|
BLOG ARCHIVES |
-
December, 2009
-
June, 2009
-
May, 2009
-
December, 2008
-
October, 2008
-
October, 2008
-
August, 2008
-
May, 2008
-
April, 2008
-
March, 2008
-
February, 2008
-
January, 2008
-
December, 2007
|
|
WHO'S ONLINE |
|
We have 16 guests online |
|
|
Thursday, 14 July 2005
|
|
Play blog 14 July 2005 Thoughts on Today's Music: Hysteria by Def Leppard
This music on
this CD (Hysteria by Def
Leppard, samples available for listening, here)
offers some nostalgic value for me.
Nearly twenty years ago, when I was enrolled at the
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, this music was current, it was
extremely popular, and I listened to it quite a bit.
During those days, I spent a major amount of time
thinking about philosophical issues (especially in the realms of ontology and
the ethics of personal conduct). My intense study of Ayn Rand's
Objectivism both as a philosophical system and as a guide to practical living
also thoroughly engrossed me.
In addition, I spent many hours thinking about
and writing my own, philosophical essays.
I wasn't just spending my time thinking in those days,
however.
I was also then involved in my first, serious, romantic
affair, with my college girlfriend. Notwithstanding her love for classical music
(this was her field of study, and she then played both flute and harpsichord) -
she also enjoyed listening to some popular music with me. (To give her
credit, she first imbued me with my enduring interest in the flute-heavy
music of the "art rock" band Jethro Tull, which is the "pop" band that
I've enjoyed more times, live in concert, than any other!) Although she
didn't end up being the woman whom I would eventually marry, I think
we both learned and grew tremendously thanks to our relationship, and
I'm grateful that she remains a dear friend to this day.
Listening to this music also reminds me of some of the tensions that I then
experienced. In a way that may sound odd, the music now sometimes feels quite
appropriate for me to listen to as background for thinking about
fundamental philosophy, since, during that period, I focused
so much on that.
At the same time, listening to it reminds me of how immature, naive and
even conflicted I was then. I was struggling to define who I was and what I
thought. And in that struggle, sometimes I lurched for "certainty" that
(eventually I learned) was beyond my ability to fully justify. In
addition, interpersonally, I experienced considerable tension, confusion and
uncertainty.
Even so, I'm glad to now be able to look back on all this and to
reminisce about all of it - the good and the bad - fondly. It wasn't all
painful, of course. Much was bright. And I admire the searching earnestness that
drove me at that time. This too, may sound odd, but I feel tremendous warmth and
love for that young man who I then was.
I'm also happy that I've grown and matured a great deal in the years since,
in no small measure as a consequence of the mistakes that I then
made.
|
|
Wednesday, 13 July 2005
|
|
A Toddler's Awareness of Skin Color
Aliana
recently started telling Cherita and me the
following.
"Mommy is brown. She is big brown. And I am brown. A tiny, little bit brown.
And Daddy is yellow. Or maybe orange."
Since Cherita
is "black," and I'm "white," and Aliana is mixed, it's adorable
to learn what (in many ways, more precise) color classifications she's striving
to articulate to identify these differences.
|
|
Monday, 11 July 2005
|
|
11 July 2005 Love blog By What Authority?
I object to much in Roy Moore's article, "A Higher
Authority."
Before I spell out what I object to in it, though, I want to acknowledge the
following.
I agree that some of what many conservatives describe as "liberal, judicial
activism" has contributed to the erosion of the rule of law in the U.S. And I
definitely don't think that it's the appropriate role of the judiciary to
"rewrite the Constitution."
Even so, I'm far from convinced that some conservatives' programs for change
in our judicial system would prove to be any less damaging than the liberals'.
Unfortunately, Moore's article provides evidence to support my concern.
Although I gather that Moore claims to favor "strict" interpretation of the
U.S Constitution, some of his remarks suggest that he actually favors a
religiously conservative "activism" that would be no less pernicious in practice
than the "activism" that too many liberals favor.
Moore writes:
With these cases, it should be clear that, as Justice Antonin Scalia opined
in his McCreary County dissent, "nothing stands behind the court's
assertion that governmental affirmation of the society's belief in God is
unconstitutional except the court's own say-so."
In 1952, Justice William O. Douglas, writing for the court, stated in
Zorach v. Clauson, "We are a religious people whose institutions
presuppose a Supreme Being." And in 1961 in McGowan v. Maryland, Justice
Douglas observed that the "institutions of our society are founded on a belief
that there is an authority higher than the authority of the state, that there is
a moral law which the state is powerless to alter, and that the state possesses
rights conferred by the Creator which government must respect." However, this
week in McCreary County and Van Orden, the high court contradicts
history, logic and law in denying our inalienable right to acknowledge
God.
Whether Moore recognizes an inalienable right to express nonbelief in
any god remains a crucial question.
I champion the right of each adult, U.S. citizen to freely adopt, express and
- while fully respecting the individual rights of others - to put into practice,
one's religious and/or nonreligious views.
Moore, however, seems to favor an interpretation of the U.S. Constitution
that would treat U.S. law as subservient to a conception of God as the ultimate
authority. Per Moore, how our rights are to be interpreted and applied must
derive from such a conception and must accord with that God's sense of moral
law.
(Strictly speaking, of course, Moore wouldn't call it a "conception" of God. I have to assume that Moore would say,
"it's the real God," since presumably, Moore claims to know, not only that God
exists, but also, to know exactly who and/or what God is.)
For me, questions arise.
Which conception of God should serve as the "ultimate authority" in
interpreting U.S. law? What conception of theistically-based "moral law" should
be regarded as "higher" than U.S. law? And who is to determine the answers to
such questions?
Logically, if Moore's assertions were consistently made the basis of the interpretation of
law in the U.S, then wouldn't it be consistent with such interpretation
for a Supreme Court Justice of the sort that Moore would prefer, to cite the
Bible in interpreting and applying the U.S. Constitution?
Given the wealth of material that one can find in the Bible, and given the
fact that that text is notorious for lending itself to practically any
interpretation that a given interpreter might prefer, such an approach would
easily pave the way for allowing "activist," conservative justices to interpret
the Constitution every bit as whimsically as any "activist" liberal justices
ever have.
This causes me serious concern. Moore's expectations to the contrary
notwithstanding, his preferred approach to interpreting U.S. law leaves open the
question of who is doing the interpreting, and according to what conception of
"God" and "moral law."
Just as people interpret the Bible variously, so people's conceptions of
"God," and theistically-based "moral law" vary. Such variation persists
even among people who broadly share the same, "world religion." For example,
Christians vary tremendously in how they conceive of "God" and "moral law."
Unfortunately, Moore's remarks lend credence to some liberals' expressed
concerns that at least some conservatives want to impose a Christian theocracy
on this country.
The principles that Moore and too many other conservatives favor in this area
strike me as thoroughly incompatible with promoting the religious pluralism
which, to the extent that it still exists, I think is at the heart of whatever
greatness the United States still displays.
By contrast to the liberal and conservative positions, a libertarian
alternative - one which interprets the U.S. Constitution as a document intended
to protect the citizen's individual rights, and according to which the
government must neither promote nor prohibit religious expression - is the only
alternative that is rationally defensible, capable of defending human
well-being, or preserving what can properly be described as "the American
way."
|
|
Monday, 04 July 2005
|
|
I'm a fitness enthusiast, and today, I will post a few words about the history of my enthusiasm. I will also mention some tools that have helped me both to get into, and to stay in, shape.
Today, though, I'm interested in writing only about aspects
of my interest that have manifested themselves in recent years. At another time,
I may well write about the ways in which fitness captured my imagination while I
was growing up.
Just so it's clear, too, I make no money by recommending fitness books or products. So if I mention any, I'm actually not advertising.
Now, to the story. :-)
Some time after my wife, Cherita, and I were married, the fitness bug bit me.
I was quite out of shape, my waist size was about 40 inches, and I wanted to get moving.
The Body-for-LIFE (BFL) program introduced in 1999 by Bill Phillips in his book of the same title served as the program that I initially adopted. It worked wonderfully for me. I made tremendous progress even during my first three months. Then I made even more after that.
That book offers the advantage of presenting its program in simple terms. Some criticize that it markets (on just a few pages) some supplements that EAS (the company that Phillips then headed) sells. Especially now, though, I don't get caught up in marketing hype, and I know well that it's possible (and often, far less expensive) to make excellent progress without certain products.
Leaving aside some of the book's marketing, though, it outlines a good program that for many people can be marvelously effective.
In recent years, having studied fitness far more deeply, I've learned far more than that book outlined, though, and I've often used and benefited from different programs.
As a rule, though, my approach to fitness still involves eating six, small, nutritious meals per day; treating one day per week as a "Free Day" on which I can eat "unauthorized" foods; and utilizing some combination of aerobic and weight training exercise on alternate days. I also really enjoy walking on a regular basis.
For
a time, I even pursued fitness as a career, and professionally consulted with
people as they made progress in their efforts.
Due to our recent move, however, and the fact that given his health issues, I've undertaken full-time elder care for my father, I'm no longer pursuing a fitness career. I still love helping people with their fitness efforts, though, but now I do so in an informal manner.
Although Body-for-LIFE got me going, right now, if I were to name one fitness book that especially appeals to me, it would be Burn the Fat: Feed the Muscle (BFFM) by Tom Venuto.
This ebook is available online for purchase and download as
a PDF. The BFFM book explains how to put together a program that's very similar to the Body-for-LIFE program in many respects... but the
BFFM book explores much more deeply the principles that underlie fitness success. Much more than the BFL book does, Venuto's exploration provides the reader with information about how an individual can personally customize one's exercise and nutrition. (In advertising the BFFM book , Venuto compares his book with the BFL book, here.) The BFFM book also offers more specifics regarding the variety of exercise and nutrition approaches that a person can gainfully use. There is also an active BFFM Yahoo support group
to which people post every day.
I did slip once a few years ago, during which time I got out of shape again (though not nearly as far out of shape as I was before the fitness bug bit me in 1999). That same year, though, I refocused and got back on track. I've remained lean consistently ever since, with a waist measurement of 32 inches. I measure my body composition (including my body fat percentage) regularly, and it's rare that I get as high as 10% body fat.
While I was getting back in shape, I started using BalanceLog nutrition and exercise tracking software. This software tracks the calories that a user consumes in food and expends in exercise. I've been using it consistently since then... and it has been a central factor (along with keeping measurements, especially of body composition) that's kept me lean.
I'm so enthused about BalanceLog, in fact, that I often think of it as something of a "secret" that most people don't know about. Perhaps surprisingly, though, I think that BalanceLog remains a secret even to many of the people who have purchased it, but haven't yet fully integrated it into their lives. I imagine that most people, if they learned the principle behind it, and made a habit of using BalanceLog every day in combination with some variety of sensible exercise and nutrition program, would get into, and stay in, shape.
Even though I've tried several other, commercial computer programs that attempt to do much the same thing, BalanceLog easily remains my personal favorite. It's my
favorite for a variety of reasons, including that it's available not only for
Windows, but also for use on many palmONE handheld computers, such as
my Tungsten
T3. This makes it marvelously
portable. For those who have both the palmONE and Windows versions, they synchronize with each other. (Unfortunately, BalanceLog apparently doesn't
currently work on palmONE handheld phone devices, such as the Treo.)
I think that BalanceLog elegantly focuses on the "energy balance" that we each need to manage in order to get and stay fit, regardless of what nutritional or exercise strategy we happen to employ.
Given my interest in fitness and in this software, I've served as the owner and lead moderator of the BalanceLog Yahoo support group.
As with anything, though, I think that the trick with BalanceLog is the initial process of learning how to use it, and making a habit of using it consistently. |
|
Sunday, 03 July 2005
|
|
On Sunday, July 3, after attending church together, my father, wife, daughter and I traveled to the Village of Lakewood, Illinois. We made the trip for the sake of enjoying a visit, a barbecue and recreation with relatives. My cousin Joe and his wife Debbie hosted at their home. They provided us with ample and flavorful food. My grandfather, my father's father, who is ninety years old, was there. So were Joe's three younger brothers, Jim, Mike and Matt. Jim's wife Stacey also was there, as was Mike's wife Kate. The parents of Joe, Jim, Mike and Matt - my Uncle Ken and Aunt Madonna - also were there. We played croquet and bocce ball. Fortunately, the weather cooperated. It wasn't nearly as hot as it's often been lately, and it never rained. Our daughter, Aliana, started out as simultaneously repelled by and attracted to one of my cousinÃÂs dogs. She kept saying, "Don't eat me!" In time, though, she relaxed... and the dog had to be moved away from Aliana because she was petting and leaning on him too vigorously! Aliana enjoyed herself so much that by the time we needed to depart, she didn't want to leave. As my wife, Cherita, mentioned to me today, it was a pleasant, relaxed visit. Today, Cherita, Aliana and I walked to watch the Independence Day parade. My father opted to stay home. His choice later proved to be wise. Moments after the parade reached the point along its route at which we were sitting, there was a downpour! The crowd's efforts to exit reminded us of a Godzilla (or other disaster) movie's fleeing throngs of people. Fortunately, in this case, people fled from discomfort, rather than extreme danger. For us, it was actually funny - especially given that Aliana kept insisting that she didn't want to go home so soon! Then, though, she started complaining that her pants were getting all wet. Despite holding an umbrella, straight through our clothes to our skin, the cold rain thoroughly drenched us. After managing to get inside, Aliana defiantly insisted to her mother, "I will never let my clothes get wet in the rain again!" When Cherita told me about this soon afterward, she and I giggled. Once we had removed our soaked clothes, dried off, and put on new ones, in order to minimize the chill, Cherita kindly prepared - and together, the three of us drank and sipped - hot cocoa and soup. Then, as a family, the three of us just hung out together inside, and watched home videos of Aliana that Cherita had made when our daughter was less than two years old. Gradually, we each grew very tired, and to the sound of fireworks displays that sounded in the distance, we each went to sleep for the night. |
|
| | << Start < Prev 31 32 33 34 35 Next > End >>
| | Results 280 - 288 of 314 |
|
|