“”If our senses did not work - if we were blind, deaf, etc. - we would see things as they are; infinite.””
— Jorge Luis Borges
Founder, Editor: A Football Report.
Based in Brooklyn, via Boston. Lived in Barcelona, Buenos Aires, and Perugia.
Work Featured In: The New York Times, Al-Jazeera, ESPN, Public Radio Exchange's This Week In Social Media, Boston.com, The Guardian, Fox, The Football Ramble, Rivista Studio (Italy)
If it's related to football, chances are it's on my radar.
— Jorge Luis Borges
Your personality is not set in stone. You may think a morning coffee is the most enjoyable thing in the world, but it’s really just a habit. Thirty days without it, and you would be fine. You think you have a soul mate, but in fact you could have had any number of spouses. You would have evolved differently, but been just as happy.
You can change what you want about yourself at any time. You see yourself as someone who can’t write or play an instrument, who gives in to temptation or makes bad decisions, but that’s really not you. It’s not ingrained. It’s not your personality. Your personality is something else, something deeper than just preferences, and these details on the surface, you can change anytime you like.
If it is useful to do so, you must abandon your identity and start again. Sometimes, it’s the only way.
Set fire to your old self. It’s not needed here. It’s too busy shopping, gossiping about others, and watching days go by and asking why you haven’t gotten as far as you’d like. This old self will die and be forgotten by all but family, and replaced by someone who makes a difference.
Your new self is not like that. Your new self is the Great Chicago Fire—overwhelming, overpowering, and destroying everything that isn’t necessary.”
But Confucius has answered them with the final whistle, it’s all over. Germany, having trounced England’s famous midfield trio of Bentham, Locke and Hobbes in the semi-final, have been beaten by the odd goal.
— Bertrand Russel
Answer Then Ask
14 Questions. 14 Answers. I asked the first question and answered the final question. Students at Emory University carried the chain of thoughts the rest of the way.
(Watch it in HD)
Here it is if you haven’t read it yet. The argument is between a Christian student and an atheist professor. It’s been spreading like wildfire on Facebook, Tumblr, and beyond once again. I know many see the flaws in the conversation’s argumentative structure, but I thought I would address a few factual and logical flaws that people have unfortunately failed to acknowledge.
1) Okay, let’s get the first “Are you a Christian?” line and the last “By the way, that student was EINSTEIN” line out of the way. Einstein wasn’t Christian…
2) The student is inconsistent when he attacks the professor’s “flawed premise of duality.”
3) The student leaps to the accusation that the professor cannot prove he has a brain because no one has seen it.
4) The student’s reasoning to take a supposed leap of faith is a classic example of false equivalence. Faith ≠ Probability.
My final thought on this argument is that it is not necessarily one for religion. Rather, it is pro-agnosticism and anti-atheism, which can be both misleading but actually still in accordance with some of Einstein’s beliefs. To quote Einstein (no, the real Einstein) in an interview published in 1930 in G. S. Viereck's book Glimpses of the Great, he said:
"I’m not an atheist… We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God."
Anyway, I’d love to discuss this further. Comment, reblog, or find me on twitter.