So a colleague at work today listened to the album Omen by Soulfly for the first time, which he got from someone else. The first track on the album is called "Bloodbath & Beyond", which he found incredibly funny despite not knowing about the "Bed Bath & Beyond" chain until I told him about it. Not sure if that is good or sad.
I went to Goatse.cx fully prepared for it to still be the same and for this to all be a prank. I'm now planing to convince people lemon party followed suit.
I went to Goatse.cx fully prepared for it to still be the same and for this to all be a prank. I'm now planing to convince people lemon party followed suit.
Dude, it turned into an imgr competitor months ago.
I went to Goatse.cx fully prepared for it to still be the same and for this to all be a prank. I'm now planing to convince people lemon party followed suit.
Dude, it turned into an imgr competitor months ago.
Goatse or Lemon Party? Don't want to check either at work for obvious reasons.
Pitch idea for web series; Alexander the Great and Ptolomy's adventures in the new world. With Alexander being shown as a cross between a frat boy and spoiled child and Ptolomy as his long suffering "minder". This is not to far from the truth depressingly.
Received an email requesting a commission of my Die Hard Christmas Cross Stitch yesterday. I politely declined. I don't have time to do that at the moment. If they messaged me a month ago, perhaps. I offered to give them the pattern and if they can do it or find someone to do it, then it's all good.
Sometimes you have to take the initiative. Sometimes you have to take back the country. Sometimes you have to tell your own story. Sometimes you have to shoot the story teller in the neck.
Buying a first edition novel (of one of the first books my Dad ever read to me) that I've arranged to have inscribed by the author to my father as his Christmas gift. I am nervous though, because I've never bought a rare book before and doing it online makes it a bit nerve wracking.
Wow, you know, I thought Big Bang Theory was funny. But now I realize how boring it is and how terrible some of the characters are. *goes off to write a script for a youtube video*
I'm thinking of becoming a Freemason. It's interesting, and I like the core concepts. I just may not have enough free time, and also might be disqualified because I consider myself agnostic.
Spirit day at BLS. We don't get a whole week, just a day. It always kinda scares me. The huge crowds all in uniform, the masses shouting unintelligible slogans; as I type, I'm skipping the pep-rally. Haven't gone since Eighth Grade. Makes me feel like I'm at the Nuremberg Rallies.
There are several flaws with that chart. First of all, it conflates knowledge with 100% certainty; the two are quite different, and agnosticism/gnosticism is about knowledge rather than certainty. Knowledge is something that people do have in the real world, while 100% certainty is basically unjustifiable with regards to anything.
Secondly, it conflates certainty with the possibility of certainty (or knowledge with knowability) - whether or not it is possible to be certain with regards to this issue is a separate question from whether you yourself are certain. It's true that the term "agnosticism" can be used to refer to both cases - i.e. that something is unknown, or that it cannot be known - but it doesn't help to conflate the two in a single diagram.
As a quick demonstration of the second flaw, you can believe that, in the diagram's own words, "it is possible to be 100% certain" that there is a God or Gods, while lacking that certainty yourself.
I'm thinking of becoming a Freemason. It's interesting, and I like the core concepts. I just may not have enough free time, and also might be disqualified because I consider myself agnostic.
You can always call yourself a deist (i.e., there was a Creator, but he pretty much just created the universe, set the laws of nature into motion, and then took a 13+ billion year vacation without doing anything else, ala Thomas Jefferson and the like). All they care about is that you believe in some sort of "Great Architect of the Universe," and they don't really care the nature of your belief or whatnot.
I'm thinking of becoming a Freemason. It's interesting, and I like the core concepts. I just may not have enough free time, and also might be disqualified because I consider myself agnostic.
You can always call yourself a deist (i.e., there was a Creator, but he pretty much just created the universe, set the laws of nature into motion, and then took a 13+ billion year vacation without doing anything else, ala Thomas Jefferson and the like). All they care about is that you believe in some sort of "Great Architect of the Universe," and they don't really care the nature of your belief or whatnot.
That's what I'm seeing. I also know a fair number of freemasons, some of whom are actually atheists. I'm gonna have to visit the local lodge to see what the guys are like there.
As I said, though, the point may be moot because I don't have time. If only I could actually join the French Freemasons instead of the American ones, I really like the cut of their jib.
There are several flaws with that chart. First of all, it conflates knowledge with 100% certainty; the two are quite different, and agnosticism/gnosticism is about knowledge rather than certainty. Knowledge is something that people do have in the real world, while 100% certainty is basically unjustifiable with regards to anything.
Secondly, it conflates certainty with the possibility of certainty (or knowledge with knowability) - whether or not it is possible to be certain with regards to this issue is a separate question from whether you yourself are certain. It's true that the term "agnosticism" can be used to refer to both cases - i.e. that something is unknown, or that it cannot be known - but it doesn't help to conflate the two in a single diagram.
As a quick demonstration of the second flaw, you can believe that, in the diagram's own words, "it is possible to be 100% certain" that there is a God or Gods, while lacking that certainty yourself.
The point is that when you apply the label of agnostic/gnostic to a person, it is a descriptor of their epidemiological stance. If you call yourself agnostic, you have said nothing about whether you personally believe in god(s).
The point is that when you apply the label of agnostic/gnostic to a person, it is a descriptor of their epidemiological stance. If you call yourself agnostic, you have said nothing about whether you personally believe in god(s).
Breaking news: agnosticism/gnosticism describes someone's stance on the effects of disease on populations of organisms!
The point is that when you apply the label of agnostic/gnostic to a person, it is a descriptor of their epidemiological stance. If you call yourself agnostic, you have said nothing about whether you personally believe in god(s).
Breaking news: agnosticism/gnosticism describes someone's stance on the effects of disease on populations of organisms!
Only if you say in a sentence that "X is (a)gnostic on the effects of disease on populations of organisms." If you simply say "X is (a)gnostic" with no further context, then it does not.
Comments
"And fuck it!"
Secondly, it conflates certainty with the possibility of certainty (or knowledge with knowability) - whether or not it is possible to be certain with regards to this issue is a separate question from whether you yourself are certain. It's true that the term "agnosticism" can be used to refer to both cases - i.e. that something is unknown, or that it cannot be known - but it doesn't help to conflate the two in a single diagram.
As a quick demonstration of the second flaw, you can believe that, in the diagram's own words, "it is possible to be 100% certain" that there is a God or Gods, while lacking that certainty yourself.
As I said, though, the point may be moot because I don't have time. If only I could actually join the French Freemasons instead of the American ones, I really like the cut of their jib.