Friday, January 23, 2009

Taxes And Spending

I thought this was interesting. From TaxWatch (via TaxACT). Nice of them to compute it. Isn't it funny how quickly all those little numbers can add up to 100%?
 
-Max

Where Does Your Tax Money Go

Ever wonder where your tax dollars are spent each year? The table below provides a summary of government tax spending percentages applied to the tax you paid in.

Your Money Is Spent On Your
Share
%
National Defense $4,203.00 19%
Veterans and Foreign Affairs $885.00 4%
Medicaid, Food Stamps, and Related Programs $2,875.00 13%
Unemployment and Social Services $1,327.00 6%
Social Security, Medicare, and Other Retirement $8,405.00 38%
Interest Payments $1,991.00 9%
Law Enforcement and General Government $442.00 2%
Physical, Human, and Community Development $1,991.00 9%
Total Paid $22,119.00 100%

--

"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)
 
"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Thursday, January 22, 2009

Mathematically modelling Parkinson's Law

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126901.300-explaining-the-curse-of-work.html

The new work aims to do just that. "Parkinson's essays weren't quantitative," says Klimek, "but they're so clear that it's easy to cast them into specific mathematical models." From a simple system of equations using quantities such as the promotion and drop-out rates within a hierarchical body, a "phase diagram" can be computed to show what conditions breed ever greater bureaucracy. A high probability of promotion coupled with the hiring of more subordinates - the scenario Parkinson described- is unsurprisingly a recipe for particularly fast growth.

Any thoughts?

-Max

--
"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Monday, January 19, 2009

Ills of a Golden Age (and the Law of Unintended Consequences)

Classic example of a problem which could happen only in a Golden Age:
 
http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2009/01/small-business-and-thrift-store.html
 
Hailed almost universally on its passage last year--it passed the Senate 89 to three and the House by 424 to one, with Ron Paul the lone dissenter--CPSIA is now shaping up as a calamity for businesses and an epic failure of regulation, threatening to wipe out tens of thousands of small makers of children's items from coast to coast, and taking a particular toll on the handcrafted and creative, the small-production-run and sideline at-home business, not to mention struggling retailers. How could this have happened? [snip]
 
The first thing to note is that we're not just talking about toys here. With few exceptions, the law covers all products intended primarily for children under 12. That includes clothing, fabric and textile goods of all kinds: hats, shoes, diapers, hair bands, sports pennants, Scouting patches, local school-logo gear and so on.

And paper goods: books, flash cards, board games, baseball cards, kits for home schoolers, party supplies and the like. And sporting equipment, outdoor gear, bikes, backpacks and telescopes. And furnishings for kids' rooms. [snip]

So a disabled kid has goods made special for them by a third party and the testing can run $100,000 for an item depending on the number of components. We really have a lot of geniuses in our Federal government. And what about R&D? A computer board I once made was put into a wheel chair for a young lady to help her operate the wheel chair by blowing puffs of air. I sold the board for $50. How in the heck could I afford $100,000 of testing for a production run that amounted to about 1,000 pieces if even one of those boards was incorporated in a device for a handicapped child? And horror of horrors, the device used lead based solder.
Only a very rich civilization can afford to spend so much effort on (attempting to ensure) child safety. Even if there's another side to this story, even if it saves a hundred lives, nobody can deny that this is very expensive legislation.
 
-Max

--
"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)
"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Re: 2009

[Redacted. -M.]

M.,

Hokay, starting in no particular order:

My workflow style tends to be pretty linear because I have a high reliance on spatial and temporal locality--I'm most aware of things I've worked on recently, or that are similar to things I've worked on recently, and those things tend to get more work until they're done. This is odd because my learning style is *not* linear--I spread out and learn about bunches of different aspects at once (seventeen Wikipedia tabs open at a time, etc.) and synthesize those bits, but when it comes to doing things... Things tend to get done either immediately or not at all. Which is partly why I usually write back to you fairly quickly. If a week goes by without a reply from me you can pretty much count on it having fallen off my queue, and I may not write again for months unless you remind me.

Similarly, I tend to forget people exist if I'm not interacting with them regularly. There are a small handful of people who stay in my low-level awareness pretty much permanently--old friends, cousins, "kindred spirits" if you will--but I've so often had the experience of being recognized by old acquaintances whom I didn't myself recognize that I've just resigned myself to the embarrassment. Although that's partly also my bad facial-recognition capabilities, especially outside of context; I don't even always recognize my own sisters (true story), and my cousin M.J. once caught me on our college campus to say hi, and it took me over sixty seconds of guessing to figure out who she was. Pretty awful.

Come to think of it, I guess even the small handful of kindred spirits only stay in my awareness because I've got a low-level background task refreshing my memory of them. For instance, I've just today renewed my deal with my cousin B. to write her one letter every month. This is the third year in a row I've been doing this, and one of my motivations is that B. is one of my favorite people in the world (smart, pretty, lots of integrity, assertive and a bit fierce to her peers but kind to those who are weaker than her, which is how I think people should be[1]) and I don't want to forget about her now that I've moved to Seattle and don't see her frequently. (Related: are you familiar with the notion of a "monkey-sphere"? Primates have trouble keeping track of too many relationships; humans average higher than other primates but still no more than one hundred fifty or so relationships per person. Google "monkeysphere".)

Yes, I probably am a ponderer, although I'm at least as much of a talker--I do my best thinking when there's another person in the loop, whether it's a class I'm teaching or a friend I'm planning on sharing my thoughts with. (And sometimes I get halfway through a line of thought and go, "Actually, I'm not really buying this argument, are you? I think it's wrong.") Recently I've been thinking about goals, and pondering who it is I want to be in 2050 and what kind of goals are worth making. I won't share those thoughts, though, since (brutally frank here) you're not really inside my monkeysphere, or at least not the inner circle of people that I trust enough to discuss personal feelings and thoughts with. Sorry, the exclusion is expedient. I'm more than happy to discuss with you anything that I would discuss with an artificial intelligence, though.

Islam is interesting to me. Actually, Islam tends to be interesting to a lot of Mormons because we have a surprising number of beliefs in common--probably not any more than we have in common with Jews or Catholics or Eastern Orthodox Christians or ancient Egyptians, but not necessarily less either. I was talking to my co-worker E. fairly recently (she's Muslim), and she happened to mention her belief that we lived as spirits before being born on Earth. I was like, "Huh? How do you know about that?" The scriptures say that the Lord raises up wise men unto all nations, speaking in their own language, and sometimes I wonder how much he has said to whom. Of course it's also possible that the belief in question was simply passed down from the early Christians (Coptic Egyptians or somebody), which got transmitted along with a sort of residual respect for the Bible. Or maybe Muhammad really did speak with an angel--it's hard to know without having read the Qu'ran, which I haven't. (Maybe some day I'll get around to it.) The one thing I do know is that whatever else he was, Muhammad was not called as a prophet because prophets always, always testify of Christ, in some language or another, and Muhammad didn't. But that still doesn't explain why Muslims know so many interesting truths.

You want to know the plot of the play, hmmm? Tell you what, since you're asking me, I'll give you _my_ understanding of the scriptures, references available upon request but with the understanding that it's always possible I'm misunderstanding something--the general thrust of this is quite orthodox, but my way of looking at things is sometimes idiosyncratic. (In other words, other Mormons probably wouldn't disagree with me but they'd probably also never tell it this way on their own, and especially not starting where I'm starting.)

There are two kinds of things which exist or can, things which act and things which are acted upon. The scriptures generally call the first kind "spirit," or sometimes "intelligence," and where the second is referred to at all it is called "element" or "matter." It's not completely clear whether intelligence is innumerate or intrinsically individualistic, but it's what you and I are, and it can neither be created nor destroyed. Intelligence has always existed and always will, although it can learn and progress and grow. Our story has no beginning, but we'll begin at the first point the scriptures discuss, which is when God, who is also an intelligence, called his children together to announce that he had a plan whereby they would receive bodies made of element, learn from experience about good and evil, and have the opportunity to progress to become like he is.

 22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones;
 23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.
 24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell;
 25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;
 26 And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.
 27 And the Lord said: Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I, send me. And another answered and said: Here am I, send me. And the Lord said: I will send the first.
 28 And the second was angry, and kept not his first estate; and, at that day, many followed after him.

The one "like unto God" was Jesus Christ, the firstborn and greatest of the children of God. ("Firstborn" is probably an approximation of the actual concept since, as noted before, intelligences have always existed and so there is no being "born" in the conventional sense, but it's a pretty good approximation.) The second, who rebelled, was Satan, or rather the entity who became known as Satan (in Hebrew, "the accuser"). We know from other scriptures that the controversy in heaven was that Jesus said there would be certain souls who would not be saved, and Satan said he could save them all, and coveted God's glory in order to force that to occur; and when Jesus was chosen to be the Only Begotten and the Savior of mankind, Satan rebelled and was cast out. (By the way, Satan was wrong. It is impossible to force intelligences into perfection; you cannot subjugate them to your will and simultaneously bring them to perfection. The very idea is nonsensical--empowering them without giving them power to rebel against you.)

And that, really, is the plot of the play. We're here to taste the bitter in order to know the sweet, and to learn to forsake evil by doing good. There are some complications. One is that none of us, except Jesus, was or is strong enough to always do the right thing once we were placed in our current circumstances; this is both the reason why Adam and Eve were warned not to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Moses 3:17, "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.") and the reason why the Lord, knowing that we must partake of that knowledge in order to progress, sent Jesus to suffer alongside us, each and every one of us, vicariously and in all our pains and trials and sins, so that having "descended below all things" he would also have the power and the right to forgive our sins to one another and to bring those who hear and obey his voice back to the fold.

Not incidentally, he also has the power to correct all ills which are merely that of element--resurrection is the reuniting of body and soul in a perfect restoration, never to be divided again and never again to suffer pain or injury. Everybody who ever lived will be resurrected eventually--one of the reasons Jesus showed himself to his apostles after his resurrection was to show them how literal the promise was, not of being some nebulous spirit but the actual person restored again. Ills of the spirit are more problematic, but everyone who desires to do righteousness will receive as much capacity for righteousness as he desires to receive, while those who desire to do wickedness must remain as they choose to be:

  32 And they who remain shall also be quickened; nevertheless, they shall return again to their own place, to enjoy that which they are willing to receive, because they were not willing to enjoy that which they might have received.
  33 For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift.

But the point of life on Earth is to be tested and to learn, and even though it's hard sometimes we know that even the worst of problems are not really as bad as they seem, any more than a disastrous experience on the first day of kindergarten is really a disaster to the grown-up person you are now. Revelation 21:4 says, "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

There, that's the basic plot. We know some other things--various things that must happen before the time is right for Christ to return to Earth in glory, and some of the things which will happen after he comes and what life will be like here then, and a little tiny bit about the far future--but now you know the most important parts of the play. Except that you really don't know them and can't know them until the Lord confirms it to your heart directly--you're never responsible to believe in mere words--but at least you know what I believe and know. Any questions?

Wow, I'd better go to bed soon. I see I've overlooked a couple of your questions so I'll answer them briefly: yes, the people going door-to-door may be missionaries for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Or they may be shoe salesmen or Jehovah's Witnesses or something. It depends upon which people you're seeing. :-) If they're missionaries they'll have little black name tags with their names and the name of the church on it. Whatever I know about talking about my beliefs I actually didn't learn on my mission, really, partly because the Filipino culture is different (so what I learned there isn't applicable here) and partly because I wasn't old enough. I think I just learned it by being alive for long enough and by living my life (as opposed to anyone else's, which would have taught different skills).

"Are Mormons required to go on a mission?" you also ask. I don't really know how to answer that question--the whole point of life is that no one is ever required to do anything, strictly speaking. Serving a mission is also a privilege and you're required to meet certain standards. At the same time, it's a really, really good idea, especially for the young men (who, as I've mentioned before, will serve as priests and church leaders throughout their lives), and often a good idea for young women. Thus, the answer to your question is probably that, for the young men at least, it's expected and encouraged to prepare for a mission to the same degree that most people are encouraged to go to college--I have male friends who didn't serve serve missions, but they're the exception--and for young women it is one possible option which they are encouraged to exercise if they feel they should. (And we are grateful for the sister missionaries. They have unique gifts and can do some things the elders can't. All the ones I served with were really neat.) (By the way, "elder" is a priesthood title and doesn't necessarily have much to do with age--all male missionaries are ordained elders and are addressed as "Elder So-and-so" while on active duty, so to speak.)

There, I think that covers all your questions. If I've overlooked any, you know what to do.

Be well,
Maximilian

[1] Leo Rosten quote: "I learned that it is the weak who are cruel, and that gentleness is to be expected only from the strong."

--
"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Sunday, January 18, 2009

Re: 2009

M.,

I wrote, "Someone once pointed out to me that we are living in a Golden Age today, and our problems are those that come with Golden Ages. Admittedly they said that before this latest economic meltdown, but unless it gets much worse I'd still call it a Golden Age."

You wrote, "Please explain."

So. [drums fingers] How to say this?

I think most human beings throughout history would be thrilled to have the problems that 21st-century Americans have. That's not to say that they aren't real problems had by real people, but they're definitely a different kind of problem.

"How do I lose weight? How do I keep a steady relationship? How do I make more money? How do I pay off my credit card debt? How do I get an education so I'll be prepared for a job? How do I cope with a sudden death in the family?"

This is a different sort of problem from, "How do we survive the winter now that the crops have failed? How can we pay the king's new tax without starving? How do we escape from the Turkish invaders? Will I ever see Papa again?"[1]

Our problems, and our vices, tend to be those of people who have a lot, whether they realize it or not, and don't know what to do with themselves.

There's a Fred Reed column which expresses one facet of the problem, I think, or at least shows that this IS a Golden Age even for those who have problems. (The affluent have an entirely different class of Golden Age problems, as I've alluded to already.) Quoting from "Thoughts on Poverty":

As a police reporter for the better part of a decade, I've been in a lot of homes in allegedly poor parts of cities. Physically they weren't terrible. Some (not many, really) were badly kept up, but that isn't poverty. The residents could have carried the garbage out to the dumpster in the alley. They just couldn't be bothered.

Ah, but they were indeed morally deprived, culturally and intellectually impoverished, or what we used to call shiftless. I've come into an apartment in mid-afternoon and found a half dozen men sitting torpidly in front of the television, into homes where the daughter of thirteen was pregnant and on drugs. The problem wasn't poverty. The poor can keep their legs crossed as well as anyone else. If the daughter could afford drugs, she could afford food.

Most of these homes would have been regarded as fine by the graduate students of my day. They would have put in board-and-cinderblock bookshelves and a booze cache and been perfectly content.

The reality is that the wherewithal of a cultivated life of leisure, if only in tee-shirts and jeans, is within the reach of almost all of the "poor." If I had to live in really cheap welfarish quarters in Washington, DC, which I know well, on food stamps and a bit of cash welfare, what would I do?

I'd have a **** of a good time.

First, I'd get a library card, which is free, for the public libraries of the District. The downtown library, over on 9th Street, is a huge dark half-empty building in which very few people appear and none of the poor. I'd spend time reading, which I enjoy and the poor don't. They aren't interested.

A great many of the poor can't read, and the rest don't, but in both cases it is by choice, not because of poverty. The poor can go to the public schools. Their parents can encourage them to study. The schools are terrible, but neither is this because of poverty. The per-student expenditure in Washington is high. The city could afford good teachers and good texts. It isn't interested.

Music? A hundred-dollar boombox these days provides remarkably good sound, and I'd roll in pirate CDs. The poor listen chiefly to grunting animalic rap, but that is by choice, not by necessity. Washington is neck-deep in free concerts by good groups, as for example the regular ones at KenCen. All of these are advertised in the City Paper, which is free. You never see the poor at these performances, though there is no dress code or discrimination. They aren't interested.

Washington abounds in good museums and galleries, usually free, none terribly expensive. There is the entire Smithsonian complex, with the National Gallery of Art; there is the Phillips Collection, the…on and on. You never see the poor in them. They aren't interested.

I've read stuff like this before, and that's probably why when John Ringo says that our problems are those of a Golden Age--writing in the afterward to a science fiction novel about an alien invasion which puts a definitive end to that Golden Age--I think he's right, and we should be glad to have our modern problems instead of the usual ones for a human being.

I'll reply to your other message some other time. For now I think I'm going to read a book.

Perpetually,
M.

[1] Frequently, the answer to these questions is, "You don't. You die, and eventually someone else takes your place." That's not Golden Age material.

--
"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Barges: Why Two Holes?

[Sorry for including so many people--I started out with just a couple but I wasn't sure who all wouldn't be interested.]
 
Why did the Brother of Jared's barge have two holes instead of one? According to this video demonstration, one hole on top is insufficient to vent bad air, but the hole in the bottom combines with wave action to pump bad air out through the top hole. What do you think, is that correct? I don't know enough math to crank the numbers to see how much efficiency you gain, but it seems a plausibly good idea to me.
 
-M.

--
"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Friday, January 9, 2009

Solar Wind

J.
 
Solar wind is down 20%, the lowest level in 50 years (since we began measuring it). Maybe interesting, maybe not--we'll find out if temperatures respond, eh? "Good science," to paraphrase the Marine maxim about training.
 
 
Any thoughts?
 
-M.

--
"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Thursday, January 8, 2009

Non-state actors

 
-M.

--
"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

In His Footsteps

[J., you might have something to say about this, from another conference.]

Recent discussion... reminds me of something:

'The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it' ( Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith [1976], 121).

One doctrine I have not seen much understanding of in the Christian world at large and to an extent even within the Church is the significance of the Resurrection, and specifically why it matters that Jesus not only died but also 1.) rose again and 2.) ascended into heaven. Jesus' job was not merely to overcome sin—if saving people from hell had been the point of the exercise we would have been served just as well had the Lord never planted the tree of knowledge in Eden—but to ascend into heaven to claim his Father's throne so that we, now possessed of knowledge, could do the same by following the way he provides.

Read Hebrews 1, for instance, which is a defense of and an exposition on the doctrine of exaltation. The structure of the early chapters of Hebrews is:

Chapter 1: Jesus, the Son of God, ascended into heaven and is sat down on his Father's throne. He is not an angel but a God.
Chapter 2: We are Jesus' brethren (& sisters) and can therefore become like unto him in all things, not angels but Gods.
Chapter 3 & 4: Having so great a promise, shall we not be faithful? Others in the past have taken the promises lightly and so fallen short.
Chapters 5 – 13: More good stuff.

All of this would be a non-sequitur had not Jesus already done exactly what it is we hope to do: become like unto his Father, and my Father, and your Father. That Jesus rose again on the third day and ascended into heaven is vital to the substance of our faith.

-Max

--
"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Monday, January 5, 2009

Another Old Friend

[For reasons of my own, I am posting this picture directly to the blog. Unlike most of my other posts, this one was not sent anywhere but here. -M.]

Idolatry in the Old Testament

I think the Lord's position on idolatry in the Old Testament is really interesting. Sometimes people think the God of the Old Testament is some huffy, jealous god who doesn't want anybody worshipping anybody but himself. That's not how I read the scriptures. The primary objection to idolatry is that it is both useless and stupid: the following statement is typical of the Old Testament.

9 ¶ They that make a graven image are all of them vanity; and their delectable things shall not profit; and they are their own witnesses; they see not, nor know; that they may be ashamed.

  10 Who hath formed a god, or molten a graven image that is profitable for nothing? ...

  14 He heweth him down cedars, and taketh the cypress and the oak, which he strengtheneth for himself among the trees of the forest: he planteth an ash, and the rain doth nourish it.

  15 Then shall it be for a man to burn: for he will take thereof, and warm himself; yea, he kindleth it, and baketh bread; yea, he maketh a god, and worshippeth it; he maketh it a graven image, and falleth down thereto.

  16 He burneth part thereof in the fire; with part thereof he eateth flesh; he roasteth roast, and is satisfied: yea, he warmeth himself, and saith, Aha, I am warm, I have seen the fire:

  17 And the residue thereof he maketh a god, even his graven image: he falleth down unto it, and worshippeth it, and prayeth unto it, and saith, Deliver me; for thou art my god.

  18 They have not known nor understood: for he hath shut their eyes, that they cannot see; and their hearts, that they cannot understand.

(Isaiah 44:9-18, emphasis added.)

If the Lord finds it offensive to have his children abasing themselves before dumb idols, he is certainly not taking offense on his own behalf but on theirs. He would that we follow Jesus and rise to his own level, rather than grovel in the dirt before nothings. See Hab 2:19 and 1 Kings 18.

On a somewhat related note (futility of false belief), I share one of my favorite stories:

"A man came to me in Kirtland and told me he had seen an angel, and described his dress. I told him he had seen no angel, and that there was no such dress in heaven, he grew mad and went into the street, and commanded fire to come down out of heaven to consume me - I laughed at him and said, you are one of Baals prophets, your god does not hear you, jump up and cut yourself; and he commanded fire from heaven to consume my house." (Joseph Smith's diary, http://www.boap.org/LDS/Parallel/1843/9Feb43.html)

-Max

--
"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Thursday, January 1, 2009

"Faith"

Here's a definition I'm rolling around in my mind.

Having Faith: projecting knowledge you have gained back onto your past self in time for you to act on that knowledge before you have actually acquired it.

Implicit in this definition is that in order to have faith in something it must actually be true (otherwise the knowledge will never be gained). Oh well. This definition probably doesn't make sense in English.

-Max

--
"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Discussion with an old friend

[Redacted for the blog, but I've saved the interesting bits]

M.,

Oh wow, there are so many things I want to respond to in your letter--you're an interesting person to talk to. Let's start with polygraphs. My understanding is that the real utility of polygraphs is in interrogations. "Did you kill Bob?" and then just checking the polygraph is the dumb way to do things--you should use it to elicit information which is actionable. A good interrogator will ask questions like these: "We know you killed Bob. Did you bury the body near your house? What constitutes 'near'? Less than a mile? I see the river is about a mile away from your house. Did you bury it near the river?" Etc. It's more like playing 20 questions, and the ultimate goal is to find the body and be able to prove that the suspect led you to it. My understanding is that a major objection to polygraphs, and the reason they're inadmissible in court, is that this technique *works* and people are uncomfortable with how much it is able to reveal: Americans like their privacy. (Imagine it being used in a custody hearing instead of a murder trial, for instance. All kinds of embarrassing secrets could come out.)

I don't necessarily know that we disagree per se about the lying-to-Nazis question, and I didn't say it shows poor character--I did say it means you're untrustworthy (generic "you" here), but I agree with you that "the person is doing the best with what they've got." It's just that actions do have consequences. As people grow in capabilities ("It takes more brain power and creativity to skirt around the questions in a way that would reflect the same result as someone else's lie.") those who desire to will become more trustworthy. You ask why my siblings gave a different answer: honestly, I think it's just because I'm older and I've thought it through more. I think a lot of people will eventually come to the same conclusion, because it's a true principle and therefore cannot be avoided. :) That's pretty arrogant, huh? The alternative is that I'm the one who's wrong, in which case I will eventually and inevitably change my mind.

S.'s contact info:

[Redacted]

Out of curiosity: you didn't know I was Mormon--I presume though that you knew that S. is too? We probably would not have been such good friends if we had only interacted at school and stuff, but she was one of the four girls in my age group in Sunday School, so she was pretty special to me, kind of a quasi-sister although not exactly. I haven't met her kids--haven't seen her in person since leaving Washington--but now that I'm back in Seattle I may get the chance, next time I'm down in the Portland area.

I haven't been back to the Philippines since my mission (I got back in 2001), although now I'm done with school and therefore no longer poor :) I am considering a recreational visit next year (2010) with a buddy of mine who will be finishing his Ph.D then. (My goal would be to gain some perspective on history and technology, to satisfy my curiosity about how fast the Philippines is industrializing, to visit some old friends, and to remember some things I've forgotten and brush up on the language.) That mission relates, of course, to your question about how did I become a priest and what does it mean. Firstly you should know that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints purports to be the same church that Jesus organized before the world was and established in Jerusalem during his mortal life, now restored to Earth in the last days. One implication is that there are a lot of Christian traditions that you will see in Christian churches from the 2nd through 21st century that we don't have. Thus. We have no full-time, professional clergy at the local level (although the church as a worldwide organization does employ e.g. auditors and computer programmers and such, and I think the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles receives a living stipend, although they're generally all old enough that I expect they have retired from their professions as nuclear engineers and lawyers and teachers and whatnot) and all young men are expected to prepare themselves to serve as ordained representatives of God wherever it becomes necessary (and eventually to become "kings and priests unto God and His Father," per Rev. 1:6). The story for young women is a little harder to explain so I'll leave that aside for now. Anyway, the practical effect on a day-to-day basis is that I am expected to and can bless the bread and water for the Sacrament on Sunday, participate in or perform certain ordinances for the dead in the temple (proxy baptism, eternal marriages), and hop to it when we decide something else needs doing like digging out blackberry bushes for an old lady. Maybe this reflects on my earlier response to the Nazi question, after all--I've pledged to live up to a higher standard.

You say, "I don't believe you need to actually be in a church building to pray or be a good servant." True principle, that. I agree.

Perhaps it's a slight tangent, and this may sound a little bit odd, especially in light of the preceding paragraphs, but I've never really thought of myself as a particularly religious person by nature. I participate in organized religion (the Church) because my understanding about the nature of reality indicates it as the best way to get things done, as well as it being a fulfillment of commitments I have made--but the personal understanding comes first. In other words, I see my life as organized around facts, not religion. Yes, I'm a weird kid. Always have been. :)

Going back to your earlier point about intentions, "If a man who works everyday in the best job he can find but still can't make enough money to feed his family steals milk to feed his child is it wrong?" There's no simple answer to that question. The simple answer would be, "Yes." He's been forced into a situation where every answer within his power is wrong. Welcome to mortality, kiddo. That's why Jesus' Atonement was necessary, actually. It's also why the Lord warned Adam not to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge--once you hit mortality, unless you happen to be as capable as Jesus was, which you're not, you will inevitably do wrong things and die, spiritually as well as physically. But at the same time there's no way to learn good from evil without having that very opportunity to make mistakes, so God arranged a way for Jesus to pay the balance for our mistakes on our behalf--to satisfy Mercy without robbing Justice--so that he could still send us down here into this terrible, messy, mortal situation without it permanently destroying us. That's how it looks to me, anyway. But anyway, for the moment, yes, you do the best you can.

I agree that it would be fun to take a polygraph, just to see if I could beat it. This is one reason I love games like /Scruples/. It doesn't count as lying if you've announced in advance to everyone that, for the duration of the game, you will be lying like rugs. It's the only chance I have to see if I can do it without getting caught--aside from acting I guess, but I haven't done any plays recently.

Perpetually,
Max

P.S. Last night? I stayed up until 12:04 a.m., called a friend to wish her happy New Year's, and then since I hadn't slept all year went straight to bed.

--
"The presentation or 'gift' of the Holy Ghost simply confers upon a man the right to receive at any time, when he is worthy of it and desires it, the power and light of truth of the Holy Ghost, although he may often be left to his own spirit and judgment." --Joseph F. Smith (manual, p. 69)

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."