Submit an Article | Bookmarked Articles
Viewing Articles About All - Page 14
| New Goth VS. Old Goth. | June 18, 2007, 2:23PM |
 by: Insane |
|
Hello, I feel this needs to be adressed, for people are getting the wrong impression on the "Gothic Culture" and leading it to be something a bit different from what it actually is, Most of this was written by "Adrya Stinbridge" I got it from a text book so alot i had to write myself for it wasn't in these exact words, considering the book was like Romeo and Juliet with there odd way of saying things, so here read, enjoy, and try and understand. Gothic. The word triggers different and sometimes passionate responses from many people, including those within the community and those who look on from the outside. What exactly does gothic mean? Who are Goths, and what do they believe? How long has Goth been around, and what is its future? The word “gothic” was first used to identify a group of European tribes from ancient history. Goths are commonly believed to have originated from the Island of Gottland off the Denmark coast. Over time the tribes grew numerous and powerful enough to sack sacked the great Roman Empire in 410, and they ruled Europe for 250 years before slowly fading into ancient history. It is important to know where the word “gothic” comes from, however there is a notable difference between ancient Gothic culture and the modern gothic phenomenon. Goths of ancient history were a nomadic people who had a reputation for ruthless violence. Ancient Goths were also a religious people; their beliefs were based around worship of pagan deities. Today, “gothic” is used to describe a subculture based largely on a certain style of art, literature, and music. Some forms of gothic art and literature date back to the 12th –15th centuries, however gothic music as we know it today is a relatively new development and is responsible for having the greatest impact on the development of gothic subculture. Modern goths differ from ancient Goths in that they are not part of a dominant culture; they are a part of a subculture. Where ancient Goths had a set religious system, modern gothic subculture is not linked to any particular religion. There are some pagan goths, however many more goths are Christian, Jewish, Catholic, or Aethiest. Modern goths tend to be varied on their social and political views as well. The glue which holds the gothic community together is an affinity for the macabre, a longing for romance, and an appreciation of darker aesthetics. Historians of modern gothic subculture generally agree that its beginnings were in the late nineteen-seventies, developing as an offshoot of the punk rock movement in the UK and USA. Before we look at gothic subculture it is noteworthy to briefly examine what punk is and how it came about. Essentially punk grew out of dissatisfaction with popular music of the 1970’s although many saw it as a viable means of political and/or social rebellion. Mainstream culture of the 70’s was consumed with over-produced, under-motivated rock-n-roll and cheap, uninspired dance music. A war still quietly raged in the steamy (and charred) forests of Vietnam and both America and Britain were in the midst of economic depression. It was from this social and political climate that punk rock grew into angry fruition. While punk wasn’t exactly a new concept (MC5 in the late 60’s are generally recognized as an important and highly regarded “pre-punk” band), it didn’t catch on until the late 70’s. First-wave bands like the Ramones, Stooges and the Sex Pistols spawned new bands formed by awestruck concertgoers who knew something big was happening. Mainstream society took notice of punk’s anti-social and rebellious deeds and became somewhat nervous considering the social upheaval it underwent a decade before. Radio stations wouldn’t play punk, clubs won’t have punk shows, and police targeted punk fans whenever the opportunity presented itself. Punk was raw and full of feeling. People who lived near a scene heard about it through word of mouth or fanzine. Many others never knew about punk until years after the first wave had long passed. Punk gained momentum without the help of the Internet, music videos or mainstream radio exposure. It was underground and punks demanded it stay that way. By the late seventies the second wave of punk began. By then most in the younger generation had at least heard about if not experienced punk first hand. New fans were coming into the scene and new bands were being formed at a rapid rate. With new bands came new sounds and styles, some of which branched off of or built on commonplace 3-chord song structures. Industrial music saw its beginnings in the late seventies with the likes of Throbbing Gristle. Kraftwerk and pre-Dare The Human League paved the way for later a genre, which was broadly referred to as new-wave. A new four piece punk band from Manchester, England called Warsaw appeared in 1977. Like many of their counterparts they didn’t play very well, however there was energy behind the group’s sound, which was powerful and unique. The band’s style subdued over the months and the members soon renamed themselves Joy Division. The name was controversial due to the reference to Nazi Germany forced brothels, however the band members themselves denied any association with national-socialist beliefs, nor did they espouse racism in their lyrics. What were evoked in Ian Curtis’ lyrics were feelings of helplessness, hopelessness, and despair. The group’s music shifted from angry 3-chord punk to subdued 3-chord punk, and then to something altogether new and even more somber. It was this new sound which caused Joy Division’s manager at the time, Anthony H. Wilson, to refer to them as gothic. Another band which began as a straightforward punk outfit then gradually changed it’s sound into a darker version of punk was Siouxsie and the Banshees. They, along with Andi Sex of the Sex Gang Children were also referred to as being gothic. UK Decay and Bauhaus were in their development stages and both had a remarkably dark, brooding punk-ish sound. While some early bands were tagged gothic by their peers, bands and fans didn’t universally adhere to this label. In fact early ‘gothic’ music was commonly referred to as deathrock. Deathrock had a decidedly punk-influenced sound as opposed to what became known as gothic many years later. In America, particularly the west coast, deathrock grew independently from the British scene. Early US pioneers were the Misfits, 45 Grave and Christian Death (years after the band broke up the founding member Rozz Williams revealed that this was a play on the popular western culture icon Christian Dior – it wasn’t necessarily a religious statement). In Britain the deathrock scene centered and flourished around a small club called the Batcave. It was here that bands like Bauhaus, Alien Sex Fiend, the Sisters of Mercy, and many more got their start. The Batcave scene is still highly regarded as an integral piece of the modern gothic puzzle. By the mid to late 80’s deathrock had stepped a little further away from its punk roots. While death rockers continued to oppose to mainstream western culture and commercialism, deathrock music and style began to change slightly. Heavier use of keyboards and drum machines ushered in an entire new group of fans. Gradually the scene goers began referring to themselves and the music they enjoyed as gothic. Gothic music, like deathrock, was typically somber and somewhat dark. Songwriters used a wide range of instruments although the most common were guitar, bass, drums (or drum machine), and keyboard. Songs were often written and played in slower tempos, and musically dark modes such as Dorian, Phrygian, and Lydian were commonplace. As opposed to heavy metal and more common forms of rock-n-roll, gothic musicians rarely used extended solos, wah pedals, flangers, or double-kick drums. Lyrically, gothic music has its roots in gothic literature. Themes of death, solitude, and romance were common. Gothic lyricists tended to stay away from overt political messages although many did so subtly. Punk lyrics were characteristically singsong with widespread profanity and heavy social or political themes; lyrics found in gothic music placed much consideration on art and style; profanity and slang were not often used. Styles of gothic music ranged from the light and dreamy to dark and nightmarish. While some bands had limited commercial success (The Cure, Siouxsie and the Banshees) most remained hidden from the eye of mainstream culture. For the most part however gothic/deathrock music was not easily accessible to the general public – both in terms of the style and sound of the music and the availability of the music. Gothic fans were ever careful to keep pop culture out of their scene; in fact most would answer “no” if asked whether they were indeed gothic by outsiders. Like punk, gothic subculture retained its distrust and contempt of the mainstream. Goths wished to be left alone, however the unique and interesting qualities of the subculture would soon prove to be too much for the mainstream to ignore. In the early 90’s neo-industrial bands like Ministry and Nine Inch Nails began enjoying popular success on commercial radio and MTV. While many Goths listened to these bands, few considered them gothic. Fewer saw what was beginning to happen: the subculture that they enjoyed so greatly was slowly becoming ridden with in influx of fans raised on neo-industrial and dark metal. As NIN and similar bands had more commercial success, the media began (incorrectly) calling their music and fans “gothic”. Around the same time corporate music labels began a heavy push of what they labeled “alternative” music. NIN fit nicely with this scheme because their music was commercially viable; people who had never heard industrial music could buy Closer and immediately identify as a “gothic industrial” – despite the fact that NIN were hardly a serious industrial band. Younger people were fascinated by goth’s dark look and dark sounds, however few understood the difference between what Goths considered gothic and what music corporations & MTV were calling gothic. NIN was just the beginning of a commercial siege on the subculture. About the same time NIN were striking gold in the charts, a little known and quite plain appearing music editor by the name of Brian Warner saw the shift in pop music and felt the time was right to pursue a career in the industry as a performer. He assembled a few musicians from the Florida area (the Spooky Kids) and adopted a stage name of Marilyn Manson. It would be his best decision ever. Warner’s music was never well received in the gothic community simply because it was not. The Spooky Kids worked in a style that is best-described hard rock or metal, and Warner’s lyrics were sometimes crass, and often based in hatred. His band covered and released a song originally written by Charles Manson, a murderer and man who claimed to be Jesus Christ. Goths did often write about the macabre, however it was somberly done in the vein of Romanticism. Brian Warner’s lyrics were profane and thrived on anger, alienation, conflict and hatred. The driving force behind Marilyn Manson sought to incite and shock, whereas Goths sought to create art and desired to be left alone. Manson’s art was hate; the art behind gothic subculture was beauty and romance. The importance of distinguishing the difference between Warner’s project and a typical gothic band is great. By the mid-nineties Manson fired the Spooky Kids and signed a major label record deal. His name soon appeared in newspapers and on various television and radio talk shows across America. To the dismay of many in the gothic community, he was often incorrectly labeled by his fans and the media as "goth". The irony here is that Goths did not like Manson, and most of the fans that followed Manson were unaware of what gothic music really was. As Manson became ever more popular due to MTV exposure and his obnoxious comments offered in interviews, his fan base grew substantially. Other groups began appearing that imitated Marilyn Manson. An entire new subculture was developing based around Brian Warner, yet the media could not see the difference between it and gothic subculture. It was the same to them either way – despite gothic fans becoming increasingly opposed to Manson’s music and following. Attendance at gothic clubs around the world steadily declined in the mid to late 90’s. Since the popularity of Nine Inch Nails and later false-gothic groups the people who weren’t really into goth jumped on the Industrial or Shock Rock bandwagon. Other active scene goers eventually found jobs and families and were no longer able to remain active in the scene. Those who did stay in the scene noticed a further shift in the direction of gothic music. DJ’s who worked at gothic clubs began incorporating more EBM, neo-industrial, and dark techno into their playlists. While this was desirable to those who continued to go to the clubs to dance, many in the scene quietly stopped going as a result. Fetishism became increasingly linked to the gothic subculture due to “documentaries” written by MTV and other outsiders. After Columbine, many wrongly associated the gothic community with violence. The two teens that committed the atrocities, the “Trenchcoat Mafia” as they were called, were in fact not into gothic music – they enjoyed metal and some industrial bands but neither were part of their local gothic scene. Out of all of the negativity and apathy some very good bands emerged in the mid to late 90’s. Bands such as the Changelings, Faith and the Muse, and the Cruxshadows continued to provide new and quality gothic music for the fans who remained. A new band began to attract the attention of some disinterested music fans in the late 90’s, however this group went out of their way to disassociate themselves from the gothic scene. Cinema Strange saw the writing on the wall for gothic subculture early on and avoided trying to gain acceptance altogether (http://www.angelfire.com/goth/eckearchive/zillo.htm ). CS headed a new movement that has been called “newgrave” but is most commonly known as deathrock to fans who know. Their music harkens back to the Batcave days where ripped fishnets and punk-influenced dark-rock ruled the day. What makes Cinema Strange so unique is that they are bringing new life to a forgotten genre. And fans all across the world are responding. Deathrock scenes have sprouted in California, New York, and Germany. More are sure to emerge in the coming years. The new breed of deathrockers is returning to their roots; no more shiny boots of leather, no whips and chains, no computerized karaoke-industrial, no more scene pretension. From the Ghoul School’s website (a club in West Hollywood): We are sick of going to goth clubs and only being able to hear Trance, Techno, Synthpop, and Repetitive beats. This is not a latex titty fetish club - finally a real refuge for goths and death punks. What is old is new again, and it’s looking even better the second time around. | |
topic: Essays | |
[reply] [37 comments] |
|
| The reason to live: sister | June 12, 2007, 4:43PM |
 by: DeathNoble |
|
Nicki, a former Hooters girl and recently a cover girl model for SaltLife. There are no memories that date back to a time when my sister was not a part of my life. A close childhood friend from the days when times were still good and innocence gave false promises of a happy life. The days when we grew up and realized exactly the kind of darkness that could be injected into us as fate chewed us up and spit us out, which is what has made us as close as we are now. Today, she is an immaculate freelance model with a dream of one day becoming a cosmetologist with her own salon. Perhaps the earliest memory I have of Nicki is over a decade ago, a day at church when I split my pants. Nicki’s mother, unable to reach mine by phone, took me in her car and drove me to their house, where I was to borrow a pair of pants from her daughter and wear them back to church. I, a humiliated and overweight five year old with a new pair of backless chaps around my waist, walked in the door and was overwhelmed with glee to see the owner of the pants I was to borrow, a complete tomboy watching cartoons on the floor in the living room of the oversized house. You know you’re somebody’s friend when you’re wearing their pants, so play-dates were made by parental units for multiple play-dates after that day. Indeed, the happiest memory I have of childhood is the day when we were in my room, playing Power Rangers, with Transformers, when Nicki suddenly asked me if I had a crush on her. Despite her tomboy appearance, Nicki came into this world with a supermodel’s good looks, and so I wasn’t ashamed to admit that I did. She leaned over and kissed me on the cheek and told me that she had a crush on me, too. But this elementary, childhood relationship didn’t last long, as none seem to make it to the top of the next hour. It wasn’t too long before the old days, which contained these happy memories withered away, leaving two hurting teenagers with the scars of life’s rough spots in plain view for everyone to see. Our age had doubled in numbers, and I was twelve. With the age comes an onslaught of new emotions, feelings, experiences, and so forth. Puberty and a few other forces, some actually physical, were beating me with a relentless anger I couldn’t understand. A whole new individual rose from the ashes of the happy, short, nerdy fat kid that everyone had grown accustomed to. I hated everyone and everything, because everything was telling me who and what to be, and everyone didn’t care in the least. I am not ashamed to admit that I sunk further and further into depression. At the mere accursed age of twelve, thoughts of ending all the pain inside me were already brewing. What did anyone care? I would just be another statistic to them. So I open the drawer and move papers aside, hunting for that Swiss army knife that every dad gives their son at perhaps too young of an age. Before I even found it, the phone rang. It was Nicki, and she just wanted to call to see how I was doing because it had been a while since we talked. To someone who’s suicidal, just a single person that cares enough to make a phone call can mean the world to you. If she hadn’t called right then and there, I might not be around anymore. She saved my life. She saved me from myself. But this damn world is governed by Alchemy’s first law of equivalent exchange. Humankind cannot gain anything without giving up something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must first be lost… I was in the hospital three years later when my sister’s boyfriend at the time died. He asphyxiated after eating something he was allergic to. His windpipe closed up and the paramedics never got there in time. While she went to the funeral of the one she loved, her little brother was fighting to keep his limb intact on a hospital bed. You wouldn’t believe the bond two people can share when they have so much pain welled up inside them. We’re both better now, but we each have our days when things get tough. But we have each other and that makes everything better. I’m graduating from high school pretty soon and going on to college to pursue a degree in web design and development thanks to Master Eon’s inspiration. Nicki will be moving away in a month or two to Tallahassee to go to one of Florida’s most prestigious beauty schools. It’s going to be hard on us, but it’s only nine months and then she’ll be back. Besides, you never fall out of touch with family. Nicki’s impacted my life, because in a lot of ways, she is my life. | |
topic: Essays | |
[reply] [0 comments] |
|
| Update Roundup | June 9, 2007, 10:56PM |
 by: eon |
|
I've done a number of little updates which I'll list here. 1. Group Applications. Now when your group is set to require applications from new members, there will be a comment box where applicants can let you know why they want to join. Go to the 'Manage Member' page for your group and look at the top of the menu. Here, you can provide instructions that will be shown to all of your applicants so they'll know what you're looking for on their application. For instance, if your group was about books, you could ask them to list their favorite authors. 2. The group applicants who are waiting for your approval will be listed along with the first 250 characters of their application to make everything easier to browse. Each applicant will link to a special page where you can review their entire application, see their picture, link back to their profile, approve or deny the application, etc.. 3. Staff Threads in Groups. You now have the option of creating topics in your groups which will only be visible to Moderators and higher. This will make it easier for group leaders to conference in private, just check the 'Staff Only?' box when you create your new topic. A special symbol (yellow star) will appear next to staff threads on your forum lists. 4. Comment Private Profiles. Andromeda members who have set their profile to private may allow blocked visitors to leave a comment. To enable this feature go to: Control Panel -> Experience -> Profile Privacy Message Box Thanks, guys... | |
topic: Site News | |
[reply] [6 comments] |
|
| Orgin of Sagging pants | June 8, 2007, 11:12AM |
 by: Syn |
|
I was walking down the street to go get a few redbulls and some snacks for the week i see a few kids wearing baby blue tshirts that don't look like they fit them and their pants were above their knees. I then decided to do some research on why they do that. It all started with "Gangster Rap" which was originated in prison. here exactly is the definition of "The Sagging Of the Pants." "Sagging" is the fashion of wearing trousers (slacks, shorts or jeans) below the waist, hanging around the buttock area. Usually the underwear is worn higher, so that the underwear is exposed, but not much bare skin. The style is typically worn by males. Sagging began in prisons, where ill-fitting uniforms and rules forbidding belts resulted in falling-down pants. The practice spread to Los Angeles and New York City street gangs. This style expresses a "tough guy" image for the wearer, and became a prominent element of hip hop fashion as gangsta rap became popular in the 1990s, and remains very popular today, especially with middle and high school students. In many school districts across the United States, sagging is prohibited. The Virginia General Assembly tried but failed to approve a law making the sagging style illegal in February 2005. Now thats just one of the many definitons of "sagging." It did start in the prisons but it meant that the person with sagging pants was a so called "prostitute" or even "open for buisness." The technical term they use in prison is "Prison b***h" now i know that its considerd a fashion but do half of these people out there know where it came from? Where its orgin lies? I think not but maybe if they were to read or hear about it from actual people going to jail maybe then they will change their mind and wear a belt or pants that fit them. In my all honest opinion they need to pull their pants up no one wants to see their boxers or underwear showing. So next time you see someone walking down the street with their pants almost at their ankles inform them the orgin of "Sagging the Pants."Maybe the they will pull them up and fasten the belt or even go out buy some pants that actualy fit and look more civilized. | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [7 comments] |
|
| Genocide in Rwanda and Sudan | June 4, 2007, 6:48AM |
 by: nothingmoves |
|
13 years ago genocide transpired in Rwanda. In 100 days about 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed. The explanation for the event begins with the Belgian colonists, who emphasized what they (under the influence of the then popular "phrenology" movement) took to be a deep, biological, difference between Tutsis and Hutus. They issued everyone identification cards which listed their "ethnicity", and ceded all of the elite governmental posts to the Tutsis. What is often thought of as an ethic division really turned into a class war. The Hutus were the disenfranchised peasant class, and the Tutsis were the ruling, often corrupt, elite. The peasants wanted to rise up and make things right. And they tried at least once before Rwanda received its independence in the 60s. Some 20, 000 Tutsis were killed in conflicts in the 50s. But when the Belgians finally left, the Hutus took over. A mostly Tutsi rebel force, the "RPF", formed. Things were tense for the next 40 or so years. But they were also functional. In the early 90s the RPF and the Hutu government agreed to a peace deal. UN peacekeepers were sent in to see that it was abided by. Nothing about it seemed very sincere. Extremist Hutu radio stations continued to broadcast aggressive, hate-filled, tirades about the "Tutsi cockroaches", and the UN authority there, Roméo Dallaire, contacted UN headquarters reporting a shipment of vast numbers of arms to Hutu militias, and requesting the right to impound them. In the same message Dallaire told UN headquarters that he had reason to believe that hutus would attempt a genocide if something wasn't done. The UN told him that he was out of line. He and his men weren't allowed to fire a shot. Days after the signing of the peace deal the president's plane was shot down, apparently by the RPF (the president being a Hutu). Immediately, the killings began. In rhetoric shockingly similar to the Nazis', extremist Hutus broadcast speeches to the effect that the "final solution" to Rwandan problems required the annihilation of the Tutsis. The Tutsis had to be purged from the map, so that Rwanda could be made clean. Hutus throughout the country were told to kill their Tutsi neighbors. Moderate Hutus were to be killed along with them. As the fighting broke out, 10 Belgian UN peacekeepers were sent to guard the token Tutsi prime minister. All 10, along with the prime minister and his family, were killed. Dallaire reported the severity of the situation to UN authorities, and pleaded for 3000 more troops with combat capabilities. In response, the Belgians pulled all of their troops out immediately, and the overall number of troops was reduced from 2000, to 270. Almost all of the remaining troops were poorly trained and African. Dallaire himself violated orders by staying in Rwanda. Very soon it became apparent that what was happening in Rwanda was genocide -- the intentional extermination of an entire group of people. But, having lost a handful of troops in the infamous mogadishu mission, the leader of the world's lone superpower, Bill Clinton, refused to interfere in any African affairs that failed to involve our "national interest". Other western powers followed suit. Even so, the UN is required, by its charter, to stop genocide, by force if necessary. So, if western governments were to admit the obvious, that genocide was taking place in Rwanda, they might find their troops wearing blue helmets and being shot at by Hutu militias. Hence, exchanges like this between western diplomats and reporters became commonplace ("Shelly" is Christine Shelly, former US state department spokesman): Shelly: Based on the evidence we have seen from observations on the ground, we have every reason to believe that acts of genocide have occurred in Rwanda. Elsner: What's the difference between "acts of genocide" and "genocide"? Shelly: Well, I think ... as you know, there's a legal definition of this ... clearly not all of the killings that have taken place in Rwanda are killings to which you might apply that label ... But as to the distinctions between the words, we're trying to call what we have seen so far as best as we can; and based, again, on the evidence, we have every reason to believe that acts of genocide have occurred. Elsner: How many acts of genocide does it take to make genocide? Shelly: Alan, that's just not a question that I'm in a position to answer. The western powers, thus, sat by as Tutsi civilians were slaughtered at the rate of more than 275, 000 per month. The slaughter only ended when the RPF took the capital, 3 months after the extermination began. The Hutu militias fled to the Democratic Republic of Congo, along with many Hutu civilians who feared Tutsi reprisal. The current president of Rwanda is the former leader of the RPF, and many of the Congo's recent problems stem from the 1994 influx of Hutu militias and refugees. All of this is old hat. But it needs to be repeated. If you don't believe me, just make your way to the international section of your favorite newspaper, and see what's happening in Sudan (and a bit in Chad). What's been happening in Sudan is, for all practical purposes, just what was happening in Rwanda 13 years ago. An entire group of people are being exterminated. Some of the killing is being done by government troops; some of it is being done by government-sponsored militant groups; and some of it is being done by civilian populations. But the purpose in all of it is clear -- to wipe an entire people off of the map. Once again, the UN has failed to call it genocide. Once again, the peacekeeping troops are powerless. Once again, everyone who is in a position to do something about it is looking the other way. We should have learned from our mistakes after we watch the Nazis slaughter the Jews; and then after we watched the Turks slaughter the Armenians; and then after we watched the Hutus slaughter the Tutsis. But, for God's sake, let's learn from our fucking mistakes this time. Every life is equally valuable. Losing 1 American is sad. But losing 1 million Africans is 1 million times sadder. Do something: http://www.savedarfur.org/content?splash=yes http://www.darfurgenocide.org/ http://hrw.org/doc?t=africa&c=darfur | |
topic: Current Events | |
[reply] [6 comments] |
|
| Definition of Cause, based on belief. | May 30, 2007, 4:59PM |
by: Insane |
|
This is a essay, I had to do research on for science, on belief, though not allowed in schools, I was forced apon it anyways, I've taken bits and pieces and written it in my own words, so enjoy. he most famous and influential definition of a cause is Hume's definition; indeed, most contemporary definitions include conditions that are similar in some respect to at least one of the three conditions included in Hume's definition: "Contiguity in time and place is therefore a requisite circumstance to the operation of all causes...Priority in time is...another requisite circumstance in every case....[A] third circumstance [is] that of constant conjunction betwixt the cause and the effect. Every object like the cause produces always some object like the effect. Beyond these three circumstances of contiguity, priority, and constant conjunction I can discover nothing in this cause."[1] Hume's definition includes three conditions for being a cause: temporal priority, spatio-temporal contiguity, and a nomological relation ("every object like the cause produces always some object like the effect".) (a) TEMPORAL PRIORITY If time began to exist with the universe, the "temporal priority" condition of Hume's definition implies that the universe cannot be caused to begin to exist since there is no earlier time at which the cause could occur. Even if there is time before the universe, the "temporal priority" condition rules out an originating divine cause if all divine acts are timeless. However, the "temporal priority" condition only shows the universe cannot have an originating divine cause if time began to exist with the universe or if all divine acts are timeless. It is logically possible that time preceded the beginning of the universe, even if there are no known laws of physics according to which the physical variable t can take values earlier than the time at which space and mass-energy began to exist. Further, it is logically possible that God exists in time and that a pre-universe time is occupied by God's mental life, which includes his volitions. Thus, it is logically possible for a divine volition to meet the "temporal priority" condition of Hume's definition. The intractable problems begin with the other two conditions. (b) SPATIO-TEMPORAL CONTIGUITY Hume's and many other definitions of causality require that the causal event is spatially in contact with, or is spatially near to, the effect. God is said to be omnipresent, but this means she is conscious of and stands in a volitional relation to each physical particular. It does not mean that divine volitions, which are non-physical, touch or are in the spatial vicinity of the physical particulars that are the objects of these volitions. God's act of willing that the big bang occurs is not spatio-temporally contiguous with the big bang since this act of willing does not have spatial coordinates. c and e are spatio-temporally contiguous only if the spatial coordinates x, y, z that locate c on a manifold either are identical with the spatial coordinates x', y' ,z' of e, or locate c in the neighborhood of e. (c) NOMOLOGICAL RELATEDNESS The third feature of Hume's definition, the nomological condition ("every object like the cause produces always some object like the effect"), is also common to many definitions of causality. Hume's definition belongs to the line of reductive definitions that define causes in terms of laws of nature and a set of non-causal relations (such as temporal priority and spatio-temporal contiguity) between two particulars c and e.[2] According to these definitions, c is a cause of e only if there is a law of nature L that enables a statement that e occurs to be deduced from the premises that c occurs and that the law L obtains. For example, Carl Hempel writes[3]: "a 'cause' must be allowed to be a more or less complex set of circumstances or events, which might be described by a set of statements C1, C2, . . . Ck. ....Thus the causal explanation implicitly claims that there are general laws- -let us say, L1, L2, . . . Lk--in virtue of which the occurrence of the causal antecedents mentioned in C1, C2, . . . Ck is a sufficient condition for the occurrence of the explanadum event." A probabilistic law L may be permitted as well, in which case "to be deduced from" would be replaced by "to be inductively supported by". However, the nomological condition for being a cause is logically inconsistent with a divine cause of the big bang, since God by definition is a supernatural being and his or her actions are not governed by laws of nature. Furthermore, the fact that God's willing is omnipotent makes "the big bang occurs" deducible from "God wills that the big bang occur" alone, without the need of any supplementary nomological premise, thus vitiating the condition that a nomological premise is a logically necessary condition for the derivation of the conclusion that the effect exists from premises one of which is that the causal event occurs. At this point, we have already ruled out virtually every extant definition of causality, since most every definition includes either the spatio-temporal contiguity condition or the nomological condition. We are left with non-contiguity and singularist definitions of causality. A non-contiguity definition does not mention spatio-temporal contiguity and does not require the cause to be both temporally and spatially contiguous with the effect; variants of non-contiguity definitions may allow for timeless divine acts and/or temporal divine acts that are not spatially nearby or in contact with the effect. A singularist definition allows an event to cause an effect in a single case, without the cause and effect needing to instantiate some law. However, the extant formulations that are singularist and/or noncontiguity definitions are few and far between and prove problematic for a defender of the logical possibility of an originating divine cause. Also, to add, there's: Ducasse's Singularist definition of cause. The most famous singularist definition of a cause is J. C. Ducasse's. Ducasse's conception "defines the cause of a particular event in terms of but a single occurrence of it, and thus in no way involves the supposition that it, or one like it, ever has occurred before or ever will again. The supposition of recurrence is thus wholly irrelevant to the meaning of cause; that supposition is relevant only to the meaning of law."[4] Since the nomological condition is explicitly rejected, it seems this definition applies to God's willing that the big bang occurs. However, further inspection of Ducasse's definition shows it does not apply, since his definition requires spatio-temporal contiguity. Ducasse claims the cause c is a sufficient condition of the effect e and that c is sufficient for e if (i) c is a change that occurred during a time and throughout a space terminating at an instant i at a surface s of an object; (ii) the change e occurred during a time and through a space beginning at the instant i at the surface s; (iii) no change other than c occurred during the time and through the space of c, and (iv) no change other than e occurred during the time and through the space of e.[5] Thus, Ducasse's account meets the singularist criterion, but not the non-contiguity criterion. (Although Ducasse calls his account a "definition" of a cause, it is only a partial definition, since he begins his definition with "if", not "if and only if".) | |
topic: Essays | |
[reply] [7 comments] |
|
| T-Shirt Update | May 10, 2007, 9:30PM |
by: eon |
|
Well, I ordered one of the t-shirts that I announced in the last news update and it seems to be a fine product. My only minor gripe would be that it's 100% cotton and shrinks quite a bit in the wash. So if you order any, consider buying a size or two larger than usual. Other than that, they look good. Soon I'll be adding another design, that being a plain DS "D star" logo on the front center and the familiar "(D)arkstarlings.com" logo on back. A bit plain, but still a basic, almost obligatory design that a lot of people are understandably interested in. I mean, we're talking about prints of the logo. Also I plan on doing some kind of contest for a t-shirt design in the near future with andromeda time (and maybe other stuff) as prizes. I have no specifics on that at present, but it's a definite at some point in the future. So if you have any creative inclinations, any time whiled away in photoshop or elsewhere won't hurt you one bit. Order t-shirts in confidence: Our First T-Shirt Design Discount: As a promotion, I've marked the price down by a couple of dollars for the next week, so be sure and snag yours at the promo price while you still can. The $2 mark down is already figured into the prices displayed and applies to all shirt sizes and styles. Expires 5/18/07, 11:59 PM Central Time. As always, thank you kindly and your fine support is greatly, greatly appreciated. | |
topic: Site News | |
[reply] [5 comments] |
|
| The Chromosome of Missing Sense and (Personal) Space Invaders | May 10, 2007, 10:23AM |
 by: Dark_Alice |
|
Recently I blocked a girl on here who added me to msn. Now this girl seemed really nice, she was pretty and there seemed nothing wrong with her in any way. So why did I block her I hear you ask? It was because she just added me to msn without talking to me properly. Now before we start, this entry isn’t an attack on her, I was just using her as an example because it seems a lot of people have this missing chromosome that doesn’t allow them to read profiles properly. I clearly stated in huge bold letters on my profile that I want people to at least have a bit of a chat with me before adding me to msn. Now I used to freely put my email at the bottom of my profile because I thought (Wrongly) that people would have the sense to talk to you properly before adding you. The odds are that I won’t even like you when you add me to msn randomly, and its not like I will hide it or am too shy to tell you to get lost (and that is me being polite there lol…). I mean, would you really want to add someone you think you would get on with to msn, only to be confronted with someone like me being all abusive because you didn’t have the decency to chat first? Or what’s worse, adding someone you like because you read their profile and finding online they are nothing like the page they made on the net? Of course not, it would put a bit of a damper on your day, so why the hell risk it? All this isn’t me being elitist or anything, it’s just manners. You wouldn’t ask someone you don’t know and is completely un-interested in you for their phone number. You would talk to them, let them know you a little, make them want your number as much as you want there’s. Same goes for email as far as I’m concerned. In the last 2 months I have had a wide range of people add me to msn from here, ranging from girls who were ‘bored and wanted to chat’, people who add me and then never talk to me, cool people who I have things in common with and one perv from Turkey who thought I was a girl and probably wanted webcam action... before you ask, he didn’t get any, although he did get promptly deleted. Now I love talking to new people, it’s the reason I joined this and any other profile site I have ever joined. Isn’t that why we all join profile sites? This little commentary may make me look like a bit of an angry antisocial guy but I’m not, people fascinate me and I like to think I’m quite pleasant usually. 99.9% I will reply to your message if you send me one. But obviously, the internet is littered with lots of people you are going to love, and an equal amount you are going to want to poke out their eyes with [insert your pointy object of choice here], so really it makes sense to test out the water first with someone to see if they fall into the good category or the pokey-eyes-out category. And the best way to do that is by sending them a message or two. This article is a plea. A plea for sense, because I’m pretty damn sure I’m not the only person on the internet who gets this from time to time. Reading someone’s profile and looking at their pictures does not mean you know them. Profiles can be a little deceiving. Before you add someone or ask them for their email, get to know them a tiny bit beyond their profile. Don’t just come barging into their space, adding randomly or demanding emails and I think they will respect you a little more for it. xXxLeexXx | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [8 comments] |
|
| The Continuum Hypothesis and Mathematical Idealism | May 8, 2007, 3:31AM |
by: nothingmoves |
|
Consider the following two sets of numbers: The Natural Numbers (which we shall abbreviate with 'N'): 1, 2, 3,... The Even Numbers (which we shall abbreviate by 'EN'): 2, 4, 6,... Two features of each set are immediately obvious. First, each set is infinite in some intuitive sense of "infinite". Second, N contains EN in the sense that for every object, x, such that x is a member of EN [we'll abbreviate this 'x (= EN)'], x is also a member of N. That is, x(=EN --> x(=N [where '-->' indicates the material conditional, or, roughly, the relation of logical implication]. Something else that we can say immediately is that it is *not* the case that x(=N --> x(=EN [for example, 3(=N, but it's not the case that 3(=EN]. Summing the second observation with this last point, we can say that N contains EN, but the converse is not true. In this sense, then, N is of greater size than EN. Call this sense of "size" Inclusive. But now consider the following function between N and EN: f(x) = 2x f(x) is a bijection. It is an injection, because f(a) = f(b) --> a = b, and it is a surjection, because for any y(=EN, we have f(x) = y, where x = y/2. But to say that f(x) is a bijection is just to say that there exists a one-to-one correspondence between N and EN. Intuitively, this means that for every element of the first set, there exists a element of the second with which it can be uniquely paired, and vice versa. There is a clear sense in which if there exists a one-to-one correspondence between two sets, then those sets are of the same size. Call this sense of “size” Cardinal. So, we have the result that N is of greater Inclusive size than EN, but of equal Cardinal size to EN. The first question that arises is which sense of size corresponds to our own pretheoretical one. My own view is that this first question is both uninteresting, and misguided. It is uninteresting, because it amounts to an inquiry into what we mean by mathematical words, and not into mathematics itself. And it is misguided because, in all likelihood, our pretheoretical vocabulary is too vague to choose between the candidates. We should no more expect there to be an answer to the first question than we should to the question “which sense of “mass” corresponds to our pretheoretical one – Newtonian or Relativistic”? A second question that arises is, however, in my opinion, both interesting and right-headed. That is “can an infinite set, X, ever be of greater *Cardinal* size than another infinite set, Y?” The answer is nowhere near obvious. In fact, substantial data would favor the negative answer to it. First, there is, trivially, a bijection between EN and -EN, -N, and I (where 'I' stands for the integers). But, what’s not at all obvious, is that there is even a bijection between EN and Q (where 'Q' stands for the rational numbers). So, EN is of the same Cardinal size as Q. Given this, it’s hard to think of a set, Y, such that EN is of lesser cardinal size than Y. In fact, the set of real numbers (abbreviated 'R') forms such a set. It is demonstrable, via a certain diagonal proof technique, that the set of real numbers is of greater cardinal size than the set of even numbers (or, thus also, the set of natural numbers, integers, rationals, etc.). This is a fascinating result. But it begs a new question: (C) Does there exist a set of cardinal size greater than that of EN (N, I, Q, etc.) but less than that of R? George Cantor’s “Continuum Hypothesis” (CH) amounts to the claim that there does not. Crucially, CH cannot be proved or refuted on the basis of established axiom sets. Our canonical foundational set-theory, ZFC (Zermelo-Fraenkel set-theory with the Axiom of Choice), is consistent with both CH and its negation. The same is true of other candidates for foundational theories (PM, NF, NBG, etc.). CH seems to float free of the axioms of our foundational theories in way that certain metaphysical questions (such as “what happened before the Big Bang?” or "is there a God?") float free of the basic postulates of our fundamental physical theories. The question that I wish to raise for discussion, then, is this: Is the situation with respect to C really analogous to the situation with respect to, say, the question of what happened before the Big Bang, or the question of whether or not there is a God? We take questions about the likes of the Big Bang or God to have answers, and the fact that our best physical theories don’t entail those answers to be a mere reflection of our cognitive, or more broadly epistemic, limitations. But perhaps C, like all mathematical questions of the same “axiom-transcendent” character, is different. Perhaps we should regard the mathematical “world” as being fixed by our formal stipulations, in a way that we shouldn’t regard the nonmathematical world as being so fixed. The question is whether there is peculiar reason to be a sort of global idealist, or more general variety of antirealist, about mathematics, as opposed to physics, chemistry, or biology. | |
topic: Philosophy | |
[reply] [3 comments] |
|
| New Features and T-Shirt Preview | March 16, 2007, 4:14AM |
by: eon |
|
Two new features have been added to the picture galleries: Re-Upload: You will notice a 're-upload' link that appears under each of your uploaded pictures when you manage your pictures in the control panel. Using a 're-upload' link will allow you to replace a picture without losing any of the comments that have already been posted to it or any other picture information (such as it's order number and description). This would be handy, for example, if you had a new version of a picture to upload but people had already added a ton of comments to the old picture that you didn't want to lose. Picture Comment Replies: Clicking a 'reply' link under a comment on one of your pictures will let you write a note that will appear directly under the picture comment. For example: Suppose someone posts a comment on one of your pictures that says, "OMG U R SO EFFING FAT!!" You can now reply and your words will appear directly underneath their rude remark, allowing you to tell them off succinctly, "OMG I AM SO NOT FAT! I ONLY ATE 9 CHOCOLATE CREME BURRITOS AND A FEW CHEETOS THAT DAY SO STFU!!! AND MAYBE LIKE HALF A THING OF FRIES BUT THAT DOESN'T COUNT SO STFU!!!" Your answer will show up underneath their comment as "[your name] replies:" Up to this point, hitting the 'reply' link on a picture comment just sent a reply to that person's profile. Not really as useful in my opinion, since it's doubtful that anyone else would actually see what you had to say about their comment. If you do want to reply to someone's profile from their comment on one of your pictures, just click their avatar. T-Shirt Preview: I'm trying out a new place called Good Storm that does on demand t-shirt printing and delivery for a very reasonable price. Kind of like Cafe Press, except they charge in dollars and cents instead of in arms, legs and left nuts. I'm still thinking about different designs but I do have one posted up that I think looks pretty snazzy. If you're so inclined, you can check it out and tell me what you think. I am not yet recommending this product until I receive the t-shirt I ordered myself for inspection. Here it is if you'd like to take a look. Thanks, guys and gals. You make it happen. | |
topic: Site News | |
[reply] [23 comments] |
|
| pages: back 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 next |