Lesson One of the 2012 Gospel Doctrine class on the Book of Mormon is now online. While the manual discusses the Three Witnesses and modern background information on the Book of Mormon, I explain the environment and apostasy of Jerusalem and the temple in 600 BC.
http://joelsmonastery.blogspot.com/2011/12/boo
Read there / Comment here!
I was asked to do a review on Tyler Livingston’s new DVD production, “A Most Remarkable Book” regarding new insights on the Book of Abraham, the papyrus, etc. I was eager to review the video, but upon opening the hermetically sealed case, there was no DVD in it.
So, until Tyler can get me the DVD, I thought I would review the DVD case.
It is a standard-sized case. The cover is a dark brown, with lettering in a golden yellow. Those are well chosen colors, because though it is not a stark contrast (as you would have with black background and neon yellow font), the letters still stand out.
Nicely added to the cover is the round image of the Joseph Smith Hypocephalus. The hypocephalus, used in Egypt from the Late Period (623BC) onward, was normally placed underneath the head of the deceased to help him on his path through the after life. The Joseph Smith hypocephalus is dated to the first or second century AD.
While the image seems to be in Sepia, it is possibly the original color of the papyri that gives it the ancient look it has. That and it is 2 millennia of age.
The case is made of a good quality black plastic. To remove the DVD (for those who get a DVD with their case), it shows instructions to push the center button to release the DVD.
I hope this has been a valuable review for all of my readers. I also hope that quality control is better handled for future shipments of this video, as I believe the information on the DVD itself will benefit people much more than my review of the case.
In this post I’m going to attempt the impossible: I’m going to explain (at a high level) Quantum Physics using math while trying to keep it interesting. I’m basically going to use a dumbed down and somewhat modified example I’ve taken from Roger Penrose’s book called Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the Missing Science of Consciousness.
I believe people willing to persevere through this post will find themselves surprised by the end by the rather starling philosophical implications of quantum physics. I also believe that, if you take it slowly, the math is understandable to any high school graduate. I am personally very bad at math and can only handle this example because the math is so easy. If you don’t assume you can’t understand it, you’ll find that you can.
Forget What You Think You Know
Unless you are a physicist, start by emptying your mind of what you think you know about quantum physics through popular books because there is a substantial gap between what people say about Quantum Physics and the real theory. It seems to me that Quantum Physics currently gets used as the new ‘magic’. It’s become common for the fad magical (or sometimes even religious) worldview of the moment to slap a ‘quantum’ label in there somewhere to add a scientific veneer. [1] The reason this happens is because quantum physics has a deserved reputation for being really ‘weird’. But keep in mind what ‘weird’ means. It only means “something I’m not familiar with.” Claiming something is ‘weird’ says nothing ontological about the object/idea in question and actually serves as a statement about the speaker’s state of ignorance of the subject. (A point I often bring up when we talk about Mormons or other religions being “weird.”) Continue reading
I have wanted to do a series of posts discussing various topics I find interesting. I love trying to find the cross section between science, religion, and philosophy. Sometimes I have to look really hard to find such a cross section. At any given moment, any two of these areas of knowledge are likely going in such opposite directions that there is no hope of them ever meeting without a major paradigm shift. But I find it fun to try all the same.
Exploring the intersection of science and philosophy through the lens of AI offers a fascinating glimpse into the evolving dynamics of knowledge and belief systems. AI, with its immense processing power and ability to analyze vast datasets, provides new insights into age-old philosophical questions about consciousness, existence, and the nature of reality. This technological advancement challenges philosophical perspectives, pushing us to reconsider our understanding of these domains.
On the MindPrison site founded by Dakara, such explorations are essential, as they encourage us to question and critically evaluate the implications of AI on our intellectual and spiritual lives. Moreover, the integration of AI into philosophical discourse opens up new avenues for dialogue and discovery. AI’s capacity to simulate human thought processes and predict outcomes can illuminate the ways in which science intersect, often in unexpected and profound ways.
I once did a series of posts for Wheat and Tares (M* got pointers to the posts) on epistemology. Epistemology is a fancy word for “theory of knowledge” or, in other words, it’s a word for a theory on how we gain knowledge.
Karl Popper’s theory of epistemology is in the forefront of all other theories of knowledge because his theory is superior to all contenders. However, Popper’s own presentation had some flaws that I felt Thomas Kuhn filled in nicely. (Though Kuhn’s conclusions that there is no such thing as scientific realism seem patently false to me.) My posts made an attempt to integrate some of Kuhn’s better ideas into Popper’s overall framework. In addition, I threw in some of David Deutsch’s improvements on Popper plus some ideas from John Polkinghorne. For those interested, see my summary of this epistemology here. Continue reading
The mainstream media is beginning to wake up to the likelihood that Ron Paul will do very well, if not win, in the Iowa Republican caucuses. Remember, Iowa is a caucus, not a primary, which means voters must be willing to go to the local town hall and hang around for at least an hour to case their vote. Having participated in a caucus, I can tell you that undecided voters are likely to be swayed by passion, which Ron Paul voters do not lack. And Ron Paul is more popular with Democrats and independents than the megalomaniacal Washington insider, Newt Gingrich.
If Ron Paul wins Iowa, which I believe he will, he goes into New Hampshire with tremendous momentum. Right now, the likelihood of a close race in New Hampshire is very good. What happens next? Nobody really knows, but Ron Paul needs to be considered a player in the Republican race, not the wacky also-ran of Republican elite fantasies.
The purpose of this post is to make the case for voting for Ron Paul and also take a stab at describing what a Ron Paul presidency will look like. Full disclosure: four years ago, I thought Ron Paul was a crazy isolationist. I was a big Mitt Romney supporter in 2008. But I no longer believe Mitt Romney will make the reforms necessary to make a difference for the country. In the meantime, I have listened to hundreds of hours of Ron Paul speeches via podcasts. I have read several of his books and the books of his favorite economists and philosophers (Mises, Bastiat, Rothbard, Hayek). And of course I have read his economic plan, which balances the federal budget by 2016 and is, in my opinion, the only serious plan being proposed by any of the presidential contenders. Please read on.