Atheism or Pantheism in that it rejects the dogmas and superstitions of religion in favor of individual reason and empirical observation of the universe. Deism differs from these other free-thought philosophies in that it sees an order and architecture to the universe that indicates a Creator. The word "God" is used to describe this creator, not to be confused with the "Biblegod."

Deism notes that we as humans are endowed with the power of reason and an indomitable spirit. It follows that we are intended to exercise them. Therefore, skepticism and doubt are not "sins" but rather natural expressions of God's gift of reason.

Because skepticism and doubt are not sins, Deists view with extreme suspicion any efforts by other humans to claim divine authority, such as claiming to be a "prophet" or citing "sacred scripture" said to be written by alleged prophets (as in the Bible, the Quran, the Book of Mormon, etc.). Placing faith in scriptures, prophets, priests, churches, "holy" figures, or traditions is surrendering your personal reason to another source. Usually, this other source has far less interest in "the state of your soul" as the accumulation of wealth and political power.
With scripture and revelation removed, all that remains to know God is personal reason and observation of the universe. Essentially, this is getting to know the artist by studying the artwork. The only "Word of God" is the universe itself. "

Penis loaf version 3.0

2005-12-24T09:25:00.000+13:00

Worked today from 1am to 9am. Our boss is paying us till 11am because she thinks the company owes us money for working quite fast haha. Being the productive baker I am, I spent my time making a Tri-shafted penis loaf on the busiest day of the year.

After Proof

Trying to stay awake till at least 8pm so I can sleep right through till xmas. Xmas is a great day - usually the second best of the year (One in front of birthday, one behind the big day out - although with next years BDO announcement I'm not as excited as per usual). Not only is Xmas extremely profitable (Expenditure <$200, Intake >$600 of vouchers, money and worthwhile gifts + roughly $50 of n00b gifts), But also involves mass consumption of animals and alcohol with the family. Tomorrow morning I will be woken up by my sister (and I'm guessing my foster sister type person) before 7am to open my presents - but more importantly to them, watch them open their presents, which they wont be allowed to do until I am upstairs. When the clock ticks 7am it becomes socially acceptable to start drinking, so I should be on my second beer by then. I have 20 Heinekin in the fridge ($17 per dozen special this week). At home I will reap a tennis racket, plus two gift voucher sized gifts that are under the tree. My guess is music vouchers and movie super savers. I will also open the book-like present from Stace then. Perhaps Santa will also pay me a visit. I will give Mum The Da Vinci code, Dad his David Bowie + Uriah Heep DVDs and Kerryn her Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles DVD. A Profitable morning indeed.

Come 8am its a walk down to my Nana's for xmas breakfast with my mums side of the family - A BBQ + Beer event, and more present opening/exchanging. My Nana is giving me between $100 and $150 to buy new shoes. My aunty is giving me a gift that apparently cost $30 - she told me so that I was obliged to also spend $30 on her. She better still like Blink 182 because I got her their greatest hits. If she doesn't, it's her fault for liking them at one stage and then not informing me of her change of opinion.

Then it is to my other Nana's house for lunch, more beer and more meat. This Nana is giving me $100-150 in Real Groovy vouchers, as well as random gifts she likes to collect for each of her grandchildren during the year. This is where I catch up with Dad's side of the family, and get drunk with them.

Then we are driving to Mangawhai for more meat, more beer, and no presents. The least profitable part of the trip in terms of presents, but still good, as Alcohol intake will be peaking at this time. So yeah, Xmas is shaping up to be sweet. Also I have Boxing Day off work, so Hangovers are not an issue :).

Work

2005-12-23T11:41:00.000+13:00

Been working good ol' wage labour for a good part of the last few weeks - lovely 1, 2, 3 and 4am starts. My work mainly consists of listening to Hauraki, thinking of ways to annoy James, arguing with James over who is the bigger man, speaking in 1337, throwing bread at James, taking breaks (scheduled and unscheduled) and then sometimes baking bread.

Today I parked James in great.

My car is the white one (With Styled rust). He had to go over to his passenger door to get back into his car while i stood, watched and laughed. This was one of the highlights of my day, and a park of monumental skill.

Another highlight was baking Penis loafs. This time instead of a singular penis loaf, I decided to bake two. This tray is a concept tray. The penis with the disproportionately large testicles is James. The other Penis is one of James' other friends. The penis of his friend is intercepting James' Penis, hence they are swordfighting. I call this concept tray 'Swordfight of the smaller man".

Luckily we have a cool interim boss (Team Leader) who lets us slack off and muck around. She delighted in the Penis Loafii, and put them on the shelf as is, so our Speciality Breads case had a penis loaf sitting in it for a good part of the morning. All the old ladies we work with came over and had a peek also. They enjoyed looking at our Penii Loaf.

In less interesting news I have been accepted into stage 2 law, which is good. But nDeva is not letting me enroll into my courses, which is bad. Stupid nDeva. Now 11:58am. I have work again tomorrow (xmas eve) at 1am-9:30am. That gives me 13 hours go get drunk with James and sleep. So I better start drinking now. Good Day!

2005-12-13T01:31:00.000+13:00

Luke

2005-12-04T18:22:00.000+13:00

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10358338

Luke at the cricket.

haha.

drunken buffoonary

2005-12-03T18:39:00.000+13:00

just spent 3 hours at the a and e. i now have my right arm in a sling so it is hard to type. not gonna bother trying to use capitals. yeah really didnt think it was necessary to go to doctor - family made me. guess it was a good idea because it is my writing hand. yeah so i got there at about 3"30. left at 6"30. not fun at all - i could have been watching the cricket.

thursday night me charles dalton and clown got pissed and jackknife sober drove my car round cruising. was awesome as. had many a bulleit and jim beam/coke. glenn ended up ringing us and we went to drink with him at matts house. hadnt seen glenn or matt for ages so that waS cool.

somehow i ended up staying at glenns house - woke up there with a fucking swollen hand, glenn already gone to work, little memory of what had happened, a bad taste in my mouth, wet clothes and no idea where my car had ended up. luckily a few texts later jackknife had organised david to come pick me up in my car... havnt had an alcohol blackout for so long. i remember punching either matt or glenn in the arm. im guessing thats how i fucked my hand. i think i also remember a drunken shower at matts house. was random. do not remember the trip to glenns house. lost my jim beam. somehow retained my wallet.

my parents and the doctor and my work all laughed at me after explaining what happened. feel like quite a dork haha.

hmm at least i get tomorrow off work. hopefully it isnt broken and heals soon. hard to do stuff with just your left hand. my hand is tired just from typing though.

Leitch's Civ4 Wins : 0

2005-11-21T03:50:00.000+13:00

Robbie : 3.5 Wins
Me: 2.5 Wins
AI: 1 Win
Leitch: 0 Wins

I should be on 3.5, Ultimate cheatery by Leitch keeps it at 2.5. Never again playing with AI players involved. Ever. Leitch proclaimed that game to be "most satisfying loss ever". Since all of his games have been losses, I guess he is pretty satisfied at the moment.

I take solace in the fact that Leitch remains on 0.

Decisions....

2005-11-18T20:20:00.000+13:00

My parents just told me that if they sell our house in Whangaparaoa (currently on the market) that I have 2 options. Stay where I am in my apartment, or move into a house in Albany. Dad will be buying an Albany-based house as a location for his work, with my parents moving to our house in Mangawhai as their primary residence.

Option A - Stay at Apartment. This is a picture of the Apartment complex.

The Apartment life is good, I certainly have no regrets about moving there this semester. It is in prime location - 10 mins walk from University, 5 mins from Queen Street. Everything I need is near me, and I get along well with Ryan, my flatmate. Getting drunk is always fun there. I had always presumed I would be at the Apartment for the rest of my university life. (The only negative things about it are the size, but that doesnt really bother me, and the lack of a carpark, which is annoying).

The other option I am presented with is a move to Albany, where I would share a house with my dad (who would only be there a couple of days a week) - so basically a house to myself, near the new Albany bus station (so bussing to and fro uni wouldn't be too much of a hassle). My parents would buy me a new car, so I would easily be able to commute up to Mangawhai and see them, which wouldn't be the case if I stayed at the Apartment. In non-uni times I would be near the shore (where pretty much all of my friends live), and a 20 minute drive from Whangaparaoa where my work, and the rest of my family are. A new car would be awesome, as would a house, basically to my self.

The house in whangaparaoa is on the market, so I guess I could have to make the decision at any time. I've really liked the apartment life, but a house would be even more sweet, I think. Any suggestions on which of the two places you guys would rather have, or think I should take? At the moment I'm probably leaning towards Albany...

Cheers

2005-11-09T23:24:00.000+13:00

The TV Program cheers.

Having the theme song from this program on my "study" playlist has really made me interested in this show. Admittedly, I have never watched an episode of Cheers in my life. But with such a kick-ass theme song, the show couldn't possibly be bad. Just think of Charles in charge. That program had an insanely catchy theme song, and the program was great. Using my 1337 powers of analogy, the same must apply for Cheers - great theme song, so the show is surely great.

But really, I am considering making this show one of my favourites, despite never having seen it. It has everything going for it. Look at the lead actor - Ted Danson.

Read more about this hunk here - http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001101/bio

"Ted Danson is well known for his role as Sam Malone in the television series "Cheers" (1982). During the show's 12-year run, he was nominated nine times for an Emmy Award as Best Actor in a Comedy Series and won twice, in 1990 and 1993. The role also earned him a Golden Globe Award for Best Actor in a Comedy Series in 1989 and 1990. He and his wife, actress Mary Steenburgen, starred in and were executive producers of the CBS comedy series "Ink" (1996)."

If a man as great as Ted Danson is best known for his role in this program it must be good.

Another actor listed as acting in cheers, is Woody Harrelson. Woody Harrelson plays the brilliant role of Roy Munson in Kingpin. Also plays Larry Flynt in 'The people vs. Larry Flynt'. Another great actor, who I know for his roles outside of Cheers. Especially in Kingpin. Man that is an awesome comedy. Will be making a trip to the video store to get that out after my exam tomorrow.

Reading through the main imdb page for cheers (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083399/) I notice that Kelsey Grammer plays the role of Dr. Frasier Crane between 1984 and 1993. Never knew the origins of this character came from outside the show Frasier. How awesome.

I wonder why New Zealand TV doesn't seem to have re-runs of this show constasntly, pretty much everything within the program builds it up as a near-perfect sit-com. Great Song + Ted Danson + Roy Munson from Kingpin + Frasier Crane + the possibility of likening it to Charles in charge.

On a completely different note, I have my last exam tomorrow (introduction to Roman history). During the course of my study for this course, i have, of course, encountered some amusing quotes (some of them are extremely coarse). In an effort to commit them to memory, and entertain you I will list the most shocking and funny ones.

Emperor Tiberius

"After retiring to Capri, where he had a private pleasure palace built, many young men and women trained in sexual practices were bought there for his pleasure, and would have sex in groups in front of him."

"He had little boys trained as minnows to chase him when he went swimming and to get between his legs and nibble him. He also had babies not weaned from their mother breast suck at his chest and groin."

"[people he was torturing be]...cast headlong into the sea before his eyes, while a band of marines waited below for the bodies and broke their bones with boathooks and oars, to prevent any breath of life from remaining in them."

"he would trick young men into loading themselves with copious draughts of wine, and then on a sudden tying up their private parts, would torment them at the same time by the torture of the cords and of the stoppage of their water."

Gauis (Caligula)

"He lived in habitual incest with all his sisters... Of these he is beleived to have violated Drusilla when he was still a minor, and even to have been caught lying with her by his grandmother Antonia."

"He drew up a line of battle on the shore of the Ocean, arranging his ballistas and other artillery; ... he suddenly bade them gather shells and fill their helmets and the folds of their gowns, calling them 'spoils from the ocean'."

Nero

"Punishment was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievious superstition."

"besides abusing freeborn boys and seducing married women, he debauched the vestal virgin Rubria."

"He castrated the boy Sporus and actually tried to make a woman of him: and he married him with all the usualy ceremonies, including a dowry and bridal veil, took him to a house attended by a great thong, and treated him as his wife."

"Even before that, whenever he rode in a litter with his mother, he had incestuous relations with her"

"He so prostituted his own chastity that after defiling almost every part of his body, he at last devised a kind of game, in which, covered with the skin of some wild animal, he was let loose from a cage and attacked the private parts of men and women, who were bound to stakes.

Yeah the Romans really were dirty fuckers haha. Can't wait to do more papers on these Emperors. Such insanity, but done with brilliant dashes of humour.

Masculinity, Degrees and Arse

2005-11-06T22:17:00.000+13:00

It seems that the degree you take not only has a noticable effect on the career path you will take, but also the form in which your body develops. The case example here is Charles, and how the Masculinity of his Arse has suffered a complete turnaround since his undertaking of a Fine Arts degree at ELAM.

Photograph one

This here is the famous photo of Charles' arse floating out of a window on the motorway on one of our underage mooning trips. Notice the lack of a belt, the looseness of the jeans, and the visible man-hair covering much of the Cheeks. This is a Man-Arse if ever I saw one (No i don't go out of my way to observe them, but yes, I do have a knowledge of what is and is not a man-arse). Which brings me to my next point.....

Photograph two

This is not a man Arse. In no way is this a man Arse. It is hard to beleive that this is the same posterior, with only one year in difference. It looks as if Charles has shaved his lower back in order for a smoother appearance (judging from the hair in photo one, I am guessing that there is naturally some hair on the lower back region that is visible in photo 2). The jeans have tightened, as has the jacket. The jeans are multi-coloured and more fashionable, a stark contrast to the loose, worn, uni-coloured jeans of photograph one.

The Masculine pose of photograph one ("haha world, look at my arse in all of it's masculinity!") has been replaced with a pose that can only be labelled as "presenting". Whatever Charles is waiting for in photograph two, I'm glad there is no visual evidence of it. Now, I beleive this change in arse has come as a result of the degree Charles is undertaking. That is the only difference in Charles' lifestyle that I can accredit to such a change.

In photo one, it appears that Charles is under the influence of beer. In photo two, there is a bottle of beer visible in his hand. Alcohol is a constant factor. In photo one, Charles is in an act of delinquincy (mooning), in photo two, Charles is preparing for fireworks and sparkler bombs (delinquincy). Delinquincy is a common factor. Charles was, and is certainly still (as far as I can ascertain) a heterosexual, who goes out of his way to refute any statements referring to him as a metrosexual.

The only element of difference that I can determine is the change in degree. The first photo was taken whilst Charles was still at Rangitoto college in 7th form. The second photo was taken after the completion of Charles first year in fine arts (ELAM) at Auckland University. This year of fine arts has taken an arse that was fully man, and replaced it with an arse that, well.... is not man.

Any thoughts on the matter...?

Sex0r!

2005-11-03T19:43:00.000+13:00

On a more fashionable note than the hoodrat post, here is a picture of me at my study-station wearing my man-singlet and $8 warehouse trackpants. Notice the masculine yellow of the walls in the room I stay in when I'm at Whangaparaoa? If the photo had been larger you would also be able to see the Winnie the Pooh stickers on the mirror, and the Stars on my roof. Oh the joy of moving out of home and having your sister take your old room, leaving you with her crummer of a room.

The youth of today

2005-11-03T17:35:00.000+13:00

The culture of today's youth can be defined in a single peice of clothing : the flat-peak.

There is nothing I can think of that infuriates me more than seeing one or several of these hats worn amongst a group of hoodrats. I don't know what it is about them that infuriates me so much, but they just do. I beleive it is the lack of quality childrens programming that is breeding this new wave of idiots. Back in the day we had an amazing array of quality programming to keep us entertained, as well as provide positive messages of morality, the wearing of proper hats, the importance of acceptance (although i am positive that no characters in any of my cartoons would have accepted a person in a flatpeak) and violence.

First of all : Captain Planet

Captain Planet was my joint favourite cartoon as a child. Everything from the cool sidekicks (mainly wheeler, the fire guy, well actually everone apart from the heart guy - who was lame), awesome villians, and the green mullet. I'm pretty sure the heart dude would be the only person on this show to contemplate wearing a flatpeak, but thats ok - all the kids that watched knew he was lame anyway. Not only does this show have lots of violence, but also plenty of moral messages.

Just look at the theme song

Captain Planet, he's our hero, Gonna take pollution down to zero.
He's our powers magnified, And he's fighting on the planet's side.
Captain Planet, he's our hero, Gonna take pollution down to zero.
Gonna help him put asunder Bad guys who like to loot and plunder.
"You'll pay for this Captain Planet!"
We're the Planeteers, You can be one too 'Cause saving our planet is the thing to do!
Looting and polluting is not the way. Hear what Captain Planet has to say!
"The Power is Yours!"

Amazing - the song not only manages to rhyme two awesome words - asunder and plunder - but portrays a positive environmental message. Encourages involvement in saving our planet as well as the avoidance of looting and polluting.Click the link below to hear the song.

http://www.turner.com/planet/mp3/cp_close.mp3

My other favourite cartoon was Teenage Mutant Ninja turtles. These guys kicked serious ass. As a kid I had a giant Donatello (sp.?) soft toy that was certainly my favourite. I also had the Teenage mutant ninja turtles computer game, and that's what got me into computing, which eventually led to my liking of h4x012 (which is a good influence). Anyway, you would never see the turtles dressed inappropriately either, and they had plentiful supplies of cool violence. Educational show too - after associating the names Raphael, Michelangelo, Leonardo and Donatello with the turtles, learning about the actual people became much more interesting and desirable.

Today kids have to suffer through copious amounts of bad programming.

http://www.tvnz.co.nz/view/2kids_index_skin/tv2_2kids_index_group

Here is a listing of the kids shows now offered by TV2. With the exception of Spongebob Squarepants, they all suck penis.

""Hi-5 is being made for today's children with today's music. We think it is energetic and fun," says producer Helena Harris, who has created and produced many children's programmes including the phenomenally successful Bananas in Pyjamas. It's laughter, movement, dancing, singing and outrageous fashion statements as the totally hip, totally pop Hi-5 team perform their socks off every weekday on TV2."

We don't want programmes made for today's children with today's music. Todays children are idiots, and the music is crap. "totally hip, totally pop"? what?! these kids are surely doomed. I don't want todays kids seeing shows that are energetic and fun, they need to watch shows that are bad-ass and cool. The younger generations mindset needs a complete overhaul, and since TV is the biggest influence on their lives, TV is where we have to start. If we don't, who knows.... perhaps someday our kids will be wearing flatpeaks and listening to fitty cent junior behind our backs.

As for the idiots who happened to watch decent programming as a child but still wear flat peaks and other gangster paraphinalia (except for that asian guy with blonde hair who hangs round the commons wearing his gansta costumes - he does it with style and without a flatpeak) the source of the problem is the hip-hop culture. How they could watch Captain Planet and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and then be tricked into listening to hip-hop and idolising fools like Fifty Cent and others I have no idea. But anyway, these people will fail to get jobs, and therefore either:

a) fail to have the ability to attract a female into procreation, or

b) fail to have the ability to provide for their childrens survival.

So natural selection takes care of the idiots who managed to weed their way through the quality programming, but unless we act now, the new generation are all doomed.

BRING BACK DECENT CHILDRENS PROGRAMMING!

$1.40 Gruds

2005-11-02T12:58:00.000+13:00

Yeah, gruds cost only $1.40 ($4.25 for a 3-pack) at the warehouse. I indulged in a pair. Snug. Regretting not going for the double pouch though... (James decided that we should half a 3 pack of single pouchers).

Ranfurly beer - $10.50 for a 12 pack. 87.5 cents per can. 4% alcohol - 1 standard drink per can. 87.5 cents per standard drink. So good. Can taste the savings.

Yeah, so instead of studying I've been buying cheap beer and reading essays on the Simpsons. Really interesting......

"The Simpsons, Morality, and Religion"

http://www.snpp.com/other/papers/jc.paper.html

Really interesting paper where five simpsons episodes are examined in light of religion and morality.

"What about “The Simpsons”? Where does this show fit on the grid of morality and ethical values? Over the years, those responsible for determining these standards have fluctuated on their view of the show. At first, when the show focused on Bart’s “badness” and his rebellious attitude, most considered this show harmful for the family and youth to watch, including then-President George Bush. Since the show shifted from that emphasis and on to the family at large and their relationship to the community, most critics have changed their opinion. "

"In this paper I hope to explore how five key episodes are written and how the issues in those episodes are handled. I hope to determine if they are looking at the issues through postmodern eyes, or if they are looking to the Christian/religious perspective. After determining the perspective, I wish to explore the merit of either perspective on the issue at hand. "

"In Homer the Heretic, In Marge We Trust, Bart Sells His Soul and Hurricane Neddy, there is an obvious pro-religious slant. Many atheists have complained about the show and even claimed “it’s more like a Sunday school lesson than a sitcom.” While this could be true, it should also be pointed out that religious figures in the show are seen as completely human and completely flawed. Many evangelicals have complained about this point as well, claiming that the show makes fun of religion rather than uphold it."

"Can shows like the Simpsons communicate theology, Biblically based morality, and promote Christianity? Robert Short, author of The Gospel According to Peanuts, claims that the Simpsons “can have an impact in the postmodern world... It’s amazing how God can speak in these out of the way places... He can be very deliberate in using a medium like the Simpsons... The arts get under our skin far more effectively than direct discourse, far more effective than a sermon.”"

"While this is true, God is very often portrayed as a last resort for help or at the most a benefactor of meals at the dinner table. There are many who hold to this form of Christianity, but the Simpsons does communicate a different form of Christian faith that is honest, caring, very personal, and very connected to who we are. This faith is not overbearing to others, but it works in our lives to guide us and help us in our time of need. God is seen as intervening in our world with all five fingers, ready to help us when we need him."

Personally, I find the religious references in the Simpsons absolutely brilliant, and they manage to poke fun at Christianity in most episodes. I read an interview in time out a couple of weeks ago with Al Jean, the head writer, and he was saying that the Simpsons purposefully offers an easier pathway for Philosophical discussion than reading literary works by famous philosophers. I think its great that shows like The Simpsons can cater not only for the humour of the youth, but also make observations on aspects of our lives usually only spoken about in acedemic or religious circles.

bloggus newus

2005-11-01T22:33:00.000+13:00

Yeah a new blog - great way to procrastinate. Since everyone else (well most people. hint hint, robbie, update more...) who's blog I have on my favourites doesn't seem to update anymore, I guess i'll have to write my own blog in order to waste time.

H4x0R. It's the new thing. or should I say 'Th3 N3vv Th1n9'. It really is 1337. I wish more people did it. Not only is it cool to type, but its even cooler to spell the words out in speech, replacing letters with numbers. I really dont see why it has stayed limited to the realms of internet gaming and chatting - it makes talking so much more fun. What better way is there to laugh, than to repeatedly state H4H4? So yeah, everyone who reads this please endeavour to become more adept at hax0r, and use it more frequently.

Doing my Roman History study yesterday I came across a family name I had never heard before, but one that I would most definitely have been a member of had I the choice. The Manlius family line. What better last name could there be then Manlius? (none). I wish they actually did something of more note so I could write an essay on them, but I guess when you have a name like manlius it would be greedy to accomplish anything else. People called Manlius are already a long way towards winning life.

In order to keep up with the fashion I made a trip to the warehouse last week and got a brand spanking new pair of trackpants. $8. For pants. So comfortable, and so stylish. I look like a programmer from the 80s. Decided to get two more pairs this week (also in dark grey - allows for the stains to stand out more - enhancing my outfit).

Yeah.... I guess thats enough to write for a first post.

Time to get into the trackpants. So sexy.