September 2006 Archives
I'm reading a Philosophy of Science book by Abraham Kaplan called The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science with some colleagues at school. Kaplan borrowed from John Dewey when he stated the autonomy of inquiry principle as a declaration of scientific independence in his opening paragraph.
It is the principle that the pursuit of truth is accountable to nothing and to no one not a part of that pursuit itself.
This is an idealistic position because scientists are held accountable by many sources whether regardless of legitimacy. My question is whether the same principle applies to religious truth-seekers? Are we only accountable to others on "the quest"? Even if the answer is yes, it's rarely a satisfying response to critics.
I am 36 years old today. I remember making friends with a 36 year old guy when I was 28 and thinking it was weird that he was so old and hanging out with twenty-somethings. In reality, we were both in a "young" couples Sunday School class at church. I realize now I'm that guy the twenty-somethings I know are having the same thoughts about. Sigh.
Forty-four is the age of a friend of ours who recently died after a 2-year battle with cancer. She leaves behind a husband and two daughters. Thirty-four is the age of my wife who is currently debilitated due to recent gastrointestinal surgery, unexplained arthralgia in her knees, and life-threatening blood clots. Carpe diem, people.
The Boomers had Kennedy's assassination, Generation X had the Challenger explosion, and we all have the 9-11 attack. Where were you when you heard about the Twin Towers on 9-11-01? Not surprisingly, this phenomenon is a topic of study in cognitive psychology called flashbulb memory. Such memories are characterized by vivid accounts of personal circumstances at the time a significant incident, usually a shocking event of national or international importance. This is a familiar experience for most people. Evidence suggests, however, that flashbulb memories aren't nearly as well preserved as people believe. I had a student tell me that she went home and read her diary from 9-11-01 after I lectured on flashbulb memory and she was shocked to learn that many of the details that she remembered were different from those she recorded at the time. One theory suggests that there is something different about such emotionally charged memories that makes them less susceptible to forgetting. I come from the theoretical tradition that shuns special status memories. The vividness of the memories likely results from repetitive retellings over time, which also explains the creeping loss of accuracy.
I did not intend to let so much time lapse between my last entry and this one, but life circumstances have occupied me in other ways, as most of you know. I've been thinking about posting for a week or so but I haven't been able to come up with a good entry. So, I'm posting this I'm back entry just to get over the hump.
As an aside, I'm really enjoying O'Conner's "Woe is I: The Grammarphobe's Guide to Better English in Plain English." I recommend it, especially if you have some nagging grammar uncertainties or some common vocabulary misunderstandings. O'Conner does a good job of explaining a lot of do's and don'ts in grammar, making it a nice refresher. I suspect that it's the grammarphiles that read this book, though, not the grammarphobes.
