I’m interested how people can hold both of these as bad/immoral things. That there is BOTH no God (and a harmful delusion that there is) and killing/war is inherently evil. I find that statement horribly inconsistent, and I think those that make it know its inconsistency yet still viscerally can’t/won’t admit the logical and rational conclusions of a materialistic impersonal universe without any sort of god.

Either God does exist and this existence is the very foundation for human value (created in the image of this God), or God does not exist and we’re all the result of impersonal, materialistic forces driving us toward this unimportant moment in time. I’ve heard it said way too many times that the only value out there is the value we give it. Ok, so why should one person have to value human life if he doesn’t want to (see Hitler, Stalin, etc.). Either there is transcendent value to humanity, or we’re all just a bunch of protoplasm and atoms bouncing around in a meaningless void. Every Darwinian (I actually have a lot of Darwinian leanings – I’m not debating evolution here) stops short of being a full fledged materialist social Darwinian. They don’t like where it necessarily leads which is a true “survival of the fittest,” might makes right.

To quote Wilson (to whom I’ve linked above), “without God, nice does not exist.” There is no reason why atoms organised in cells, tissues, organs, to bodies should be called people. It’s easy and often correct to attack the abuses of religion and rightfully to call out the problems with many wars and all murder, but you can only do so by borrowing from a deistic point of view. Otherwise on what grounds can you point out the “immorality” of certain actions? That they violate human laws? Why do we need to listen to a bunch of cells stacked on top of each other? The only reason I’ve ever been able to be convinced of is that that stack of cells bears the image of a deity who fashioned it from the clay and breathed (animatus/animosus/soul) life into it.

I’m not stating atheists are unintelligent, rather I’m saying I’ve always noticed this inconsistency. I’ve just never understood how they avoid coming to the strict materialist social Darwinian conclusion without appealing to some internal/personal endowment of humanity with value. When you personally decide to give value to humanity out of a materialistic worldview, don’t you still out of necessity have to appeal to the right of others who themselves choose to not give this same value the right to do as they so please such as murder, steal, and commit other violations of another person’s humanity since these things don’t really have any real existence anymore?

That being said, what decisions you make as an autonomous adult in regards to your own lifestyle and health are yours, and I have no right to force you to do or not do anything. If you are open to it, I would try to convince you not to smoke and help you find ways to quit if your so inclined. At the end of the day if you still want to smoke, I or anyone else has no right to force you to do otherwise.

I took the time today to look through the proposed graphic images for cigarette packaging and advertising and rather than being encouraged by the FDA’s most recent attempt at cutting smoking rates, I was quite underwhelmed, a bit offended, and weary of their tactic. From what I can gather the basic premise for the graphic image labeling is to deter smokers from purchasing cigarettes by giving vivid examples of what cigarette use can do to you and those around you (ranging from COPD and cancer, to death).

What offended me wasn’t what the images themselves portray (I actually wish that was the case, it would be evidence toward their effectiveness), but the fact that they’re quite mediocre in production value and almost seem comedic rather than effective in preventing cigarette purchasing. I get what the FDA is trying to do, I actual support it in theory, but why not treat people as adults (last I checked you couldn’t buy cigarettes unless you were one) and be upfront and honest rather than resorting to scare tactics using what I’m guessing is going to be another ineffective shot in the dark.

One of the unintended consequences I would not be surprised to see (I’d be happy to be proved wrong) when these images come into effect is that cigarette sales may actually jump due to kids/young adults/juvenile-minded-adults thinking the “warnings” are funny and grabbing a pack because these warnings, rather than preventing them from otherwise making the purchase, spark their interest and draw their attention from something they may have otherwise not even noticed.

This is the root of where I’m offended by these images. If you’re going to try to deter someone from using something, don’t make it front and center with what could be taken as clever reverse-type-advertising. Isn’t there a reason why every other warning sign we know of isn’t a sub-par photograph of a corpse with a toe-tag but bright yellow/orange backgrounds with clear black bold lettering or stick figure enduring frightening mutilation. On a personal note, one of the major contributers to my never embarking on routine tobacco use was the actual histological comparisons of smokers’ vs. non-smokers’ lung tissue. Something about the black, necrotic tissue of smokers’ lung pleura still makes me squirm, but rather than using this in these recent images, the closest thing I could find was a rather cartoonish computer re-imaging of this comparison that wasted all of its inherent thunder.

These images are only a section of a campaign against cigarette use, but I’m a little nervous it’s going to do a bit more harm than good to the other more honest approaches (family education, very well produced tv spots/commercials, physician clinical advising against continued use, the development of much better cessation programs and medications, etc.). I hope I’ll be eating these words next year when these images find their way before my eyes on a convenience store checkout shelf, but at this moment I still have my doubts.

This semester I wanted to try and accomplish two main things in my organization scheme for class: have my notes stored in such a way that I can access them no matter where I am, and to do so without the need to carry around a bunch of binders stuffed with paper. The only real purchase I made was to upgrade my very heavy, and very non-portable Dell Inspiron 5100 to a new shiny Dell Inspiron Mini 10 netbook. First thing I did was removed the Windows 7 that came with it and installed Ubuntu Netbook Edition (which in afterthought was a bit rash, I should have backed up Windows 7 on a USB to install later as a virtual machine instead of needing to resort back to XP).

Ubuntu Netbook Edition

After getting UNE running great and customizing it to the look I wanted, I got it geared up to become a super-note-taking machine. I installed the Dropbox client for Linux and created folders to store all my course documents (powerpoints, syllabi, problem sets, etc.).

Dropbox set up

I’m a big fan of Evernote and am sorely disappointed that they don’t have a Linux desktop client, but I was able to find a suitable workaround using Nevernote.

Nevernote - Evernote desktop client on UNE

I put my schedule on my Google Calendar and manage tasks using Remember the Milk (Astrid on my Android phone). The result: I can now access and edit any of my course documents, notes, tasks, schedule from any computer and even my Android phone with any changes seamlessly synchronizing everything in the cloud. For good measure I set up a couple of redundant back-up systems locally on my netbook and to my home server in case something were to happen to any of my remote data.

Another happy product of this set-up is that it allows me to be (nearly) paperless. I’m taking a biochemistry course which does require me to pull out the occasional notepad to jot notes not easily typed on a computer, or chemical equations/mechanisms which need to be drawn out. Another added benefit of Evernote however, is that once I have these things written down on paper, I can pull out my phone, take a snapshot and upload it to Evernote where it’s cataloged alongside that day’s notes or problem sets. I’m also evaluating the merits of purchasing a Boogie Board LCD tablet ($35) to completely remove the need for paper at all.

The Final Result

Here’s a picture of the tools in my arsenal, depending on my mood I’ll either walk or bike to school so my pack changes from the Mountainsmith Tour shown or a Timbuk2 messenger bag respectively simply moving all the supplies from one to the other.

My typical school back pack set up

Since part of the point was keeping this as paperless as possible, I didn’t want to buy a notebook so I found an old lab notebook I had and cut it down the middle so it’s more portable. It ended it being one of my favorite note pads. The other lab notebook is my homemade text on Haitian Creole I keep on me to review whenever I have some spare moment or the other to look it over.

So far I’ve been incredibly happy with this set-up, I love being able to study my notes on my phone’s Evernote app while waiting to meet up with someone, or having access to a syllabus or lecture notes via Dropbox. Feel free to hit me up in the comments for any questions about implementing something like this for yourself or if you have any suggestions for good methods you’ve used.

Music Reviews:

• Josh Ritter – So Runs the World Away
• The New Pornographers – Together
• Blitzen Trapper – Destroyer of the Void

I’ll work up and post a more comprehensive description of our last trip to Haiti.

Have a couple of book reviews and thoughts to share/discuss.

I’ll also be sharing some highlights from our move this week, things we’ll fix up, and if we have any clever decorating/fixing ideas. You can follow me on Twitter for more current thoughts/happenings/pictures, and check out my Flickr for photos from our move and our upcoming trip to France.

http://gcmedical2010.shutterfly.com/

Platform shifts…

While I, like Sayers, would consider myself a laudator temporis acti, find her arguments compelling for a return to a more medieval form of education. It’s a short essay, I think everyone who has any inclination to consider the most appropriate educational constructs for our children should read this and form their own opinions. While a “medieval” method would probably be laughed out of consideration by the majority of today’s populus, I would challenge potential naysayers to carefully consider Sayer’s arguments and provide appropriate rebuttals. I myself am a product of public education, I feel I turned out alright, but upon entering the university I did find that there were many areas of thought and study in which I feel I should have and ample opportunity to at the very least been given categories through which to approach novel problems.

Sayer’s words are as potent and timely in contemporary educational debates as they were in the setting of 1940′s England. Rather than dismiss the argument as antiquated and simply the rantings of an old classicist, let us engage and learn from the sage advice and insight of someone who has thought long and hard about the foundations and presuppositions we blindly take for granted nowadays.

http://haitiancreole.wordpress.com/