Joel, you've quoted too many people this morning. It gives the impression that you read too much, which (in a politician) is scary, at least in the US. In September 2001, it was Tony Blair who provided the thoughtful speeches, invoking Thornton Wilder's "The Bridge of San Luis Rey."

My old pre-Amazon habit of buying sale books from Oxford led me to have a copy of Loyal Rue's "By the Grace of Guile: The Role of Deception in Natural History and Human Affairs." It's probably badly out of date by now, since recent research on western scrub-jays shows they're constantly trying to hide food from one another, but a guy who could write a book by that title over a decade ago has to be on the ball.

I can't even begin to remember the author, but I think there's a recent book on military leadership, pointing out that excessive optimism is the norm.

On the side, one James M. Taylor of the Heartland Institute (evidently a tobacco-lobby outfit) bashed Al Gore for alleged "lies" about global warming. He cited actual scientific papers. But there's a vast difference between lying and representing rather rapidly-changing scientific literature. No matter, anyway. Mr. Taylor's out to argue that the world's getting cooler.

I doubt that I am first to post.

Very fallible judgment. Hey, I've got one of those! The problem with certainty is that it blinds one to evidence that one must see and deal with to be successful.

TBG, I loved Doonesbury this week. I've said it before: when the literature of the current time is judged for posterity, Trudeau will be at the top. The man is genius. One of the reasons is his incredible ability to see and puncture PC certainty on every side.

As I may have posited before in this here forum, "true" religious faith (i.e., that for which one shall not immediately be stoned (as in literal stones thrown at one, rather than standing around saying "cool" or "groovy")) requires an *absolute* belief.

And for that, let there be no, um, doubt, one cannot always be certain. Because absolutism requires an itty-bitty (Pentagon word, I have no doubt) modicum of reality. The less reality one has creeping in, the more certain we are. Yeah, well.

I must admit that I am overloaded with fatigue about this so-called administration. I have a picture of my niece some 34 or so years ago just beginning to walk in my apartment in Ann Arbor, MI. In the background is Sam Ervin conducting the Watergate hearings. Yes, indeedy, fellow bloggers, I was glued to the set, read everything in sight and couldn't get enough of it. Today, I'm just too inexorably pi$$ed off at what they've done to my country -- *our* country. To imagine that they might rot in hell is simply not punishment enough for me.

And I got absolutely no doubt about that.

On that note, enjoy the rest of the weekend.

Someone should tattoo those eight elements of critical thinking on Uncurious George's forehead as a reminder to all who interact with him.

(Don't worry, he spends enough time looking in the mirror that he'll probably notice them himself, eventually.)

Another excellent post, Joel. Great way to start my Sunday.

agreed, randyman...

Great Post.

One thing to point out is that "things change." Joel makes a great point about Obama. What our nation really needs is an analytical thinker who gets true information (not engineered BS that is stove-piped right past the knowledgeable analyists that we pay dearly) and who can see when things change in either fact or perception that warrants a new direction or Plan B.

What we do have is a group in control who have really developed strong PR skills. It is somehow more valuable to appear to be right than to be right.

Yesterday's post about Bush's massive courage was also telling. You need huge amounts of courage to stand up to the outcry for better judgment.

Good morning boodle!

I have doubted my own assessments of the VP as that phrase that shan't be mentioned and Bush as an illiterate twit. Is there a prize for being a doubter extraordinaire?

Cassandra-Hope you feel better than I felt yesterday. Today is already much better for me.

TBG-Unfortunately letting the 85yo cleaning lady go is part of the budget gap closing strategy. We've tried for 6 months to ease her into a dignified retirement, like Viking Robert Smith leaving at the top of his game, but apparently she's not gathering the inference.

I really like this column. The mark of a truly sophisticated mind is the ability to tolerate the possibility that all the truths he or she holds dear are, in fact, wrong.

Now this is, of course, a pretty tall order. I would just be happy if everyone who, when told that there is only a 20% chance of rain come Saturday, do not automatically mean that it is okay to go on a picnic. I want people to take the time to ask, well, what if this happens to be the one-out-of five times when it *does* rain.

Is that too much to ask?

One problem is that doubters are said to be paralyzed. I will think on that further.

Dolphin has reminded me to forge ahead in my great solitary thought-experiment (solitary in that I know no great internet thinkers personally, so I plod along alone here): peer-to-peer networks. No for-profit servers at all. Just RF and volunteerism. Tokyo has been pointed out as a place P2P could work now. Fast email, etc. So many nodes.

P2P in Kansas takes a lot more work.

frosti... I'm sorry I made that joke now. Please forgive me?

I have always believed that the smartest thing someone can say is "I don't know." I've thought back and realize that my husband (the smartest person I know) often tells the kids that when they ask a question. Then he finds out, or they find out together.

Remember how irritating it used to be to have your mom or dad say "look it up!"

Well now thanks to Google it takes about a minute to find out even the most-obscure fact. You always have to be careful that you're getting correct info, but that's all part of the learning process.

Of course, now that I think of it, maybe my husband isn't the smartest person I know... or maybe my kids are just coming up with really hard questions.

TBG- Don't be sorry. It is funny in a perverse, "How did we get to this screwed up point?" way.

I doubt I will get to all of these, but it's a fine list, no doubt about it.

http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462

Joel: Have there ever been leaders who were comfortable with uncertainty and doubt? George Washington, who was always the first to cite his lack of qualifications for a job (Continental Army commander, president), said in his farewell address that he did the best he could with a "very fallible judgment." No one today would dare say such a thing.

LL: It seems today that the presidential candidates have been winnowed by the time of the general election to those with the largest war chests. Most of us end up voting for that candidate with the fullest war chest, those that overflow with bucks. Who are these people making contributions? How beholden are the top-tier two candidates to these corporations and the men (or families) who own them? Did George Washington have a war chest?

As far as Washington citing his lack of qualifications, he was simply being disingenuous. Washington learned his lessons well under Braddock at the Battle of Monongahela, used the element of surprise when crossing the Delaware and fought braveley against Hessian mercenaries the next day at Trenton, and established American superiority at the colonial victory at Saratoga less than 12 months after Trenton. Was Washington beholden to special interests? Who are the modern-day Minutemen?

If the public cannot tolerate doubt these days, then I believe corporate American tolerates it even less so. And where and when there is uncertainty, there is ample opportunity for business--just ask Halliburton and the manufacturers of arms--or duct tape, as examples.

Joel: Way too deliberative. Correct answer: I'd start killing lots of bad guys. (Better yet: Make pocketa-pocketa sound effects while while pantomiming the machine-gunning of the enemy.)

LL: Well, there is the pocketa-pocketa method, that the United States has certainly implemented. But there are also more subtle ways to eliminate those foreign leaders who don't toe the American line: coups--against Mossadegh of Iran, Qasim of Iraq, Arbenz of Venezuela, and Lumumba of the Congo. Or would it be more illuminating if I expanded the list and broke it down by continent?

[Joel, the passage about snap judgments based on appearance(s) reminds me of Zebrowitz's book "Reading Faces." Which reminds me never to judge a book by its cover art, illustrations, or lack of them--tattered or gilded. It's what's between the covers that counts.]

Great story here...

Fated to Be Friends
One defied orders to leave the other behind to die; decades later, the rescuer saw his patient in traffic: 2 chance encounters sparked a lifelong 2-member fraternity

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/30/AR2007063000767.html?hpid=artslot

What with JA's piece, and the Lynne Olson piece (Outlook Sausage), Dub might want to take a look at some of Benny Franklin's writings.

"...For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged by better information, or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others."

Another BF quote, perhaps more suited to Dub..."We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

Isn't resolving doubt, albeit temporarily as other facts are ascertained, just another form of the scientific method of reasoning? Ya bring in the hypotheses, swirl them around with the facts at hand, see what sifts out, see what stays in, put on shelf until another wave of hypotheses and swirly (and/or squirrelly) facts come into your lab (it helps if your lab has just had a run and is too tired to interfere) -- you take the shelved results of the last experiment, see how it stands up to what just flew into your mind and do it all again.

I mean, I ask you, how cool is it to pop some balloons of smug complacency and even frightened acquiescence (you know, to keep those who march in the night away from your particular door) -- doubters, at least those I know, *always* question authority and are never paralyzed. If no one does it, then we are all truly paralyzed.

Besides, rants are good for the immune system. I mean they are, right? Right?

uh-oh

LL...back then, candidates didn't 'run' for office, they 'stood' for it. Campaigning was seen to be ungentlemanly. Even so, Geo Washington shelled out for 160 gallons of rum, beer and hard cider on election day (Va House of Burgesses). There's more than one way to skin a cat.

The beginnings of campaigning for office as we know it today didn't come into play until the 1830s, and real campaign finance laws didn't come about until 1974, as a result of Watergate.

My geekness is showing.

>One problem is that doubters are said to be paralyzed. I will think on that further.

Having doubts about a course of action doesn't imply paralysis unless the people involved have no cajones. You can proceed aggressively and may have to be even more aggressive to deal with the questionable issue.

Acknowledging doubts does strongly suggest the benefits of having a backup plan, and some checkpoints along the way to know when to switch to it.

I saved my company from a major mistake last year, but I literally had to tell management they might as well put all their money on a horse and to put the crack pipe down or we'd lose a major contract and end up on the front page of the NY Times.

I figured I'd probably get fired either way, so what the he11.

By the way, I got a big raise for telling them to put the crack pipe down.

Now here's an issue of some small doubt: It's the French Grand Prix today. Do I go with straight champagne or can I have a Mimosa?

It's not the doubters that cause the problems. It's those criticizing them.

I'd say this is about doubt.
"In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable."
Dwight D. Eisenhower

Lost in Thought:
LL...back then, candidates didn't 'run' for office, they 'stood' for it. Campaigning was seen to be ungentlemanly.

LL. I know. *smiling* But there was a movement to make Washington an Imperial President. Wiser heads prevailed.

http://www.gwu.edu/~ffcp/exhibit/p4/p4_3.html

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20040116.html

(John Dean writing on the U.S. Supreme Court and Bush's Imperial Presidency: Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.'s The Imperial Presidency gave the term its currency. He traces its growth from George Washington to Richard Nixon, showing how a presidency never contemplated by the founders has evolved. As a basis for their authority, presidents typically cited their role as commander-in-chief -- an undefined constitutional term -- and "inherited powers" other presidents had used before them.)

Lost in Thought: The beginnings of campaigning for office as we know it today didn't come into play until the 1830s.

LL: True--although I would have to do a look-up on the election of 1830. Perhaps you can elaborate? Consider, though, the machinations that Norman Buel Judd, chairman of the Republican State Committee of Illinois undertook, a bit later, in 1860, for Abraham Lincoln.

I would add to Error's "put down the crack pipe" that once a course of action is demonstrated to be folly that "put down the shovel and back away from the hole" should be said more often. In fact, a predetermined time to put down the shovel should be considered before the course of action proves disastrous. This may be what Cheney and Bush eschew as doubt, most of the rest of us call it contingency planning.

"In fact, a predetermined time to put down the shovel should be considered before the course of action proves disastrous. This may be what Cheney and Bush eschew as doubt, most of the rest of us call it contingency planning."

You're right... putting down the shovel should be considered part of the course of action.

I posted my comment on the last kit, early this morning. I will add, however, that one has to remember the circumstances surrounding some of the action taken by the present administration. And I am not in any way justifying any of this, just calling it to your attention.

If I remember correctly, most people were looking for a courageous leader, a strong man, if you will, because of 9/11. Why else would we be talking about Rudy as president if that was not the case. People were very scared. We had 9/11, the arsenic thing, and all those colored warnings, you know, the yellow, the red, and the list goes on. The country was paralyzed. It seems every one was waiting for the other shoe to drop. I stayed glued to the television set for any and all information. People wanted to be protected, and they were willing to give up whatever they had to give up for that to happen. Personally, I've never believed that any one person could protect me or give me the illusion of protection. One is just as likely to run into the bad stuff when stepping out the door in the morning as waiting for the next terrorist attack. Sometime the necessity of stepping outside does not have to be. Anywhere.

Ivansmom, I hope I can impose on you to answer a question for me in your area of expertise? We're getting rain every evening now too.

I have the week off, but it will not seem that way if the g-girl is here all week. Grandma loves her so much, but she is a handful and more. I think she is lonesome so much of the time. She loves to play with other kids, no kids here.

Most people don't necessarily vote for someone because of their intelligence. I think it is more their biases(?). People probably lean more toward the person that holds the same beliefs they do, or they think they do. How can one tell? Politicians, some, are notorious liars. And we can't leave out those secret words and signs given to let some of us know exactly where a candidate is coming from.

I'm sure some of you remember that political ad that Jesse Helms did showing the black hand and the white hand. Went over big time. So many of his contributors came from other states.

Cassandra, never saw that ad. But then, I'm just happy Jesse Helms does not represent any state I live in.

This is hopeful news, though:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/01/AR2007070100381.html?hpid=topnews
Obama is getting contributions from lots of small donors, which I view as a good thing, if they don't get discouraged before the election in 2008.

I think a lot of folks still believe that Republicans will lower taxes, spend less, and be stronger against crime and terrorism. Even if that's demonstrated not to be true. Republicans have a great PR machine, especially when it comes to appealing to racists without actually saying that. But maybe after these disastrous years of Republican rule, people will see the light. Of course, it would help if the Democrats would get their act together.

Howdy y'all. We have a 20% chance it won't rain again today, and it is hard to not take that as "it will rain". In August, of course, we'll all be sure it means "no rain".

In the judicial business doubt is pretty much a professional qualification. If you already know how a case should be decided before you've heard the facts and seen the applicable law, then you're not deciding the individual case. You're just ruling based on what you already "know". That isn't the way the law is supposed to work. And yes, I know there are examples otherwise. As far as I'm concerned they prove the rule: a good judge is one who admits and even relies on what she doesn't know. People get mad when they ask a judge, "how would you rule on this or that case" and the judge says, "I don't know, I haven't heard all the evidence." That is the right answer.

Cassandra, if I can I'll be glad to answer a question.

Ivansmom

The apartment complex I live in is getting ready to put up cameras. This complex falls under HUD, and is a low-rent housing complex. I'm pretty sure they can do what they want with their property, but don't the tenants have some leadway in what they do with the film. And I mean how they use this film? They cite all the good reasons for putting up cameras, and I don't really have a problem with it, I'm just know that in putting up the cameras, the tenants will lose what little privacy they now have, and I want to know how far can they go with this within legal guidelines. Can they at some point turn around and bite us with this?

I doubt
The FSM
With the mighty Noodle
Will ever duplicate
This wonderful Boodle.

Cassandra, if the cameras are viewing truly public spaces, there's not much in the way of privacy expectations. If they aim the cameras at people's windows, though...

Cassandra, I can't answer your whole question off the top of my head. The apartment complex can certainly put up security cameras in the public areas, including stairwells, etc., and these may well take pictures of individual apartment doors. As far as the uses for the film, I expect there are some restrictions on it and I'm sure they are outlined in some federal regulation. HUD complexes can legally refuse to rent to, or evict, drug dealers for instance (and I think their families as well). They can probably use the pictures to see who is coming and going and whether they are banned from the apartments, etc. However, I don't think they can have unlimited use of the film to invade people's privacy. I'll ask around. There may be other lawyers on the Boodle who can weigh in as well.

This morning I found a religious tract on my windowshield challenging the notion of doubt as a virtue. It contained a phrase suggesting that those who doubted the particular religious interpretation being advocated would be damned to "lakes of fire and the jeers of the righteous."

Look, I can accept the notion of being cast into a fire by a vengeful god. It's the idea that the righteous would be cheering their approval that gives me pause.

The cameras I believe will pick up our entry to the apartments. So the complex will have pictures of folks coming and going from the different apartments. In fact, there were a couple of guys here some weeks ago doing the logistics for placing the cameras, and they went to each apartment entrance. I just want to know is there a limit on the use of the film or can they play God and the tenants fall down and worship them for a roof over our heads.

RD, many people cite judgements for those that dont believe as a scare tactic to get people to confess Christ as their Lord and Saviour. Some use goodness and compassion as reasons to accept Christ as Lord and Saviour. The Bible describes both scenarios, yet the choice is up to each individual. We get to choose life or death. God created man as a rational creature, and gave him free will. Belief will get you there. The choice is entirely yours.

Cassandra - I don't know about the use of security cameras in public housing specifically, but have had occasion to find out a little about their use in schools and other public areas. I often videotape my classes, have taught in schools with cameras in the halls and cafeteria, and many school systems equip all their buses with mounts for video cameras but then rotate the actual cameras so that kids don't know which buses have cameras and which don't.

My understanding is that if the camera does not record sound and is in a public space where there is no expectation of privacy the building/vehicle owner is free to put up cameras and either monitor them live or save recordings. The sound prohibition is so as not to run afoul of anti-wiretapping rules by being able to hear a whispered phone conversation for instance. If tapes are kept, and the custodian then wants to use them for a commercial purpose (like selling pictures to the tabloids)then state law would probably govern.

My concerns as a resident would be:
1. How is the video going to be monitored? Live monitoring is great if it means someone is going to take action to prevent crime. The stockpiling of tapes/dvr isn't of much use if all they're going to do is look at them after a crime is committed. Don't give me just another feel good measure, give me real security!
2. If recordings are stored, for how long and by whom? Should I ever gain great fame and fortune I want to be able to control my image and not have that night I was yelling at Frostdottir sold to the highest bidder when I win my mother of the century award.
3. Are these regular video cameras or do they have some enhancement like infrared capabilities that violate my expectation of privacy? I expect you to be able to see me coming down the hall, but not know that I have under my coat a heating pad taped to my sore back.

Personally, I would just ask for a copy of the written policy governing the cameras and ask who is responsible for making sure the policy is followed. There's not much you can do to insure the policy is a good one, or that it is actually followed, but asking questions sheds that old disinfectant called sunshine.

I'm all for doubting, but if you want to take it to the extreme...

Welcome to Pyrrhonism 101.

From WikiPee, the most easily accessible and corruptible source of knowledge on the planet:

"Pyrrhonism, or Pyrrhonian skepticism, was a school of skepticism founded by Aenesidemus in the first century BC and recorded by Sextus Empiricus in the late 2nd century or early 3rd century AD. It was named after Pyrrho, a philosopher who lived from c. 360 to c. 270 BC, although the relationship between the philosophy of the school and of the historical figure is murky. Pyrrhonism became influential during the past few centuries when the modern scientific worldview was born.

Whereas 'academic' skepticism, with as its most famous adherent Carneades, claims that "Nothing can be known, not even this", Pyrrhonian skeptics withhold any assent with regard to non-evident propositions and remain in a state of perpetual inquiry. According to them, even the statement that nothing can be known is dogmatic.

For example, Pyrrhonians might assert that a lack of proof cannot constitute disproof, and that a lack of belief is vastly different from a state of active disbelief. Rather than disbelieving psychic powers, for instance, based on the lack of evidence of such things, Pyrrhonians recognize that we cannot be certain that new evidence won't turn up in the future, and so they intentionally remain tentative and continue their inquiry. Pyrrhonians also question accepted knowledge, and view dogmatism as a disease of the mind."

--

I actually wrote a paper a few years back that dealt with this. Here's a quick excerpt:

"According to [David] Hume [an 18th century philosopher], this method [of thinking] would have a detrimental - or more likely, fatal - effect on any person brave enough (or foolish enough) to practice it:

'All discourse, all action would immediately cease; and men remain in a total lethargy, till the necessities of nature, unsatisfied, put an end to their miserable existence.' (ECHU 119)

In other words, anyone who would attempt to live by this philosophy would be paralyzed by his inability to accept anything as real. When this practitioner's stomach begins growling because it is empty, instead of eating, the practitioner would question whether he actually had a stomach, whether his doubtable stomach was truly empty, and finally, whether food (the existence of which would in turn be doubtable) is actually necessary to quiet his stomach - or even necessary to maintain his bodily existence. This practitioner would most likely die of starvation before even completing his line of sceptical questioning. Using this approach, all is questioned and all answers are distrusted or rejected outright, therefore no Matter of Fact can be knowable."

Loved this Outlook piece and the comments today, though I was only able to scan them earlier.

I'm just settling in and able to really consider them.

I hope everyone's enjoying as beautiful a day as those of us in the DC area are.

As a side note, I am a little disappointed that Joel could write this piece without invoking Werner Heisenberg (perhaps he did, and that ended up on the cutting room floor like Ron Suskind.). Or Einstein, Bohr, Schrodinger, and Copenhagen.

More later.

bc

Should have added to my 5:05, there's some of *my* geekiness showing.

bc

There has always been a difference between being impatient with uncertainty vs being downright proud of our ignorance. We have unfortunately crossed that line.

Joel, loved the kit. I told a friend this week that I can't stop doubting myself because I'll stop learning and growing.

I have yet to finish back-boodling.

Martooni, take care of yourself in whatever way you can. Stay close to people who love you.

Question for Dooley: Is Ica the place where it does not rain, where they grow the irrigated asparagus? Take some pictures for me, please.

frostbitten, thank you so much. I want to do something, and your suggestion sounds really good. The cameras are probably a good thing, but I'm sort of squeamish about one looking in my door twenty-four seven. I work with children that may come from trouble homes or whose parents are into I don't know what. I don't want to get caught up in anything trying to help someone. Most folks that know me, know where I live. That can be good or that can be bad. I don't turn children away or their parents. And I don't deal with children without their parents, so you can see my problem. I don't inquire as to what the parents do, I really don't want to get into that. I did make these facts known before I moved in.

The Director of the complex has a list of folks that are not allowed on the properties. She has not updated this list, and some of those are dead. I understand the rules, many of them keep us safe. I don't have a problem with them. Just don't want to get caught up in something that I don't really do. Does that make sense?

EF said that doubters have no cajones. Those are drawers, as in where you store your socks or your silverware. Cojones is the right word.

Ivansmom, forgot to say thank you.

I meant to ask, does doubt apply to religion too?

I have a story to share that I know the Boodle will understand. I just need to get this out...

My husband and I will have been married ten years by the end of the summer. This morning we were talking about it and decided to look up some people and places we knew back when we first got married. What we found was this regarding the rabbi.

http://blog.nj.com/ledgerupdates/2007/05/marlboro_rabbi_gets_5_years_fo.html

I am disappointed, but not just disappointed. I feel this detracts from my memories. I wish I had never found out, but you can't undo knowledge like that.

Oh... a bea c... that's terrible. I can see why you feel how you feel, but think of these things...

1. This has nothing to do with your wonderful memories of 10 years ago.

2. He sounds like a troubled, remorseful person. He didn't try to make excuses; that sounds like he understands exactly what he did was wrong and is probably really a good person who did something bad.

3. Don't let this get in the way of celebrating those wonderful 10 years.

a bea c, that is a sad story. It was bad to steal the money, but he told what he did with the money, and that made it worse. A used car salesman sounds like a good job for him.

a bea c- I hope you will be able to laugh one day, but I know you'll look at your wedding pictures differently for a while. The magistrate who married Mr. F and I was indicted days after our courthouse wedding for fraud. A few years ago we learned via google that our witnesses, at the time the most stable long married couple we knew, have since divorced. But here we are these many years later, still going strong. (Frostdottir claims we're like "obsessed teenagers." Takes one to know one, I say.) If nothing else you can use your story to warn potential Bridezillas that no amount of money or whining can make the weddubg perfect-the marriage is the important part.

She'll feed us now, or suffer continued hijacking of the keyboard. wddubg indeed.

EF post plus AbeaC post combine into two over-the-top images.

Drawers of one kind are for flatware or socks: cajones!

Drawers of another type MIGHT contain cojones.

Off to swim. I hope I do not burst out laughing under water. That would not be good.

tehehehe, Joel said knitting.

CP - I thought of you this afternoon when we were perusing the discount book store.(No Achenbach titles, by the way.) There was a book called "chicks with stick" about th joys of knitting.

It's like some kind of cult.

Cassandra - my concern was the implication that one of the rewards for being a believer was to see nonbelievers suffer. I have a higher opinion of believers than that.

>Cojones is the right word.

a bea c thanks for the spelling correction. but what I actually said was not that doubters have none, just that people who slip into paralysis due to doubt have none.

You have to take some course of action. Nothing is ever certain.

My husband got rid of his cajones and installed estantes instead.

hello my achenfriends! i made it back to l.a. last night. two weeks of running around the east coast (pa-nj-nyc-nj-up-state-ny-dc-pa). i am very grateful to have had the opportunity (twice!) to hang out with my imaginary friends. i no longer doubt your existence. sufficient evidence to the contrary.

friday night i got to take my folks out to dinner. their 40th is next weekend. as we were driving home after dinner and we were remarking on the fireflies (one of the things i miss in la), they reminded me of a childhood incident. they had gone out for their anniversary, and my sister and i (instigated by me, i confess) decided to make their evening even more special. we thought they'd enjoy drifting off to sleep to the twinkling stars ... of fireflies in their bedroom. except, this didn't work out too well. 'cause fireflies really only fly around when it's dusk-ish, and they don't seem to perform on cue when they are confined to the indoors. the result was that mom and dad spent a good bit of time that night catching the bugs that were all over their walls and mercifully releasing the critters outside.

re: Mantas & their kids in Okinawa:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/01/AR2007070100765.html?hpid=topnews

As an 11- or 12-year-old kid, I was snorkeling along the reef somwhere near Nishihara (a cheap bus and/or taxi ride for a young man on summer vacation with some allowance and lawn-mowing money in his pocket, back in 1972-73... the days of 360 yen-to-the-dollar), and had the terrifying and exhilarating experience of seeing a full-grown manta sweep near me, and a juvenile (about my own size) actually brush against me. A week or so earlier, a small hammerhead shark (about 2.5 - 3 feet long) had swum up beside me, tracked me for a few moments, then gone elsewhere.

Great memories, glad I survived!

Frostbitten and Ivansmom-- video without sound can still run afoul of anti-wiretapping rules if sign language conversations are recorded, or lipreading is done.

In fact, I believe the CIA routinely employs videotape screeners with lipreading skills to attempt to identify any key phrases. Apparently they never saw the Marlee Matlin episode of Seinfeld.

But it bugs me; everywhere I go is videotaped. Sometimes they notify people of that, sometimes not. If people truly had the will to follow antiwiretapping rules, they'd make sure that surveillance video has a limited number of frames a second, so it would not be possible to read a signed conversation exactly.

Wilbrod - I'd think that you'd appreciate the fact that someone is tracking all of the things that you can't hear! In case it's ever handy for you to know, I mean.

:)

Great piece, Joel. Unfortunately, your conclusion probably is correct. That is, it's doubtful that people, any more than the leaders they choose, will be inclined to value evidence of thoughtful doubt in candidates. Humans usually are more comfortable with someone who shares the same worldview. We impute to them sometimes- undeserved wisdom and gain confidence in them solely on the basis of their likeness to us. May our side be right, but our side, right or wrong.

Wilbrod, surely (No, I'm NOT calling you "Shirley!!) you don't doubt that EVERYTHING is being audiotaped?

kindathinker - Unfortunately, as those of us who take up this space learned long ago, Achenbach is EXACTLY the sort of judgmental, pontificating, know-nothing fossil about which he pretends to rail.

"George Washington was the greatest!" "Scientific exploration of unknowable things is the best path forward!" "Lots of meat is good food for men!"

I have to laugh!!

I wouldn't want anyone videotaping the door to my living place. They'd know who visits and how often. Yes, it is a public place, but still, I wouldn't want anyone keeping tabs of that. They'd also know my routines pretty accurately, when I take out my trash, when I leave, when I bring home groceries. There has to be a way of keeping track of who's there without taking in every door.

BTW, I now have a Second Life. Interesting. We should start a Boodle Island there.

I ended up there because so many of the people in Atlanta kept saying it was a great professional development tool for educators. I did meet one guy there this morning who gave me information about an open source conference coming up soon, but that's it.

Umm.. well, OK. JA's probably right about all of those things. : )

What's the reason the anti-Pyrrhonians give for eating dinner?

mostly - yes, wouldn't it be lovely if the Dems got their act together? I am a little worried....

frosti - made me laugh! This has been a most beautiful day here in Tidewater...no humidity, huge puffy clouds drifting across a blue, blue sky. So, we opened our windows very early and the only problem with that is when I'm left wondering exactly what the neighbors heard when the plugged up toilet was discovered and the 16 year old decided to speak disrespectfully at just the wrong moment? Something tells me that the neighbors don't think the hubby and I are Ozzie and Harriet!

I really dated myself there, didn't I?

Joel's column was a treat.

Kim - In theory, it was great when the "Pilgrims" of Plymouth and the "Puritans" of Massachusetts Bay got together for a common cause, given that both colonies were experiencing some distress. In practice, it didn't work out so well.

What I suspect will work out well is when Bill Richardson & John McCain (both having realized that they aren't going to be the eventual nominee) join forces to push a reasonable agenda.

I may not live to see it, but I think it's gonna work well whenever it happens.

Bob...hubby doesn't agree with me, but can you say..."dream team?"

Maybe 20 yrs ago, we got some NASA-Space Shuttle projects for artificial intelligence. One was to prototype natural language interfaces to computer systems -- talk into speech recognition system, or type, but the user wouldn't be required to know a specific query language like SQL, or wouldn't be expected to use it properly. This is a bit of a fool's errand (if you can't explain exactly what you want, why should the computer take you seriously?), but can be valuable as we see in the ability of search engines to find things we didn't even know we were looking for. We hired someone from the linguistics department at the local world-famous university to work on this. She would get questions from the engineers she was trying to help concerning technical engineering details, about which she knew nothing, and should have replied, "I don't know." The engineers would understand that -- what would a linguist know about inertial measurement units or software defect reports? But after years of dealing with students who were expecting information and wisdom from their lecturers, she would always have something to say, no matter how vague or incorrect it was, and no matter how long it took her to say it. Eventually we got the message the engineers preferred that someone else should take her place.

LTL-CA:

Point taken!

:-D

Hey. It barely rained today. Just a smidgen.

Cassandra, frostbitten's idea was great - ask for a written copy of the policy and who'll be enforcing it. Also, that might be a good time to remind the Director of your situation: that you are working with kids who may have families with dubious or even unsavory connections, and that you don't have anything to do with them except for their kids. You might ask her to notify you if any of the parents that may come to your door turn up on her list; that way you can offer to make arrangements to see the children somewhere else. You might even follow up with a letter about that. This way the Director is reminded of your situation, you are on record, and with any luck you won't be caught up in something you aren't really involved in.

a bea c

That was my point also. Someone watching the door. They know who comes in, who goes out. When you buy groceries, everything, if it takes place in that door. I know we're videotaped so much of the time, but I guess that is the price we pay for security, of a sort.

Sorry about your memories, a bea c.

Time for bed. The g-girl has wore me out, totally. And guess what? She's not sleepy.

RD, scripture states that sinner will be the first dealt with at the judgement, so that saints get a chance to see those that persecuted and killed them. Those that deny the remedy (Jesus Christ) will make up the first line.

Have a good night, and pleasant dreams.

Cassandra - As we're both well aware, the Scripture states a lot of things, not always completely self-consistently.

--------

I have to chuckle a bit at the self-congratulatory back-patting that the PGA is giving itself here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/30/AR2007063000930.html?hpid=moreheadlines

I mean, c'mon. Tiger Woods (poor Tiger! Only three wins, and six top-ten finishes this year, with about five million in prize money, and not a Major title to be found) IS the PGA at the moment! If Tiger mentioned tonight that he had always loved playing putt-putt with his dad in Atlantic City, and that he'd be willing to host a 4th of July Miniature Golf Championship, but only if the Cyclone was gilded in solid gold, you can bet your butt that the PGA would have goldsmiths at work by midnight tonight, and by Tuesday at least half of the pro tour professionals would have honed up their putt-putt skills and have arranged for last-minute accommodations in or around New Jersey!

BS

A bea c, that is a terrible thing to add to your memories, I remember reading about it.

Like Ivansmom's profession, doubt is a professional qualification in IT. As is the ability to laugh at anything. I hope this doesn't offend you, but, for me, looking at my husband and saying, "Well, it was his *discretionary* fund," would help me feel better about it.

There's so much we can't control. All we can control is how we lets it affect us.

Speaking of which, I have a neighbor who is a true jerk (along with his mom and many of his friends).

Last night, they set off an hour's worth of firecrackers in his backyard. Big ones, the kind you'd see at a fairground. Our houses are all close together, the yards are small, I could see and hear remains bouncing off my roof and the roofs of my other neighbor. I think I'm still breathing the afteraffects today.

I'm sure this is illegal, and I have called the cops on them for other things in the past. But I'm also sure you know how well jerks take to having the cops called. My hope is they don't have enough money to repeat this on the 4th. If they do, I will call the cops then.

Suggestions? Normally I'd go and talk this out, but I don't want their Rottweiler sicced on me.

dbG, this is an issue for your local fire department. Look in the phone book for the local fire marshal or the fire prevention bureau. They should be happy to help you.

Thanks, Slyness!

I'll do that.

Let us know how it works out, too! I always like to know the end of the story!

Will do. Just spoke with the haz mat office, who gave me the code office's number, I left a message.

Not that I'll be home if they come over, but my neighbor on the other side is long-retired and sees *everything* that happens on the block. I'll get a blow-by-blow description.

As a guy who's lived in close-knit suburbs during nearly all of my life (never really a rural kinda guy, although I certainly spent plenty of time at the homes of relatives who were actual rural farming folks; never really an inner-city urban kinda guy, although I've spent a number of stints visiting and/or living there briefly), I've been fascinated to watch the attitudes toward fireworks change over the years. Same kinda neighborhoods, same kinda fireworks, same kinda dangers, extremely different coping techniques. Fascinating!

bc, I agree that Joel's article needed to be more pointy (esp. Heisenberg). I had never done this before but I posted directly to the comment thread to the article. Wow, to be around such pretention and doo-doo heads at one time was too much for me.

Oliphant on cooking Cheney for dinner:

http://cartoonbox.slate.com/patoliphant/

For the first time in my life I can say, you go, Dick Lugar!

bill e. - I also commented on the article, then reported myself for a copyright/plagiarism violation. How do you think that will play out? Will I be banned from further comment, do you suppose?

Bob S., as long as you don't dis the New Guy I think you are ok.

Joel suggests that "We need leaders who think more like scientists, who know that knowledge is provisional,"

I find it quite interesting that we humans prefer certainty, when at the universe's most basic levels, uncertainty suffuses everything.

Many of you are familiar with Werner Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of quantum mechanics, where all measurements and characteristics of a system are described by probability distributions with associated standard deviations. In English, it means that you or I or any Observer of a given particle or system subject to quantum mechanical laws cannot describe that particle or system absolutely precisely in terms of all its characteristics at any single point in time. The more precisely you know any given characteristic such as position or momentum, the less precisely you can measure or "know" the other characteristics of that particle or system.

(I'm going to leave out the Observer effects and particle/wave dualities and such for the moment, to keep this from being too philosiphotechnogeeky)

That is, you or I or the smartest person in the world cannot be certain of everything having to do with a single subatomic particle (this, of course is why they call it the Uncertainty Principle). We can calculate probabilities for all of these teeny-tiny characteristics and events, leaving us with a probabilistic view of those little foundations of the universe rather than a deterministic one. So we have this universe built out of all of these Uncertainties and probabilities and wave functions of observation and reality (leading to a famous exchange between Einstein, "...God does not throw dice," and Bohr, "Einstein, don't tell God what to do.").

Granted, quantum mechanics does not scale up very well, and people and money and bullets are not photons or fermions or Higgs bosons, nor are politics, human belief systems, psychology, and law the Standard Models for cosmology or particle physics.

As I've said many times, we humans are notoriously unreliable Observers to begin with, and there's so much of Everything we see that we just don't understand. Heck, we can't even explain ourselves most of the time, much less things like dark energy or gravity or why there aren't WMDs in Iraq.

But for me, there's enough fundamental Uncertainty for me to have some doubt about almost Everything.

Curiously, one thing I have little doubt about is love. Love *always* leaves a mark.

bc

bill everything, I typically steer clear of the article comments, but I did look over there. Er, I like it better over here, though I did note that a few Boodlers did make comments.

a bea c, I'm sorry to hear that about the rabbi under the circumstances. But as others pointed out, it does not change anything between you and your husband, does it?

Saw this quote from an article by Rob Stein regarding research showing stress as a biological trigger for weight gain:

"Scientists reported yesterday that they have uncovered a biological switch by which stress can promote obesity, a discovery that could help explain the world's growing weight problem and lead to new ways to melt flab and manipulate fat for cosmetic purposes.

In a series of experiments on mice, researchers showed that the neurochemical pathway they identified promotes fat growth in chronically stressed animals that eat the equivalent of a junk-food diet.

The international team also showed that blocking those signals can prevent fat accumulation and shrink fat deposits and that stimulating the pathway can strategically create new deposits -- possibly offering new ways to remove fat as well as to mold youthful faces, firmer buttocks and bigger breasts.

'It's very exciting,' said Zofia Zukowska of Georgetown University's Department of Physiology and Biophysics, who led the research, published online by the journal Nature Medicine."

Perhaps I shouldn't have laughed at that, but I did.

Read the rest of the article here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/01/AR2007070100431.html

bc

dbG, I know exactly how you feel. I live in a predominantly muslim area. Fireworks start 1 week into fasting month and don't stop until 1 month after hari raya aidilfitri. I've got dirt rain down on roof all the time. That kind of fireworks is illegal. Police? They don't want to deal with it 'cuz almost every house in the area does it.

If I live in a predominantly ethnic Chinese or Indian area, it would be fireworks for 2 weeks during Chinese new year (Jan/Feb) period and probably 2 weeks during Deepavali (Oct/Nov) time. If I live near indigenous people, it would be 1 month during Gawai festival (May/Jun). There's no escape.

My dogs are all stressed out during that period, thereby stressing me out. There are no caves I could move into around here so my only choice is to move further into the jungle. But I not a fan mosquitoes with legs 10 times the size of their bodies, leeches, snakes, scary looking ants etc. Sigh.

Good morning, friends. I'm so up. Been up for awhile. Fingers moving funny this morning. It is Monday. For some, not a good day. Either because they have the biggest hangover on record or there's the job, the one you don't want to go to. I hope neither option is yours my dear friends.

I slept heavy. Have you ever done that? Just too tired. Feels like I could do it again, but I won't indulge. Have to try and get to that laundry room.

Bob S, I believe the Scriptures. As for any inconsistency, I feel it may be my lack. I don't always understand what I read. That's is quite true here, as in other things. I'm willing to admit that. Don't feel I lose anything by saying that, but am aware that may not be everybody's thinking. I figured out a long time ago I am not perfect. I don't know everything, not even close. Not real sure about this "Cassandra person" either. She seems to be okay, but don't look too hard. I suspect there are many flaws and shortcomings. She tries to take it one day at the time, moving forward, one step at the time.

Martooni, hope your life is going in the direction you want. And I hope your want is what it needs to be.

Morning, Mudge, Slyness, Scotty, and all.*waving*

Fireworks! Being deaf at this time can be a blessing, as long as I stay indoors. I like fireworks, but only those that are supervised, as in a show.

Ivansmom, thanks for the information, and thanks to you, frostbitten. I will try it, and see how it goes.

Have a great day, and a great holiday too. I'm off, got to call my sister this morning, and have her stop by before work. Talk to one of my grandsons for a little bit last night. Time to get the coffee.

God loves us so much more than we can imagine through Him that died for all, Jesus Christ. Peace.

bc;

Yer gonna hurt yerself with all that pointy stuff so late at night... *L*

dbG, I think Slyness can back me up on this -- the fire department's in a better position to handle "anonymous" complaints, since they can act on the evidence themselves.

*almost properly caffeinated Grover waves as I wait for NukeSpawn to awaken and accompany me to work*

:-)

Hey Cassandra!!! *extra Grover waves*

Ivansmom

If I ask the Director to notify me about parents that come to my door that may be on her list, it seems I set myself up for her to look at my door. Is that the case? If anything does come up, by my own request I could be hung? I understand that this is a way to clear me if anything does come up, but it also seems to set me up to be looked at perhaps more than I would be? Would this not be a form of admission? I will ask for a written notice of what this entails, and I think the other tenants need to have this information also. We had a meeting about this, and only a few people showed up(less than ten), and they did not really understand the other side of this coin. I have a feeling this will offer some security, but in the wrong hands it could bite with a vengence.

Just asking. It seems a little complicated to me, and Lord knows, I don't know.

What's up, Scotty? I should have known you would be around here somewhere. Hope your morning is good. I see you are doing the waving thing this morning so all is good I suspect. *waving* Mine is a little slow this morning, the fingers don't want to work this morning.

Well, drinking coffee. That seems to clear out some corners, not many, but some.

I don't understand why we don't have more comments on this kit. It is certainly an interesting subject. I suspect some people may not want to hear it. I mean, gee whiz, pointy heads going around talking about doubt. We cannot have that. There should be "umbrage" here and more, umbrage. I mean someone should get insulted to the highest. Any suggestion that there is a subject on the Achenblog that we are in doubt about. It just is not so. Tell me it isn't so. There isn't a kit alive or dead that we can't come up with more pointy head comments. And RD, you don't get off just because you're down there soaking up sun and hopefully, fun, at the beach. We're looking for you to fill up your quota no matter where you are. And that certainly goes for the rest of you. It is a subject that one and all can talk about. I'm sure many of you have had that moment, that time, when doubt seems to be the only thing you knew. Be brave, my friends, tell us about it. We know you have it, so out with it. You are among friends, we can take it. Doubt is right up there with your most embarrassing moment. I'll bet that word, the one with the "e" is not spelled correctly.

You see how the coffee just jumps in there and fire those neurons or whatever is in the brain, right up. I'm not saying it's a good up, but it's up.

SCC : 10 times their body lengths

Perhaps I should start first.

My most doubtful moment.

My most doubtful moment begins every morning when I open my eyes. It is a new day, and I don't know what to expect. I hope it is all good, but don't have a certainty on that. I say my prayers, and thank God for Him and for His Son, Jesus. And then I come here. And every morning, or whatever the hour is, I say "good morning, friends." And every day I do it with doubt. I realize that I am putting myself out. I am opening up to people I have never seen in real life. I am leaving a bit of myself here, and perhaps some may be offended and not receptive. Some may be warm and loving, and accepting of me, yet it is still riffed with doubt and unknowns. I am not among my equals in life work or even knowledge. Yet I consider myself very much a equal because of my humanity, still there is doubt. One would think that it gets better over time, it does not. For me, every morning is like the beginning, doubt on the horizon. Yet I continue, I face the doubt, and face the offended. And embrace the loving and accepting. I am just a country person with no real feel for the city or its way of life. Yet I make this step, and I make each morning or day, and I look forward to this, this doubt. I will possess it and make it mine, doubt and all.

Time to go. Have to meet the sister. Have a great day, my friends. And know that prayers have been said and you were included.

Happy Monday, all! Hey, Cassandra, you are quite the philosopher this morning.

Quite right, Snuke. The fire department's code enforcement folks should be able to deal with any issue without saying who called. If dbG's inspectors are like ours, they will be busy this week.

Now, the kit. Great leaders have humility and the ability to see, understand, and incorporate other points of view in their vision of reality. As bc said, none of us has the complete understanding of total reality. If our leaders are to do what is right (regardless of popularity), they must be able to see rightly and make informed decisions on all the information they had. That's the problem with the neocons; they edit out too much reality because it doesn't fit well in their vision. It's the worst possible mistake, especially in politics.

Herein lies the genius of The Man in Joel's basement. Washington wasn't interested in wielding power for its own sake; he wanted to make life better for all the people in the American colonies, and he saw that breaking with England was the only way that could happen. There was a great deal of luck in his success, but he set himself up to be lucky by his character and his actions.

BTW, great article in the current Smithsonian about the southern campaign of the American Revolution and the success of Nathanael Green. Now there's a story of how good strategy brings luck and success.

Good morning, everyone.

Yes, whatever the Rabbi did doesn't change the great relationship I have with my husband. And, the Rabbi himself is in part to thank. He spent lots of time with us during our first year of marriage, when we were having a terrible time getting used to sharing home and finances. Unlike most couples I know, we never lived together before getting married.

And it is humorous that he used his discretionary funds to fund his indiscretions.

I watched Casino Royale over the weekend. Probably the last person on the planet to do so. All I can say is Daniel Craig is just beautiful. Well, that, and the movie kept me on the edge of my seat. I'll watch it again today before sending it back.

Thanks for the good advice, all!

a bea c, thanks for not taking umbrage. . . being human is the best and worst of us!

> uncertainty suffuses everything.

As a great man once said "The future's uncertain and the end is always near."

Then he said "Let it roll baby, roll !"

Error;

But that was after he woke up this morning and got hisself a beer.

:-)

And yes, Cassandra, caffeine is a good thing this early.

"All night long"

You've gotta admit, this article about a family obsessed with raising show dogs has one great headline...

Dog Willing, They'll Win It

Here's the link to the dog article...

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/why-we-compete/2007/07/ego.html?hpid=artslot

Very well reported piece by Peter Baker on Bush:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/01/AR2007070101356.html?hpid=topnews

"No modern president has experienced such a sustained rejection by the American public."

And Hiatt weighs in, too. What's left of the Bush presidency? [Checking calendar to see how many days left.]

FYI, I'm going to try to annotate the Outlook piece a little -- look for that 10-ish today. And then at 11:30 we have the weekly meeting to plan the next section -- I'll try to relate some data from that.

Time to post the link to the Backwards Bush clock:

http://www.backwardsbush.com/

> Love *always* leaves a mark.

Would that be carpet burn?

Or were you thinking "hickie"?

Wow, what a lovely day. 3 days off and so much to do. I am sure some time will be spent at the river, perhaps involving some wormies.

good morning. up early - still on east coast time, which is convenient, since i start a job today. yes, gone are my free-wheeling grad student days. except i still have to finish that long paper thingy. i doubt i will enjoy the next few months. or whether i'll have much time to boodle.

i really like the kit. i didn't feel like commenting on it when i read it because i get so angry thinking about the current administration, and i've ranted many times before. i think that hubris has turned into a calculated pr strategy of projecting decisiveness and admitting no mistakes. i'm ok with a strong leader approaching that role with a measure of certitude and decisiveness - after going through a thorough process of fact-finding and analysis. and realizing that you can never be 100% sure.

it's probably even good when a lot of the sensitive debates remain behind closed doors. what we have around arbusto, though, is lack of internal debate - way to many yes men (and women). we know now more than ever that the cabinet members who did not make it into the second term were the ones challenging the modus operandi. so the certitude factor relates to bush (and cheney) personally, the internal culture of the administration, and the manner of relating policy and decisions to the public. bleh.

My only other thought on this topic is that it seems way easier to criticize others for not tolerating doubt than it is to criticize ourselves. I guess that's because we view an advocacy of doubt in other people as a sneaky way to get them to admit that they are wrong.

Good morning. Nice pointyheaded comment on uncertainty from bc, and practical ones from Cassandra. My biggest area of doubt, of course, revolves around parenting, since Ivansdad & I are making it up as we go along. So far we seem to be doing okay, judging from the results, but every day offers new opportunities for uncertaintly. I'm also often open to discussion about professional conclusions; what may seem obvious to me is, astoundingly, not always obvious to everyone following my reasoning. At that point I'd better look again. Of course, sometimes I look again and decide those people are just wrong. Doesn't always mean I'm right, though.

Cassandra, you raise a good point about setting yourself up. You might ask whether the manager will notify residents generally when a banned person comes on the property, or even if you could see that list of names in advance -- so you could help the manager, of course.

When I was a little girl and our area was even more rural, we had a family fireworks display every Fourth. Despite that I'm not a "local" fireworks fan. When I was a kid our neighbor's roof was set on fire by a stray bottle rocket. That was before we had a fire station or hydrant. They managed to save the structure.

From the Peter Baker piece that Joel linked to:

For all the setbacks, he [President G.W. Bush] remains unflinching, rarely expressing doubt in his direction, yet trying to understand how he got off course.

There's a well-reported piece in today's NYT about the "network effect" of genes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/business/yourmoney/01frame.html?

The issue is: If units of the genome, such as junk DNA, as recently reported, are not inert and can impact the workings of other genes, can discrete genes be patented, especially, as is now becoming clearer, that genes work in concert. For example, as reported in the article, scientists recently decoded the genetic structures of one of the most virulent forms of malaria and found that it may involve interactions among as many as 500 genes.

The "network effect." Perhaps this phrase should gain greater currency in our vocabulary? When the United States launches an extremly questionable "pre-emptive" war, perhaps Bush and his circle of advisers should consider the "network effect"--not only on us and our international standing--given the false premises on which the war was begun, but on those who are targeted by the bombs, the violence, the widespread destruction, and by occupying armies?

Baker's piece reported that Bush is meeting with intellectuals and a British historian is mentioned. I was reading a passage this weekend that mentioned very briefly that British historian Toynbee predicted that the conflict of this century would not be against the Communists, but Christians against Muslims. Does anyone know hisorian Toynbee intimately enough to cite the source or passage of Toynbee's that delves into this? Was he truly that prescient?

Thanks for the heads up about the Smithsonian article, Slyness, about Nathanael Greene. Now to find it at the library.

Joel has certainly done his master's, or masters' bidding, with his Kit on Friday. We got it all--the Supremes, a story on Iran, Bush being compared to another world leader, and Joel's article about doubt. Not that this is all to the bad.

I remember an exercise I did with a class during my Teacher Corps days. The students had to read an article about volcanoes. I tested them on their knowledge before they ever set eyes on the material--a pre-test. Of course, they got poor scores. Then the junior high kids read the piece and were tested again. Their reading comprehension and retention of the information were high, as reflected in their test scores. Tickling their curiosity, and subsequently holding their feet to the fire, was a good thing.

How many of us would have made the comparison of Bush to Neville Chamberlain? Gordon Brown certainly has had his hands full during his first 72 or so hours in office. Interesting tidbit about the location of the first bomb near the Tiger Tiger nightclub in London and the hypothesis that the bomb was laid there because Islamist (fanatics?) see women who drink and carouse in these types of nightspots as promiscuous. Also, the knighting of Salman Rushdie playing into the hypothesis. Has anyone read "Satanic Verses"?

I wonder with whom Brown will be compared? Brown isn't Mr. Hollywood and I find myself liking that and his serious posture before the television cameras. I question the wisdom of making Tony Balir, an architect of the Iraq war, a Middle East peace envoy. The appointment seems like a contradiction in terms--and the Middle East hardly seems like northern Ireland. Is accepting the slot all about Blair polishing up his legacy?

Enjoy the Smithsonian article, Linda. One of my goals in life is to take the time to follow Cornwallis' route from Charleston to Yorktown. I've been to several of the battle sites, but I'd love to do them in order. The first members of my mother's family in this area fought in the Revolution, so I have a personal interest.

My thought about the incidents in London and Glasgow is that either the terrorists are getting more and more stupid about what they do, or the police are getting much better. I hope both are true, but neither makes Gordon Brown's life easier. I wish him well.

Good morning, all.

martooni, the mark obviously depends on the love.

Cassandra, who does not wake up with some doubt in their mind about *something*?

You're not alone, you're human just like the rest of us.

bc

NYT's reporting this morning hints at fanatical Kurds (not Sunni, not Shiite...is al Qaeda really involved in these incidents over the last handful of days in Britain or not?):

The detainee arrested over the weekend in Staffordshire was a medical doctor of Iranian-Kurdish descent, according to two people with knowledge of the police inquiry.

One of those people, and a BBC report, identified him as Mohammed Asha, 26, and a newspaper, The Sun, said he worked at North Staffordshire hospital near the Midlands town of Newcastle-under-Lyme, where the police searched a house on Sunday. ...

British intelligence agencies had warned the government last April that terrorist attacks might be initiated by Iranian Kurds to coincide with the end of Prime Minister Tony Blair's term of office, according to a person who saw the warning. Mr. Blair handed power to Mr. Brown last Wednesday.

The government has not confirmed that report, and it is unclear precisely *why* Iranian Kurds would be aggrieved. But a radical Kurdish group, Ansar al-Islam, was largely driven out of northern Iraq four years ago when American and British forces overthrew Saddam Hussein, and it has since found a haven in Iran, security officials have said.

On the way home I realized my post to LiT was a bit off, and meant log on all weekend but kep getting distracted. All caught up on the kit and boodles. Thanks bc for setting the record straight, I've got an order in at Amazon for the book, thanks for that too.

I'm full of doubts. So full in fact that I sometimes doubt my doubts. That's why I'm so confused all the time. That's my excuse for misinterpreting LiT last Friday.

And can't think of anything special about today, but I'll get an early start on tomorrow: the start of Dog Days.

And to LTL-CA, glad your trip was a success. The weather around isn't like that all summer. Some days it's worse.

Looks like Joel skunked the Competition. Didn't see any other pieces on Doubt over the weekend!

Meanwhile, a patio-building project left a pile of leftover dirt (sand, actually, this being Florida). The simplest way to deal with it seemed to be a retaining wall, to create a well-drained raised bed. So late on Sunday I finished the project by installing a couple of Yucca filamentosa, which are native as far north as Washington (city, not state) and have nice, soft leaves--a yucca that can be cuddled. Also two Florida beargrass plants, which are a bit yucca-ish. I suspect their long, slender leaves may have been useful for basketry, like the related Southwestern plant, sacahuista.

Today's US presidency has been described as a job that doesn't allow time for reflection, so it's best to hand it over to someone with fixed opinions; Reagan would thus be an excellent President, while Clinton should have paralyzed the government by his propensity to "talk through eight sides of every issue, often until his listeners passed out from information overload." My gosh, an articulate ruminator. Dangerous! Unfit!

One British editorial cartoonist (Telegraph?)had Brown as a bear, walking backwards into his first audience with the Queen because Tony told him to.

Morning everyone! I hope all my fellow canukistanians had a good Canadoodle day! New position here is real laid back. I haven't done a single thing thus far today... other than boodle skimming.

Nice outlook piece by the way boss.

I haven't had time to annotate the Doubt story but I did add to the top of the kit some of the feedback.

PITGOATS. Allen Stairs might get a phone call from the Competition.

The Stalin and Mao regimes seem to have been Pitgoaty. The Maoists, in particular, came up with enthusiasms: turning cooking pots into steel, rice so thick, you could walk on top of the ready-to-harvest plants. So underlings reported huge harvests to the overlings, who demonstrated China's great success to the world through exports. Meanwhile, something like 35 million farmers starved (info foggily remembered from "Hungry Ghosts" by Conquest).

Nineteenth-century infantry charges seem to have worked the same way. If a charge didn't work, it was for lack of sufficient enthusiasm.

Pitgoat is a GREAT word.

My theory as to why many atheists are pitgoats: the alternative is incredibly frustrating.

Take a pitgoat Christian and a pitgoat atheist: If the Christian is right, the atheist may very well spend Eternity in the Fires of That Very Bad Place With All Of His/Her Best Friends and Lawyers, trapped in an unending "I told you so".

If, on the other hand, the Christian is wrong and there is only decomposition after this life, he or she will never know about it.

Any atheist who allows himself any doubt about the veracity of his position is forced to realize that he will only ever know the truth if he is wrong, and the Christian will only ever know the truth if he is right. And the one thing atheists want more than anything is to be able to say, "SEE? I *told* you!" and by definition, that can never, ever, happen.

If I believed in God, I'd think she was playing a pretty clever little joke on me.

I think the Universe would be the most incredible waste of space if we only get to ride it once.

Still confused apparently:

kep=>kept
meant log=> meant to log
And the book purchased is the one bc mentioned, not the one LiT mentioned.

Omni..Can you be any nicer? Geez Louise, I'm not that thin-skinned. (Not to be misunderstood: when push comes to shove, you want me on your side in the alley.) Besides, if it were a problem, we would hammer it out over a cheap burger. Of that I have no doubt.

Thanks, bc

Ivansmom, got the list, we all have it. Appreciate the advice.

Thanks-
Slyness, hope everything is okay with you.

Back from the laundry room. That is one long job.

>I think the Universe would be the most incredible waste of space if we only get to ride it once.

Agreed. Remind me to come back as Paris Hilton next time.

"Nineteenth-century infantry charges seem to have worked the same way. If a charge didn't work, it was for lack of sufficient enthusiasm."

You'll never see a better examination of this very idea than Kubrick's "Paths of Glory."

I'm an atheist and feel pretty comfortable about it. The aforementioned Socrates said that death is a continuation of consciousness or it is oblivion and neither one can be bad. One of the things that I have always found off-putting about Christianity is the idea that humans are the only creatures with souls. Now I'm fairly certain I don't have a soul- seen a lotta folks die, never saw a soul, never a difference from an animal's death- but if a soul can be defined as an air of spirituality and a capacity for devotion, then I refuse to believe that I have a soul and my dog Mick has none. Perhaps I'm a closet Bhuddist in the making. Nah, I'm too carnivorous.

A little puzzle for our friends to the North who observe Canada Day on Monday when the first falls on a Sunday.

http://www.jigzone.com/puzzles/2007-07-01

Morning/Afternoon all, Joel you wrote a kit that speaks directly to me, I am sure of very little - I am feeling better about myself after reading the kit (I think).

Moved rocks for six hours yesterday still a long way to go but taking a break today and will get back to the job either tonight or tomorrow, (really need to work on the "holiday" concept). Canada Day was quiet here, just a work day around the house and fireworks at night.

LiT, I didn't think any thing I posted would cause you to take umbrage (burnt or any other kind). It's just that I realized after I'd left that that bc and I talked about two books...aw heck I'm still a very confused person, let's just leave at that while go for a walk and get some tea.

'Morning, Boodle. Been back-boodling and playing catch-up. Martooni, I loved your 8:57.

I thought Joel's piece was one of his best in quite a while, and agree that PITGOAT is a great term, and it will surely enter the lexicon, if not everywhere then certainly here on the Boodle.

I come at the question of doubt from a slightly different perspective than most of you. Ever since I was a wee cub reporter and journalism major way back in the dawn of pre-history, "doubt" went under the general name of "skepticism," and was always considered to be the newspaper reporter's best friend. So I've always tended to look upon "doubt" not as a problem but as a (very) useful tool. The reporter's other tool is curiosity, constantly asking "why things are" (hey, Joel, that would make a good name for a book). To me curiosity and skepticism go hand-in-hand as necessary components of a properly functioning intellect. I've long since come to the conclusion that "the enemy" isn't especially any one particular ideology, but ideology itself, any and all idealogy, whether under the name of religion, or secular/political theory (communism, capitalism, socialism, fascism, totalitarianism, even "democracy," which hasn't worked real well in Iraq, Lebanon or for the Palestinians on the West Bank). A "little bit" of some of these things doesn't seem to be too bad if mixed in with some pragmatism, smome moderation, some tolerance, andsome common (or uncommon) sense. But it's when things start to get extreme and rigid that there starts to be problems. It has always seemed to me that "belief" per se was the problem, and doubt the anodyne. Or another way of putting it was that it's OK to believe something "a little bit," but just don't start believing in "it" (a theory, a religious doctrine, whatever) so much that the belief overwhelms common sense, reality-testing, etc.

Take the Peter Baker article about Bush and his "serenity," for example. The picture being painted is one of Bush being serene and confidant in the rightness of his position, etc., all of this sustained by his faith. This kind of commentary to most people is viewed as