Ron Paul and the principle of subsidiarity.
Top o' the Stack.
Hey Bill, Got it now, thanks for clarifying. I hope you have a nice Sunday. May God bless you!
-
The Politics of Abortion
-
Nagel on Evolutionary Naturalism and the Fear of Religion
Substack latest.
-
Joe Biden: An Anti-Civilizational, Race-Baiting, Opportunist and Ignoramus
And as all of those things, a worthy representative of the contemporary hard-Left, hate-America, Democrat party. Ben Shapiro has his number:
More importantly, however, Biden's characterization of "English jurisprudential culture" as "white man's culture" is profoundly disturbing. English jurisprudential culture is rooted in the belief in the rule of law, due process of law, equal rights under law; English jurisprudential culture is responsible for preserving the natural rights we hold dear, rights which were imperfectly but increasingly extended over time to more and more human beings, particularly minorities. No less a leftist figure than Barack Obama explained just that in 2009, saying he sought a system at Guantanamo Bay that "adheres to the rule of law, habeas corpus, basic principles of Anglo-American legal system."
Protection of individual rights — and in particular, minority rights — lies at the heart of English jurisprudence. Yet Biden boiled down those rights to racial privilege. And the attempt to reduce the fundamental principles of our civilization to a mask for racial hierarchical power is both false and frightening. It suggests that those principles ought to be undermined for purposes of disestablishing that supposed hierarchy. Get rid of English jurisprudential law, presumably, in order to fight racism.
5 responses to “Joe Biden: An Anti-Civilizational, Race-Baiting, Opportunist and Ignoramus”
-
Prayer: A Fall-Back Position
Suppose there is no God. That might be so even if I am a believer. (And it seems that I must be a believer, actually or potentially, if I am to pray sincerely.) Whether or not God exists, when I sincerely pray for someone I produce benevolent thoughts that benefit me even if they do not reach beyond me. Intercessory prayer, then, is good for me even if God does not exist.
What about petitionary prayer? I take a dim view of petitionary prayer for mundane benefits for oneself. Petitionary prayer for another, whether for material or spiritual goods, falls under the rubric 'intercessory prayer' which is good for the one who prays whether or not God exists.
As for non-petitionary prayer to God, prayer in which I do not ask for anything material or spiritual for myself or for another, but simply aim to elevate my mind/heart to God in worshipping and loving him, this too is beneficial even if there is no God. In this case there is a self-elevation and self-ennobling in a God-ward direction.
Of course, I won't be able to engage in this sort of aspirational prayer unless I sincerely believe that the object of my worship, love, and aspiration exists. My point, however, is that I become a better man when I engage in this sort of prayer whether or not God exists.
This is the 'fall-back' should it turn out that there is no God.
Objection: If you pray in any of these ways, and God does not exist, then your prayer life is one of self-deception and you waste your time on an illusion!
Response: Not so! For the objection to hold water, the objector would have to know that God does not exist. But he knows this just as little as the believer knows that God does exist. Both the existence and the nonexistence of God are epistemically possible, that is, possible given what we can claim legitimately to know in the strict sense of 'know' which implies impossibility of mistake. One cannot prove either the existence of God or the nonexistence of God, if 'prove' is used strictly and responsibly.
An objector who thinks otherwise is himself guilty of self-deception. If he is an atheist, he fools himself into thinking that it is objectively certain that God does not exist, and if he is a theist, he fools himself into thinking that it is objectively certain that God does exist. There are rationally acceptable arguments on both sides of the question, but no rationally compelling (rationally coercive, philosophically dispositive) arguments on either side.
14 responses to “Prayer: A Fall-Back Position”
-
Negative Events: Likelihood versus Gravity of Occurrence
Suppose you pack heat. Someone might ask you, "But what is the likelihood that you, given your cautious and circumspect style of life, will ever be in a situation in which you will need to defend your life, or a family member's life, with deadly force?"
The question is legitimate. The answer is as follows. You must weigh the likelihood of the negative event against the gravity of its occurrence. Although it may be unlikely that you will need to defend yourself or another with a firearm, the consequences of not being able to do so are dire indeed: death of self or other.
The point is that you must not consider merely the likelihood of negative events, but also their gravity should they occur, when determining courses of action.
For a second example, consider wearing a seat belt. I never drive without seat belt fastened. Given my cautious driving habits, the likelihood of a serious accident on any given day are very low. But the consequences of going through the windshield are grave, in two senses of that term.
2 responses to “Negative Events: Likelihood versus Gravity of Occurrence”
-
Terrorist and Non-Terrorist Gun-Related Deaths
Top o' the Stack.
Clear thinking provided; vicious abstraction opposed.
Once again, I take on Howlin' Wolff, the Stoned Philosopher. (In all fairness, his little book on anarchism is excellent, and he is a good Kant scholar.)
Memo to self: write a separate post on vicious abstraction, an informal fallacy, undiscussed as far as I know.
3 responses to “Terrorist and Non-Terrorist Gun-Related Deaths”
-
Saturday Night at the Oldies: Women and Girls
Where would we be without them? Languishing in the sphere of the merely possible. On the other hand, "Pretty girls make graves." (Jack Kerouac, Dharma Bums)
Roy Orbison, Pretty Woman. Mercy! See how many of the sidemen you can identify. A great song that blends the tender and romantic with the thrustingly Dionysian.
James Burton wins the dueling Telecasters contest, but Bruce Springsteen is no slouch of a guitar slinger.
Bob Dylan, Just Like a Woman. I won't say anything lest I gush, my romanticism loosened by a delicious blend of tequila and Aperol. The polished Blonde on Blonde version. Van Morrison pays tribute here.
Bob Dylan, Girl from the North Country
The interplay of guitar and harmonica in this early masterpiece is perfect. The girl on the Freewheelin' album cover is Suze Rotolo. She died on 25 February 2011 at 67 years of age. 'Dylanologists' usually refer to the following as songs she inspired:
Don't Think Twice. This Peter, Paul and Mary rendition may well be the best. It moves me as much now as it did 61 years ago in 1963 when it first came out. It was via this song that I discovered Dylan. The 45 rpm record I had and still have showed one 'B. Dylan' as the song's author. I pronounced it as 'Dial-in' and wondered who he was. I soon found out. Numerous trips to the home-town public library made of me a proto-'Dylanologist.'
Boots of Spanish Leather. Here is Joan Baez's version. There is some irony in Baez's renditions of songs inspired by Rotolo: Dylan's affair with Baez was a factor in his break-up with Rotolo.
Ballad in Plain 'D'. There's quite a story behind this song. I'll tell you about it some other time.
Finally, a song written and sung by Baez about Dylan: Diamonds and Rust.
Van Morrison, Brown Eyed Girl. This one goes out to Kathy H.
Aretha Franklin, Natural Woman. Written by Carole King. Her version.
Rolling Stone, Honky Tonk Woman
Santana, Black Magic Woman
Eric Clapton, Have You Ever Loved a Woman?
Peter and Gordon, Woman
Elvis Presley, Santa Lucia
Andrea Bocelli, Ave Maria (Franz Schubert)
And many more . . . .
3 responses to “Saturday Night at the Oldies: Women and Girls”
-
Word of the Day: Perseveration
Leftists want to limit your vocabulary so as to limit your thought and make you easier to control. They want total control. David Horowitz says it well on his masthead, "Inside every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out." (When a transgressive calls herself 'progressive,' you know there's a cesspool of mendacity up ahead.)
perseveration /pər-sĕv″ə-rā′shən/noun- Uncontrollable repetition of a particular response, such as a word, phrase, or gesture, despite the absence or cessation of a stimulus, usually caused by brain injury or other organic disorder.
- The tendency to continue or repeat an act or activity after the cessation of the original stimulus.
- The act or an instance of persevering; perseverance.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition • More at Wordnik
-
On Strictu Dictu and Holus Bolus
Dubious Latin questioned over at Substack.
-
Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion . . . . (emphasis added)
Whence it follows that Joseph L. Biden is in dereliction of duty, an impeachable offence. Furthermore,
“No State shall, without the Consent of Congress … engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.” — Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution
“As each state will expect to be attacked and wish to guard against it, each will retain its own militia for it own defense.” — James Madison, speech at the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 16, 1788
“This is not over. Texas’ razor wire is an effective deterrent to the illegal crossings Biden encourages. I will continue to defend Texas’ constitutional authority to secure the border and prevent the Biden Admin from destroying our property.”
That’s the message sent via X (formerly Twitter) by Texas Governor Greg Abbott on Tuesday.
Obviously, Governor Abbott remains resolute.
And every patriot stands behind him.
8 responses to “Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution”
-
Curiously Apropos of Current Developments
Time to wake up, kiddies. It's going on 5:30 local time. Me, I've been up since 1:58, filled two notebook pages with hand-scribble, and did my time on the black mat with a black cat in my lap.
-
Thomas Merton on the Destruction of the Liturgy
It was with no excess of charity that I described Merton the other day as "a flabby liberal both politically and theologically." So let me balance that out a bit with a quotation from Volume Five (1963 – 1965) of his Journal. Here is an excerpt from the entry of 13 April 1965, Tuesday in Holy Week, p. 227:
On Palm Sunday everything was going well and I was getting into the chants of the Mass when suddenly the Passion, instead of being solemnly sung on the ancient tone in Latin, was read in the extremely trite and pedestrian English version that has been approved by the American bishops. The effect was, to my mind, disastrous. Total lack of nobility, solemnity, or even of any style whatever. A trivial act — liturgical vaudeville. I could not get away from the impression of a blasphemous comedy.
What was going on in the Church in those days? The Second Vatican Council. It ran from October 1962 to December 1965. Merton's attitude toward Vatican II was ambivalent as you might expect, but above he strikes a traditionalist note.
I myself would like to return of a Sunday morning to the piety of my pre-Vatican II boyhood and a Latin mass with my wife, a good Catholic girl, but the RCC seems bent on reducing itself to a pile of leftist junk, secular and useless. A comparison of the RCC with Budweiser seems fitting.
They have this much in common: they don't understand their respective clienteles.
Who drinks Budweiser? Connoisseurs of the brewer's art? No. Different sorts, but mainly country folk, rednecks, Hillary's deplorables, and Barack Hussein Obama's "clingers" to guns and Bibles. So what were the head honchos thinking when they enlisted Dylan Mulvaney to promote their swill? You know, that cute little narcissistic sweetie-pie who wants to grow up to be a girly-girl.
Beats me. Apparently, drinking Bud makes you none the wiser. The 'suits' seemed shocked by the predictable boycott and backlash and have reversed course with an appeal to Harley riders. They should have gone 'whole hog' with an appeal to outlaw bikers.
As for the RCC, I have vented my spleen and blown my stack over at the Stack:
People who take religion seriously tend to be conservatives and traditionalists; they are not change-for-the-sake-of-change leftist utopians out to submerge the Transcendent in the secular. The stupidity of the Vatican II 'reforms,' therefore, consists in estranging its very clientele, the conservatives and traditionalists.
The church should be a 'liberal'-free zone.
5 responses to “Thomas Merton on the Destruction of the Liturgy”
-
‘Post-Truth’
'Post-truth' is a silly buzz word, and therefore beloved by journalists who typically talk and write uncritically in trendy ways. There is no way to get beyond truth or to live after truth. All of our intellectual operations are conducted under the aegis of truth.
Read the rest at Substack.
-
Third Parties
Stack man is against them.
Third parties are discussion societies in political drag.
-
A Theological Speculation
At death the mists of self-deception will dissipate and we will see ourselves as we are and as we were with utter clarity. We will judge ourselves! God will not judge us directly. God will judge our judgment, whether by way of ratification or rejection.
8 responses to “The Politics of Abortion”