This is G o o g l e's cache of http://sixteenvolts.blogspot.com/2006/08/lamentations-of-their-women.html as retrieved on 7 Sep 2006 21:04:48 GMT.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.
This cached page may reference images which are no longer available. Click here for the cached text only.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:Sr8GCtKxiZMJ:sixteenvolts.blogspot.com/2006/08/lamentations-of-their-women.html+site:sixteenvolts.blogspot.com&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=289


Google is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.

Send As SMS

« Home | About the Middle East, Congo and European misunderstandings » | It's a no-brainer » | Maybe they'll fix these problems in Vista » | Til they're all the same color » | Up and at them » | I heard the news today, oh boy » | The party of proud boylovers » | An afternoon of poetry with Rev. Ilkkamöller » | Drop in, tune out » | One thousand and one nights with Ilkkarazade »

The lamentations of their women

Even though I have been a staunch atheist for all my life, I always enjoy in thinning our ranks of hypocrites and dweebs. Vox Day has a new post "Fun with atheists" that humoristically points out that

When one goes on the customary "religion is responsible for most of the wars in history" rant, instead of arguing with them, agree wholeheartedly and state your admiration of their brave, contrarian support for Mel Gibson's idea that the Jews are responsible for all the war in the world.

And once the atheist starts backpedaling, ask him which religion he means and take it from there. Especially in light of the twentieth century, atheists should really give up the whole "religion causes wars and if everybody was an atheist then we would live in peace" canard. Throughout the history, wars have stemmed from the simple fact that it has been easier to take than to make, to consume than to produce, and this simple truth has then been sugarcoated with nobler-sounding rationalizations fo rally the troops to attack the neighbouring tribe.

I haven't checked out the always-excellent Agoraphilia for a while. New posts "This Is How Cynical I've Become" and "Adverse Selection in the College Cafeteria" point out certain perverse incentives related to college education.

I always hate it when somebody posts a video on Windows Media format embedded on a web page, because what just happens is that the Windows Media player object on the page starts loading the clip and then nothing happens. Sometimes it works, but it just silently fails so often that I don't really even get disappointed any more. This in contrast to Quicktime or YouTube clips, which always just work. Why can't all things always just work? Speaking of YouTube, I noticed that Valleywag has an article "Why YouTube is about to die" that makes the same points that I made in the post "Bang for the buck" and more. When the end comes it will be abrupt, but I give it up to a year simply because the whole thing is now so big and well-known that no venture capitalist wants to take the risk of YouTube magically becoming profitable and then everybody will laugh at him for being the modern equivalent of "Nobody will ever want a personal computer in their homes" or "Talkies have no future". What is a million bucks or two each month for a serious VC, after all?

Checking out the news from the old country, I can see that some polka outfit named "Loituma" has become an Internet celebrity. The video was included on the site, but of course it didn't work for me. Fortunately there is always YouTube that offers a whole bunch of videos. Perhaps after this sudden rise to fame, Pizza Enrico will become the next Internet superstar from Finland. In fact, people of all ethnicities should try to dress up as people of other ethnicities and even use makeup to change their skin tone accordingly, and then try to imitate their stereotypical mannerisms for a comical effect and finally post the results to YouTube to entertain others. I am certain that there is great untapped potential in this genre.

6 comments

While religions rarely cause wars in themselves, exceptions proving the rule, religious differences between groups can inflame existing conflicts and, as said, provide noble-sounding excuses for extreme solutions. With different group identities, conflicts turn into a matter of Us vs. Them. Inequalities of wealth, for example, seem to become a lot more galling if haves and have-nots belong to different religious groups (or ethnic, for that matter). It is simplistic to claim that religion causes wars, but no doubt it has made many wars possible that would not have occurred otherwise.

Off the topic and into the always amusing complexities of feminism. I'd recommend Daphne Patai's and Noretta Koertge's excellent book "Professing Feminism". Written by two former, now rather disillusioned Women's Studies professors, the book chronicles the degeneration of academic feminism and dissects its rhetorical and ideological follies with dry, ironic precision. Pity those two women who actually wanted to do proper academic study on gender roles... The dawning of harsh reality must not have been pleasant. Anyway, the book benefits from insider's perspective; the writers certainly now what their stuff and, since they're still feminists, they aren't tempted to demonize what's sufficiently ugly in itself.

Vacuuming is a transgressive act of liberation co-opting the symbolic objects of phallocratic domination!

I am always perplexed how people arrive at atheism. Atheism claims to know of the non-existence of God. But since God, if he/she/it exists, cannot be examined by scientific data, proving that there is no God is as problematic as proving that there is one.

The atheist and the believer both make there own leaps in faith, just in opposite directions.

"Atheism claims to know of the non-existence of God.:

Wrong. One cannot prove the non-existence of anything. You cannot prove a negative.

Atheists conclude that there is no God because of a complete lack of positive empirical evidence of God's existence.

I think it's sometimes possible to prove non-existence. I suppose one can prove the non-existence of a number that is both even and odd.

Well well, the null argument of the so called "agnostics" is back.

I would like to point out that not one of the two billion one-eyed midget-astronauts that rule the universe from the dark side of various moons in the various near-by solar systems, has been proven not to exist.

Therefore belief in the nonexistence of any single one of them is a "leap of faith".

"two billion one-eyed midget-astronauts that rule the universe" -

Hmm, I can't say for sure they don't exist. In fact, this might explain a few things here on earth.

Likewise, I don't know that God does not exist either. You can believe that there is not a God based on a "lack of empirical evidence", but that is different that saying "I am certain that there is not a God".

Besides, a "complete lack of empirical evidence" is going a little far. The fact that we are self-aware creatures roaming the planet wondering about our origins, seemingly programmed to ponder supernatural explanations, seems like some evidence to me.

Sure, we could be here due to some random cosmic hic-up, but there could also be some type of intellect behind it.

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link

Contact

ilkka.kokkarinen@gmail.com

Buttons

Site Meter
Subscribe to this blog's feed
[What is this?]