Good morning.

1. A commercial hack?
2. The technology behind carbon fiber, not exactly explained.
3. Steward on the Sherrod kerfuffle.
4. Those leaks and a likely consequence.
5. NaCl and soteriology.
6. More NaCl here too.
7. Gallantry … a old fashioned notion, for which the revival of same would not be a bad thing.
8. Mr Kerry and his taxes.
9. Like a poll tax?
10. Kind or clever … and a question begged.
11. An argument for irresponsibility examined. I reject proposition (b).
12. Diversity training in action.

Good morning.

1. Lithuania and demographics (linked from here).
2. Attention span problems? Advice here.
3. A book suggestion.
4. In the Obamacare bill.
5. Spanking.
6. Technically speaking Islam is a cult … Cult as defined means: followers of an exclusive system of religious beliefs and practices.
7. Elections in the land of the not very free at all.
8. I’ve seen liberals asking in numerous occasion, “How would the right react if there was a Black Tea Party movement.” How about, with strong affirmation?
9. Mixed signals in high school.
10. Savings … well, to be honest the current environment is sending a strong message not to save. Ever heard of low interest rates?
11. Obama lied? Say it ain’t so.
12. Discussing Academia.

Good morning.

1. Words on racism, with which I basically agree. Aff. action and other policies on racism support ontological racial distinctions … which is why they tend to support and reinforce that which they are trying to remove.
2. Where blogging is really political.
3. Flailing against “deeper than objective reason” and forgetting that most of life is like that. Your love for, well anything, but take your love for your beloved and/or your children. This is not a thing established by “objective reason.” Perhaps you don’t like the term “deeper” but that is something of shorthand for “more profound and basic.” This also connects with the piece on the Jewish discussion in which objective discussion disproved God, yet they prayed (calmly) on the way to immolation.
4. Weather without climate change hyperbole.
5. A film noted.
6. Ladies, I’m sorry but in real life it’s just not all that complicated.
7. Propane.
8. A girl and a map.
9. Ms Sherrod’s case reviewed.
10. Discussing Colonel Lynch’s solution to a vexing problem (which by the by had nothing at all to do with race relations).
11. Our new healthcare working for (or against) us.
12. Memory Eternal.
13. I’m not sure that would work for me … how about you?

Many of the more liberal Protestants churches these days practice an “open communion”, in which they welcome anyone professing to be Christian to share Eucharist with them. Apparently the ECUSA doesn’t even require Baptism for participation in Eucharist. I don’t know what the common practice is at other Evangelical churches, Baptist or the conservative reformed churches might be … but my particular church (Eastern Orthodox) does not practice this. To share Eucharist in the Orthodox church one must be a member in good standing, have confessed recently, and fasted from food and water (on Sunday) since midnight. 

In the Didache, Chapter 14 we find (wiki on the Didache is here): 

And coming together on the Lord’s day of the Lord, break bread and give thanks, confessing beforehand your sins so that your sacrifice may be pure. And everyone having a quarrel with his fellow member, do not let [them] gather with you until they have reconciled so that your sacrifice may not be defiled. For this is what was said by the Lord: “In every place and time, offer me a pure sacrifice because I am a great king,” says the Lord, “and my name [is] great among the nations.”

It seems to me this teaching is both based in Scripture and applicable to the notion of open communion. There are in fact non-trivial doctrinal differences between our churches. That we might approach these irenically does not belie the underlying seriousness and importance in working to resolve these differences. However, the word “quarrel” is important. We do not gather together and share communion until we are reconciled so that our sacrifice might not be defiled, not the least of which by our quarrel. 

So I’m curious, if your Church practices open communion … why? By what reasoning do you justify that practice? What tradition? 

Good morning.

1. TARP criticized.
2. Russia and its Soviet past.
3. Considering privacy.
4. A fool.
5. Zoooom.
6. A defense of Mr Gibson.
7. Discussing ordination.
8. The new anti-stimulus bill springs into action.
9. The reliability of journalists.
10. More on the recent canons from the Vatican here and here.

Good morning.

1. This jumped out at me, “Muslim “ideology…does not believe in a woman’s right to do anything.” … Uhm, I’m pretty sure nobody’s “ideology” believes that anybody has a right to do anything regardless of ontological category (gender, class, or whatever). For that matter, nobody thinks everybody has the same rights to do the same things either. 
2. Batman and dead languages.
3. Apathy (or more technically accidie) is winning.
4. On Mr Obama’s overwhelmingly unimpressive jurist nominee.
5. More hope and change for y’all.
6. The Sherrod lesson.
7. Cinema … another good discussion here.
8. Stupid racist tricks.
9. Carpe diem.

Good morning.

1. Life imitates art, Kafka version.
2. Hypocrisy and the life of the Congress-critter. 
3. Is there anybody dumber than Mr Biden?
4. Distancing from Mr Obama … already 8 timezones or so away. I think “honest” is a good enough to create a huge separation.
5. Religion in the land of the Cossack.
6. Work and joy.
7. Tribute offered.
8. The myth of liberal guilt. Not unrelated.
9. Another liberal myth.
10. A teacher.
11. Ignoring taxes.
12. Pot shots at the most incompetent in our midst.
13. Deontological dinner party.
14. In the face of evil, in the absence of God … what to do?
15. Considering unemployment extensions.

Good, uhm, mid-day.

1. Earmarks and moral hazard.
2. Cinema and the cold-war.
3. Baltic states in the news with Ms Clinton.
4. Union reps hiring min-wage strikers seems somewhat comparable to declaring a hunger strike but still eating.
5. Mr Obama lies about GOP stance regarding extending unemployment. Color me unsurprised.
6. Actually, I guess that’s a broken promise and a lie.
7. Speaking of Mr Obama and his hyperbole.
8. Tea party and racism, some data examined.
9. More on racism here.
10. Elijah’s ascent, and the “as if.”
11. Criticism of a progressive polemic.
12. Greece, military and economy intertwined.
13. Theories of conspiracy abound.

Good (alas late) morning.

• Budget response.
• Riffing on Blake.
• Hyperventilating on secrecy. “Every day the NSA … collects and stores 1.7 billion” phone calls and emails, which means no human agent is paying any attention to that. Uhm, so what? 
• Diversity and diversity.
• Cinema.
• Gender roles and the Roman church.
• Gas.
• Why won’t they condemn? Why won’t liberals publicly condemn every fringe movement on their shores? Same reason. (hint: its a fruitless waste of time).
• All in a day’s work.
• In the aftermath.
• A song and debt.

I’ve recently acquired this little book by the Met. John Zizioulas, Lectures in Christian Dogmatics. One of the important points made by Met. Zizioulas is that (Orthodox) theological thinking often is just a paraphrasing and restating of what has been already set out and stated by the Fathers. In his words, 

It is unfortunate that much of today’s Orthodox theology is in fact nothing but history — a theologically uncommitted scholar could have done this kind of ‘theology’ just as well or even better. Although this kind of ‘theology’ claims to be faithful to the Fathers and tradition is in fact contrary to the method followed by the Fathers themselves. For the Fathers worked in constant dialogue with the intellectual trends of their time to interpret the Christian faith to the world around them. This is precisely the task of Orthodox theology in our time too. 

So, with that in mind, I’m going to begin reading through this book and discussing some small points I encounter on the way (as time permits). Met. Zizioulas begins by defining and discussing what is meant by these terms. What is Theology? How might we define it. He begins:

Theology starts in the worship of God and in the Church’s experience of communion with God. Our experience of this communion involves a whole range of relationships, so theology is not simply about a religious, moral or psychological experience, but about our whole experience of life in this communion. Theology touches on life, death and our very being, and shows how our personal identity is constituted through relationships, ans so through love and freedom. What makes man different from any other creature? Can humans be truly free? Do they want to be free? Can humans be free to love?

Theology is concerned with life and survival, and therefore with salvation. The Church articulates its theology, not simply to add to our knowledge of God or the world, but so that we may gain the life which can never be brought to an end. Christian doctrine tells us there is redemption for us and for the world, and each particular doctrine articulates some aspect of this redemption. We have to inquire how each doctrine contributes to knowledge of our salvation. Rather than isolating each doctrine, we have to set each doctrine out in the context of all other doctrines. Theology seeks a living comprehension of the Christian faith, of our place in the world and relationship with one another. It does not just want to preserve the statements of the Church as they were originally made, but also to provide the best contemporary expression of the teaching of the Church.

Well, that is quite a bit to chew on. What might be offered to start. One thing might be said right off. He goes on in the following to define what he means by doctrine and dogmas. On reflection this begins not so much by defining what theology is, but of what the process examines and consists. What questions does it address, what concerns does theology approach is what is posed here. 

Good morning.

1. Watermelon affection.
2. Memory Eternal.
3. A question for union supporters.
4. Employment.
5. Inception reviewed from another point-of-view.
6. Medical tech and self-empowerment.
7. Emergent behavior.
8. A typical response.
9. A book reviewed.
10. A blogger and jail.
11. A big list of upcoming books.

Good morning.

1. East and West.
2. On the “unconditional engagement” strategy.
3. Why? I guess it’s part of the hope/change thing.
4. Tax cuts and revenue.
5. On those payday loan services.
6. Missing the moral of the story … the moral isn’t about immigration it’s about inculcating dependency on congress-critters.
7. Holder defends a rapist … hmm, nobody out there is connecting this with the Admin paying back Hollywood for their money and support. More here.
8. Yah, and if not, he’ll be kicking some butt (for all the good it did and would do).
9. More like unbelievably irrelevant.
10. For the panic stricken.
11. Watermelons in Bulgaria.

Regarding my “brief points” post the other night, I had this comment, 

Not quite following your safety net thoughts. Are you saying that Europe innovations more than the US and that’s because the US has a bigger safety net? I’m not really seeing how that is. Or are you saying that the US has a smaller safety net and innovates more than Europe?

I think we should differentiate between types of safety nets. Compare unemployment in the US with labor’s relative dominance in Europe. In the US you get fired you get to collect unemployment (usually). In Europe its very hard to get fired. I would argue that the latter type of safety net probably squashes more innovation since once you get a job you’re quite comfortable and businesses don’t want to risk giving someone a job unless they are 100% sure about him. Likewise businesses seek to secure their markets in order to provide for secure employment. Market upstarts and disrupters are hardly welcome in this type of social arrangement.

There are indeed (at least) two types ‘types’ of safety nets at work. One involves companies and employment and the other involves personal safety nets. The EU allows more of both, that is it is harder for companies to fail and for individuals to lose their jobs and at the same time social personal safety nets are much more prevalent, e.g., unemployment, social security, and health care. 

There are two points to be made here. One is that in the US as compared to the EU social and cultural differences that encourage the lessening of corporate safety nets are the same impulses that minimize the personal nets as well. The second point to be mad is that the greater levels of productivity and innovation in the US as compared to the EU is supported by the shallower safety nets. The underlying lesson for those (primarily on the left) who keep pushing to increase our personal and corporate safety nets are trying to sail the strait between Scylla and Charybdis. Scylla being the risk (or inevitability) of lower productivity and Charybdis would be the gamble that promises made cannot be sustained by future productivity and growth. The EU has alas it seems run into both. In the following we will concentrate on the arguments and logic over the second, the personal safety net. The argument of why the two nets are connected is implicitly contained in the argument for why a lack of safety net leads to higher productivity. 

In graduate school the advisor of a friend of mine once remarked when asked what makes a good experimentalist, “The trick is not avoiding mistakes, but making your mistakes quickly.” The point being is that innovation in the US is less due to some amazing ability of Americans to innovate but instead that banks don’t keep failing businesses afloat and that companies are don’t keep making the mistake of continuing employment of poor employees as willingly. Yet that doesn’t explain another datum. In Fault Lines, Mr Rajan points out that while the EU and the US publish roughly the same number of academic papers, those published in the US are cited far much more. The academic environments are quite similar, but the individuals in those academic environments are by and large products of their respective cultures. 

Consider two very different indigenous cultures from different environments and the individuals which are products of the same as an illustrative example. Consider those people who are products of a tropical Tahitian paradise and those who are dwell above the arctic circle. Those individuals from an arctic environment must spend a good deal of effort at sustaining subsistence. Diligence, care, and attention to small environmental details are required to acquire food and avoid inclement weather. Conversely little effort is required in a tropical paradise to obtain the minimum required for sustenance. If one were to suggest some metric for measuring diligence, industry, and the ability to endure hardships. Let’s call this measure, as a leading phrase, “virtue”. Then plot our measure of (this) virtue the two societies there might be no (or at best very minimal) overlap. That is to say, the most industrious paradise dweller likely has less virtue than the least virtuous arctic representative. Personal virtue is in a large part a product of environment. 

If this argument doesn’t convince, consider the English succession (and I’d be willing to bet that this is mirrored in the history of ruling families in nations and regions that I don’t know as intimately). Time after time, a king (a “good king”) would rise to power, such as a Henry II. Raised in a school of hard knocks he was a tough and effective ruler. His children had “all the advantages”, which as it turned out ended up to be not quite so advantageous. The point is hardships teach us. Failure is instructive and a motivator. Comfort and the absence of tests leaves one less likely to push. 

The point is that the difference in industry and productivity of the respective academic environments might perhaps be linked to a cultural requirement of a higher level of the same virtue noted above in the US because of its smaller personal safety net. 

Good morning.

1. More about taxes and choices.
2. An interesting article noted.
3. More on the new law in France, prohibiting super-heroes from using masks. More here.
4. A monastery of note in Arizona.
5. One man’s prediction for 2012.
6. Hobbes in the news … although I’d have to say for my part, Bertrand de Jouvenel skewered his main thesis quite well.
7. CEA, models and a fallacy of argument.
8. A little zoom and boom.
9. The media has started to forget (already).
10. Self perceptions, 1000 words.

Good morning.

• Shadow banks?
• Greece and stimulus.
• Slovakian politics.
• Nazi influence on Islamic extremist movements.
• A more reasonable (and likely more prevalent) Islamic action.
• Heh.
• 2 x 1000 word pick-me-up feel-good link for the day.
• A certain Mr Wallace.
• From the abortion front lines in Rockford. Chainsaws? Huh?
• Cap and trade.
• Cops get an average of a 6 figure compensation?
• I concur. The conservative meme’s on the economy are wrong (although the linked piece is not very demonstrative of that point). The flip side is that the liberal/progressive meme’s on the economy are just as wrong.
• A bookstore noted.
• Things that go boom, with a 280mm bore no less.