Thursday, September 06, 2012
Goodreads | Eric_W Welch (Forreston, IL)'s review of Injustice For All
This has potential to be a good story, a real page turner that suffered from multiple shifts in time sequences and characters.
Joe Dillard is a former defense attorney turned prosecutor. When his friend commits suicide because of some ill treatment by a local judge, everything begins to unravel as the friend's son is sought for the murder and Dillard's boss asks him to file charges that Dillard considers unethical. Oh yes, he's also haunted by the execution of an innocent client. And, oh yes, his wife has breast cancer, but his son is a great baseball player who, of course, gets good grades. Corrupt sherriffs, but a really good one, too.
Lots of problems with this book: a facile ending, too many side-trips, shifting POV's, tense changes, too predictable, etc. And yet the story pulled me along. Probably be a great, if somewhat frustrating, airplane book. This this review is disjointed? Read the book.
And I swear that animal on the cover looks like a sealion.
Tuesday, September 04, 2012
Goodreads | Eric_W Welch (Forreston, IL)'s review of The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion
Goodreads | Eric_W Welch (Forreston, IL)'s review of The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion:
Here's a quote that struck me: "And why do so many Westerners, even secular ones, continue to see choices about food and sex as being heavily loaded with moral significance? Liberals sometimes say that religious conservatives are sexual prudes for whom anything other than missionary-position intercourse within marriage is a sin. But conservatives can just as well make fun of liberal struggles to choose a balanced breakfast—balanced among moral concerns about free-range eggs, fair-trade coffee, naturalness, and a variety of toxins, some of which (such as genetically modified corn and soybeans) pose a greater threat spiritually than biologically." and another:
"This book is about why it’s so hard for us to get along. We are indeed all stuck here for a while, so let’s at least do what we can to understand why we are so easily divided into hostile groups, . . Politics and religion are both expressions of our underlying moral psychology, and an understanding of that psychology can help to bring people together. My goal in this book is to drain some of the heat, anger, and divisiveness out of these topics and replace them with awe, wonder, and curiosity. We are downright lucky that we evolved this complex moral psychology that allowed our species to burst out of the forests and savannas and into the delights, comforts, and extraordinary peacefulness of modern societies in just a few thousand years. . . I want to show you that an obsession with righteousness (leading inevitably to self-righteousness) is the normal human condition. It is a feature of our evolutionary design, not a bug or error that crept into minds that would otherwise be objective and rational."
'via Blog this'
Here's a quote that struck me: "And why do so many Westerners, even secular ones, continue to see choices about food and sex as being heavily loaded with moral significance? Liberals sometimes say that religious conservatives are sexual prudes for whom anything other than missionary-position intercourse within marriage is a sin. But conservatives can just as well make fun of liberal struggles to choose a balanced breakfast—balanced among moral concerns about free-range eggs, fair-trade coffee, naturalness, and a variety of toxins, some of which (such as genetically modified corn and soybeans) pose a greater threat spiritually than biologically." and another:
"This book is about why it’s so hard for us to get along. We are indeed all stuck here for a while, so let’s at least do what we can to understand why we are so easily divided into hostile groups, . . Politics and religion are both expressions of our underlying moral psychology, and an understanding of that psychology can help to bring people together. My goal in this book is to drain some of the heat, anger, and divisiveness out of these topics and replace them with awe, wonder, and curiosity. We are downright lucky that we evolved this complex moral psychology that allowed our species to burst out of the forests and savannas and into the delights, comforts, and extraordinary peacefulness of modern societies in just a few thousand years. . . I want to show you that an obsession with righteousness (leading inevitably to self-righteousness) is the normal human condition. It is a feature of our evolutionary design, not a bug or error that crept into minds that would otherwise be objective and rational."
'via Blog this'
Sunday, September 02, 2012
Goodreads | Eric_W Welch (Forreston, IL)'s review of The Phenomenon of Teilhard
Goodreads | Eric_W Welch (Forreston, IL)'s review of The Phenomenon of Teilhard:
N.B. This is not really a book but a series of interviews with people about Teilhard's work.
I had more than a passing interest in Teilhard de Chardin when I was in high school in Switzerland and tried reading some of his stuff in French. I suspect I was more taken with the controversy between his writings, which were for a while placed on the Index, and the Catholic Church. The formal condemnation occurred in 1962 just as I was entering high school:
"The above-mentioned works abound in such ambiguities and indeed even serious errors, as to offend Catholic doctrine... For this reason, the most eminent and most revered Fathers of the Holy Office exhort all Ordinaries as well as the superiors of Religious institutes, rectors of seminaries and presidents of universities, effectively to protect the minds, particularly of the youth, against the dangers presented by the works of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin and of his followers". (^ Warning Considering the Writings of Father Teilhard de Chardin, Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, June 30, 1962.)
One might argue that the antipathy of the Church is what made Teilhard famous and of interest. Certainly that was true in my case, and I suspect many other. Teilhard was trained as a paleontologist and priest who struggled with the interaction of faith and science. He came to believe that evolution was a straight line with the endpoint, or Omega, as being God. “The end of the world: the overthrow of equilibrium, detaching the mind, fulfilled at last, from its material matrix, so that it will henceforth rest with all its weight on God-Omega.” (The Phenomenon of Man) Unfortunately, we now know a great deal more about evolution and understand its way-points, dead-ends, fits and starts, and branches. He also became embroiled in the infamous Piltdown Man scandal.
The idea of the Omega Point is interesting in light of Watson (the IBM supercomputer) and Ray Kurzweil’s concept of the singularity. Now that I’m older, I still have a lot of respect for Teilhard’s scientific work and his attempts to reconcile what he learned in science with what he had been taught as a Jesuit. Regretfully, most of resolves into just wishful thinking. Teilhard’s search for a unifying theory (reconciling the material and the spiritual) echoes that of many others. I fear (not really a fear since I find it quite satisfying) that ultimately we will discover we are nothing more than chance random associations of molecules.
What’s interesting about his thought is the preeminence of evolution and its importance in the progression of man to the Omega Point. a linear progression toward complexity and greater consciousness, humans become responsible for evolutionary progress and continuity (interesting given his experiences in WW I.) To reach our mature form requires a self-reflection and understanding of our evolution and consciousness. Matter was not an inert substance to be manipulated but has a “luminous” quality that’s important to the unification, the ultimate singularity which is God. Nonsense, but interesting from the point of view of idea evolution.
This a a short audiotape that presents a commentary on Teilhard’s life and beliefs. I have it as an mp3 file if anyone wants a copy, I could mail a CD.
My review of his biography is at http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/37583277.
Also reading[book:The Jesuit and the Skull: Teilhard de Chardin, Evolution, and the Search for Peking Man|208930]
'via Blog this'
N.B. This is not really a book but a series of interviews with people about Teilhard's work.
I had more than a passing interest in Teilhard de Chardin when I was in high school in Switzerland and tried reading some of his stuff in French. I suspect I was more taken with the controversy between his writings, which were for a while placed on the Index, and the Catholic Church. The formal condemnation occurred in 1962 just as I was entering high school:
"The above-mentioned works abound in such ambiguities and indeed even serious errors, as to offend Catholic doctrine... For this reason, the most eminent and most revered Fathers of the Holy Office exhort all Ordinaries as well as the superiors of Religious institutes, rectors of seminaries and presidents of universities, effectively to protect the minds, particularly of the youth, against the dangers presented by the works of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin and of his followers". (^ Warning Considering the Writings of Father Teilhard de Chardin, Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, June 30, 1962.)
One might argue that the antipathy of the Church is what made Teilhard famous and of interest. Certainly that was true in my case, and I suspect many other. Teilhard was trained as a paleontologist and priest who struggled with the interaction of faith and science. He came to believe that evolution was a straight line with the endpoint, or Omega, as being God. “The end of the world: the overthrow of equilibrium, detaching the mind, fulfilled at last, from its material matrix, so that it will henceforth rest with all its weight on God-Omega.” (The Phenomenon of Man) Unfortunately, we now know a great deal more about evolution and understand its way-points, dead-ends, fits and starts, and branches. He also became embroiled in the infamous Piltdown Man scandal.
The idea of the Omega Point is interesting in light of Watson (the IBM supercomputer) and Ray Kurzweil’s concept of the singularity. Now that I’m older, I still have a lot of respect for Teilhard’s scientific work and his attempts to reconcile what he learned in science with what he had been taught as a Jesuit. Regretfully, most of resolves into just wishful thinking. Teilhard’s search for a unifying theory (reconciling the material and the spiritual) echoes that of many others. I fear (not really a fear since I find it quite satisfying) that ultimately we will discover we are nothing more than chance random associations of molecules.
What’s interesting about his thought is the preeminence of evolution and its importance in the progression of man to the Omega Point. a linear progression toward complexity and greater consciousness, humans become responsible for evolutionary progress and continuity (interesting given his experiences in WW I.) To reach our mature form requires a self-reflection and understanding of our evolution and consciousness. Matter was not an inert substance to be manipulated but has a “luminous” quality that’s important to the unification, the ultimate singularity which is God. Nonsense, but interesting from the point of view of idea evolution.
This a a short audiotape that presents a commentary on Teilhard’s life and beliefs. I have it as an mp3 file if anyone wants a copy, I could mail a CD.
My review of his biography is at http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/37583277.
Also reading[book:The Jesuit and the Skull: Teilhard de Chardin, Evolution, and the Search for Peking Man|208930]
'via Blog this'
Goodreads | Eric_W Welch (Forreston, IL)'s review of Month of the Freezing Moon: The Sand Creek Massacre, November 1864
Goodreads | Eric_W Welch (Forreston, IL)'s review of Month of the Freezing Moon: The Sand Creek Massacre, November 1864:
In November, 1864, Colonel John Milton Chivington, also known as the "Fighting Parson" (he would often appear in the pulpit wearing two guns,) led several hundred regular and irregular (I doubt if prunes would have helped) Colorado army troops down on an Indian village at Sand Creek. Hundreds of Indian women and children were killed and mutilated. Ironically, the village was flying the American flag. Duane Schultz describes why the village was flying the American flag and the aftermath of the massacre in Month of the Freezing Moon: The Sand Creek Massacre. November 1864.
In 1851, the Treaty of Horse Creek had ceded land to various tribes. In return, the Indians, mostly Cheyenne and Arapaho, agreed not to attack whites crossing their land. The U.S. agreed to pay$50,000 a year for 50 years. (This was later changed to 10 years without informing the tribes.) Concurrently, Denver was about to undergo an enormous boom during the winter of 1858-59 when gold was discovered in the hills. Almost overnight it increased in size to some 6,000, adding buildings wherever possible. One Indian walked into the first newspaper building and announced how impressed he was with the presses but could not understand why anyone would build in a creek bed. He raised his hand over his head showing how deep the water could rise. No one paid attention until the next year when the snow pack melted and the presses were finally located several miles downstream. The enormous population increases meant expanded stagecoach traffic. Indians would occasionally accompany the stages as they bumped along at ten mph with 9 passengers inside and perhaps 7 on top. There was a great deal of hatred for the Indians.
Chivington was a rather complex character. Viciously antislavery, he was once threatened with tar and feathering unless he stopped his pro-abolition sermons. The next Sunday he placed two pistols on the pulpit and proceeded to lash out at the pro-slavery forces in the congregation. He received no further threats. Denver was only 250 miles from Texas so when the Civil War broke out the national government raised 15,000 troops to protect Colorado (and its gold.) The threat from Texas failed to materialize. Chivington meanwhile had risen to the rank of Colonel and distinguished himself in battle becoming a bonafide hero. It became necessary for Governor Evans (the founder of Northwestern University) to justify payment of all those troops. He desperately needed a war. The local Cheyenne, Arapaho and Cherokee refused to cooperate despite numerous treaty violations by the government. Then came the Sioux uprising in New Ulm, Minnesota. Out of fear, soldiers and whites began shooting Indians on sight. The regular army was not eager for war and wrote several reports detailing how war could be avoided. In fact, Major Edward Wynkoop, at considerable risk to himself and his men, negotiated with the Arapaho and Cheyenne. He promised them a safe conduct to Denver. When he and the chiefs arrived he was shocked to learn that Evans refused to meet and would not discuss peace terms. Evans still had to justify to Washington the large army force he insisted he needed. Wynkoop was relieved of command and Evans told the Indians if they removed themselves to Sand Creek and Smoky Hill they would not be attacked.
Chivington remarked on the day before the attack that "I long to be wading in gore." He was granted his wish. His 700 troops surprised the camp at sunrise and shot every Indian in sight including those walking toward the troops with their hands in the air. All semblance of order was lost and most of his few casualties were from friendly fire. He and his soldiers took scalps and mutilated the bodies. It was this action more than anything that resulted in his downfall. The Senate found his conduct reprehensible and he even lost the support of the Denver crowd when it was learned he had conspired to kill one of the officers who testified against him. The Indians, of course, lost all faith in anything they were told, and the Cheyenne moved north to combine with the Sioux where they were to meet another self-righteous colonel with somewhat different results at Little Big Horn. Ironically Chivington's wife and son were killed by a marauding Indian war party several years later. He had been forced out of the army and had started a freight line which would have prospered had it not suffered from attacks by unfriendly Indians.
'via Blog this'
In November, 1864, Colonel John Milton Chivington, also known as the "Fighting Parson" (he would often appear in the pulpit wearing two guns,) led several hundred regular and irregular (I doubt if prunes would have helped) Colorado army troops down on an Indian village at Sand Creek. Hundreds of Indian women and children were killed and mutilated. Ironically, the village was flying the American flag. Duane Schultz describes why the village was flying the American flag and the aftermath of the massacre in Month of the Freezing Moon: The Sand Creek Massacre. November 1864.
In 1851, the Treaty of Horse Creek had ceded land to various tribes. In return, the Indians, mostly Cheyenne and Arapaho, agreed not to attack whites crossing their land. The U.S. agreed to pay$50,000 a year for 50 years. (This was later changed to 10 years without informing the tribes.) Concurrently, Denver was about to undergo an enormous boom during the winter of 1858-59 when gold was discovered in the hills. Almost overnight it increased in size to some 6,000, adding buildings wherever possible. One Indian walked into the first newspaper building and announced how impressed he was with the presses but could not understand why anyone would build in a creek bed. He raised his hand over his head showing how deep the water could rise. No one paid attention until the next year when the snow pack melted and the presses were finally located several miles downstream. The enormous population increases meant expanded stagecoach traffic. Indians would occasionally accompany the stages as they bumped along at ten mph with 9 passengers inside and perhaps 7 on top. There was a great deal of hatred for the Indians.
Chivington was a rather complex character. Viciously antislavery, he was once threatened with tar and feathering unless he stopped his pro-abolition sermons. The next Sunday he placed two pistols on the pulpit and proceeded to lash out at the pro-slavery forces in the congregation. He received no further threats. Denver was only 250 miles from Texas so when the Civil War broke out the national government raised 15,000 troops to protect Colorado (and its gold.) The threat from Texas failed to materialize. Chivington meanwhile had risen to the rank of Colonel and distinguished himself in battle becoming a bonafide hero. It became necessary for Governor Evans (the founder of Northwestern University) to justify payment of all those troops. He desperately needed a war. The local Cheyenne, Arapaho and Cherokee refused to cooperate despite numerous treaty violations by the government. Then came the Sioux uprising in New Ulm, Minnesota. Out of fear, soldiers and whites began shooting Indians on sight. The regular army was not eager for war and wrote several reports detailing how war could be avoided. In fact, Major Edward Wynkoop, at considerable risk to himself and his men, negotiated with the Arapaho and Cheyenne. He promised them a safe conduct to Denver. When he and the chiefs arrived he was shocked to learn that Evans refused to meet and would not discuss peace terms. Evans still had to justify to Washington the large army force he insisted he needed. Wynkoop was relieved of command and Evans told the Indians if they removed themselves to Sand Creek and Smoky Hill they would not be attacked.
Chivington remarked on the day before the attack that "I long to be wading in gore." He was granted his wish. His 700 troops surprised the camp at sunrise and shot every Indian in sight including those walking toward the troops with their hands in the air. All semblance of order was lost and most of his few casualties were from friendly fire. He and his soldiers took scalps and mutilated the bodies. It was this action more than anything that resulted in his downfall. The Senate found his conduct reprehensible and he even lost the support of the Denver crowd when it was learned he had conspired to kill one of the officers who testified against him. The Indians, of course, lost all faith in anything they were told, and the Cheyenne moved north to combine with the Sioux where they were to meet another self-righteous colonel with somewhat different results at Little Big Horn. Ironically Chivington's wife and son were killed by a marauding Indian war party several years later. He had been forced out of the army and had started a freight line which would have prospered had it not suffered from attacks by unfriendly Indians.
'via Blog this'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)