Since the inception of my ‘blog’, I have been looking around for URL redirection service. So much so, that my blog presently has quite a number of access points. Some of them are noted below (most of which I remember at least)
The n3 one keeps going off for no apparent reason, CJB gives a popup and puts the layout in a frame which effectively screws up my site. So far, the .vze has been going along fine.
For all this effort, I might as well get my own domain 🙂
Played a lot of tennis today. And got royally trashed. Quite disappointing, I always thought I was reasonably decent in the game. Sure, am not match for really tennis players but I was under the opinion I can stand up to amateurs. How very wrong.
Surprising fact was TK’s serve. Gosh! How much strength can a man pack into those rock-arms of his? Especially considering that this is the first time he was playing tennis (or so he claimed), I was quite taken back.
That started me thinking. How effective is self-appraisal? We think we have reached a certain level of competency in something only to be proven wrong, does this mean that self appraisal is inaccurate? Or is it just that the individual’s tactic of self appraisal is not quite realistic? What is the definition of self-appraisal in the first place?
Coming back to tennis though, resolved to do something about my so-called ‘decent’ standard…….let’s see how far this resoluion goes 🙂 As I forsee, it goes staright to the ever growing list of resolutions which were made but never followed up. Only time will tell…
This a continuation of my Descartes philosophy posted in June (anyone knows how to point back to a previous post?)
Spinoza was a highly religious man and extremely debted to Descartes as his teacher. He was a biblical scholar and was the first person to analyse the biblical scriptures on a historical context. Spinoza pointed out the limited intellect and the problematic authorship of the bible.
Spinoza agreed with Descartes that the best way to find solutions is to get the most elementary premise which has a logical answer and to work towards the top. However, he disagreed with Descartes on a crucial point. If everything on earth can be logically and rationally deduced from a previous or a previous conclusion, then where does god fit it? If everything in the universe can be explained by rules and mathematical equations, then where is the need for god? Being a deeply religious man, Spinoza could not accept a theory wherein god does not fit in some way.
Newton, who lived at the same time as Spinoza, gave persuasive solutions to his problem, He argued that it was god who created the universe with al its rules and regulations and left it to work according to the rules laid down. These rules are what we call as scientific laws.
However, Spinoza could not accept this and needed god to be ever-present and pervasive in all things and aspects of life.
Spinoza solved this problem to his satisfaction as thus; we know that god is an infinite and perfect human being. This Descartes proved. Now, being an infinite and perfect, god cannot have any boundaries and fallacies which humans have. Thus, it follows that god must co-exists with everything.
This solves another Cartesian problem; Descartes had defined substance as one that needs nothing outside itself to exist. However, Spinoza pointed out that the only thing which needs nothing outside itself is totality. Everything within totality is interlinked and interdependent on anotherâ€™s existence. This is follows that only a true self-subsistence being can exists on itself; god.