back in the 973

so i got back on saturday. slept the whole time on the plane and the ride back...and from 4 pm in the afternoon to 9:30 am in the morning on sunday. then i slept that night from 10 pm to 9:30 monday morning.

i had the most [insert adjective here] dream last night. it was amazing while having it, but terrible when i woke up. it seems almost embarrassing to write anything specific about it. but if i'm going to keep having these sorts of dreams, i'll never want to wake up, but when i do, never want to sleep for knowledge of what i'll feel like when i wake up. i guess it's kinda like getting drunk. it was great while it lasted, but it sucks when you wake up. a dream hangover, if you will.

sigh. cure me of dreams.

absurdity

i've been running and biking for hours every day for the past two weeks or so. trying to get tired. but it doesn't seem to get my mind off. i guess that's all i can do for now? at the very least, i'll just get more in shape.

i'm starting to read kierkegaard in fear&trembling. it's interesting that he defines faith as believing the absurd. if this is true, why do people have faith? human reason is the most powerful tool that we have, and arguably defines our humanity. how strange.

on another note, i learned yesterday that "bacon" referred to a girl's butt when you're speaking black. thanks jen for enlightening me on this. i think it's gross.

there's not much else to say, i'm not in a particular mood to write or anything. ultimate game in half an hour. kinda excited. trying to get even more tired to stop thinking about.../endpost

a beautiful thundercloud

so i'm in the middle of the best chem lab this year. partners and i went to go play pool in lower beamer in the middle of lab. excellent. now we're just sitting around waiting for things to happen to our Cu(NH3)4SO4 x H2O. however, despite this awesomeness right now, i am constantly reminded of the looming event to come in a less than 10 hours. it bites me and i don't know what to do about it. dreaming kills. so does reality. so i guess we're just destined as humans to die in some fashion. i guess i have some time to decide what to do, if anything.

andrew baur mentioned something that i didn't notice myself. i've been hiding away in my room more often. our door, which i had proclaimed to be forever open, is often closed. that surprises me and also makes me wonder. i also haven't been eating with the usual large group of people, and am often out running or doing something outside, spending less and less time in the dorm. my excuse is that the weather is nice. it's a good excuse.

today's philosophical question is euthyphro's dilemma. does god determine what is good, or is "good" something under which god falls. this is a dilemma because there are viable arguments for and against either side. for the former, that would make good arbitrary, that is there is no greater reason for good other than because god said so. an interesting example is god's commandment to abraham to sacrifice isaac. on the other side of the dilemma, however, the conclusion would be that god falls under some standard that is above his power, meaning he is not the ultimate but a subjugate of the concept of good. there are three ways of getting out of the dilemma: by choosing either side or by proposing another solution that avoids either. when considering this dilemma, a possible solution that explains both sides is that god is simply not entirely good. it justifies his commandment to abraham as well as supports that he still is the standard of good and evil.

something interesting to read, something that i read in response to "Can God do evil?":

"To a theist, there are only two possible answers to this questions, and each one leads to interesting conclusions.
The theist answer: No, He cannot do evil.
For a theist to say that God cannot do evil is actually quite a strong claim. First of all, it says that God is limited in His options and is helpless to choose to do anything but “the good”. Essentially, if God never has to make a moral choice, He ceases to be a moral agent. Theists are very seldom comfortable with the idea of their omnipotent God being powerless in any meaningful way. A dropped rock falls to the ground without choice; how much praise is due the rock for falling correctly? Theists are even less comfortable with there being no basis for praising God’s moral character — if He could not have done otherwise.
One way that a theist may try to dig out of this conundrum is to argue that whatever God does is the definition of Good. So He is unlimited in whatever He does, He’s just limited in what the things He does are called.
If the theist wants to go this route, then he has to admit that for God there is no difference between a moral and immoral action. This means that God created an absolutely arbitrary set of rules for people to follow. If this situation described reality, a theist would obey God because He is a capricious tyrant setting down arbitrary rules — not because God is praiseworthy or the rules uncover some basic moral truth.
The theist answer: Yes, He can do evil.
When the response hits upon this one, the answer you get is usually, “All right, whatever, God can do evil, He just never does. He perfectly chooses to never sin.”
As soon as the theist mentions that God has the capability to do evil, he’s in a lot of trouble. The question now becomes one of epistemology: how does this theist gain the knowledge that God never does anything wrong?"

grocery lists

well. just got back from our housing appointment. guess what? out of three suites, we were the last one and so could not get a room on our floor. in addition, we don't even have a guarantee that we'll stay in fischer dorms. how excellent is that? fuck. i'd ask god what the point of this was, but all i've gotten are hurt knees and restlessness from talking to a wall. i guess this is just another thing to add to the shitlist of the year. one of many. most having to do with wheaton. hm. is this god's way of saying gtfowheaton? or is he preparing me for better things to come? it sure seems like the former right now. fuck. i feel like i wanna instigate something dangerous.

mistakes don't come with receipts

i wonder if i've made a huge mistake. one of those nonrefundable ones. that you probably cant overlook or get rid of.

i may or may not be a predestined hobo

andrew frazer picked me up off the streets of wheaton. it was such a hobo moment. so we went to half-price books with david vogel. where i bought two really old books. 1891 and 1946. for no good reason. i mean. i know why i bought them. but i don't know why i bought them. you know? ugh. i'm not sure what i'm going to do with them. i have ideas. but i don't know what i'm going to do with them. why am i still doing this...?

i don't feel like philosophizing, but here it goes. what is the purpose of humanity? god created us when he didn't need to, and so should have sovereignty over us, as we are his creation. however, why were we created? i have heard that the chief end of man is to glorify god, but if he needs our worship, than he must have been lacking it before we created, and so not a "complete" god. so maybe he doesn't need it. but he desires it. desire also insinuates the lack of something does it not? there doesn't seem to be a good reason for god to create us. did he need something to love? surely not, he loves and receives love from himself as demonstrated by his triune nature. so there it is: what was god's reason for creating humanity? it also ties into predestination in that some were created to go to hell while others to heaven, which seems strange.

"...it don't break even..." -The Script

easter eggs dipped in rainwater

i think you've heard about it. easter sunday. an iconic holiday reminiscent of christmas in terms of marketable festivities. easter eggs, marshmallows, and chocolate. who can complain?

i spent the afternoon at jamey o'connor's grandma's place. that's a lotta apostrophes. our unrelated rabble rousers consisted of brent anderson, christian james williams, and korey schweitzer. and kate, kelly, and anna of course. it was a time of meeting oldish people, eating gratuitous amounts of food, some C.R.U.D./B.U.N.N.Y. ball, and of course an easter egg hunt in the rain.

highlight of the afternoon: anna claiming to be able to fit 4 jello eggs in her mouth at once. she failed at 2.5, but persistently tried 3 times to no avail.

the rain didn't stop anyone though, except me 'cause i hate getting wet and cold. they played an assortment of ball games in the street, all while mrs. o'connor was describing how difficult raising four children was because they get themselves into trouble all the time. can't say i sympathize.

i'm not feeling up to type out some philosophical thoughts though, so here are last night's musings that i actually wrote down on paper:

Why do moths fly toward the fire?

Because it is beautiful.

Because they know that it gives warmth,

but moths, in their eagerness, burn.

Can the moth know that it will burn?

No, because it is a simple creature.

It only knows that it loves the light

and in its folly it will burn.

But it's so splendid to watch the moth

dance around the fire,

casting shadows on the wall,

that could not be described but as breathtaking.

Is it not the nature of fire to burn things?

So the moth will burn when it flits too close to the flames.

That's so tragic.

-and the moth disappeared completely-

Interpret it as you will

c'est la vie.