Mr Chenko's Musings

I just read this out to Sebastian. He say's yo...

2012-04-08T23:18:26.882+01:00

I just read this out to Sebastian. He say's your right on the mark. There's more of course (as you know), but it's a great start. Will you write his funding applications?, he asks.

Your points are good, and the arguments well put. ...

2012-03-18T19:34:33.920Z

Your points are good, and the arguments well put. Yes, the party should make more noise in support of its policies, and laud any successes made. Yes, the debates need to be more public. Currently the Tory right wing seems stronger than it was. Clegg needs to get more positive.

It is normal for parties in power to lose popular support half way through the term of office, and this is what is happening to the LDs, who see their best policies bite the dust. The idea of ditching Clegg at the end of the 5 years seems very sound. You are right to point out the ways in which he has broken his promises and lost people’s trust. We have wondered whether to stay in the party.

Because it’s normal to lose support at this stage, it is important for the party to keep its sights on its longer-term objectives; to have a comprehensive set of its own policies, which it should keep putting forward so that at the end of 5 years there is a crescendo of interest in them. I think that this, if anything, would be the best. And yes, let’s ditch PC. I like T Farron better. It’s an embarrassing shame that 2 of our most able people have had to resign, or take a back seat through personal problems. LDs need now to identify their best players, and to make sure that those chosen don’t look likely to have such problems.

I'm not sure the lib-dems can save themselves....

2012-03-17T17:34:41.128Z

I'm not sure the lib-dems can save themselves.

A breakaway party might make a go of it; it would have to distance itself from all the current cabinet members in the party. Perhaps Evan Harris and some of the other "Social Liberal" types could head it up.

Is it right to provide so many university places w...

2012-03-03T17:27:26.766Z

Is it right to provide so many university places when there clearly aren't enough graduate positions to be filled?

It creates a buyers' market where companies can pick and choose which graduates they want, and those that aren't chosen are left with pretty awful options and poor support.

I don't think it's right for the government to set itself such high targets for numbers of people getting degrees - it is unfair on the people who are then overqualified and in debt, but often left without significant vocational experience.

http://isthatthenewmoon.blogspot.com/2012/03/enter...

2012-03-03T14:32:56.460Z

http://isthatthenewmoon.blogspot.com/2012/03/entering-debate.html

From the disabled graduate's point of view

Or bring back the scheme you and Em got on for gra...

2012-03-03T13:40:37.609Z

Or bring back the scheme you and Em got on for graduates (including the disabled ones!). That worked, you've both got jobs now.

Also, I don't want CV support from someone who doesn't understand my skills and can't spell. The university careers service offers this tailored to us already.

We may be changing every single moment, but we are...

2012-02-27T17:49:31.648Z

We may be changing every single moment, but we are still the same person. If I take an action now, I experience the consequences. It may be at a later time, but that fact that we are changing every single moment does not make us different people moment to moment.

In particular, actions we've taken in the past will always be part of us. We cannot change those. If someone from the past was deeply offended by my long-past love for the Spice Girls (and what reasonable person wouldn't be?) I wouldn't be able to say "I'm a different person now" and mean it literally. I would have to say "Sorry to offend, but I now recognise the error of my ways and would not make such a decision anymore."

I hope this clarifies.

Hi Arkady, do you realise you've just tackled ...

2012-02-27T12:47:19.597Z

Hi Arkady,
do you realise you've just tackled the central theme of Buddhisnm? And come up with the same answers? As well as looking at the relationship between action-and-consequence (karma) – which Buddhism needs to work hard to discuss, as - if we are heirs to the consequences of our actions – and yet we are changing every moment (funamental tenet of Buddhism), then who is it who experiences the consequences?
- Locana

To give them credit, I would like to mention that ...

2012-02-25T18:46:16.161Z

To give them credit, I would like to mention that I really appreciate Author of the Original taking the time to address all of their responses, genuinely being open to other people's opinions and encouraging exchange of ideas. I really do appreciate debate on volatile subjects that doesn't degenerate into a flame war, and I don't think I told them that.
- Emily

Good post. I particularly liked the bit about conf...

2012-02-12T21:29:30.358Z

Good post. I particularly liked the bit about confidence. Fake it till you make it, indeed.
Of course, your more serious forms of acting may not necessarily do this for you. I'd say it's the comedic style we do in particular, that relies on reading audience reaction and appropriate amounts of improvisation, that impacts on a person's confidence more than anything else.

Yes. Now that I've read about it, the idea see...

2012-01-31T00:50:38.759Z

Yes. Now that I've read about it, the idea seems like a waste of money, and I'd prefer to see it go towards, say, doing more to improve the relevant sections of the Natural History museum, if that money were to be spent on something relevant. But promoting rational thinking would be good too.

The Australian Skeptics and Western Sydney Freethinkers do similar stuff to your proposed Church of Atheism. They meet up, talk about particular issues, have dinners, have guest speakers, organise events for charity, attend conferences, give talks at conferences, and other assorted good things. If I were still in Australia I'd go every week, too. :)

It's a cool idea. Dawkins makes a good point b...

2012-01-29T01:20:53.027Z

It's a cool idea. Dawkins makes a good point but a boring one in that it'd be more useful to spend the money on other things. But meh to useful.

I'd say that the sermons should be lectures, rather than sermons. You could invite guest speakers to tell the congregation about philosophy, evolution, literature, astrophysics, etcetera.

Of course, you wouldn't have a mass like most churches, because those are just the mindless repetition of Church doctrine. I suppose you could cobble together a bizarre imitation by reciting the virtues of rationality and the steps in the scientific method, but it'd be a bit silly.

Bunking off labs doesn't just hurt your grade....

2012-01-23T12:17:02.396Z

Bunking off labs doesn't just hurt your grade. It hurts the grade of your entire lab group. It's not something to be taken lightly.

Maybe rules are needed on how many hours you are permitted to campaign for (per day) if bunking lectures is a necessity for success!

If you are who I think you are, I'd be happy t...

2012-01-23T12:13:09.785Z

If you are who I think you are, I'd be happy to lend you the books next time I see you.

I should point out that equating "I don't...

2012-01-23T12:11:14.460Z

I should point out that equating "I don't know" with "God did it" (i.e. "God-of-the-Gaps") is different from the "Prime Mover." There is ALWAYS the question of "what came before that?" For many people - including religious people in the scientific community - they say that eventually science will hit a point of "we CAN'T answer what came before..." They place their God wherever this point is. (The point that God transcends time is useful for them here, as time itself didn't exist before the Big Bang, so in some respects asking what happened "before" the Big Bang is like asking what's North of the North Pole...

Scientists have more to do, and less free time and...

2012-01-23T01:17:13.388Z

Scientists have more to do, and less free time and energy. Yes, they could "bunk off" for a week, but a missed lab session in my department meant a lab session deducted directly from your grades. I'm not sure if you can say the same thing about the contact time of a humanities student. Certainly the language lessons I had never awarded credit for attendance.

My suggestion is this: scientists are more able to see the world as it actually is, and therefore to recognise that politics is ridiculous.
Futhermore, they realise that the sum impact of today's student politics upon anything of meaning is close to nothing, and decide to devote their efforts to something more worthwhile, like their degrees.

Regarding the wikipedian argument: Ignoring the fa...

2012-01-23T00:43:28.520Z

Regarding the wikipedian argument:
Ignoring the fact that "great" is not defined, and taking it to mean "super special awesome", I take issue with number 2:

2. Being is greater than not being

This isn't inherently obvious, but it's the assumption upon which the entire argument rests. You could reverse it without it being any less true or meaningful.

Similarly, "perfect" is undefined in your rephrasing of the argument, and 1. is not inherently obvious.

I haven't read anything by Dawkins, although I'm starting to feel that I should (or at least his early work). Then again, it seems that to miss being able to judge The God Delusion myself would be a travesty.

I agree with the thrust of your post: semantics ma...

2012-01-23T00:26:12.939Z

I agree with the thrust of your post: semantics make a lot more trouble than they're worth. Arguments often spiral into pointless bickering over semantics, where there could have been an enlightening exchange of views.

And although the core of the arguments do run together, insofar as you point out, I do find it repulsive to equate "I don't know yet" with "god did it". The latter stinks of satisfaction in ignorance.
To frame it differently, this is how rain was explained when the content of the first book of the bible was created. Back then, god opened a window in the sky (which was a big dome he made to separate sky-water and ground-water) and let water fall out. Maybe you already knew that.

My point? People being content with a complete handwave of a fascinating, real, and worthwhile question annoys me. I should probably get a blog rather than ranting in the comments of yours.

Good post.

Yes. Edited.

2010-09-09T19:52:16.565+01:00

Yes. Edited.

"Any rule against team orders is totally enfo...

2010-09-09T17:20:40.225+01:00

"Any rule against team orders is totally enforcible." Do you mean (I think you do) "Any rule against team orders is totally unenforceable"?

No, purely anecdotal, and purely from my perspecti...

2010-08-05T19:40:59.475+01:00

No, purely anecdotal, and purely from my perspective.

What is posted here should be treated as a hypothesis worth testing. You may find it works for you, you may not.

Just be really careful, if you try it, not to be passive aggressive. That's pretty much worse than out-an-out telling someone they're wrong.

Do you have any empirical evidence that "Socr...

2010-08-05T18:08:42.342+01:00

Do you have any empirical evidence that "Socratic questioning" is more effective than a more "aggresive" approach?

There's a podcast of the full event here: http...

2010-08-03T17:21:46.048+01:00

There's a podcast of the full event here: http://poddelusion.co.uk/blog/2010/08/03/westminster-skeptics-frank-swain-the-science-punk

An interesting post. The problem is that part of l...

2010-08-03T16:12:15.287+01:00

An interesting post.
The problem is that part of life in the 21st century is taking a lot of science for granted - as who has the time, never mind ability to understand every discovery to date? So how does one decide which ones to question? Celebrities and the mainstream media don't help either, as it seems 'cool' these days to be baffled by all things maths and science.
Then there's the fact that unfortunately humans, like many other elements of nature, will generally opt for the path of least resistance. Thus if it's easier to conform rather than confront, the majority will roll with it... especially if it is convenient for them to do so.
And there lies the crux of the problem, especially as those making claims may be convincing marketing professionals etc. Thus bashing facts won't get you anywhere; after all who likes being told they're wrong.
But lets not forget delusion can be a good thing, it's what keeps most of us happy, sane individuals. If all of us were skeptics that shot down theories, ensuring everything was black and white, we'd be living in a very dull world.

I agree, hapsci. Some systematic reviews have a t...

2010-08-03T14:38:37.485+01:00

I agree, hapsci.

Some systematic reviews have a third party remove the conclusions and results from a paper while its method is being assessed for inclusion. It is quite an interesting way to read a paper if you do this on purpose.