William M. Briggs

Statistician to the Stars!

Page 2 of 546

NYC Protesters: ‘What Do We Want? Dead Cops!’ What They’ll Get Is Something Else

“Comedy” (or perhaps “farce”) is a good word to describe the human predicament given events like Sony (the hacked company which revealed emails with lame jokes) studio head and noted progressive Amy Pascal having to “run to Al Sharpton next week to beg for forgiveness“.

Run to Al Sharpton next week to beg for forgiveness! AL SHARPTON!

Now if you don’t find that hilarious, then your imagination is stunted, your sense of history and proportion is sadly narrow, and your educational upbringing largely constituted of propaganda. You’re probably also a danger to yourself; at the least your mental well being is suspect, and you might, if you are exceptionally far gone, even be a danger to society.

Incidentally, it’s one thing to pretend to be “shocked”, “sickened”, “horrified”, suicidal or worse by these emails. So much is expected because of the certifiably insane, really quite lunatic, way race relations are in this country. But if you really are “shocked” etc., then baby, you are a — — — — —. I can’t say the word in an open forum. But you know damn well what it is. We’re raising a nation of mollycoddled half-witted hyper-sensitive snivelling weepy perpetual children. Sticks and stones may break their bones, but microaggressive names will plunge them into sickening (to witnesses) despair. Idiots.

Remember when we discussed herd immunity and the waning of Christianity? How plenty of folks, particularly young ones, safely ensconced in the remnants of Christian structures but ignorant of that fact, think everything will be fine, nay superior, once we throw off the final “religious shackles” and judge morality based on enlightened voting? And how, because few have any memory what Western civilization was like without the civilizing influence of Christianity (never being taught any history that wasn’t ideological), everybody is in for a rude surprise in, say, thirty to fifty years?

Same sort of thing applies to the idiot children (some of them fully grown) who marched through my backyard Saturday night chanting, “What do we want? Dead cops?” Dead cops, mark you. They also, further cementing the poop-filled diaper metaphor (or should I say reality?), chanted that they wanted it “now”. (Another contingent of mentally challenged did similar things in Berkeley. It’s unclear whether they received class credit for it.)

Some of them meant that “now.” Some officers were assaulted. The tweet above (linked here if you can’t see it) shows one bag of confiscated hammers, which some homicidal maniac (I speak literally) brought to use on the skulls of police (see this).

See if you can put yourself in the shoes of the cop who has just fingered the collar of the bloodlusting fool with the deadly weapons. The miscreant is probably foaming at the mouth and resisting arrest, probably shouting some standard activist slogan like “Kill! Kill! Kill!”. You get the idea.

If I were that cop and I thought nobody was looking, I’d be severely tempted to show that young man the kind of damage hammers can inflict. I’d call it a science demonstration. Tempted. I don’t think I’d do it unless the contemptible halfwit actually struck me and I felt I was defending myself.

Multiply this temptation across the hundreds to thousands of cops at these many “demonstrations” (demonstrating what? sublime unteachable ignorance?). Are you not as surprised as I that nobody has yet received what was coming to him? If the demonstrations continue, it’s bound to happen, and when it does the media will trumpet it as “brutality.” This will prove beyond any doubt any civilized person might yet cherish that journalists are among the least of us. But skip that.

Suppose these mental mole hills are granted their wish and we have a few dead cops and nobody does anything about it (like our self-styled communist mayor). Further suppose that cops, having had “sensitivity” grilled into them, pull back from black neighborhoods and stop the arrests. What will happen?

For whatever reasons, blacks commit far more crime than any other group (see the FBI stats here and here). This is just the raw statistics talking—and they’re talking an order of magnitude for violent crime, more for lesser crimes. Stop arresting criminals and the crime rate climbs. Where it peaks nobody knows.

The “demonstrators” don’t know now how good they have it. Herd immunity. The police have done these past few decades a marvelous albeit imperfect job (name one profession which is perfect). Remove police, lower their moral, let crime increase, and what happens? Nothing good.

One day these silly children are going to go too far and some authority is going to, as C Northcote Parkinson colorfully put it, “have the moral courage” to fire into the crowd. It’s at that point the “demonstrators” will get the exact opposite of their “demands.”

Update The fellow behind the hammers is—are you ready?—a CUNY professor and “poet”. What rhymes with (his words) “F*** the police”?

Update Although the points made here have nothing to do with it, let’s acknowledge racism does exist in America, and it sure is ugly. For instance this and this from a NYC official who said “Racist NYPD *******”.

Summary Against Modern Thought: Nothing Is Predicated Univocally Of God & Other Things

This may be proved in three ways. The first...

This may be proved in three ways. The first…

See the first post in this series for an explanation and guide of our tour of Summa Contra Gentiles. All posts are under the category SAMT.

Previous post.

Perhaps a simple way of summarizing this chapter is that (what is not surprising) God is unlike anything else, and our language, properly used, necessarily must reflect this. I’m trying out the new footnote style here, too.

Chapter 32: That Nothing Is Predicated Univocally Of God And Other Things

1 FROM the above it is clear that nothing can be predicated univocallyi of God and other things. For an effect which does not receive the same form specifically as that whereby the agent acts, cannot receive in a univocal sense the name derived from that form: for the sun and the heat generated from the sun are not called hot univocally. Now the forms of things whereof God is cause do not attain to the species of the divine virtue, since they receive severally and particularly that which is in God simply and universally.[1] It is evident therefore that nothing can be said univocally of God and other things.ii

iUnivocally: having one only one unambiguous meaning. Aristotle: “A man and an ox are both animal, and these are univocally so named, inasmuch as not only the name, but also the definition, is the same in both cases: for if a man should state in what sense each is an animal, the statement in the one case would be identical with that in the other.”

This is contrasted with equivocally; e.g. saying “he’s tall”, “that’s a tall order” use tall equivocally. Don’t argue with me, this article is an argument!

iiIt’s obvious the sun and the heat we feel from it, though both are hot, are not the same thing. We must use hot equivocally. As we’ll see below, the things that we can say about God we can’t say about things which aren’t God.

Here is St Thomas on the same subject in Summa Theologica (emphasis mine):

…In the same way, as said in the preceding article, all perfections existing in creatures divided and multiplied, pre-exist in God unitedly. Thus when any term expressing perfection is applied to a creature, it signifies that perfection distinct in idea from other perfections; as, for instance, by the term “wise” applied to man, we signify some perfection distinct from a man’s essence, and distinct from his power and existence, and from all similar things; whereas when we apply to it God, we do not mean to signify anything distinct from His essence, or power, or existence. Thus also this term “wise” applied to man in some degree circumscribes and comprehends the thing signified; whereas this is not the case when it is applied to God; but it leaves the thing signified as incomprehended, and as exceeding the signification of the name. Hence it is evident that this term “wise” is not applied in the same way to God and to man. The same rule applies to other terms. Hence no name is predicated univocally of God and of creatures.


4 Again. That which is predicated univocally of several things is more simple than either of them, at least in our way of understanding. Now nothing can be more simple than God, either in reality or in our way of understanding. Therefore nothing is predicated univocally of God and other things.iii

iiiDon’t forget simple is a technical term here, meaning not made of parts, with no potential, etc. Whatever we can discover to say univocally about God can’t be said of anything else in that same way.


5 Further. Whatever is predicated univocally of several things belongs by participation to each of the things of which it is predicated: for the species is said to participate the genus, and the individual the species. But nothing is said of God by participation, since whatever is participated is confined to the mode of a participated thing, and thus is possessed partially and not according to every mode of perfection. It follows therefore that nothing is predicated univocally of God and other things.iv

ivA gross simplification, or perhaps a good parlor game: see if you can name of thing predicated of God which cannot be predicated of anything else. For example, “God is being-itself” which predicates the being-itselfness of God. But other things certainly have being (you do, I do), though nothing else is being-itself. Inasmuch as we can comprehend this term (which is a long way short of the fullness of it), we can only say this univocally of God and of nothing else.


6 [THIS ARGUMENT MAY BE SKIPPED] Again. That which is predicated of several things according to priority and posteriority is certainly not predicated of them univocally, since that which comes first is included in the definition of what follows, for instance substance in the definition of accident considered as a being. If therefore we were to say being univocally of substance and accident, it would follow that substance also should enter into the definition of being as predicated of substance: which is clearly impossible.v Now nothing is predicated in the same order of God and other things, but according to priority and posteriority: since all predicates of God are essential, for He is called being because He is very essence, and good because He is goodness itself: whereas predicates are applied to others by participation; thus Socrates is said to be a man, not as though he were humanity itself, but as a subject of humanity. Therefore it is impossible for any thing to be predicated univocally of God and other things.vi

vIt would be circular.

viA last emphasis. If we can speak univocally of God, whatever term we happen to use it would then be impossible to use it univocally of any other thing.


———————————————————————————

[1] Chs. xxviii., xxix.
[2] Ch. xxiii.
[3] Chs. xxiv., xxv.
[4] Ch. xxiii.

The Reimaginings Of Exodus And Noah Inspires Moviemakers—And You!

John Nolte doesn’t like Ridley Scott’s Exodus: Gods and Kings.

…Scott makes a fool of himself. DeMille used the ancient biblical tale to tell a universal story about human liberty. Where Charlton Heston’s Moses demanded that Ramses “Let my people go!”, Bale’s Moses — and this is no joke — demands that Ramses pay his slaves a living wage and make them — again, no joke — citizens. DeMille’s Moses was a liberator. Scott’s Moses is a community organizer agitating for executive action on the minimum wage and amnesty.

Now Darren Aronofsky’s Noah was just as tuned to our post-Christian ever-so-delicate sensibilities. In his review of that movie, Nolte writes:

The sins of idolatry, blasphemy, dishonesty, adultery, and treating your parents with disrespect have absolutely nothing to do with why God wants to flood the earth and start over. “Noah” isn’t even interested in Jesus’ commandment to love one another as you love yourself.

Aronofsky’s “God” is only disappointed, disgusted and ready to be rid of man for the single sin of hurting the environment. And hurting the environment is defined in the film as strip-mining, eating animal flesh, hunting, and even plucking a flower no bigger than a dime because “it’s pretty.”

…Every glimpse of those God will wipe out shows these “sinners” exploiting Mother Nature. They butcher meat, tear live animals to pieces, hunt, mine, and cut trees. According to Aronofsky, that is all these people are guilty of and that is enough to justify the coming biblical genocide.

If “God” can destroy the world for the mortal sin of pressing pretty flowers, what sort of hell, with your enormous carbon “footprint”, do you think awaits you, you climate denier, you?

But Noah made money, and early forecasts are that Exodus will do at least okay. The Bible is in and profitable. It is a rich source of moral stories that has barely begun to be mined for movie material. So, our job today is to help filmmakers with suggestions of which tales we’d like to see.

Sanitized tales, of course. We don’t want to offend anybody. Feelings must not be hurt. We—us blessed folks living on the right side of history—know more than our unenlightened ancestors. Obviously, we cannot present the Bible as it is written and must tweak it a bit. Here are some of my ideas (in which I exercise artistic license). What are yours?

Sodom and Gomorrah: The Pride And The Glory

Two mysterious strangers approach the desert twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. A festival—a parade, wine, food, circus acts—is in progress. The innkeeper Lot sees them approach. He curses under his breath, “This is all I need.” Flashback: Lot kicking out tenants who could not pay, kicking in the teeth of a man who will later be seen in the festival parade, and kicking around cats and small children.

The strangers ask for a room. Lot, seeing they are rich, boots other guests to make space. He offers his daughter and wife to the aggrieved as recompense, throwing all into the street. Seeing this, the incensed crowd reacts and tries to bring Lot to justice. The man with the kicked teeth shouts, “You inhospitable brute!”

Lot escapes into the night through a hidden back door. Meanwhile, the strangers, who have been at the wine, realize what has happened. Turns out they are members of the Yogic Guardians, mythic creatures from the planet Cron charged with meting out punishment throughout the seven hundred worlds! The strangers go into Down Dog Supreme in order to blast Lot to smithereens. But as they are inebriated, their aim is off and the towns are destroyed instead.

Lot sees this and his heart softens. He weeps and vows to mend his ways. We end with an elderly Lot (who now runs a bathhouse in Nineveh) sharing a lovely sunset on his porch with his beloved goat Franklin.

The Sharing (A Lifetime movie)

After a long day community organizing, a weary Jesus wants nothing but to rest and eat. But his followers bring a women to him saying, “This woman has said, ‘All lives matter‘.” Jesus knew they were testing him and said, “That’s racist.” He directed that the woman be re-educated by trained experts.

His followers were many and Jesus was worried there would not be enough food. But an apostle reminded that good man that all his followers were members of the Green Organic Cooperative and that they had plenty and were willing to share. “That’s a miracle,” said Jesus.

Later, all sit around a single organic candle and sing songs celebrating how nice it was to be nice to one another.

Confession: I claim no originality. Minus the cinematic details, these plots are directly from modern theologians.

Podcast: Peer Review, Bob & Ray Do Statistics, Academic Calls For Killing Of (Post-Birth) Babies

 


Show Notes

Wired’s PubPeer article. PubPeer.com itself. PubPeer’s discussion of “Macroscopic Observability of Spinorial Sign Changes under 2π Rotations“.

Bob and Ray can be found at, inter alia, the Internet Archive, which is also where you can find today’s snippet.

Getting to be the worst person you can see if you’re worried about your health is a “doctor.” These fellows are now and increasingly killing people who come to them—especially in post-Christian Europe, in places like The Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg. But here, too, in Oregon, Washington, and Vermont.

And if people like Udo Schuklenk have his way, it’s going to get worse.

The abstract of Schuklenk’s Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery article.

You can read about Heterotaxy Syndrome here.

The lecture from which Schuklenk’s clips were gathered.

Happy Birthday Frank Sinatra, and Merry Christmas.

Bonus! The podcast is also at YouTube (YouTube also says the video is blocked in Germany because of the 30 second Sinatra clip). I’ll work on restoring my iTunes feed. Maybe. Download the MP3.

Update It is to this level of podcasting perfection to which your host aspires.

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2014 William M. Briggs

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑