Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge, by acclaimed biologist E.O. Wilson is a good read for anyone pondering existence, science, and the human brain - weighty stuff indeed. Anyway, from what I've read so far, Wilson is trying to unite the branches of science into a simple, cohesive set of laws. Science at its most basic starts with physics, progresses to chemistry, then biology, then the social sciences. Each progression gets exponentially more and more complicated as the rigid laws of physics melt away to the incomprehensible complexity of what makes us truly human. There are two ways in which scientists attempt to solve a problem. One takes, say a monkey, and divides it into smaller and smaller parts - anatomy, cell biology, molecules/DNA, etc. etc. From this method, a clear picture can be attained of the organism from the top down. The alternative method is to take the individual components of the organism, from the cell level up, and predict the final outcome, in this case, a monkey. Obviously, from a set of genes or a group of organelles, the final product is almost impossible to determine on an organism scale. Yet, this is precisely what consilience would entail - the bottom up prediction of nature. In the book, Wilson likens the former method to walking through a labyrinth, laying string out as you go, until an endpoint is reached. From this endpoint, the explorer can retrace his or her steps and come out where they started. Science has the ability to do this now. The interesting part of consilience is trying to start in middle of the labyrinth and coming out at the end. The only problem with nature, however, is that there are no endpoints or beginnings, only an intertwined web of reality. Which brings me to the chapter I'm on now - the human brain and its perception of reality. I'm not well-versed by any means in biology or anatomy, but I have a general idea of how the brain works. Defining consciousness within that gray mass is another issue to which ponderers of the world have been tackling since, probably, the time we "realized" consciousness. Our instinct and free-will are connected through millions of years of evolution. For every animal, the foremost job the brain must perform is the job of survival. One slip and we're dead. The fact that the human species has evolved to do more than just simply survive is a wonderful side effect of evolution. Each part of the brain works in concert with all the other parts to create the form we know as reality. Interlacing this experienced reality with thoughts, emotions, and memories from past experiences is not something we think of everyday, but it is something to be marveled at nonetheless. All of this information we are bombarded with, even in the days before 24-hr news and reality tv, is enormous and our brain processes and files away this usually needless information continuously. When we dream, we don't remember 95-99% of our dreams the next morning. What we interpret our dreams to be is really only taking into 1-5% of what we dreamed that night. The supercomputing power of our brain, which doesn't have to be plugged in, programmed, or reinstalled, is astounding. Anyway, I'm taken by this book, and if you're reading this blog, you should stop and read Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge right now!
05 December 2007
04 December 2007
Election 2008
Am I the only one around here excited about next November???
I don't know what it is, but I am already getting excited about the election coming up in 11 months. I know most people aren't paying attention, and I don't blame them - when a political talking head on CNN immediately began to talk about Election Night 2008 on Election Night 2006, I knew the American Public would be more apathetic and sick of politics than usual. With the accelerated primary schedule, incessant debates, and no real front runner for either party (sorry Rudy and Hillary), not many people are getting into this. Yeah, so everyone has an opinion on Hillary, Obama, Guiliani, etc. but these people wouldn't even have to run for election for everyone to have exactly the same opinion of them. "Hillary is soo polarizing; Obama is soo hot right now; hey, wasn't the Guliani guy involved in 9-11 somehow?" These are all preconceived notions of the candidates that don't really do them justice (but really Rudy, stop reminding us, we know where you were on 9-11...). I think there's a kind of backlash against these front runners, at least on the CNN/NPR circuit. Where would John Edwards or Mike Huckabee be without analysts making them the sexy predictions for dark horses? They don't have any money, they're not household names, and they're not breaking any glass ceilings. Yet to me, they represent the very thing we need in America - authenticity (and $400 haircuts). These two candidates have the luxury of not being front runners. They don't have to deal with the attacks from all sides rather, in Edwards case, they are the ones attacking. It's too early to tell whether or not Edwards' attacks will actually help him, or just help Obama, but its on the attack where Edwards meets his populist calling. Railing against the establishment in Washington, workers' rights, and poverty, Edwards can flow like Jay-Z, throwing in the bravado and anger he learned as a litigator against the powers that be. But what happens when he becomes the power? We'll see. Another orator that, not surprisingly to me, is making gains in the place where you can make gains interacting with real people (Iowa), is Gov. Huckabee. A former Baptist minister and radio man, Huckabee does his best when talking to small groups of real people. Nevermind the fact that he doesn't believe in evolution (7,000 years in the making), or that he is a pretty serious social conservative-he's a likeable guy. And a runner and Chuck Norris fan. I can stand by a man with those two interests. Also, in bizzaro-world where John Edwards gets the Dems nod, who better than a straight-talking, socially conservative minister from Arkansas to beat him? Certainly not a wishy-washy robot Mormon from Massachusetts or an anti-gun, pro-choice, multiply divorced guy from New Yawk. I wouldn't like it, but I think he'd be the best candidate vs. a Dem like Edwards. Iowa caucus goers are notoriously undecided, but I'd like to see Edwards go at least 3rd and stay in the race. Huckabee would be an interesting choice from the Republicans side, but whomever they nominate, it may be futile...
I don't know what it is, but I am already getting excited about the election coming up in 11 months. I know most people aren't paying attention, and I don't blame them - when a political talking head on CNN immediately began to talk about Election Night 2008 on Election Night 2006, I knew the American Public would be more apathetic and sick of politics than usual. With the accelerated primary schedule, incessant debates, and no real front runner for either party (sorry Rudy and Hillary), not many people are getting into this. Yeah, so everyone has an opinion on Hillary, Obama, Guiliani, etc. but these people wouldn't even have to run for election for everyone to have exactly the same opinion of them. "Hillary is soo polarizing; Obama is soo hot right now; hey, wasn't the Guliani guy involved in 9-11 somehow?" These are all preconceived notions of the candidates that don't really do them justice (but really Rudy, stop reminding us, we know where you were on 9-11...). I think there's a kind of backlash against these front runners, at least on the CNN/NPR circuit. Where would John Edwards or Mike Huckabee be without analysts making them the sexy predictions for dark horses? They don't have any money, they're not household names, and they're not breaking any glass ceilings. Yet to me, they represent the very thing we need in America - authenticity (and $400 haircuts). These two candidates have the luxury of not being front runners. They don't have to deal with the attacks from all sides rather, in Edwards case, they are the ones attacking. It's too early to tell whether or not Edwards' attacks will actually help him, or just help Obama, but its on the attack where Edwards meets his populist calling. Railing against the establishment in Washington, workers' rights, and poverty, Edwards can flow like Jay-Z, throwing in the bravado and anger he learned as a litigator against the powers that be. But what happens when he becomes the power? We'll see. Another orator that, not surprisingly to me, is making gains in the place where you can make gains interacting with real people (Iowa), is Gov. Huckabee. A former Baptist minister and radio man, Huckabee does his best when talking to small groups of real people. Nevermind the fact that he doesn't believe in evolution (7,000 years in the making), or that he is a pretty serious social conservative-he's a likeable guy. And a runner and Chuck Norris fan. I can stand by a man with those two interests. Also, in bizzaro-world where John Edwards gets the Dems nod, who better than a straight-talking, socially conservative minister from Arkansas to beat him? Certainly not a wishy-washy robot Mormon from Massachusetts or an anti-gun, pro-choice, multiply divorced guy from New Yawk. I wouldn't like it, but I think he'd be the best candidate vs. a Dem like Edwards. Iowa caucus goers are notoriously undecided, but I'd like to see Edwards go at least 3rd and stay in the race. Huckabee would be an interesting choice from the Republicans side, but whomever they nominate, it may be futile...
Law Schools
Reach (<40% chance of admittance)
I took the LSAT this fall and did well enough to get into all but the t-14 schools, I think. My GPA is pretty good, considering the engineering degree and all, and my extracurriculars hopefully stand out too. That being said, I still don't know where I want to go ;o(
- University of Michigan
- UCLA / UC-Berkeley
- Georgetown
- UW - Seattle
- UC - Davis
- The George Washington University
- University of Colorado - Boulder
- Univesity of Minnesota - Twin Cities
- Boston College
- Fordham
- University of Oregon - Eugene
- Lewis and Clark (Portland, OR)
- Seattle University
- Denver University
- St. Thomas/Hamline/William Mitchell
I took the LSAT this fall and did well enough to get into all but the t-14 schools, I think. My GPA is pretty good, considering the engineering degree and all, and my extracurriculars hopefully stand out too. That being said, I still don't know where I want to go ;o(
Why?
Why am I blogging? What made me decide to pour nonsense onto this page so no one will read it anyway? Well, I think I have too much coursing through my brain and I need a place to put it all. Like Dumbledore's pensive, this will be a place for me to put random thoughts and memories which I can access later (much easier than a pensive, I might add). The name of the blog is evidence for my lack of creativity and also my love for the band the Hold Steady (try out their song "How a Resurrection Really Feels," for evidence of their genius). A little bit about me, I'm an engineering student currently residing in upper Michigan. A bleak affair. But usually like it up here, and the people/education are top-notch, so I'm not complaining too much. I'm planning on going to law school right quick after I graduate next fall. Environmental law is where its at. Just sayin. Other things I like to do, Engineers Without Borders, run, listen to music, learn. So, that's me in a nutshell. Blog on crazy diamond.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)