Tue Feb 01 2005 16:22 Capitol Hill:
Tue Feb 01 2005 16:22 Capitol Hill:
Thu Feb 03 2005 10:54 Western Return:
Tue Feb 15 2005 13:16 Snowy Morning:
Mon Feb 21 2005 13:17 New shoes and holiday weekends:
Wed Feb 23 2005 10:46 Job Interviews:
Louise and I got an email yesterday that was from a certain Anne-Marie who is a recruiter for an English school out in Japan. We have been applying for work there and she is getting back with us about times for interviews.
Here’s the situation: Louise wants to go to this training program at the school of the blind at Louisiana State University, but that program is for 5-6 months. The English school will be looking for people to teach in August, and there might be a chance for flexibility but we don’t know exactly how much of a chance. The training program costs $20,000 and we could get funding here in Utah, but it might be more difficult to get funding for the program in Texas after we move there.
I also have Medical School Interviews in August through October, and being in Japan will make it inconvenient to fly back and forth to and from Japan, but not impossible. We would like to go to Japan, but we will see if this all pans out the way we want it. Ideally we would go from October to July.
These are exciting plans for us. We have a little bit of time before we start really getting into work and family, and I think that taking this little bit of time to work in Japan will be nice for both of us to learn and experience a different culture and identity. Besides, after Louise has had her adventure, maybe I can settle her down and we can start having kids. We are looking at going to the island of Shikoku and our home base will be out of the city of Takamatsu. It is a nice rural area with minimal westernization, I am told. We are interested to see the peace park at Hiroshima as well as the historical parts of Kyoto.
In the end, I figure that we will be plenty well off in the future. I don’t need to rush to be a doctor because it is just as important enjoying the journey as enjoying the destination. Anyway, that is what I tell myself, and being with Louise, I think that is true.
Thu Feb 24 2005 11:20 Why even try???:
So, yesterday I was talking with a couple of friends about The Da Vinci Code and I mentiond that it was anti-christian. I got the same response that it was anti-catholic but not anti-christian. This is the probably the forth time that I have gotten that response from different people.
Perhaps it is just me, but wasn't the book saying that Jesus's divinity was created for political purposes by Constantine in order to pacify the pagan citizenry? (To name just one instance in the book.)
Also, we had a lively debate in my english class about bias in writing. The assignment is for us to write a <i>review of literature</i> (I will write on Affirmative Action) and that I am supposed to inject a little bit of subtle bias. The reasoning is that everybody has bias anyways, and the trick is to disguise the bias in a cleverly sophisticated analysis of weaknesses of the research of the opponent. These social scientist think thay have a handle on the hard truths, but how can they be credible when they claim cultural relativism from a universally objective pedestal. Their conclusions are contradicted by the very premises of those conclusions.
I almost think that this is almost dishonest. I want to do a fair review of all the research that has been done on the topic, (mainly because I myself am torn because of the great merit of both arguments and the supporting research of both sides). Furthermore, there are some things that I believe which will not be borne out by scientific research (i.e. resurrection of the body).
Furthermore, I am not a "randroid" objectivist, but I do think that it is possible to come to the truth in at least some areas. To say "everybody is biased" to me is like the abusive husband saying "well, nobody's perfect" in excusing his ill-temper. Both true, but the newtonian bias that the NASA scientist had when they sent a man to the moon was only centimeters away in the end from the Einsteinian relativistic ideal. If you are going to the grocery store, thinking in terms of relativity is hardly worth the time because the Newtonian paradigm is a far more useable tool.
I think we can reach a certain degree of objectivity and impariallity. The world isn't perfect, and everybody does have some sort of prejudice, but should we not make an attempt to eliminate those personal impartialities? Can we ever attain a just society? Is the rule of law just some nice idea that we will never actually attain, or justice another opiate handed down from those who happen to be the strongest and nothing more?
As for me, I would like to think, along with Keplar, Newton, and Einstein, that we can in some way come to know the mind of God. In terms of religion, I think that this desire is even more attainable.
Well, I am not going to edit this, so hopefully I was clear and didn't make too many mistakes in putting my thoughts down.