2012
● 1-2-2012: This was one of the sweetest days for me. I spent it composing (and have completed) a new version of my Reply to Ron on Abortion. I was in flow, totally absorbed; there was no frustration, the composition came easily, almost effortlessly. The weather outside was gorgeous as well. And yet, I was needlessly harsh with my father, and I think I made him feel bad. Now I feel sad and remorseful about that. But overall, I still feel gratified at my accomplishment, yet another gift from the universe.
● 1-3-2012: I once got a sift gerbapicate (also known as a gift certificate) to a store.
● 1-10-2012: A social liberal/fiscal conservative is a rich man who feels that the poor can do whatever they want, as long as he doesn’t have to help pay for it.
● 1-12-2012: The U.S. military: “It’s very good to kill people; but, after you kill them, it’s atrocious to urinate on their bodies.” This desecration of the bodies of the enemy soldiers by U.S. marines was blamed, on the grounds, among others, that it harms the U.S. mission in Afghanistan, and that it makes the U.S. miliary look bad. Well, good. The U.S. mission in Afghanistan should be harmed; it’s a bad mission. And the U.S. military damn well should look bad; they should appear as they are.
● 1-19-2012: The alternatives posited by the famous experience-machine thought experiment are not precisely drawn. An example of a (pseudo) experience the experiment mentions is that of realizing your dream of writing a great novel. The philosopher states that people would generally reject having the false experience because what they want in this regard is, not to have the experience of writing a great novel, but to actually write one. This is of course true. The exact opposition, though, is, not between doing and experience, but between doing and happiness. (You wouldn’t enter the experience-machine—or be tempted to enter it—to have an unpleasant experience.) Or we could say that the choice is doing versus experience (specifically, happiness . . . or pleasant experience).
[Later note (11-9-2023): “The philosopher states that people would generally reject having the false experience because what they want in this regard is, not to have the experience of writing a great novel, but to actually write one. This is of course true.” Not so fast! Of course you’d rather actually write a great novel than merely imagine writing one. But most people are not able to actually write one—or to write anything great. So their choice is between having the experience of it versus not having the experience of it . . ..]
[Later note (11-14-2023): No, the original sentiment makes sense. People are saying that what they want is the accomplishment (of writing a great novel, or the like), and that the mere experience of doing so—minus the actual accomplishment—is worthless. If they’re going to have just an experience, they would choose the happiest or most pleasurable experience, regardless of any other elements of the experience. . . . Well, that’s what I would say.]
● 1-20-2012: I sometimes say that what I wrote was merely for lack of a better idea. Of course, strictly speaking, whatever I write is for lack of a better idea. (If I’d had a better idea about what to write, I’d have written that.)
● Which position is the “conservative” one can be ambiguous. If a radical change in one aspect of our lives is needed in order to maintain intact another aspect (or to maintain our very lives), which action is conservative? If we’ve been driving our car in a certain direction at a certain speed for a long time, but we suddenly discover that we’re headed for the edge of a cliff, is it conservative to maintain our course, but soon die; or change course so as to continue living? In our world today, we may have to change the way we live in order to save humanity. The liberals favor radical change on our parts for the sake of preserving posterity; the so-called conservatives favor maintaining our present way of life, even at the cost of radical change, for the worse, for our progeny. It seems to me that the difference comes down to this: the liberals are willing to give up a measure of their comfort for the sake of the greater good, in this case, that of future generations, while the “conservatives” are not. And, unless “conservative” means just the desire to conserve one’s own wealth and privilege, these people are not conservative, but merely selfish. The selfishness of the rich impoverishes both present people and future people.
● 1-21-2012: “Conservative” is too good a word for the Right. The only thing the Right are interested in conserving is their wealth and privilege.
● I’ve decided to vote for Mitt Romney for president. He’s a very wealthy man (his net financial worth is in the neighborhood of $200,000,000). If he were president, everyone in the country would have that much money.
● 1-31-2012: My preference for fame over happiness might change if life were endless and pleasure substantial. But, alas, life is short, and happiness is tenuous at best.
● 2-5-2012 (Sunday): Today I devised and used a system to help my father, Jerry brush his teeth. I also cleaned his little desk, or tabletop.
● 2-7-2012: On same-sex marriage: I’d rather a child be raised by two good persons of the same sex than by two bad (or even mediocre) persons of opposite sex. (In fact, I think that, for child-rearing, probably a same-sex couple is just as good as an opposite-sex couple.)
[Later note (11-11-2023): . . . Or for any purpose.]
● 2-13-2012: I got a shock last night at the Philosophy Club meeting. I discovered that my average-happiness versus total-happiness version of utilitarianism is not a new idea (I thought I had originated it). It has been suggested by others in connection with the Repugnant Conclusion. Still, I come to it from a unique perspective. The conclusion is not new, but (I hope) some of my arguments for it are new.
● 2-16-2012:
Duties to the past: We observe duties to the dead, not for their sake, per se (we can neither help nor hurt nonexistent persons), but rather for ours, to give us, the living, peace of mind in knowing (or hoping) that certain of our own wishes regarding events after our deaths will be honored. It’s an intergenerational Golden Rule: we treat (or symbolically act toward) the dead as we would be treated after we die.
Duties to the future: Some argue that we have no obligation to remote future humans because we can’t know what conditions, or what actions on our parts, will benefit them. It seems to me, however, that, if we make a healthy, sustainable world for ourselves and our children, this pattern will roll through, like a wave in the ocean, and similarly help all futurity. A related point, the duty to enhance or protect the welfare of our existing brethren entails the same obligation toward future generations. If we care about our children, we must care about what our children will care about, which, like us, will include their own children, and so forth, ad infinitum (or ad indefinitum) (we and posterity are joined in a continuous web of lives and society). Moreover, it should be borne in mind that we, collectively, will be remembered and judged by history for our conduct. Artists have a special motivation in this regard, in that only as long as humanity lives on, will their work live on.
● Because rights and duties do not exist, as such (these terms describe just states of mind—only those “rights” exist as we choose to afford), any analysis of their mechanics (which assumes their actual existence) necessarily puts too fine a point on the matter . . . or works at cross purposes to the truth.
● People who live in glass houses, not only should avoid throwing stones, but should be careful generally about how they treat their neighbors.
[Later note (2021): That addition is unhelpful; “throwing stones” does not mean literally throwing stones: it’s metaphorical for attacking your neighbors, or even just treating them badly.]
● 3-7-2012: A comment I posted to a radio talk-show weblog today: These county officials’ rejection of the federal money [to pay for medical care for the poor] is the height of hypocrisy. They’re spending the taxpayers’ money to make a political point. Moreover, refusing to accept federal money is tantamount to requiring the taxpayers to spend more of their own money for those services, which, since money is fungible, is the same in effect as a higher tax on the public, for no additional benefit in return. A little ironic coming from those who claim to be against higher taxes!
[Later note (2021): That doesn’t quite make sense, not as it’s written (and it doesn’t seem worth the time and effort to rewrite): the federal money is not a free gift from the universe—it, too, is taxpayers’ money.]
● It’s curious that I haven’t mentioned it here yet. Over the weekend, my father fell and broke a bone in his lower back. I took him to hospital, and from there he was transferred to a Rehabilitation Center, where he is now. I saw him today, and he was in a terrible condition: he’s in pain even just by sitting up, and, worse, he’s incoherent (his prevailing dementia is being aggravated by the strong narcotic pain medicine he’s getting). This is the worst I’ve ever seen him. I have great anxiety about the near future. I have only meager savings and we have not yet received the proceeds of the sale of my father’s half interest in the house. I don’t know what will be involved in caring for him . . ..
● Sunday, 3-11-2012: Philosophy Club meeting; topic: “criminal punishment.”
● A just criminal law system is problematic, if not impossible, in an unjust society. You can’t fairly punish a poor man for stealing a hundred dollars from a billionaire, when it’s unjust for that hundred dollars to be in the rich man’s hands instead of in the poor man’s hands.
● 3-14-2012: My father is still in the rehabilitation center. Today his condition changed for the worse. He’s breathing shallowly and very fast, being given oxygen, and is more or less unconscious. He seems to be dying. I have mixed feelings about it. On one hand, I’m sad. Just before I left him today, I put my hand on his shoulder. As I left the building, I was crying. On the other hand, his passing now would be a blessing. His quality of life, tenuous up till now, would from here on be negative, filled with delirium and discomfort. For me, his death now would mean that the money (over $100,000) that we’re about to receive from the sale of his half interest in the family house, would not be eaten up in hospital costs, and I’d have the use of (all of) that money now, which I plan to use to finally turn my own financial situation around (by starting a law practice). I feel a little guilty about feeling so, but this turn of events mainly gladdens me.
● 3-17-2012: My father died this morning, at 1:00. Now, just after 5:00 p.m., I could characterize my feeling as relief and excitement, tinged with sadness and regret. I’m relieved of the burden of taking care of him, which took more than a little work. Also, I can now use all of the money from the sale of the house (over $100,000) as I see fit (and I’ve been counting on that money to enable me to start a law business, with my advertising, to finally turn my financial situation around); and I don’t have to worry that the money will be eaten up in medical expenses for my father. So, in a way, my father’s death is the beginning of my life. And yet, I regret that I treated him so coldly and callously in his last months, when he was completely dependent on me, and I was the only person in his life. . . . Jerry, I’m sorry.
● 4-7-2012: Yesterday I received the proceeds of the sale of my half interest in the family home (which I inherited from Jerry).
● 4-14-2012: The fingernail injury sustained on 11-14-2011 finally completely resolved today; the manicure clipped off the last vestige of the injured part, revealing a completely intact nail! I feel as if this was another bullet dodged.
● 4-15-2012: Philosophy Club meeting (no. 100!) Topic: “Personal Identity.”
● I believe that the real reason people are against human cloning is that they fear that the more talented persons will be cloned, which will raise the average ability of the population, and thus threaten their own position in that ranking, their status.
● 4-18-2012: It’s a strange locution to speak of something as being the most extreme thing of a certain sort “in history” or “ever”—about a category that’s existed for only a few years or decades.
● 4-22-2012: You can safely stop saving an item of memorabilia (as memorabilia) when you no longer remember how you acquired it.
● 4-23-2012: I’m going to start (or resume in earnest) variously discarding and storing my father’s things. I just now threw out his two portable urinals. I would have saved them for memorabilia, but it would have been too unsanitary. I threw away his chair (I wouldn’t use it, and there was no place to conveniently store it) and all of his clothes, except for a few items that held special memories for me, and which clothes items I saved as memorabilia (my memorabilia).
● 4-24-2012: I’ve now cleaned and somewhat reorganized the apartment. I’ve reclaimed it for myself. I cried for my father most recently yesterday, 23 April 2012.
● Haiku:
This place in the woods:
It’s here just as it is now,
Even when I’m not.
● 4-28-2012: Today this haiku of mine was read on air by a radio station. It was perhaps just enough of a taste of recognition to make me all the more keenly aware of my lack of it (now in the evening of that day, I don’t know how else to explain why I should feel so bad).
● 5-1-2012: I cried momentarily for my father this evening. I’m also rejoicing. It’s been a splendid day. I’ve found a way to use my essay “Some Reasons Not to Use Drugs” as a business-acquiring device. It’s an ingenious idea. This may bring me both wealth and fame, of which I’ll deserve every bit. It’s about bloody time! I’ve suffered long.
● 5-4-2012: Walking back from the laundry room to my apartment, I happened to notice a neighbor’s door mat, which was turned so that the “Welcome” was readable for someone exiting, rather than entering, the apartment. And I thought to myself, “What an idiot!” (referring to the occupant of that abode, since, of course, the message on the mat is supposed to welcome someone entering the apartment, not someone exiting it, as a welcome to the outside world). Then I reached my apartment, and, smugly, I glanced down at my own door mat, to feel a little hedonic twinge of superiority in observing that mine was placed correctly . . . but, to my surprise, I found that my own mat was turned the same (“wrong”) way! To my further surprise, I did not reposition the mat, but rather left it as it was, figuring that I must have had a reason for so placing it, even though I couldn’t think of what it was, or might be.
● 5-9-2012: Twice annually, once at the end of the calendar year, and then around my birthday (in May), I write an (overlapping) catalog of the high points (which so far, fortunately, have been mainly positive) of the past twelve months. Here’s the present list:
○ My father sold his half interest in the family house (to my sister, Jane). Just before escrow closed, he died, leaving me as his sole beneficiary. With the proceeds of the house sale, of his various life insurance policies, and of his company stock, I have some money, which, having lived hand-to-mouth for most of my adult years, has changed my life—for the better. Suddenly relieved of the need to take care of my father and of the immediate need to work, I’m taking an extended vacation, working only on my own projects. To boot, I’m in a position wherein I can parlay the money into a fortune, thus:
○ Attorney David Berns has expressed interest in my proposal to work together on my 1- 800-SUE-THEM.com, which will involve him investing money in the advertising.
○ I’ve formed a relationship with some non-lawyers knowledgeable about bankruptcy, who will work with me to handle bankruptcy and related debtor cases; I’ll need to cover only a few of the business’ expenses, including my advertising, which I’m ready to do with my 1-888-DEBT-END.com. Either business (the Sue-Them or the Debt-End) could be enough to start me on the path to becoming independently wealthy. Both prospects together make me truly optimistic in that regard.
○ I completed the editing of one of my best works, “Some Reasons Not to Use Drugs,” which piece, moreover, I’ve found a way to use to enhance my legal advertising, by making it into a website linked to my commercial websites, 1-800-SUE-THEM.com and 1-888-DEBT-END.com. I may be on the verge (at long last) of wealth and fame.
○ As well, I completed the revision of my masterpiece, “Ethics,” and I wrote another piece (also one of my finest), “On Happiness and Well-Being.”
● 5-15-2012: I’m a loner. I’m ill at ease around other people. But I enjoy my own company. I like being alone.
● 5-17-2012: In the sixteenth century, Nick, a chef, and his wife, Choodle, invented a now well-known variety of soup.
● I’d like someday to make a movie called Crooks and Nannies.
● 5-20-2012: Philosophy Club meeting. Topic: “Suicide.”
● 5-28-2012: Given the history of the United States, the phrase “Indian giver” is extremely ironic.
● 6-9-2012: Those who talk about “the three Rs” should perhaps spend a bit more time on “the S” (Spelling).
● Sunday, 6-10-2012: Philosophy Club meeting. Topic: “Moral Luck.”
● My response is my essay at RichardEisner.com titled (of all things!) “Moral Luck.”
● In dealing with a problematic situation with neighbors, it may be helpful to consider this: It doesn’t have to be solved, or resolved—but just gotten through.
● 6-14-2012: I bought new shoes for my car (tires).
● 6-26-2012: If two propositions are consistent, their corollaries as well should be consistent.
● 6-28-2012: I drove myself to the emergency room early this morning for intense abdominal pain (gastro-intestinal, it turned out). I’m proud of myself: the attending physician offered me morphine, but I declined it, because I had to drive myself back home. I asked the doctor if he could give me a milder analgesic, one that would not preclude my driving. He administered a non-narcotic pain medication; the pain eventually went away. And I had a productive day.
● 6-30-2012: I feel very grateful. I’ve been given so much—by the universe, and, yes, by my parents. I patiently wait for my day to come . . . heartened by the conviction that, at last, it will.
● 7-13-2012: I hope that, if and when we discover intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, it’s not more intelligent than we are, for the sake of our pride and our safety.
● Does the time-changing on an electronic digital clock make a sound?
● I believe in the subconscious mind, because sometimes I go to bed in the evening thinking about a problem, and right when I get up in the morning, I have the solution; I believe the only explanation is that my subconscious mind was working on it during the night.
● I saw a bumper sticker, reading: “The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.” To which I replied:
The “smaller” the government, the wealthier the corporations . . . and the poorer the citizens.
● If (according to Buddhism) suffering is the frustration of desire, how do you account for the suffering of a person undergoing torture?
● 7-14-2012: Robert makes a perceptive criticism of a certain trend in modern philosophy whereby the examination of the meaning of terms is so excessive that it not only does not enlighten the original subject, but actually replaces it. I’ve noticed a related phenomenon in which the philosophical argument is translated into, or expressed in, symbolic logic, such that, even if the conversion is correct, the basic ideas are lost in a fog of hyper-pedantry, or philosopher jargon.
I wrote the foregoing as a reply to Robert’s article on “Moral Luck” (in which he attacks my piece on that subject) posted on the Philosophy Club website. Then it occurred to me that sometimes (and this time) the most elegant response is no response at all.
● 7-15-2012: Philosophy Club meeting; topic: “desire.”
● If satisfaction of desire causes pleasure, why is it that we can cumulatively (or serially) satisfy numerous desires, but our pleasure does not correspondingly grow, cumulatively, additively, or at all? Perhaps desire is one of those human features not susceptible of philosophical rigor, that to subject it thereto is to put too fine point on it.
● 7-22-2012: Islam is (or at least some Muslims are) hypocritical, destroying other people’s cultural artifacts as “un-Islamic,” while treating the willful destruction of even a copy of the Koran (Islam’s primary holy book) as a capital offense (even if the destruction was motivated by a conviction that the Koran was un-Christian or un-Hindu, etcetera).
[Later note (2021): It’s not hypocrisy—it’s the same nasty, intolerant principle applied in different ways.]
● 7-25-2012: I don’t believe that the July 21 (2012) Colorado theater mass murderer (Holmes) was insane. In the past, I tended to think that perpetrators of horrific crimes were, almost by definition, crazy. But now I don’t believe so. We don’t necessarily consider a war criminal psychotic; why should the civilian mass murderer be any different? Often these criminals have meticulously planned their crimes; they (the criminals) had their reasons for their deeds. We should not mistake evil for insanity.
I’m against the death penalty in general. I oppose it in this case as well, because it would be letting the criminal off too easily. Death is merely a lack of consciousness, nothingness. Worse than no life, is unpleasant life. And what could be more unpleasant (especially for a young person, like Holmes) than being in prison, and knowing that you’re going to be locked up forever?
● 7-31-2012: I have an idea for a low-tech anti-aircraft weapon: A high-caliber machine gun with every fifth round or so a tracer round, giving the gunner the ability to see (and hence instantly adjust) the stream of his bullets in relation to the (moving) target.
[Later note (10-4-2023): That’s probably an antiquated idea. I suspect that most modern warplanes fly too high and too fast for such a weapon to be effective against them.]
● 8-5-2012: It’s better to be great at one thing than good at many. What counts is, not how many things you do well, but how well you do what you do best.
● 8-9-2012: A Sikh insulted on the street by a bigot, might respond this way: “I’m wearing a turban, you’re wearing a dunce cap.” (Or perhaps he shouldn’t, unless he’s in a large group of Sikhs, or he’s armed.)
● 8-10-2012: How the hippopotamus got its name: The creatures were found originally in North America—in fact, in the Potomac River. Some in Europe thought the name of the river was “Potomas,” and they called the animal hippo of the Potomas, which eventually became hippopotamus.
● 8-15-2012: In “trickle-down economics,” the rich get the cake, and the rest of us get the crumbs.
● 8-25-2012: “Pro-life” is a misnomer for abortion opponents. Many of them would forbid abortion even when necessary to save the mother’s life; surely, they’re not particularly interested in promoting measures to enhance the community’s quality of life. No. They’re not for life; they’re merely against abortion. “Pro-choice,” however, does accurately describe the other side in the abortion debate. They’re not for abortion, per se (or anti-life); rather, they simply want abortion to be available to women as an option.
More generally, I think many of the so-called moral values promoted by the Right, such as opposition to abortion and to same-sex marriage, are cheap values at best, immoral ones at worst, which require little or no sacrifice by their holders; do not enhance the common good, but instead merely oppress other people; and spring, not from a desire to help others, but from intolerance and bigotry. These are in sharp contrast to the politics of the Left, whose fundamental tenet is sacrifice on the part of the better-off for the well-being of the community. In sum, the morality of the Right is counterfeit; the morality of the Left is genuine.
● 8-28-2012: There’s a slight contradiction in Hamlet’s famous “To be, or not to be” soliloquy. Hamlet posits the danger of the not-to-be alternative as having bad dreams. An individual’s not being (not existing) means the lack of any awareness or experience on his part, which (experience) is the essence of an individual. But to have dreams is still to experience (and hence to be).
● Around now I began in earnest to retaliate against the women next door who’ve been attacking me for many months. Day of terror. At least now that I feel good about myself and have something to live for, I’m not a spiteful person. I retaliate, not for revenge, but merely for defense, to stop the attacks on me. I figure that those attacks won’t stop until the pain (for the attacker) of retaliation exceeds the pleasure of the attacks. I’ll increase the intensity and frequency of the retaliation until the attacks end.
● 8-31-2012: Another episode of severe upset stomach and vomiting.
● 9-2-2012: Endless killing-wars between sects within a religion are a poor reflection on the religion.
● 9-9-2012: Philosophy Club meeting; topic: “Mathematics in Science.”
● For scientists and philosophers who use the term God, it’s a metaphor for the underlying nature, or the underpinnings, of the universe, for how the universe works.
● Mathematics is so fundamental to philosophy (as well as to science) that it’s easy to overlook. For example, mathematics is the very essence of the utilitarian ethic: “the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.” More generally, the ideas that the greater the good, the better; and the greater the evil, the worse, are essentially mathematical. Unlike many mathematical axioms, however, these latter two propositions are not absolutely true, as I’ve proven . . . using mathematics.
● There’s a sense in which mathematical concepts exist independent of the human mind. If two dinosaurs are in a field, and two more dinosaurs come onto the field, then, whether or not there are humans (or any beings) to understand the concept, there are now, not only four dinosaurs on the field, but also twice as many as before.
● It has been asserted that there would be no mathematics in a universe wherein matter and energy were perfectly uniform. But that’s a contradiction, since “the universe is perfectly uniform” is itself a mathematical statement. More important, the two occupy different spheres, so to speak: the consistency of the universe is a physical fact; whereas, mathematical statements are abstract, and the physical does not affect the abstract.
● 9-10-2012: Around now, pay-per-click (PPC) ads began for my 1-888-DEBT-END.com.
● 9-13-2012: The bigoted anti-Muslim film that has created an international uproar did not reflect negatively on Muslims, but Muslims’ violent response to it did. Ironically, Muslims themselves accomplished what the film failed to do.
● 9-21-2012: One of my pet peeves is people who studiously substitute “Jewish person” for “Jew” in their speech, as if “Jew” were a dirty, offensive word, for which a euphemism is needed.
● Sunday, 9-30-2012: First meeting with potential clients from 1-888-DEBT-END.com.
● Monday, 10-1-2012: Bought my first laptop computer.
● 10-5-2012: Craft is the platform for art. The greater the artist’s craft, the greater his art.
● 10-6-2012: The poor or working person who’s against ending capitalism because he hopes one day to become rich is like the slave who’s against ending slavery because he aspires one day to become a slave-owner.
● 10-13-2012: If macroeconomic policies that benefit the rich (such as reducing their taxes) benefit the commonweal; then poor persons’ handing money to rich persons, when they meet on the street, would benefit the poor, while rich persons’ handing money to poor persons would harm them (the poor).
● 10-14-2012: Philosophy Club; topic: “free speech.” And met Gina, an attractive young lawyer.
● 10-21-2012: A voter initiative on the 6 November 2012 ballot proposes labeling food containing genetically modified organisms (GMO). I’m for it (the initiative, mandating labeling). Even if such food is not harmful to the human body, many (myself included) fear that it is, and want to avoid it. It’s like kosher food. I think that the desire to avoid eating non-kosher food is irrational. But many people feel strongly about it; they have a right to know which foods are kosher and which aren’t.
● 11-1-2012: A truce seems to have developed, for the last few days, between me and the neighbors in the apartment to the east (apartment number 3).
● 11-4-2012: Today we set the clocks back to (or from) daylight saving time. I reset all my clocks during the day yesterday to get a head start on the task. It turned out I had to do it twice, because initially I reset the clocks an hour in the wrong direction. That’s the first time I ever did that!
● 11-22-2012: I heard this quote recently, with which I agree: “I’d rather deserve honors and not receive them, than receive them and not deserve them.” (Another way of putting it is this: I’d rather be great but not famous, than famous but not great.) But the situation seems the reverse concerning money: I’d rather have it and not “deserve” it, than “deserve” it and not have it.
● 12-2-2012: In a 1998 entry in my Diary-Journal, I wrote that I’m both an agnostic and an atheist, as I believed that I can’t know whether God exists, but, absent such knowledge, I believe that (probably) God does not exist. Since (and because of) my May 2009 piece “The Impossibility of Knowledge, Free Will, and God,” I must conclude that I’m no longer an agnostic—only an atheist.
[Later note (2020): Let me clarify. I still believe that, strictly, I can know no proposition, including the proposition that God does not exist. What caused me to cease being an agnostic with the advent of the insight expressed in the essay, is that, before, I believed that God was (logically) possible. After it, I believed that God was impossible.]
The difference between an agnostic and an atheist can be described this way: An agnostic believes that he cannot know whether God exists; he may believe or disbelieve, provisionally, that God exists (or he may have no belief about it). An atheist believes that God does not exist; he may believe or disbelieve that he can know that God does not exist (or he may have no belief about it).
[Later note (1-29-2024): Strictly speaking, I’m both an atheist and an agnostic. I say I’m an atheist because I consider my belief about the impossibility of (propositional) knowledge a technical point, a subordinate, background element in my philosophy. . . . Surely, it’s in the background when we’re discussing God. . . . It’s in the foreground when we’re discussing knowledge. . . . But atheism and agnosticism come up in discussions about God.]
● 12-8-2012: Attempting to understand how the brain works has its place. And yet that study somehow seems reductive. I’m far more interested in using my brain than in knowing how it works. I’m more interested in being a Paganini than a Stradivari (or an acoustician).
● 12-19-2012: However good soul food may be for the “soul”; it’s apparently not too good for the body. On the other hand, how could something that’s bad for the body be good for the soul?
● 12-20-2012: “What does it mean to be human?” For one important thing, it means being able and inclined to ask that question. Presumably not dogs, nor even great apes or dolphins, ask what it means to be members of their species. Such trait is unique to man, and it’s a noble one.
● 12-27-2012: I just had a nightmare. I dreamt that I had allowed surgeons to perform a certain operation on my brain, which I later regretted because I thought it was unnecessary and that it had subtly but profoundly changed me, and my creativity, for the worse. Within the dream, I alternately kept waking up and, greatly relieved, thinking that I had merely dreamed the surgery, which had not actually happened; then I would awake from that state, so to speak, with fully renewed anguish, to realize that, yes, indeed, I had had the operation. When thinking that I had the surgery, I would desperately consult a series of doctors to try to get their professional opinion on how if at all the operation should affect the patient, in hopes I would find that, though I had had the operation, I was merely imagining the negative effects. It was rather amazing how long this agonizing dream continued, alternating back and forth, back and forth. Thank goodness it was only a dream!