Author Archives: Larry Franz

Polling Is Fun

Posted on by

Public Policy Polling, apparently a reputable organization, claims to have asked likely Ohio voters the following question:

“Who do you think deserves more credit for the killing of Osama bin Laden: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney?”

Among Democrats, 86% said Obama, 1% said Romney and 13% weren’t sure.

Among Republicans, 38% said Obama, 15% said Romney and 47% weren’t sure.

There are lots of ways to interpret these answers, none of them good.

On second thought, there is at least one positive interpretation: it was a silly question and some people, including many Republicans, have a sense of humor.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_OH_9912.pdf

Guess I’m Dumb

Posted on by

Glen Campbell played guitar as a session musician on some of the Beach Boys’ recordings, and temporarily replaced Brian Wilson on the road in 1964 and ’65. Brian Wilson wrote and produced this song and probably sang the background vocals. The record wasn’t a hit, but Glen Campbell’s career survived.

Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?

Posted on by

There is a new book out by journalist and former philosophy grad student Jim Holt called Why Does the World Exist? It’s worth reading if you’re interested in questions like that.

Nowadays, when people ask why the world exists they are generally asking why the Big Bang occurred. Unfortunately, nobody knows. The most common answers are that either some random quantum event or some higher being made it happen. Some physicists think that our universe is just a small part of reality and that the existence of a vast, possibly infinite, collection of other universes explains why ours is here and/or why ours is the way it is. 

As soon as a particular cause or reason for our universe to exist is suggested, however, it is natural to ask why that cause or reason is the explanation, rather than some other cause or reason. Why are the laws of quantum mechanics in effect? Where did God come from? Where did all those other universes come from?

This is why the answer provided by a Buddhist monk at the very end of the Why Does the World Exist? is my personal favorite: “As a Buddhist, … he believes that the universe had no beginning….The Buddhist doctrine of a beginning-less universe makes the most metaphysical sense….A billion causes could not make the universe come into existence out of what does not exist”.

Perhaps the reality that exists beyond our universe or that preceded the Big Bang (the super-universe, the multiverse, the quantum foam, whatever it might be) always existed and always will. It simply was. Or is. It never came into existence, so no cause, reason or explanation is necessary or even possible. Perhaps it’s cyclical. Perhaps it’s not. Perhaps it’s always changing. Perhaps it isn’t. But it had no beginning and might have no end.

The great 17th century philosopher Spinoza referred to all of existence as “God, or Nature” (Deus, sive Natura): “That eternal and infinite being we call God, or Nature”. I prefer “Nature” to “God”. To Spinoza, it was the same thing and it was eternal.

The Idealistic Way to Vote

Posted on by

Sean from Boston posted a comment on Paul Krugman’s blog the other day. He said that he had been wavering about voting for Obama, but events at the Democratic convention involving references to God and Jerusalem in the party platform had pushed him over the edge. He was so offended by what happened with the platform that he is now going to vote for a third-party candidate. 

Perhaps Sean believes that voting is a sacred act that should reflect his highest ideals. He clearly believes that voting is an opportunity to express his opinion regarding who is the very best candidate.

But those two propositions are not necessarily equivalent. Voting is not an opinion poll. It is not a question of our being asked who, in an ideal world, we would prefer. It is a method for selecting someone to hold office. By voting, we do perform a sacred act. But it is an act with consequences. We should vote for the person whose election would best reflect our highest ideals and who also has a chance of being elected. 

In 2012, there are only two people who might be elected President. We already know that Barack Obama will win Massachusetts, so it doesn’t really matter who Sean from Boston votes for, thanks to the disgrace that is the Electoral College.

In 2000, however, a significant number of voters in Florida chose to vote for the candidate who best reflected their ideals. They knew that Ralph Nader wasn’t going to win, but they weren’t sufficiently concerned about that.

As a result of their decision to express their opinion on who the very best President would be, these idealistic voters were treated to a President who trampled all over their highest ideals (peace, truth, justice, etc.).

The fact is that there are other ideals more important than voting for your ideal candidate. Voting is a sacred act that should reflect ALL of your highest ideals.

If you happen to live in Ohio or Florida or one of those other crucial states, therefore, you should consider whether Barack Obama or Mitt Romney would make the best President, according to your highest ideals. And then vote accordingly.

Bad Candidate, Excellent Speech

Posted on by

Senator John Kerry was a pretty bad presidential candidate back in 2004. I don’t think I listened to any of his speeches all the way through. 

I listened to this one, however.