I have been on vacation (and more), so it has been hard to concentrate. I did come across this, though, and thought it was pretty funny.
Turns out there is an intellectual dispute among philosophers and one of them is a Miami boy. I can't wait to get a Phd. and get into stupid arguments that no one cares about.
Our friend Alan is a big time reporter for USAToday. When I am bored at work, I read his stories and try to pick out any mistakes that were made--mostly grammar mistakes. In his defensiveness he showed me the recent AP story, and while I hate to be the grammar police can anyone tell me what this lead means:
Motorists slid off roads Sunday across the Great Lakes states and into New England as a storm already blamed for three deaths cut visibility and iced over highways with a wind-blown brew of snow, sleet and freezing rainAnyone?
There is an article in The New York TImes about a "new" philosophy. Though I don't see how this is any kind of new philosophy.
Maybe someone knows better than I, but this seems like it would fall under some kind of philosophy of science and technology.
And then there is the thought experiment that the article brings up:
Kripke offered a thought experiment: Suppose, he asked us to imagine, that Gödel’s theorem was actually the work of a fellow named Schmidt; it’s just that Gödel somehow got hold of the manuscript and thereafter was wrongly credited with its authorship. When those of us who know about “Gödel” only as the theorem’s author invoke that name, whom are we referring to? According to Russell’s view of reference, we’re actually referring to Schmidt: “Gödel” is merely shorthand for the fellow who devised the famous theorem, and Schmidt is the creature who answers to that description. “But it seems to me that we are not,” Kripke declared. “We simply are not.”
To which experimentalists reply: What do you mean “we,” kemo sabe? Recently, a team of philosophers led by Machery came up with situations that had the same form as Kripke’s and presented them to two groups of undergraduates — one in New Jersey and another in Hong Kong. The Americans, it turned out, were significantly more likely to give the responses that Kripke took to be obvious; the Chinese students had intuitions that were consonant with the older theory of reference. Maybe this relates to the supposed individualism of Westerners; maybe their concern that we get Schmidt’s name right isn’t shared by the supposedly more group-minded East Asians. Whatever the explanation, it’s a discomforting result. “We simply are not”: well, that may be so at Princeton or Rutgers. On the other side of the planet, it might seem we are. What should philosophers make of that?
I finally finished The Crying of Lot 49 after doing all my grading and such.
The plot is a simple one: Opedia Mass, a restless wife and thinker, is married to a somewhat vapid disc jockey. The novel starts off with her getting a letter informing her that she has been made the executor of her ex-boyfriend's will, Pierce Invararity, who is some rich guy in California. She decides to go to (the fictional) town of San Narciso to fullfill her duties. After meeting her lawyer, the once child star, and the Paranoids--she begins to unravel a world-wide postal conspiracy dating back to the 1400's.
The novel then becomes a satirical detective novel as Opedia meets strange characters that all seem to be connected in some way to W.A.S.T.E--it all has to do with the postal conspiracy. She continues to search through Southern California even though she starts to see the people around her crumble into insanity (mostly from using too much LSD), and she wonders, herself, if she is not falling into the same kind of paranoid fantasy.
The actual plot of the novel is almost secondary. It is not so much what Pynchon is saying, but the way in which he says it. And the way that Pynchon tells his story is fascinating. The novel is, first of all, funny. Secondly, the novel deals with all those complex post-structural ideas that make a English Lit. nerd like myself toes tingle.
If we merely look at the name of the town and the hotel Opedia stays at, into account, we see the reference to the Greek myth of Narcisus and Echo. Opedia is an obvious allusion to the odyssey that Opedia takes. There is a motif in those stories that is seen throughout this one: the problem of communication, the problem about how language is never fully present, about how people are disconnected from each other because they can not understand each other through words. The tension in the novel is achieved through this mis-communication.
I will not get into the deeper philosophical issues here as I promised the owner of this blog that I would stay away from the mental masturbation, but feel free to make comments if you would like to discuss these issues and the many others that arise in the book.
I discovered Pynchon through a great short story called Entropy , and I have been meaning to read Crying for a long time. I highly recommend both of these stories to anyone looking to get into Pynchon and the ideal post-modern novel.
You can read an excerpt of the novel here.
As I procrastinate in grading papers, I came across this highly aggressive review which states how this crop of BBoW books are trite and something yadda yadda...
The only book I have read of the books being "reviewed" is "A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius" by David Eggers. While the book has its flaws, it is still, in my opinion, a wonderful and wonderfully original work. And when I see the author say:
Maybe I’m taking literally what’s meant to be sarcastic, but beneath the sarcasm lays real disdain. This is most evident at his sister’s wedding, a presumably significant event in Eggers family annals. Instead of extending the lattice, however, the sole, incredibly tepid description he gives of the groom is that he’s “a nice young man named James.” As for the other guests, Dave thinks, “I am not them. I am . . . a hundred years old.”This, in my opinion, is a complete misread of the story. It makes the review sound as if he hadn't read the rest of the book. Eggers says he want to be the lattice, but that he can not/does not know how to achieve it. And the reason that Eggers says, "I am not them. I am...a hundred years old" is because of his situation. He was thrown into raising his little brother while still being a bit of a child himself.
As I sit up at night unable to sleep, I came across this article. No commentary necessary other than "duh." But I'll comment for the hell of it.
As I started teaching English Composition and Rhetoric (as ENC 1101 at FIU is now called), I start every semester asking all the students what their favorite books are and more and more the answer is: Harry Potter, The Da Vinci Code, and The Alchemist.
The way the students answer the question makes it sound like their favorite book is the only book that they have read. Time after time it is the student who can't answer that question (because he/she has too many favorites) who is the better writer.
So my question is: are these finding really a suprise?
Seeing the school I teach at take out Literature from the composition classroom, it makes me wonder if the students leaving my classroom aren't leaving without the tools needed to succeed? I also wonder: if these kids don't read a book in my English class, and they are only required to read one story in their ENC 1102 class, well, then, are they ever going to read another book besides Harry Potter and the one in 1102? After all, as the report states:
In seeking to detail the consequences of a decline in reading, the study showed that reading appeared to correlate with other academic achievement. In examining the average 2005 math scores of 12th graders who lived in homes with fewer than 10 books, an analysis of federal Education Department statistics found that those students scored much lower than those who lived in homes with more than 100 books. Although some of those results could be attributed to income gaps, Mr. Iyengar noted that students who lived in homes with more than 100 books but whose parents only completed high school scored higher on math tests than those students whose parents held college degrees (and were therefore likely to earn higher incomes) but who lived in homes with fewer than 10 books.
As promised earlier... It seems the kids over at FIU have joined forces with the kids over at the University of Miami and Miami-Dade College to start a new magazine. The way Robert, the humanaties editor describes it is:
Basically, the magazine is about topics that are interesting to the College student.
Some of the sections are:
The Humanities: (My section. I deal with Arts, culture, and topics like religion and philosophy. I do reviews of interesting arts events around the Miami area, book reviews, T.V. reviews, and upcoming movie reviews. The section also deals with Fiction/Poetry/Prose.)
Spit it Out UM, MDC, and FIU: (Deals with upcoming events in each of the campuses, gossip, and anything directly related to each university)
Hot Spots: (Cool places to visit. Mostly underground, undiscovered places which Backslash wants to bring attention to)
Fashion: (Deals with trends)
The Who: (features interesting persons that have something to do with the universities)
Politics: (Deals with Politics or events somehow related to)
The Future: (Has to do with neat technological advances that a reader might be interested in reading about. Such as bionic parts or melanin pills that are meant to give a supposed natural-artificial tan)
These are only some of the already outlined sections. Still, the magazine is evolving until the specific mood that we envision is established. What the Backslash staff see is a magazine that is slick and humorous, informative and exciting.
