Memento

 Posted by on 23 June 2002 at 6:59 am  Uncategorized
Jun 232002
 

Paul and I watched Memento last night. Wow! I’m definitely looking forward to rewatching it. Here are a few non-spoiling comments:

The backwards progression in time was perfect for this plot. All the mystery resided in the influence of the past, not in any future events.

The plot was amazingly tightly wound. Most movies are cluttered with extraneous scenes, pointless little bits of time fillers. Those same movies usually also omit elements essential to a good movie. But in Memento, every moment is essential to the plot. Nothing is expendable. Nothing is extraneous.

I have been reading and enjoying Ayn Rand’s Romantic Manifesto these past few days. So towards the end of the movie, I began wondering if the movie was entirely naturalistic. After all, Leonard seems driven by his past, most of which he cannot remember or comprehend. But the end of the movie proved me gloriously wrong. Leonard’s own conscious and deliberate choice, combined with his virtues, created his future.

I love this quote from Leonard, said in the beginning of the movie: “My wife deserves vengeance. Doesn’t make any difference whether I know about it. Just because there are things I don’t remember doesn’t make my actions meaningless. The world doesn’t disappear when you close your eyes, does it?” That statement has a rather different meaning at the end, no?

Here’s a final funny thought: In the first five minutes of the movie, I thought to myself, “Man, this guy needs a blog!”


Share This Post

The Wicked Witch is Dead

 Posted by on 22 June 2002 at 7:44 pm  Uncategorized
Jun 222002
 

Ann Landers is dead. I can’t say I’m sorry. I’ve read her column intermittently over the years and regularly since my return to philosophy last summer. (Reading such advice columns and listening to Dr. Laura helps me get a sense for the sorts of moral dilemmas that ordinary people struggle with everyday.)

Ann Landers doled out some seriously awful advice on a regular basis. She was an altruist of the worst kind, recommending that people but up with obnoxious, mean, and immoral people because they were “probably lonely.” She routinely advocated putting people on medication as a way of solving moral flaws. In contrast, her twin sister Dear Abby, generally doles out good, common sense advice, despite her proclivity for sappy mystical stories about pennies from heaven.

So good riddance to bad advice!


Share This Post

Containment is Glorious

 Posted by on 22 June 2002 at 7:16 pm  Uncategorized
Jun 222002
 

The whole eastern edge of the fire has now been contained! VodkaPundit, worry no more! So now the only uncontained area of the Hayman fire is to the west, burning into wilderness, not homes. Woohoo! Hooray for firefighters!

In more troubling news, a number of small fires flared up elsewhere in Douglas County today, including one that was fairly close to us. They were all rapidly extinguished, thankfully. It was a grim reminder that the Hayman fire will likely not be the only wildfire we face this summer. Anyone want to start a betting pool for the number of evacuation alerts, voluntary evacuations, and mandatory evacuations that NoodleFood and GeekPress will face this summer? We’re already 1-1-0. :-/


Share This Post

Wild and Woolly!

 Posted by on 21 June 2002 at 9:07 pm  Uncategorized
Jun 212002
 

We are experiencing a wild and woolly storm here at this very moment! Poor Abby is, as usual, beside herself with worry over the wind and the thunder and the lightening. (Thankfully, the rain just started too.)

Don’t tell Paul, but I let her up on the forbidden couch to sit with me. I was hoping that she would be comforted by my presence. But I clearly didn’t make the grade, as she shortly jumped over the couch to go crawl under my desk, where she now lays, quivering in fear. Poor doggie.


Share This Post

Second Test Results

 Posted by on 21 June 2002 at 8:24 pm  Uncategorized
Jun 212002
 

So I took the test again to see how much my results would vary from just a few hours ago. I worked harder at a realistic assessment of my 7-ness, which is evidenced by its lower score, I think. So here they are:

Enneagram Test Results #2

Type Score Summary
5 21 Fives are basically on some level ambivalent about the world, consequently, their mind is usually their best friend. They like to analyze things and make sense of them (that is their anchor), perception and invention come naturally. The immense inner world of fives can cause them to lose touch or interest in reality.
8 13 Eights are natural leaders. They are straight forward, direct, large personalities, that are unlikely to back down to adversity. They have a talent for motivating others. They have a strong sense of justice and are often protectors of the weak. However, they also have short fuses and can become domineering tyrants.
4 10 Fours are all about being unique and creating their own distinct culture. They experience the highs and lows of life more intensely than other types. They take great pride in their aesthetic tastes. Fours often feel like misplaced children, and they long for a sense of real family.
7 10 Sevens are optimistic thrill seekers that see life as an adventure. They are always thinking of new possibilities and adventures. This constant zest for life can become escapism. Once things lose there fun they are no longer interested, so many projects go unfinished. Essentially, they avoid the difficulties of life because they fear being overwhelmed by them.
3 10 Threes derive self worth from success in the external world. They are highly skilled at adapting themselves in whatever way necessary to achieve success. This external success driven image often comes at a price of having a personal identity and they often are uncertain of who they really are.
6 9 Sixes are overly alert and anxious. They are skeptical of the status quo but are also fearful of being on their own. They satisfy their need for security and belonging by establishing strong friendships and/or loyally backing a cause.
1 9 Ones are idealistic and strive for perfection. Morals and ethics drive them. They live with an overbearing internal critic that never rests. They are always comparing themselves to others and are overly concerned with external criticism. They can be very judgmental and others perceive them as too uptight.
9 8 Nines are calm, laid-back, and optimistic. They are able to see everyone’s point of view, and have a natural desire for making peace. Consequently, they are effective mediators. Fearful of conflict and separation from others, they can be too accommodating and unassertive.
2 2 Twos are defined by their empathy of other people. They are uniquely gifted at tuning in on the feelings of others. This makes them great networkers, but being too caught up with other people can cause them to lose track of their own personal well being. Two charity is really a projection of how they want others to care for them.

There is a fair amount of difference in the ordering of the #2 to #8 slots compared to my first test. But I suppose that I can be very certain that I am a 5 and nothing like a 2. Over time, a person is supposed to integrate aspects of all the enneagram types into their personality. Perhaps I’ve just done that very well! :-)


Share This Post

Oh So Five!

 Posted by on 21 June 2002 at 6:59 pm  Uncategorized
Jun 212002
 

So when I took the the personality compatibility test blogged below, I noticed that it was an enneagram test. I’ve been interested in enneagrams for a while now, as Josh Zader introduced me to Don Richard Riso’s very interesting and clear book Personality Types a few years ago.

Riso’s enneagrams quickly captured my attention for a few reasons. First, Riso’s enneagrams seemed to distinctly and clearly capture most people’s personalities in a way that other typing schemes do not. Second, the description of my own personality type (which I’ll get to in a minute) identified and integrated some very strange traits of mine that I never ever would have thought of related to each other or shared with others. Third, there is little rosy glow to the enneagrams, as each of Riso’s descriptions of the nine enneagram types includes ten clearly identified levels of healthy to unhealthy functioning within that type. (To know that an unhealthy person of my personality type is the Unabomber is a bit chilling.)

Anyway, my reading Personality Types made it quite clear that I am a 5. (I expect that a great many bloggers are 5s.) I got similar results from the Similar Minds enneagram test:

Here’s my detailed results:

Enneagram Test Results

Type Score Summary
5 19 Fives are basically on some level ambivalent about the world, consequently, their mind is usually their best friend. They like to analyze things and make sense of them (that is their anchor), perception and invention come naturally. The immense inner world of fives can cause them to lose touch or interest in reality.
7 14 Sevens are optimistic thrill seekers that see life as an adventure. They are always thinking of new possibilities and adventures. This constant zest for life can become escapism. Once things lose there fun they are no longer interested, so many projects go unfinished. Essentially, they avoid the difficulties of life because they fear being overwhelmed by them.
8 12 Eights are natural leaders. They are straight forward, direct, large personalities, that are unlikely to back down to adversity. They have a talent for motivating others. They have a strong sense of justice and are often protectors of the weak. However, they also have short fuses and can become domineering tyrants.
9 11 Nines are calm, laid-back, and optimistic. They are able to see everyone’s point of view, and have a natural desire for making peace. Consequently, they are effective mediators. Fearful of conflict and separation from others, they can be too accommodating and unassertive.
3 10 Threes derive self worth from success in the external world. They are highly skilled at adapting themselves in whatever way necessary to achieve success. This external success driven image often comes at a price of having a personal identity and they often are uncertain of who they really are.
1 10 Ones are idealistic and strive for perfection. Morals and ethics drive them. They live with an overbearing internal critic that never rests. They are always comparing themselves to others and are overly concerned with external criticism. They can be very judgmental and others perceive them as too uptight.
6 8 Sixes are overly alert and anxious. They are skeptical of the status quo but are also fearful of being on their own. They satisfy their need for security and belonging by establishing strong friendships and/or loyally backing a cause.
4 8 Fours are all about being unique and creating their own distinct culture. They experience the highs and lows of life more intensely than other types. They take great pride in their aesthetic tastes. Fours often feel like misplaced children, and they long for a sense of real family.
2 5 Twos are defined by their empathy of other people. They are uniquely gifted at tuning in on the feelings of others. This makes them great networkers, but being too caught up with other people can cause them to lose track of their own personal well being. Two charity is really a projection of how they want others to care for them.

I tend to think that I scored more 7-ish on this test than I actually am. Interestingly, I know from too much personal experience that 7s are rather dangerous people for me to become close friends with. I suspect that it is my own unhealthy tendencies towards 7-ness that make 7s both attractive and dangerous to me. (So I might have score too highly 7-ish because I am ultra-aware of any minor slippage in an unhealthy 7-ish direction. But not all my 7-ness is unhealthy — and much of it is healthy. Certainly without it, I would be boring with a capital b.)

I wonder whether the longer test would give better results. This one didn’t seem to hit on many of the core issues for any particular type, as it was simply too short. I also wonder whether how much my results would vary if I took the test in a week or month or year. I’m sure that I’d still be a 5, the only question is how much the above numbers would vary.

Oh, and Paul’s results are here. It is interesting to me that he rated more 5-ish than me. But even more interesting (and accurate, when I think of it) is his high 9-ish score.

Since Paul was as similar to me as I was to Eric Raymond, we tried a direct comparison here. As it turns out, Paul and Eric have a higher similarity and compatibility rating (95% and 96%, respectively) than I do with Paul. Oh dear! I just hope that Paul doesn’t file for divorce and elope to Vegas with Eric Raymond!


Share This Post

Similarity Test

 Posted by on 21 June 2002 at 6:12 pm  Uncategorized
Jun 212002
 

This bit by Eric Raymond is so amazing that my brain is about to explode.

And… Yoohoo! Eric!

SimilarMinds.com Compatibility Test
Your match with Eric S. Raymond
you are 92% similar
you are 91% complementary
How compatible are you with me?

Okay Paul, time to see how you measure up!

I’m going to join the site so that I can take the real test.


Share This Post

Busy Bee

 Posted by on 21 June 2002 at 1:15 pm  Announcements
Jun 212002
 

I’ve been busy updating the web site today!

I’ve posted my lecture to the COLP convention, The Philosophical Underpinnings of Capitalism, which argues that political theories collapse into one of four distinct forms of statism without a philosophical foundation of reason, egoism, harmony of interests, and mind-body integration.

I’ve added my lecture notes from two short speeches to Toastmasters, one entitled “Hidden Clues,” the other “You Like Dr. Laura?!?.” [I've since deleted those, as being of too little interest. -- DH, 23 Aug 2012]

I’ve also added a bunch of internet posts from the past two months. [I've since deleted those, as being of too little interest. -- DH, 23 Aug 2012]

And finally, I’ve added the slide presentations in PowerPoint for my 2001 talk on forgiveness and redemption.


Share This Post

On the Brink

 Posted by on 21 June 2002 at 6:45 am  Uncategorized
Jun 212002
 

Oh, woe, I feel like some washed-up girlfriend upon reading this entry from Brink Lindsey:

I’ve now been at the blogging game for three months, posting almost every weekday and not infrequently on weekends. My guess is that I’m ready to scale back to once or twice a week — I’ve never thought that I could maintain this initial pace for the long term, but I figured more-or-less daily posting at the outset was necessary to build up readers. I hope the folks who’ve discovered this blog over the past three months will continue to tune in even if it’s updated less frequently. We’ll see.

He lured me in with his excellent analyses, only to abandon me once I was hooked on him. The bastard!


Share This Post

Jun 202002
 

A while back, I was working on my lecture on metaphysics and epistemology for the Objectivism 101 course soon to be given at the TOC Summer Seminar. Working on that lecture reminded me that my own serious interest in Objectivism was largely sparked by Ayn Rand’s short description of her theory of concepts in “The Objectivist Ethics” (of VOS). At the time, I was immersed in the confusion and muddle of a very demanding philosophy of language course. The obviousness and simplicity of Ayn Rand’s account hit me like a sack of bricks:

A “concept” is a mental integration of two or more perceptual concretes, which are isolated by a process of abstraction and united by means of a specific definition. Every word of man’s language, with the exception of proper names, denotes a concept, an abstraction that stands for an unlimited number of concretes of a specific kind. It is by organizing his perceptual material into concepts, and his concepts into wider and still wider concepts that man is able to grasp and retain, to identify and integrate an unlimited amount of knowledge, a knowledge extending beyond the immediate perceptions of any given, immediate moment. Man’s sense organs function automatically; man’s brain integrates his sense data into percepts automatically; but the process of integrating percepts into concepts–the process of abstraction and of concept -formation–is not automatic. (VOS 21)

It was clear to me at the time — and is even more clear now — that this description was merely a beginning of a theory of concepts. But what a promising beginning it was — and still is!

So I’ve long wanted to write a book entitled How I was Seduced by Epistemology. Perhaps that will be the title of my autobiography when I’m a wrinkled old philosopher. In any case, with a title like that, the book cover will have to look like this:

Yowza!


Share This Post

Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha