Sunday, June 6, 2010
Book I have been reading for 4 years
It isn't often that I don't finish a book for years, well I just finished one last night that took that long. This book was "Mel Gibson's Passion and Philosphy." It took me a long time to get through it which is indicative of my review of the book. Unfortunately I have read a lot of the 'pop culture and philosphy' series of books and after a while it is just the same thing over and over. This book was actually a little different in that some of the essays were unique but I don't think that saved the book. I feel the series on a whole has gone downhill and this book was a clear example. It just wasn't engaging. I remember having an intense reaction to the movie (I am an evangelical Christian for reference, or at least I think that is the sect that most defines most of my beliefs though there are major differences between me and the dogma). Anyway. I can't recommend this book. If you want to read about philosphy and christianity there are better books and if you want to read one of this specific series there are way better ones as well.
Friday, June 4, 2010
Quick Post: Classic Daily Show
So for some reason this segment of the Daily show has been in my head recently. So I am posting it. :-)
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| South Park Death Threats | ||||
| ||||
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Video round-up
Thought I would highlight a couple of videos I watched tonight because they were interesting. So here we go:
1) Question: Do you think reason.com could defend government intervention in the fishing industry and spin it towards a free market solution?
It was interesting to here this argument which I had never really heard made. I think there is a moral hazard in the other way though for instance, overstating fishing reserves or promoting the growth of one species over another so they can get more of the quota. I just never thought I would hear that argument before.
2) Question: Can John Stewart attack someone from the American Enterprise Institute?
Answer is yes again. I don't know what I think about this answer. I think John Stewart instead of actually attacking the book attacked the methods the soft sciences use to understand the world. I feel like this attack was slightly unjustified. Also he didn't really let the guest talk enough. The guest was trying to say that there was a dissonance between the views the voters had and their actions and John Stewart wanted to take his argument to an extreme. This was extremely unhelpful to the discourse in my opinion. He would have better served his audience to not have gone that way. However he did have good points that this isn't some vast conspiracy and that sometimes the markets are messed up and need a little help from the government. The problem is the government is usually the source of those problems but I digress.
3) The last set of videos are the most recent videos on 'Uncommon Knowledge'. I won't post the link since you can get to it from the sidebar and I can't really recommend the videos. The discussing was all about foreign policy, Israel, and Iran and I feel the discussion wasn't intelligent nor thought provoking and in general boring and unhelpful.
1) Question: Do you think reason.com could defend government intervention in the fishing industry and spin it towards a free market solution?
It was interesting to here this argument which I had never really heard made. I think there is a moral hazard in the other way though for instance, overstating fishing reserves or promoting the growth of one species over another so they can get more of the quota. I just never thought I would hear that argument before.
2) Question: Can John Stewart attack someone from the American Enterprise Institute?
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Exclusive - Arthur Brooks Unedited Interview Pt. 1 | ||||
| ||||
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Exclusive - Arthur Brooks Unedited Interview Pt. 2 | ||||
| ||||
Answer is yes again. I don't know what I think about this answer. I think John Stewart instead of actually attacking the book attacked the methods the soft sciences use to understand the world. I feel like this attack was slightly unjustified. Also he didn't really let the guest talk enough. The guest was trying to say that there was a dissonance between the views the voters had and their actions and John Stewart wanted to take his argument to an extreme. This was extremely unhelpful to the discourse in my opinion. He would have better served his audience to not have gone that way. However he did have good points that this isn't some vast conspiracy and that sometimes the markets are messed up and need a little help from the government. The problem is the government is usually the source of those problems but I digress.
3) The last set of videos are the most recent videos on 'Uncommon Knowledge'. I won't post the link since you can get to it from the sidebar and I can't really recommend the videos. The discussing was all about foreign policy, Israel, and Iran and I feel the discussion wasn't intelligent nor thought provoking and in general boring and unhelpful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
