<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Daily Sabbatical &#187; Philosophy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/category/philosophy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical</link>
	<description>Music, Books, and Assorted Maunderings</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 22:02:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Why I Will Not (Currently) Pay to Download Music</title>
		<link>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2009/01/07/whyi-will-not-currently-pay-to-download-music/</link>
		<comments>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2009/01/07/whyi-will-not-currently-pay-to-download-music/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 18:32:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjhowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[downloads]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mp2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[music industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Piracy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/?p=468</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It’s time for a rant. I am an avid downloader of music that I do not pay for. Only occasionally do I feel even a twinge of guilt about this. I felt such a twinge recently. So, good citizen that I am, I investigated the possibility of actually paying for downloaded music. I found, to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--[endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" /> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext="edit"> <o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" /> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It’s time for a rant.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I am an avid downloader of music that I do not pay for.<span> </span>Only occasionally do I feel even a twinge of guilt about this.<span> </span>I felt such a twinge recently.<span> </span>So, good citizen that I am, I investigated the possibility of actually paying for downloaded music.<span> </span>I found, to my great chagrin, really, that there is no way I am going to pay for downloaded music at this point.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Let me explain.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">First, something about myself.<span> </span>I am, perhaps, not the RIAA’s picture of the mp3 hungry internet hoodlum.<span> </span>I buy a lot of CDs.<span> </span>I also buy a lot of vinyl.<span> </span>I don’t know how much I have, but it’s in the thousands of albums.<span> </span>My stereo is worth more than my car.<span> </span><span> </span>So, I am not averse to spending money on music, but I am very serious about the quality of that music.<span> </span>So, why steal?</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Put simply, the record industry and their retail partners simply are not treating the digital age seriously.<span> </span>Or rather, they are treating it seriously, but only as an opportunity to seriously screw the consumer.<span> </span>Let’s take a look.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Take, for example, one of the best albums of last year, Bon Iver’s For Emma Forever Ago.<span> </span>On Amazon, I can buy this album on CD for $11.49.<span> </span>Now, let’s go to ITunes.<span> </span>First, to do this, I have to download a bloated piece of software onto my computer.<span> </span>So before I even start, I’m paying a cost I don’t pay at Amazon, and that I certainly don’t have to pay if I steal the music.<span> </span>But, then, the music is cheaper.<span> </span>A mere $7.99.<span> </span>(For what it’s worth, this is an example favorable to ITunes.<span> </span>The best album of the year, by Deerhunter, can be bought as a double album on Amazon for less than it can be bought on ITunes.)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">If I download from ITunes, what I get is a DRM encoded file that I can only install on five computers, and that only plays on certain devices.<span> </span>Already, this is simply unacceptable.<span> </span>Between my wife and I we have four computers and two IPods.<span> </span>At our current rate, we’ll probably replace a computer every two years.<span> </span>This means that somewhere down the line, even if not now, DRM will prevent me from using my own music on my own computer.<span> </span>Not acceptable.<span> </span>Fortunately, as of yesterday it appears that Apple is stopping this nonsense, so that’s a step in the right direction.<span> </span>It hasn’t happened yet, though, so we’ll see if the price goes up when it does.<span> </span>At this point, however, ITunes is a nonstarter.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Amazon offers downloads as well, so let’s take a look there.<span> </span>For $8.49, Amazon will give me a download of the album at 256kbs.<span> </span>This is a pretty high quality mp3, but it is not cd quality.<span> </span>Mp3 is compressed format that does not preserve all of the data.<span> </span>Put simply, mp3s come in various qualities, depending on how much data is lost, and the higher the kbs number the less that is lost.<span> </span>The difference between a 256kbs recording and a cd of the same music is, in fact, audible.<span> </span>(In general, the sound of a mp3 is noticeably thinner than the cd sound.) <span> </span>So, I am saving three dollars, but I am getting an inferior product.<span> </span>Still, 256kbs is pretty good, so perhaps the $3 discount is fair.<span> </span>But I don’t only lose quality, I also don’t get the CD insert.<span> </span>This is minor in the case of Bon Iver, since there isn’t much on the insert, but it’s still art and information I’m not getting.<span> </span>The loss is more significant if I want to buy, say, Andras Schiff’s <span> </span>first volume of Beethoven’s piano sonatas.<span> </span>That insert contains a valuable essay and interview with the pianist.<span> </span>For an opera, of course, the CD comes with a libretto, which is indispensable.<span> </span>So, missing the insert is not always a minor thing.<span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Still, I have to say that saving $3 still sounds pretty good, and the insert is not always so important.<span> </span>But there is an important loss with the download, over and above the quality and the insert: with an mp3 I have no resale value.<span> </span>Let’s say that down the road it turns out I don’t really care for Bon Iver as much as I first thought.<span> </span>If I own the CD, I can see that album on half.com for (at the point of writing) $10!<span> </span>That means that I can recoup a significant portion of my losses if the album turns out to be a dud or if I weary of it.<span> </span>If that happens I’m out only $1.50.<span> </span>With the mp3, I’m out the full $7.99.<span> </span>The $3 savings isn’t sounding so good now.<span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Admittedly, usually one is out more than $1.50 when one sells a cd, but the point is general.<span> </span>When you buy a CD, you have an asset that retains some value.<span> </span>You can sell it when you are hard up for cash or when you simply want different music.<span> </span><span> </span>Not so with an mp3.<span> </span>To make the loss more tangible, think of the physical CD like a coupon that is worth anywhere between three and ten dollars, that can be used when you grow tired of the CD.<span> </span>So, buying the CD at Amazon gives you better quality, liner notes, and a coupon that is worth $10.<span> </span>The mp3 is by far the worse deal.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There are other options out there.<span> </span>Emusic is a very good one.<span> </span>For $25 a month you can get 100 downloads—making the cost about 25 cents per track.<span> </span>That means the Bon Iver album can be had for about $2.25.<span> </span>That’s looking better, but there are two problems.<span> </span>First, you have to download 100 tracks each month to really be getting that price.<span> </span>If you only download Bon Iver one month, that album just cost you $25.<span> </span>Second, the quality at Emusic is about 192kbs.<span> </span>That is a difference that <em>anyone </em>can hear on almost any equipment, and it is particularly grating on good equipment.<span> </span>For me, at least, 192kbs is not worth paying for.<span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So the basic deal is this: when you pay for downloaded music online, you are typically getting inferior sound quality, you are not getting all of the information and art that comes with a cd booklet, and you have no resale value.<span> </span>The last bit is the often overlooked clincher—the resale value alone is usually worth more than the difference between the retail cd price and the download price! <span> </span>That means, essentially, that you are paying at least the same price for an inferior product when you pay for downloaded music.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The real kick in the ass is, it really doesn’t have to be this way.<span> </span>Record companies and retailers can enjoy much lower production and distribution costs in a world of downloaded music.<span> </span>I’m not privy to the numbers, of course, but as cheap as they are, cds, jewel cases and inserts do cost something, as does shipping and handling them.<span> </span>My guess is that there is at least one middleman who no longer needs to be paid.<span> </span>I also strongly suspect that the cost of promotion can go down significantly, since the retailers themselves do much of the promoting with samples, recommended purchases, and inventive search engines.<span> </span>There is an untapped world of market innovations out there that are simply not being utilized.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Everyone can be a winner at this point.<span> </span>The fact that everyone isn’t a winner is merely a sign that someone is refusing to adapt, and my suspicion is that rampant music theft is one of the responses to that.<span> </span>There will always have to be safeguards against digital piracy, but the music industry has little right to complain unless they offer a truly reasonable response in the form of a well priced product of reasonable quality.<span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">(Note:<span> </span>I realize I have not defended the morality of digital piracy.<span> </span>It obviously doesn’t follow that because the music companies are offering an inferior product that anything goes, including theft.<span> </span>I do think that this ethical issue cannot be understood, however, unless it is clear why people should not be asked to pay the price they are currently asked to pay for the product they are stealing.<span> </span>A defense of that theft will have to wait for another occasion.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2009/01/07/whyi-will-not-currently-pay-to-download-music/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Dialogue on Consciousness&#8211;Released</title>
		<link>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/12/29/a-dialogue-on-consciousness-released/</link>
		<comments>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/12/29/a-dialogue-on-consciousness-released/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 01:02:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjhowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dialogue on Consciousness]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/?p=461</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s finally out, and it is a lovely little book if I do say so myself.  And boy, it seems so much cleverer now that it is bound and formatted.  It&#8217;s too late for Christmas, but all of your philosophical friends and relatives would no doubt appreciate A Dialogue on Consciousness as a New Year&#8217;s [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone" title="Doc" src="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51rtSQx2e6L._SS500_.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="500" /></p>
<p>It&#8217;s finally out, and it is a lovely little book if I do say so myself.  And boy, it seems so much cleverer now that it is bound and formatted.  It&#8217;s too late for Christmas, but all of your philosophical friends and relatives would no doubt appreciate A Dialogue on Consciousness as a New Year&#8217;s present.  Great for birthdays, holidays, and hell, even Fridays.  <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Dialogue-Consciousness-Torin-Alter/dp/0195375297/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1230598455&amp;sr=8-1">Amazon</a> has it listed as a pre-order, but it should ship now if you order it.</p>
<p>I know I&#8217;m being presumptuous to think anyone reading my blog will order the book, but in any case, I&#8217;d advise against buying the hardback.  It doesn&#8217;t have the cover art and is bound for libraries only.  The paperback is much prettier.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/12/29/a-dialogue-on-consciousness-released/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Poverty and Brain Function</title>
		<link>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/12/17/poverty-and-brain-function/</link>
		<comments>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/12/17/poverty-and-brain-function/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 17:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjhowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poverty]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/12/17/poverty-and-brain-function/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[According to The USA Today: A new study finds that certain brain functions of some low-income 9- and 10-year-olds pale in comparison with those of wealthy children and that the difference is almost equivalent to the damage from a stroke. This from a study to be published in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience this year.&#160; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to <a href="http://usatoday.com/news/health/2008-12-07-childrens-brains_N.htm?POE=click-refer&amp;imw=Y">The USA Today</a>:</p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">A new study finds that certain brain functions of some low-income 9- and 10-year-olds pale in comparison with those of wealthy children and that the difference is almost equivalent to the damage from a stroke.</font></p>
<p>This from a study to be published in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience this year.&nbsp; This raises some important questions in political philosophy, and should cause us to seriously question certain free market conceptions of justice that presume a level playing field.&nbsp; It&#8217;s too early to know what these results really mean, but this is an area that certainly deserves some attention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/12/17/poverty-and-brain-function/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Dialogue on Consciousness&#8211;The Cover is Here!</title>
		<link>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/12/05/a-dialogue-on-consciousness-the-cover-is-here/</link>
		<comments>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/12/05/a-dialogue-on-consciousness-the-cover-is-here/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 17:24:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjhowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dialogue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dialogue on Consciousness]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/?p=386</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Coming soon&#8230;.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="mceTemp">
<dl id="attachment_388" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 510px;">
<dt class="wp-caption-dt"><a href="http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/final-cover-alter_01.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-388" title="final-cover-alter_01" src="http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/final-cover-alter_01.jpg" alt="DOC" width="500" height="748" /></a></dt>
</dl>
</div>
<p>Coming soon&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/12/05/a-dialogue-on-consciousness-the-cover-is-here/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sarah Palin and Turkey Torture</title>
		<link>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/11/21/sarah-palin-and-turkey-torture/</link>
		<comments>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/11/21/sarah-palin-and-turkey-torture/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:36:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjhowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sarah Palin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vegetarianism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/11/21/sarah-palin-and-turkey-torture/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Boy, I hate to put two animal misery videos back to back on the blog, but I couldn&#8217;t pass this up. This is a video of Sarah Palin, who apparently went to a turkey farm to &#8220;pardon&#8221; a turkey before thanksgiving. She then gave an interview while turkeys were being slaughtered behind her. It&#8217;s rather [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Boy, I hate to put two animal misery videos back to back on the blog, but I couldn&#8217;t pass this up.  This is a video of Sarah Palin, who apparently went to a turkey farm to &#8220;pardon&#8221; a turkey before thanksgiving.  She then gave an interview while turkeys were being slaughtered behind her.  It&#8217;s rather surreal.
<div class="youtube-video"><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/z-kjM1asH-8&amp;color1=0xb1b1b1&amp;color2=0xcfcfcf&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/z-kjM1asH-8&amp;color1=0xb1b1b1&amp;color2=0xcfcfcf&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/11/21/sarah-palin-and-turkey-torture/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Meet your Meat</title>
		<link>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/11/20/meet-your-meat/</link>
		<comments>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/11/20/meet-your-meat/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:41:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjhowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Disturbing News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vegetarianism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/11/20/meet-your-meat/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today was animal rights day in my intro class. It was probably the preachiest I&#8217;ve been all year. (Next class, though, is Famine, Affluence and Morality. That&#8217;ll take the cake.) I refrained from forcing them to sit through Meet your Meat, so I&#8217;ve decided to post it here. If you eat factory farm meat, which [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today was animal rights day in my intro class.  It was probably the preachiest I&#8217;ve been all year.  (Next class, though, is Famine, Affluence and Morality.  That&#8217;ll take the cake.)  I refrained from forcing them to sit through Meet your Meat, so I&#8217;ve decided to post it here.<br />
If you eat factory farm meat, which if you eat meat you probably do, I&#8217;d suggest giving this a look.<br />
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VIjanhKqVC4&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VIjanhKqVC4&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/11/20/meet-your-meat/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>2008 MacArthur Fellows&#8211;Still, no philosophers&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/09/24/2008-macarthur-fellows-still-no-philosophers/</link>
		<comments>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/09/24/2008-macarthur-fellows-still-no-philosophers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:50:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjhowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bitching]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Genius Grants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MacArthur Grants]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/09/24/2008-macarthur-fellows-still-no-philosophers/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The legendary MacArthur &#8220;genius&#8221; grants have been awarded for 2008, and it&#8217;s an interesting assortment of folks.&#160; Check em out here.&#160; I have to say I&#8217;m always disappointed that philosophers don&#8217;t make it onto the list more often, and the philosophers who do are usually incredibly well established, which does not seem to be the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The legendary MacArthur &#8220;genius&#8221; grants have been awarded for 2008, and it&#8217;s an interesting assortment of folks.&nbsp; Check em out<a href="http://www.macfound.org/site/c.lkLXJ8MQKrH/b.4536877/"> here</a>.&nbsp; I have to say I&#8217;m always disappointed that philosophers don&#8217;t make it onto the list more often, and the philosophers who do are usually incredibly well established, which does not seem to be the trend in many other fields in which the grant seems to find &#8220;rising stars.&#8221;&nbsp; Since the award was founded, here are the philosophers who have received it:<br />
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Stanley Cavell</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>Patricia Smith Churchland</td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>Leszek Kolakowski</td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>Richard Rorty</td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>Thomas M. Scanlon</td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>Judith N. Shklar<br />Nancy Cartwright<br />Evelyn Fox Keller</td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Compared to the list of recipients from other disciplines, this is a very short list indeed.&nbsp; In the humanities, we have more than classics, biography and musicology, but are whomped by religious studies, literary studies, History of Science, History, Art History and Criticism, and American History.&nbsp; Considering biography and arguably classics is a form of history (though classics no doubt can be grouped with literary studies as well) That leaves us ahead of musicology.&nbsp; Surely philosophy has a larger place in the intellectual world than this!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/09/24/2008-macarthur-fellows-still-no-philosophers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fine-Tuning Questioned Empirically</title>
		<link>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/08/05/fine-tuning-questioned-empirically/</link>
		<comments>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/08/05/fine-tuning-questioned-empirically/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 23:04:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjhowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Relijun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cosmology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fine-Tuning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/08/05/fine-tuning-questioned-empirically/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the more interesting arguments for the existence of God claims that our universe is &#8220;finely tuned&#8221; so that life will emerge. In other words, with only slight variations in the physical constants the universe could not bear life, and the best way to explain the aptness of this universe is that the constants [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the more interesting arguments for the existence of God claims that our universe is &#8220;finely tuned&#8221; so that life will emerge.  In other words, with only slight variations in the physical constants the universe could not bear life, and the best way to explain the aptness of this universe is that the constants were set by an entity that wished for life to emerge.  There are problems with the argument, of course, but the basic empirical premise is usually accepted&#8211;that the conditions under which a universe would bear life are rare.  An interesting result to be published in The Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, however, questions that.<br />Fred Adams at The University of Michigan in Ann Arbor maintains that the appearance of fine tuning is illusory.  While it is perhaps true, Adams says, that if you fiddle with just a single characteristic of the universe it would no longer be apt for life, it does not follow that if you generated a host of settings randomly that the resulting universes would only rarely allow for life.  When Adams ran a computer model of such a test, however, about a quarter of the universes included stars that result in some sort of life.  Thus, even the empirical premise of the fine-tuning argument is substantially undermined.</p>
<p>Read more at <a target="_blank" href="http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19926673.900-is-our-universe-finetuned-for-life.html?feedId=space_rss20">The New Scientist</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/08/05/fine-tuning-questioned-empirically/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Handey vs. Heidegger</title>
		<link>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/08/04/handey-vs-heidegger/</link>
		<comments>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/08/04/handey-vs-heidegger/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:06:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjhowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Haha]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Handey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Heidegger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/08/04/handey-vs-heidegger/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cliché Reality has a hilarious comparison of quotes from Jack Handey and Martin Heidegger to determine who is the better philosopher. The answer is clear.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://clichereality.blogspot.com/2008/08/jack-handey-vs-martin-heidegger.html">Cliché Reality </a>has a hilarious comparison of quotes from Jack Handey and Martin Heidegger to determine who is the better philosopher.  The answer is clear.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/08/04/handey-vs-heidegger/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hume&#8217;s Treatise, The Cloud</title>
		<link>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/07/24/humes-treatise-the-cloud/</link>
		<comments>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/07/24/humes-treatise-the-cloud/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 04:39:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjhowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cloud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hume]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wordl]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/?p=94</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In my valuable free time, I decided I needed to paste Hume&#8217;s Treatise into Wordl and generate a word cloud representing the frequency of words used in old Dave&#8217;s masterpiece. This needed to be done, and it is beautiful, if I do say so myself.  Click for the bigger image.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In my valuable free time, I decided I needed to paste Hume&#8217;s Treatise into <a href="http://wordle.net/">Wordl</a> and generate a word cloud representing the frequency of words used in old Dave&#8217;s masterpiece.  This needed to be done, and it is beautiful, if I do say so myself.  Click for the bigger image.<br />
<a title="Wordle: Hume's Treatise" href="http://wordle.net/gallery/wrdl/87582/Hume%27s_Treatise"><img style="padding:4px;border:1px solid #ddd" src="http://wordle.net/thumb/wrdl/87582/Hume%27s_Treatise" alt="" /></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjhjr.com/thedailysabbatical/2008/07/24/humes-treatise-the-cloud/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

