Saturday, February 27, 2010
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Now That's A Dinner Party
First, the invitation (really, a follow-up email to the invitees):
Dear All,And now for one of the guests' answers (only slightly redacted):
Since we will be having a group of like-minded folks, please come armed with one theological, philosophical, historical, literary, or political question to discuss over dinner (however -- house rules -- any discussion of Obama is strictly verboten.)
Some examples just to get you thinking are:
Why was the Renaissance a mix of great sensitivity to beauty and great violence?
Wine: French or Italian?
Why are all the women named Mary in Jane Austin Novels poor characters?
Should the Christmas tree come down before Epiphany?
Has Hobbes' goal of transforming life from "nasty, brutish and short" triumphed in our tidy, humane and long life? Is this an improvement?
Who is better for the soul? Bach or Mozart?
Is it possible to appeal to the modern American without the explicit graphics of Flannery O'Connor and Walker Percy?
Is tithing necessary when your pastor doesn't wear a cassock?
I likely won't be able to attend, alas, but heaven forbid that there be any sort of gathering where I can't be present to trumpet my humble but correct opinions. So, here are my answers; I realize that this means that there's no need to have a discussion over dinner, since you will have all the correct answers in advance, and that consequently ***'s birthday will be ruined, but such is the price we pay for truth, justice, and the *** Way.
At 01:23 PM **/**/2009, *** wrote:
Dear All,
Since we will be having a group of like-minded folks, please come armed with one theological, philosophical, historical, literary, or political question to discuss over dinner. (However -- house rules -- any discussion of Obama is strictly verboten.)
Some examples just to get you thinking are:
Why was the Renaissance a mix of great sensitivity to beauty and great violence?Wine: French or Italian?
- Well, if you're referring to religious or political wars and executions, people feel strongly about things that are worth feeling strongly about; passions are not wrong, but what we do with them is what gives them moral value. In an era where men felt strongly about the faith, this was certainly the case, plus politics and religion were inextricably intertwined. Not to mention the old dictum corruptio optimi pessimi also applies - it's a shorter step for someone who is willing to commit to good to be committed to evil, in a sense, because commitment is not foreign to him. CS Lewis makes reference to this in The Screwtape Letters when Screwtape laments the blandness of modern evil souls compared to the Pharisees. Or, conversely, St Paul was a firebrand for Phariseeism, and brought that same zeal to Christianity.
Why are all the women named Mary in Jane Austin Novels poor characters?
- Hmm, I don't know. Is Gallo a French or Italian name?
Should the Christmas tree come down before Epiphany?
- Anti-Irish prejudice?
Has Hobbes' goal of transforming life from "nasty, brutish and short" triumphed in our tidy, humane and long life? Is this an improvement?
- That's a tough one.....couldn't you ask something easier, like "describe the Beatific Vision"?
Who is better for the soul? Bach or Mozart?
- Hmmm. In certain ways, it could be argued that we have traded physically nasty, brutish and short lives for morally and spiritually nasty and brutish lives. We have more comfort and heightened "tolerance" in our day...but no one in Hobbes' era would have endorsed widespread infanticide or sodomy, and certainly not under the banner of being more humane. I could go on, but I think you see the point at which I'm driving.
Is it possible to appeal to the modern American without the explicit graphics of Flannery O'Connor and Walker Percy?
- Palestrina. However, Bach was more religious (despite subscribing to the Lutheran heresy) and wrote music that was more profound and less focused on merely stirring the emotions as opposed to stirring the soul.
Is tithing necessary when your pastor doesn't wear a cassock?
- Of course. How this would happen is a bit long for me to type, but I have ideas . . . that don't involve Oompa-Loompas.
- ABSOLUTELY NOT.
Posted by verily prosaic at 5:56 AM 0 comments
Friday, April 17, 2009
Everyone IS Someone If You Love Them
Everyone is someone.
Posted by verily prosaic at 5:29 AM 1 comments
Labels: humility, humor, personalism, prayer, sociology
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
How "We" Decide Our Economic Future
This video clip may make you release urine into your shorts:
Posted by verily prosaic at 7:57 PM 0 comments
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Philosophy: Causality
Posted by verily prosaic at 7:38 AM 0 comments
Labels: causality, humor, philosophy, statistics
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Blogging Doom
Have I said lately how much fun it is to blog doom?
It is strangely fun.
There. Now I've said it.
How does blogging doom fit into this blog?
(1) Its my blog.
(2) Its strangely fun.
(3) It reminds me of the hope in my heart.
(4) I hope it brings hope to others: confront reality; let the transcendentals* prevail.
* Truth. Beauty. Goodness. Etc. (ens, res, aliquid, unum, verum, bonum, pulchrum).
Posted by verily prosaic at 5:53 PM 0 comments
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Comment: Making Predictions Can Be Stupid
(Though they may be accurate).
Posted by verily prosaic at 6:49 AM 0 comments
Labels: humor
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Sunday, February 15, 2009
How to Refute Any Philosophical Argument
Posted by verily prosaic at 7:59 AM 0 comments
Labels: humor, philosophy
Philosophical Proofs
It would be nice to have a deductive argument that p from self- evident premises. Unfortunately I am unable to provide one. So I will have to rest content with the following intuitive considerations in its support: p.
Most people find the claim that not-p completely obvious and when I assert p they give me an incredulous stare. But the fact that they find not- p obvious is no argument that it is true; and I do not know how to refute an incredulous stare. Therefore, p.
P-ness is self-presenting. Therefore, p.
If not p, what? q maybe?
Can you name the philosopher to whom each of the above could be attributed?
Posted by verily prosaic at 7:31 AM 0 comments
Labels: humor, philosophy
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Wow. What an Idiot
We've all heard how historic it was to have the first African-American elected President back in November. Is it not equally important to have the first African-American ever elected to the position of Chairman of one of our political parties?Well, umm, no: sure Republicans live in the "real world". It'll be a long wait for that phone call.
Posted by verily prosaic at 6:17 AM 0 comments
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Why It Is Necessary to Check Homework
Posted by verily prosaic at 1:08 PM 0 comments
Labels: children, homeschooling, humor








