ANSELM'S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
An ontological argument is one that relies on a priori assumptions about the nature of an object's existence. In 1078, Anselm of Canterbury proposed in his Proslogion his proof of God's existence.
First, he defined God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived".
Thus defined, he argued that since we can conceive Him as such, this God must exist in our minds.
Now, things can exist in our minds and they can also exist in reality.
Things are greater if they exist both in our minds as well as in reality rather than in our minds only.
If God exists only in our minds, and not in reality, then God would not be the greatest Being; because another hypothetical being which may exist both in our minds and in reality would have been greater than God.
But, as already defined, God is the greatest Being ever conceived. So, God must necessarily exist both in our minds as well as in reality.
Therefore, God must exist!
Well, how convincing is that? I think the best way to evaluate it is to present a similar, but counter ontological argument below:
A COUNTER ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
This argument was apparently formulated many centuries ago to refute Anselm's proof of the existence of God.
It goes something like this:
Ok, let's accept Anselm's definition of God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived".
Part of that greatness would be because He created the Universe.
God can create the Universe either with Himself also existing in the Universe or without Himself existing in the Universe.
But a God who could create a Universe without Himself even existing in that Universe would be greater than a God who requires to exist in that Universe in order to create it.
Yet, God is the greatest Being. So, He should create the Universe without Himself existing in it.
Therefore, God does not exist!
Sunday 27 July 2014
Thursday 24 July 2014
WORLD DILIGENCE DAY 24/7
Readers of this blog would know that this is the 2nd World Diligence Day that we are celebrating, having been inaugurated on 24th July 2013 by myself. The occasion is for us to pay a tribute to all the hardworking people of the world who work hard almost 24/7 to bring better lives to their families. It does not matter what their station or nature of work is, for as long as they work honestly and diligently for positive reasons, they are worthy of our respect.
Readers of this blog would know that this is the 2nd World Diligence Day that we are celebrating, having been inaugurated on 24th July 2013 by myself. The occasion is for us to pay a tribute to all the hardworking people of the world who work hard almost 24/7 to bring better lives to their families. It does not matter what their station or nature of work is, for as long as they work honestly and diligently for positive reasons, they are worthy of our respect.
Monday 21 July 2014
RENDEZVOUS
Sadao Watanabe (1985)
Let me introduce some nice jazz music to you. This is Sadao Watanabe's 1985 album called "Rendezvous". It is very mellow and relaxing. Please enjoy.
http://youtu.be/XTJ5PjKOg28
Tracklist
1 Rendezvous 5:12
2 Fire Fly 5:43
3 If I'm Still Around Tomorrow 4:21
4 Cool Breeze 4:43
5 Here's To Love. 4:37
6 Maraval 4:31
7 Love Me As I Am 4:57
8 I'm Yours. 4:44
Sadao Watanabe (1985)
Let me introduce some nice jazz music to you. This is Sadao Watanabe's 1985 album called "Rendezvous". It is very mellow and relaxing. Please enjoy.
http://youtu.be/XTJ5PjKOg28
1 Rendezvous 5:12
2 Fire Fly 5:43
3 If I'm Still Around Tomorrow 4:21
4 Cool Breeze 4:43
5 Here's To Love. 4:37
6 Maraval 4:31
7 Love Me As I Am 4:57
8 I'm Yours. 4:44
Sunday 20 July 2014
THE DISSONANCE BETWEEN STATISTICS AND THE FEAR OF FLYING
ROSY STATISTICS VS FLYING PHOBIA
Call it pteromerhanophobia, aerophobia, aviatophobia, or aviophobia, but whatever the big term, it is the pure fear and anxiety about flying that grip us whenever there is a high-profile plane crash. Just as we are about to accept MH370's mysterious disappearance into the Indian Ocean last March, we now have to confront the utter destruction of MH17 by a missile in Eastern Ukraine 3 days ago!
The statisticians never stop to reassure us that it is plain silly to worry about plane crashes. If you are boarding a plane today, there is apparently only a 0.00001% chance that your plane will crash. Put, another way, plane crashes occur at the rate of one per 1.2 million flights.
If you take one flight a day, you would on average need to fly every day for 10,000 years before being involved in a fatal crash! Dying in a plane crash is a 1 in an 11 million lottery because even if involved in a crash, 95.7% of passengers survive! It has even been suggested that it is far more likely to die in the taxi that is bringing you to the airport as your chance of dying in a car crash is much higher at 1 in 5,000!
RATIONALITY VS EMOTIONALISM
Yet, 40 percent of plane passengers will experience some kind of fear at one time or another while flying. Are these 40% silly? Why are the above rosy statistics not comforting enough for so many people?
I think the reason is not that these people are irrational. People are fearful not because plane crashes are statistically frequent but because of the very fact that they occur at all. In fact, unlike statisticians, people have very different ideas of what "rare" and "frequent" means.
For example, in 2013, there were 12 commercial air crashes killing a total of 185 people. And so far in 2014, it had been even more deadly, killing 555 in 4 incidents.
So, in the last 18 months, 740 people had perished while on board a commercial plane, working out to roughly 1.37 deaths every day since January 2013. Each of these 740 people must have thought that their chance of dying was a minuscule 1 in 11 million, but yet it happened ...
According to data from Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives, if we look at all aircrafts (not just commercial jets), there were 138 plane crashes in 2013 (462 deaths), and 155 in 2012. These average out to 11.5 crashes a month in 2013 and 12.9 a month in 2012; or about 1 crash every 2 and a half days over those 2 years. So, plane crashes are not "rare" events.
MISSILE VS PLANE
Now, this latest crash of MH17 on the 17 July 2014 has a different dimension because it was the result of a deliberate attack. In fact, MH17 was the 13th commercial plane to be attacked by gunfire or missile since 1980.
When passenger jets which typically travel at 800 km/hr are attacked by missiles, they are unable to defend themselves or take evasive action because a missile like the one fired from the Russian-made BUK-M2 system would be traveling at about 1,000 metres per second! That's why there was no chance of escape or survival.
CONCLUSION
Bearing all the above in mind, I ask: is the fear of flying justified? For myself, I try to avoid plane travel not because I disbelieve the statistics. I have complete faith in them, especially the part about 40% of all plane passengers having fear and anxiety. To me, having a 40% risk of worrying about my mortality is no way to live. This is just one statistic that is too high!
ROSY STATISTICS VS FLYING PHOBIA
Call it pteromerhanophobia, aerophobia, aviatophobia, or aviophobia, but whatever the big term, it is the pure fear and anxiety about flying that grip us whenever there is a high-profile plane crash. Just as we are about to accept MH370's mysterious disappearance into the Indian Ocean last March, we now have to confront the utter destruction of MH17 by a missile in Eastern Ukraine 3 days ago!
The statisticians never stop to reassure us that it is plain silly to worry about plane crashes. If you are boarding a plane today, there is apparently only a 0.00001% chance that your plane will crash. Put, another way, plane crashes occur at the rate of one per 1.2 million flights.
If you take one flight a day, you would on average need to fly every day for 10,000 years before being involved in a fatal crash! Dying in a plane crash is a 1 in an 11 million lottery because even if involved in a crash, 95.7% of passengers survive! It has even been suggested that it is far more likely to die in the taxi that is bringing you to the airport as your chance of dying in a car crash is much higher at 1 in 5,000!
RATIONALITY VS EMOTIONALISM
Yet, 40 percent of plane passengers will experience some kind of fear at one time or another while flying. Are these 40% silly? Why are the above rosy statistics not comforting enough for so many people?
I think the reason is not that these people are irrational. People are fearful not because plane crashes are statistically frequent but because of the very fact that they occur at all. In fact, unlike statisticians, people have very different ideas of what "rare" and "frequent" means.
For example, in 2013, there were 12 commercial air crashes killing a total of 185 people. And so far in 2014, it had been even more deadly, killing 555 in 4 incidents.
So, in the last 18 months, 740 people had perished while on board a commercial plane, working out to roughly 1.37 deaths every day since January 2013. Each of these 740 people must have thought that their chance of dying was a minuscule 1 in 11 million, but yet it happened ...
According to data from Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives, if we look at all aircrafts (not just commercial jets), there were 138 plane crashes in 2013 (462 deaths), and 155 in 2012. These average out to 11.5 crashes a month in 2013 and 12.9 a month in 2012; or about 1 crash every 2 and a half days over those 2 years. So, plane crashes are not "rare" events.
MISSILE VS PLANE
Now, this latest crash of MH17 on the 17 July 2014 has a different dimension because it was the result of a deliberate attack. In fact, MH17 was the 13th commercial plane to be attacked by gunfire or missile since 1980.
When passenger jets which typically travel at 800 km/hr are attacked by missiles, they are unable to defend themselves or take evasive action because a missile like the one fired from the Russian-made BUK-M2 system would be traveling at about 1,000 metres per second! That's why there was no chance of escape or survival.
CONCLUSION
Bearing all the above in mind, I ask: is the fear of flying justified? For myself, I try to avoid plane travel not because I disbelieve the statistics. I have complete faith in them, especially the part about 40% of all plane passengers having fear and anxiety. To me, having a 40% risk of worrying about my mortality is no way to live. This is just one statistic that is too high!
Wednesday 16 July 2014
WORLD CUP 2014 BRAZIL
FINAL REFLECTIONS
WORLD CUP NEOLOGISMS
This year's World Cup is highly enjoyable and particularly memorable. I will honor and celebrate it by introducing the following new words or phrases to the world:
1. "Brazil's Mineirao moment" (noun)
This refers to the an extraordinary, unexpected and inexplicable total collapse of a premium brand or a top performer.
Eg. "Even a blue-chip stock cannot be immune from having Brazil's Mineirao moment one day!"
2. "Suarez" (verb)
To suarez someone is to mysteriously attack someone for no apparent reason in full view of everyone.
Eg. "We don't know why he suarezed you, but maybe, he is under too much stress."
3. "Robben" (verb)
To robben is to deceive someone so convincingly that its expertise in deception is only exceeded by its cynicism.
Eg. "Repeated robbening of the public has undermined the President's moral authority."
4. "Fly Persie's dolphin" (verb)
It means to exaggerate or create an unnecessary spectacle.
Eg. "There is no need to fly Persie's dolphin, what I did was nothing to shout about."
5. "Messi state of mind" (noun)
This is the feeling one gets after having a bittersweet experience especially if its sweetness is overwhelmed by its bitterness.
Eg. "He is in a Messi state of mind because the heart of the beautiful girl he married was long dead after her previous boyfriend's tragic death."
FINAL REFLECTIONS
WORLD CUP NEOLOGISMS
This year's World Cup is highly enjoyable and particularly memorable. I will honor and celebrate it by introducing the following new words or phrases to the world:
1. "Brazil's Mineirao moment" (noun)
This refers to the an extraordinary, unexpected and inexplicable total collapse of a premium brand or a top performer.
Eg. "Even a blue-chip stock cannot be immune from having Brazil's Mineirao moment one day!"
2. "Suarez" (verb)
To suarez someone is to mysteriously attack someone for no apparent reason in full view of everyone.
Eg. "We don't know why he suarezed you, but maybe, he is under too much stress."
3. "Robben" (verb)
To robben is to deceive someone so convincingly that its expertise in deception is only exceeded by its cynicism.
Eg. "Repeated robbening of the public has undermined the President's moral authority."
4. "Fly Persie's dolphin" (verb)
It means to exaggerate or create an unnecessary spectacle.
Eg. "There is no need to fly Persie's dolphin, what I did was nothing to shout about."
5. "Messi state of mind" (noun)
This is the feeling one gets after having a bittersweet experience especially if its sweetness is overwhelmed by its bitterness.
Eg. "He is in a Messi state of mind because the heart of the beautiful girl he married was long dead after her previous boyfriend's tragic death."
Wednesday 9 July 2014
WORLD CUP 2014 BRAZIL
SECOND REFLECTIONS
9 July 2014: Brazil 1 Germany 7
The first reactions to such a scoreline are shock, disbelief, alarm and even ridicule. It doesn't seem to make much sense. But, if you had watched the full match live and spend 5 minutes after the final whistle having some cool reflection, everything really makes sense and is not that surprising.
1. First, the big scoreline. Losing by 6, 7 or even 8 goals are nothing special even for quality teams like Brazil, Manchester United or Arsenal. Brazil themselves conceded 5 goals in official games 6 times in or before 1940 and twice in 1963. Their previous worst defeats were a 6-0 loss to Uruguay in the 1920 Copa America and an 8-4 friendly defeat to Yugoslavia in 1934. So, quality teams do lose and sometimes they lose big. That is no big deal!
2. The reasons for this latest thrashing are many and the most obvious is a poor defensive formation and the fault is largely Scolari's. Brazil was highly effective in their last match against Colombia with a fast, pressing and aggressive attacking approach and they started this match the same confident way. Had they scored the first goal, things would have turned out differently. When they conceded a soft first goal from a corner, it was so unexpected that suddenly, they lost their shape and couldn't recover their composure. The whole defense became at sixes and sevens and before they knew it, they had conceded a total of 5 goals in the first 29 minutes, most of them very soft goals. So, apparently, Scolari had worried too much about the loss of Neymar when the real problem was the absence of his captain Silva who was a key organizer and member of his defense. It was already a lost cause in the second half even though his forwards tried to make amends.
3. Another deficiency of Brazil was the lack of depth in their squad. This is evident when Scolari replaced his injured superstar Neymar with the forgettable Bernard. As Gilberto Silva had pointed out, there is a paucity of world-class talent in the squad.
4. Germany is a quality team. They are well-organized, disciplined, well-drilled and intelligent enough to recognize Brazil's weakness in defense and exploit it time and again to score multiple goals. They actually did not do any brilliant or complicated things, but they thoroughly deserve to be in the final. So, we wish them all the best.
5. We should not read too much into this match as it was probably a one-off anomaly. In truth, Brazil is still a very good team. They had won the 2013 Confederations Cup beating the then reigning FIFA World Cup (2010) champion Spain 3-0 in the final of a tournament that also featured Italy, Mexico and Nigeria. Now, they will finish either 3rd or 4th in this World Cup. That is not such a total catastrophe that it has been made out to be.
SECOND REFLECTIONS
9 July 2014: Brazil 1 Germany 7
The first reactions to such a scoreline are shock, disbelief, alarm and even ridicule. It doesn't seem to make much sense. But, if you had watched the full match live and spend 5 minutes after the final whistle having some cool reflection, everything really makes sense and is not that surprising.
1. First, the big scoreline. Losing by 6, 7 or even 8 goals are nothing special even for quality teams like Brazil, Manchester United or Arsenal. Brazil themselves conceded 5 goals in official games 6 times in or before 1940 and twice in 1963. Their previous worst defeats were a 6-0 loss to Uruguay in the 1920 Copa America and an 8-4 friendly defeat to Yugoslavia in 1934. So, quality teams do lose and sometimes they lose big. That is no big deal!
2. The reasons for this latest thrashing are many and the most obvious is a poor defensive formation and the fault is largely Scolari's. Brazil was highly effective in their last match against Colombia with a fast, pressing and aggressive attacking approach and they started this match the same confident way. Had they scored the first goal, things would have turned out differently. When they conceded a soft first goal from a corner, it was so unexpected that suddenly, they lost their shape and couldn't recover their composure. The whole defense became at sixes and sevens and before they knew it, they had conceded a total of 5 goals in the first 29 minutes, most of them very soft goals. So, apparently, Scolari had worried too much about the loss of Neymar when the real problem was the absence of his captain Silva who was a key organizer and member of his defense. It was already a lost cause in the second half even though his forwards tried to make amends.
3. Another deficiency of Brazil was the lack of depth in their squad. This is evident when Scolari replaced his injured superstar Neymar with the forgettable Bernard. As Gilberto Silva had pointed out, there is a paucity of world-class talent in the squad.
4. Germany is a quality team. They are well-organized, disciplined, well-drilled and intelligent enough to recognize Brazil's weakness in defense and exploit it time and again to score multiple goals. They actually did not do any brilliant or complicated things, but they thoroughly deserve to be in the final. So, we wish them all the best.
5. We should not read too much into this match as it was probably a one-off anomaly. In truth, Brazil is still a very good team. They had won the 2013 Confederations Cup beating the then reigning FIFA World Cup (2010) champion Spain 3-0 in the final of a tournament that also featured Italy, Mexico and Nigeria. Now, they will finish either 3rd or 4th in this World Cup. That is not such a total catastrophe that it has been made out to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)