Misthought

Sorry for the very long delay, I've been working on several projects and thought a quick blurt might be nice here. This is pretty much a observation and a writing down of a method of thinking.

If you are North Korean or Russian or Chinese then you may have to believe that American forces are driven by corporate interests - after all the last bastion of Marxist thought must be to proclaim ones sensitivity of Capitalism in any area. Much like being pious or holding faith -for such a retracted point which does not outright offer another candidate for something that we must presume then needs no candidate- deserves respect without consideration for it's implications. But the fleeting point here is that if we aren't talking about feudalism or some other pre-Capitalistic method of doing things we must then we are talking about socialism or communism. If this is the case then indeed as the anti-Americanizationists mean to say that if corporatism is bad then we intend for the state to make a loss from war. And I don't here exclude war as a premise only because no corporation has ever declared war.

William Lane Craig

It's a weird concession that's made when Craig gets a free pass to his evangelizing. He is a noted debater and often given the title of Champion of Modern Day Christianity. Craig offers up an explanation to trump any rational argument against him by saying areas of science -be it understood or not- explain for god, the complete one eighty from the usual theist argument that god explains science. He also doesn't rely on his belief as substantial evidence for god, he sticks with combative yet persuasive arguments that reminded me of Deepak Chopra with a well made script to hide any mysticism as he continues to intently avoid a suspension of belief.

There is however a set of fallacies with Craig's position, you see religion isn't religion without faith and to say that there is a scientific explanation for god brings two questions to the forefront as debating points. One, does Craig believe that science proves or explains for miracle works in some way and/or the supernatural which in other words; the what can only be explained by humans as supernatural? The second question is then if he believes the first or whatever derivable conjuration of the first question that he makes; does that mean science proves Zues, Odin, Set, Sol, Vishnu and so on or does science adhere to his dogma alone and only proves his god? Two fair questions I believe, there is no sense in debating Mr. Craig because he takes up the impossible task of saying science proves the supernatural when by virtue if the supernatural was provable by science it would cease to be supernatural. The challenge here is that gravity would be abstract unless we knew what it was before we named it and yet god remains abstract no matter what we name it.

Ego and Morals

Normally between guys we get into ego contests which are consummated as being a measuring of ones own  against another ones phallus. I can't rightly say I can challenge my dear reader to such a contest without a perhaps sinister sleight of hand being express - I guess not sleight enough. But I can make a short challenge between my reader and I on who has the larger frontal lobe, I've picked this only because I believe I could win, assuming you my dear reader are indeed more psychopathic than I am. 

A Gentleman by the name of Ahmed Omed Khpulwak a BBC reporter was killed by US soldiers when he reached for something as reported by the soldier; it was believed that he was reaching for something and his identity was mistaken for a suicide bomber. Now typically Press ID in a heated area is respected by NATO forces which probably means it wasn't in clear view, also he spoke English which makes me all the more suspicious. I'd imagine if I were an unarmed reporter I would be yelling at the top of my lungs in English to US troops while I was chin first on the ground and hands away from my person. And so I'll start the query off with what I believe to be a difficult proposition, should the family of Mr. Khpulwak be entitled to any damages?

I received a question earlier this week from a female friend, it was a telling reference of a past philosophical question on the use of a person if they were born blind, deaf or missing some other sense. I was taken aback at how incredibly aghast it must be for any literature hobbyist (my friend) to forget Hellen Keller and a sister one at that, the shame of it should be unbearable. And what a question it was; asking that psychopathic babble be weighed with rational thought as if they were on equal ground, what a pretentious and ill construed machination hiding behind the white veil of proper learning, with its eye lashes fluttering as to suggest nothing is amiss.

I hope that was interesting and take care.

My First Blog

In this blog, four friends under the pseudonym Arceb Laoce will be making postings about any topic.

Be gentle.

Welcome to the blog, I'll try not to bore the reader as well as not bore myself. You can come to expect a slow but steady flow of my travels around the world this coming month either on this blog or my travel blog, and I'll share as much as I can. When it comes to my writing style or the words you will find at work on this blog, there are a total of four writers on this blog and three of them will probably post once a year in a treatise format, the other two (myself included) will be posting information relevant to our interpretations.  I write pieces on anything from  Gender Relations, Politics, Religion and History with the intent of pointing out the cliches and the ironies.

Have a Day!

~ Favorite Quote Today:

"What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof." - Christopher Hitchens

  ~ Image of the day:

The Iron Lady.