Last Week [chat]
Last week. But, of what?
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes" - Obi-Wan Kenobi
Disagree?
Blizzard Achivement Points to span all games:
“Your ‘WoW’ score would be just one factor that will go into your Blizzard Level. And rather than call it a ’score,’ we just wanted it to be like you’re leveling up on Blizzard games… You’ll have this Blizzard identity, and you’ll be able to see things like ‘Oh, this guy was great at Diablo III, but he never played Starcraft and he was mediocre in WoW. That sort of thing.”
Posted by
_J_
at
5:39 PM
0
comments
Labels: diablo III, WoW
Cary and I are off to Lollapalooza for the weekend. Follow Live updates at twitter.com/thesupermikey
Posted by
Mike Lewis
at
10:08 AM
1 comments
Labels: liveblog
Mike Gallagher was on Hannity and Colmes talking about Obama not giving his children birthday and Christmas presents and...well, just read the transcript...
Mike Gallagher: I mean, Sean, did you notice in the big cover story in People magazine this week, it was revealed that the Obamas don't believe in giving their children Christmas presents or birthday gifts?
Sean Hannity: Yeah.
Mike Gallagher: Now -- we've been looking for proof that they're socialists. There it is. There's proof positive that this is a socialist family. These children are going to have a lifetime of therapy to have to contend with. They don't give them -- they don't give them Christmas or birthday presents? You've got to be kidding me. I'm telling you, I'm -- I'm worried about these kids not getting Christmas and birthday presents.
Sean Hannity: I'm with you, Gallagher.
Mike Gallagher: I mean they're going to wind up -- Sean, they're going to wind up on a bell tower someday if we don't send them presents.
Posted by
_J_
at
4:01 PM
9
comments
I've been watching House a lot over the past few weeks. As I've listened to their method of diagnosis and read about the terms and diseases they discuss a question has formed. So, let's talk about what a few words mean.
Evolution: While the definition of Evolution is articulated differently depending upon the particular source of the definition its core is that "Evolution" is the concept of replication with change. A species or class or type changes over time, mutates over time, and those changes and mutations are passed along through various particular manifestations of a species or class or type via, in biology, its genes.
Cancer: Cancer is the term used to denote a class of malignant Neoplasms or "growths". While Carcinogens promote the propagation of Cancers a particular organism's response to exposure to a carcinogen will be influenced by that particular organism’s inherited traits of susceptibility, its genes.
Genetic Disorder: A Genetic Disorder is a detrimental abnormality in a particular organism which results from an abnormality in its chromosomes or genes.
Here's my poorly worded, unnuanced question: Are not Genetic Disorders and Cancer particular manifestations of the core concept of Evolution? Are not Genetic Disorders and Cancer the result of that which occurs in the process denoted by the word "Evolution"?
For the moment let's abandon the social implications or understandings of these concepts and rather assess these concepts without bias. The idea of Evolution is that fundamental structures of life change over time. For example, the finches Darwin observed are said to be related but not identical. Each particular manifestation of a finch was an example of a modification to the larger category of "finch". How are Genetic Disorders and Cancer in human beings not the human equivalent of a change to beak structure?
Evolution is not sentient, not a god-esque force in Nature making decisions and assessing merits. Evolution is change; unbiased, unencumbered change. Darwin noted that species which evolve to have characteristics which are detrimental to survival die off whereas species which evolve to have useful characteristics thrive. But evolution does not make a conscious decision of "detrimental" or "useful". Evolution is merely change. Reality is where those characteristics play themselves out and "detrimental" or "useful" is observed based upon the impact a particular mutation has on an organism's survivability.
When you think about it? Cancer and Genetic Disorders are instances of Evolution, of that tendency for mutation which is a fundamental component of life within this reality. Treating Cancer, treating Genetic Disorders, is really an attempt to treat Evolution. Yes, in some instances doctors treat the result of evolution. But in others? They are attempting to treat evolution itself, to take particular biological instances of Huntington's Chorea and somehow modify these results of Evolution to not have that which they have evolved to have.
While we could focus on the boring, arbitrary conversation of whether or not treating these "diseases" is right or wrong, beneficial or detrimental, it would be more interesting to assess whether or not I am correct. Are Cancer and Genetic Disorders part of the process of Evolution? Are not these changes and mutation merely the result of the facticity of the reality in which we live, that fundamental process which occurs in the reproduction of the species? Evolution is replication with change. Are not Cancer and Genetic Disorders little more than that replication with change? Are not Cancer and Genetic Disorders the sorts of things which occur through Evolution?
Posted by
_J_
at
11:56 AM
12
comments