I am not.
Just got home from the first Ultimate of 2007 - work* ended at about 11:45 today, so I jaunted over to Cognex across Route 9 and joined the computer programmers for a quick game. And I am totally out of shape, couldn't really run for any more than two seconds, tweaked a hammy, my right IT band seized up, my ankles were sore and my heel ached a little by the end. If this game was** a Magic Eight Ball, then "Signs point to No."
* - Work: Egads. A very mixed week. A fairly egregious academic dishonesty incident where two students took advantage of my niceness (they essentially asked me for help on a math problem that I thought was from their homework when it was actually from a test they were actively taking - good good y'all), evoked the wrath of their normally nice math teacher and one of them may have gotten the big fat starts-with-E-X-P thrown at them. I also have three students in my class, all seniors, who continue to skip assignments and not participate in class and are all in danger of failing / not graduating. AWESOME. On the plus side, we watched a couple of Global Warming videos this week and the response was great - we actually had a solid 55 minute sdiscussion session on Thursday. Good times.
** - Just wanted to point out that this is one of the few times that "if it was" is correct.
I'm kinda a wreck out there, and all I'm good for right now is the throwing (which I can still do well). Or, in fantasy parlance, I am like Dave Roberts - only good for one category.
Geez, fantasy. two leagues in which I am trying to be relatively dedicated / serious is quite a burden. But fear not, I won't let it take away from my awesome blogging responsibilities. Both of you will still have something to read every day.
Just finished the Modern Scholar's Faith and Reason, a lecture series by Peter Kreeft, a philosophy professor from our very own Boston College. In contrast to the other one-sided accounts I read yesterday, Kreeft's series is extraordinarily methodical and presents the arguments on both sides of the table. If there was a weakness to this lecture series, it's that the topics were a little to broad for even a seven CD collection - there was a lot fo general debating on the existence of God, heaven, hell, morality, and whatnot, but because Kreeft was debating the general concept of God and not a particular religion's version, some of his claims became a little washed out. That's a very minor complaint - overall Kreeft nails down something of a religious philosophy canon - he expounds upon every argument out there, points out which ones are arguments for certainty and which ones are arguments for probability. He also restricts much of his discussion to a strict Socratic logic, limiting the shots he takes at the various calims to addressing their internal consistency. He very evenly elucidates the two sides to each question, continues to elucidate what the two sides responses would be, and imho very fairly assesses each one. I'm going to NR it because it's a lecture series and not really intended as a work of art or a piece of entertainment, but I will recommend it, especially to the believer who doesn't always delve into what they believe: this is a nonconfrontational set of lectures where you can really evaluate if what you have been taught makes sense to you. If the unexamined life is not worth living, then it's a very short jump to conclude that the unexamined religion is not really worth believing.
That's more or less it from this end - beck just finished up in Phoenix, so she'll be home shortly. I have some tutoring and some more self humbling Ultimating to do this weekend, and otherwise I'll just be chilling with the S&W. So give a shout if you want, and if I don't answer, I am either out or screening my calls. :)
I'll leave you with a very cool shot of a samurai sword slicing an egg is SUPER SLO MO....
No comments:
Post a Comment