Skip to main content

If

I had a crazy trip to Minnesota in the latter half of last week.  My law school sent two moot court teams, and we competed.  Moot court is where you get up in front of a 3-judge panel and argue a contentious, current legal issue for an hour (each team puts up two people, and each of those gets a quarter hour).  I like to compare it to being like doing a comedic set, except you have to be respectful to the hecklers who are constantly attempting to throw you off your game.

To make a long story short, we lost every match.  The first one was actually against our other team, and basically both sides had their worst arguments of the competition.  We lost to them, but it seemed pretty close to a tie (which would have meant they won, anyway, based off a written portion of the competition).  The next two arguments we thought we had destroyed the other teams -- our coach sent a text out saying we had just "pummelled" one of the other teams ... yet we lost both times, somehow.  Our final tally: 0 - 3.  What we feel our REAL tally should be:  2 - 0 - 1.

But, that is beside the point.  The point was that I still had a great time.  After picking up my bruised ego (which is pretty resilient, me being arrogant and all), my team and I went around Minneapolis and got to know the small sub-section that we could walk to.  There was a great restaurant named "Spill the Wine" that had the most excellent wine, and the manager/owner/server/whatever there was awesome.

So, as I was thinking through the events of the week, Rudyard Kipling's old poem "If" kept going through my head.  I am including the link to it because it is worth reading again, if you never have.

One caveat:  A former female friend of mine (still female, as far as I know -- the former attaches to the "friend" part) threw a fit when I sent this to her during a rough time because she thought Rudyard Kipling was a misogynist and that this poem is sexist.  So, first ... get a life (which was my original response, and thus the "former").  Second ... the perspective is from a father to his son.  The fact that it ends with "you'll be a man, my son" is thus not sexist.

Anyway, read and enjoy.  I think this is a good goal, a philsophical asymptote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If%E2%80%94

muse on,
 B

http://amusingbeam.blogspot.com/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The problem with fundamentalism, part 2: Religious fundamentalism

This is the second part of a two part series where I discuss the problems I see with two prevalent forms of fundamentalism (the first discussed Constitution and fundamentalism: http://amusingbeam.blogspot.com/2012/05/problem-with-fundamentalism-part-1.html ).  In this part, I will be discussing biblical fundamentalism.  I will be referring to sources more frequently here, as I cannot claim the expertise I could for the last installment. Let me start by saying that I understand this is an extremely controversial topic, especially the stance I am taking.  My goal is not to offend, but it is instead to discuss why I think a fundamentalist approach to the Bible (and, in some respects, any text) has insurmountable problems.  I think that most Fundamentalists I know are quite willing to discuss why they believe their hermeneutic approach is the correct one, so my hope is that they are equally sanguine when someone explains why that pathway seems problematic. Here is t...
2 comments
Read more

Why COVID-19 is MUCH worse than the seasonal flu

This is the second in a series of posts about the COVID-19 pandemic . This installment is discussing why COVID-19 is much, much worse than the seasonal flu. Here it is, in a nutshell : COVID-19 is more contagious, more deadly, already has more known long-term impacts, has no vaccine or truly effective treatments, and has no apparent seasonality. Contagion SARS-COV-2 is much more contagious. The median R0 (average number of people infected by each person when nobody is immune) is 5.7 , or more optimistically 2.5 . For the pandemic to go away, R0 would need to effectively be less than 1.  The estimate of the 1918 novel flu was between 1.2 and 2.4 .  (An R0 of 5.7 means we need over 80% of the population to be immune to reach effective herd immunity .) Beyond that, the incubation period is long, and the number of transmissions before symptoms begin hovers near half those infected . And the duration of being contagious is longer, up to 10 days after the first symptoms. That means ...
3 comments
Read more

The problem with fundamentalism, part 1: Constitutional fundamentalism

In this two-part series, I plan on discussing the major issues I see with two prevalent types of fundamentalism: constitutional and biblical.  Though the two need not be related, it appears to me that one often leads to the other. This first installment is on a fundamentalist interpretation of the Constitution.  I have some expertise here, given that I have my JD and an undergraduate in English, so I will rarely be referring to other sources (outside the Constitution itself).  In this discussion, I am defining constitutional fundamentalism as a combination of "originalism" -- look at what the words meant when they were originally written -- and "strict constructionism" -- go strictly by the words on the page, with no reference to anything external, avoiding inferences. Original intent Ethical considerations Before I get into a more textual discussion, first I would like to point out that the founders were extremely flawed, and the document they made was, to mo...
Post a Comment
Read more