Archive for September, 2011

« Older Entries

Why do you write Science Fiction?

Posted September 30, 2011 By John C Wright

I write science fiction because I like science fiction.

You may ask: What do I like about science fiction?

Well… let me think …

I can best answer with an example rather than an explanation. Behold!

Read the remainder of this entry »

35 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Drollery

The Promissory Note of Physics

Posted September 29, 2011 By John C Wright

Materialists often make the logically unwarranted (not to mention presumptuous, paradoxical and preposterous) claim to the effect that the physical sciences can and will some day be able to quantify and weigh the qualitative and imponderable aspects of human consciousness, and that the mere happenstance that science has no means, tools, powers, methods or ability to do so is a temporary accident.

The physical sciences are not competent to make any statements at all about non-physical things at all, not even to make the rather modest statement that non-physical things exist or do not exist. When asked why he concludes otherwise, the materialist will say that science (or, rather SCIENCE!) has proven that non-physical things do not exist, or, if they exist, they can be reduced to physical things.

When asked for the name and date of the peer reviewed experiment or observation that affirms this theory, the materialist blinks in astonishment, or when asked for details on how to perform the experiment or observation for oneself which affirms the theory, the materialist becomes surprised and belligerent (well, more belligerent) and tells you that the scientific method does not rest on repeatable experiment or observation, but instead rest on the firm foundation of some opinions he picked up in casual conversation  and/or woolgathering somewhere he cannot quite recall, but perhaps it involved reading a book, or the first part of it anyway, by Isaac Asimov or Carl Sagan or perhaps an article on Wikipedia.

I am frequently awed by the logic, clarity, rigor, and apodictic and indubitable nature of this new method of scientific procedure, one unknown to any scientists. And by “awed” I mean the argument is awful. It is an argumentum ad populum without any people.

Read the remainder of this entry »

68 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Musings, Reasonings

Wright’s Writing Corner: On Endings

Posted September 28, 2011 By John C Wright

Today’s post discusses endings, why Casablanca is a classic, and how we’d rather not read a story that ended “An uncomfortable silence ensued.”:

http://arhyalon.livejournal.com/209525.html

Excerpt:

An ending is like a punch line. It is a thing that pulls the story together in such a way as to make the experience satisfying. Usually, an ending is the moment just after the victory when all is concluded. (Unless you’re me, and you write two full chapters of post-victory-missing-father-answers-questions stuff. But I don’t recommend that approach! So, in this case, you might want to do as I say, rather than as I do.) Normally, endings are more like the old romance guidelines which said: end the story the very moment that the couple gets together.
Basically, you write your story. You write your climax. You write what happens next. Then go back and cut everything after whatever the final sum-up moment of the climax was, ending at the very moment when the story is complete.

Again.do as I say, not as I do. Got that? Okay.

Also, I was interviewed this week by intrepid agent extraordinaire Michael Kabongo. It’s a more amusing interview than most, because he asked amusing questions:

http://www.agentincite.com/?p=586

Be the first to comment
Filed in Other

Euthyphro’s Dilemma and the Paradox of Paternity

Posted September 28, 2011 By John C Wright

Part of an ongoing discussion. A reader with the alliterative name of Randall Randall writes:

“Even granting that God exists and created everything but himself, who is eternal, it doesn’t follow that morality is objective, merely that he has the power to enforce what he wants.

Mr Wright said: “Moral standards come from a moral authority, that is, from a sovereign will which has the ability to make moral choices and the authority to demand acquiescence thereto, whether the power to enforce that command is present or not.”

But what gives *that* entity moral authority? There’s an implied infinite regress, here.

Unless you assume from the start that God is a moral authority, what could possibly convince you that he is?”

My comment: There are two questions here, and let us not mix them. The first, which we might call the Objectivity Question, is whether objective moral standards exist at all. The second, which we might call ‘Euthyphro’s Dilemma’ is whether God is a moral authority.

Euthyphro’s dilemma was posed by Socrates in the Platonic Dialog of the same name, asking whether the gods will the good because it is good, or whether whatever the gods will is good because the gods so will. If the gods willed evil, would evil become good?

The Christian answer is always that ‘good’ and ‘God’ are two words for one thing, and thus the distinction exists in speech only, not in reality. It is like asking whether light is bright because brightness is light or because lightness is bright? If light were darkness, would brightness become dim? The question is meaningless.

So, yes indeed, unless you assume from the start that light is bright, it is hard to see why one should so conclude.

Read the remainder of this entry »

35 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Apologetics

Interview with a Writer, wife of a Writer

Posted September 26, 2011 By John C Wright

http://www.agentincite.com/?p=586

Onyxhawke (or someone of the same name) over at Agent Incite website has interviewed Mrs. Wright, who, in order to save our family from the shame of cavorting with known science fiction people, writes under her maiden name of L Jagi Lamplighter, answers questions, queries, and interrogatories.

Where are you from?
I was born in Manhattan. I grew up in North Salem, NY, which is about an hour from New York City. Every day, on my way to school, I passed through Salem Center, which is where Professor X’s mansion is. I even took lessons in the only school in Salem Center! When my father objected to me reading comic books, I explained that X-Men was local news.

Nowadays, I am from Virginia, near Washington, DC. No superheroes live near us, but the place is filled with Revolutionary and Civil War ghosts. We met some at a local mansion at Christmas time. They looked so real! My kids kept claiming they were people in costumes, but really! Who would believe in something like that?

You may read the rest of her wit and wisdom here. http://www.agentincite.com/?p=586

You may also buy her books here:

http://www.amazon.com/L.-Jagi-Lamplighter/e/B0028OGMLM

Please by at least three dozen in hardback. They make great gifts! Today is, after all, the feast day of saints Cosmas and Damian, patron saints of pharmacists! Tomorrow is the feast day of Saint Barrog, who is probably the patron saint of throwing Gandalf into a subterranean pit.  Remember that Halloween, Thanksgiving, and Christmas will be arriving soon, as well as Boxing Day, Wrestling Day, Dirty In-fighting Day, Walpurgisnacht and Gesundheit.

 

 

2 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Only Posting a Link

Whether Secularism Implies Moral Subjectivism

Posted September 26, 2011 By John C Wright

An ongoing debate:

Dennis Prager writes

The intellectual class and the Left still believe that secularism is an unalloyed blessing. They are wrong. Secularism is good for government. But it is terrible for society (though still preferable to bad religion) and for the individual.

One key reason is what secularism does to moral standards. If moral standards are not rooted in God, they do not objectively exist. Good and evil are no more real than “yummy” and “yucky.” They are simply a matter of personal preference. One of the foremost liberal philosophers, Richard Rorty, an atheist, acknowledged that for the secular liberal, “There is no answer to the question, ‘Why not be cruel?’”

A reader named David Ellis writes

“One key reason is what secularism does to moral standards. If moral standards are not rooted in God, they do not objectively exist.”

I’ve yet to see a good argument for this claim.

I propose the following arguments:

Read the remainder of this entry »

127 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Apologetics

Playpowerment

Posted September 23, 2011 By John C Wright

Note: the article below was written in September of 2011. By the first of October, the show being discussed had already been canceled by NBC.

———————————————————————————-

I see in the news that NBC is putting out a melodrama set in a Playboy club.

The thinking behind such a drama is not hard to guess. If you want to have an excuse to squeeze lots of pretty actresses into lots of skimpy outfits, you have to come up with an excuse simple enough for a television executive to understand: so you pitch a show about lifeguards at a beach, all of whom are in bathing suits.

If someone has made a crime drama where all the undercover under-twenty she-cops are beauty queens, or cheerleaders, or Hooter’s waitresses, that show would probably get the green light also. I propose someone should make a series about the shadowy world of international espionage and catfight-jello wrestling among lingerie models. The show could be called VICTORIA’S SECRET AGENT.

What I find uproariously amusing, if pathetic, is the following statement by the toothsome damsel who is one of the stars in the show.  The young beauty is named Jenna Dewan-Tatum.

She tells PR.com, “Like it or hate it, the Playboy bunny is iconic. I think it’s a beautiful, sexy, womanly outfit. I also believe that by today’s standards, we are wearing a lot more clothing (on the show) than most bathing suits and bikinis out there!

“What I love so much about the Playboy bunny costume is that it creates this hourglass figure when you wear it. For somebody like me who has to work hard to have my curves, it’s nice to wear something that helps me out a little bit, gives me that corset and gives me those hips. As soon as you put it on you feel empowered, you feel sexy and you feel womanly. There are very few things I’ve worn in my life that I can say make me feel more like a woman.”

Read the remainder of this entry »

55 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Drollery, Musings

The First Tachyon?

Posted September 22, 2011 By John C Wright

From the Associated Press:

CERN claims faster-than-light particle measured

By FRANK JORDANS, Associated Press

GENEVA (AP) — Scientists at the world’s largest physics lab say they have clocked subatomic particles traveling faster than light, a feat that — if true — would break a fundamental pillar of science.

The readings have so astounded researchers that they are asking others to independently verify the measurements before claiming an actual discovery.

“This would be such a sensational discovery if it were true that one has to treat it extremely carefully,” said John Ellis, a theoretical physicist at the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN, who was not involved in the experiment.

Nothing is supposed to move faster than light, at least according to Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity: The famous E (equals) mc2 equation. That stands for energy equals mass times the speed of light squared.

But neutrinos — one of the strangest well-known particles in physics — have now been observed smashing past this cosmic speed barrier of 186,282 miles per second (299,792 kilometers).

CERN says a neutrino beam fired from a particle accelerator near Geneva to a lab 454 miles (730 kilometers) away in Italy traveled 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light. Scientists calculated the margin of error at just 10 nanoseconds, making the difference statistically significant. But given the enormity of the find, they still spent months checking and rechecking their results to make sure there was no flaws in the experiment.
Read the remainder of this entry »

41 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Only Posting a Link

Benightenment

Posted September 21, 2011 By John C Wright

Here is an article by Dennis Prager. It is short enough that to reprint the whole thing would take no more words than to describe it:

Why Young Americans Can’t Think Morally
Moral standards have been replaced by feelings.

Last week, David Brooks of the New York Times wrote a column on an academic study concerning the nearly complete lack of a moral vocabulary among most American young people. Here are excerpts from Brooks’s summary of the study of Americans aged 18 to 23. It was led by “the eminent Notre Dame sociologist Christian Smith”:

● “Smith and company asked about the young people’s moral lives, and the results are depressing.”

● “When asked to describe a moral dilemma they had faced, two-thirds of the young people either couldn’t answer the question or described problems that are not moral at all.”

● “Moral thinking didn’t enter the picture, even when considering things like drunken driving, cheating in school or cheating on a partner.”

● “The default position, which most of them came back to again and again, is that moral choices are just a matter of individual taste.”

● “As one put it, ‘I mean, I guess what makes something right is how I feel about it. But different people feel different ways, so I couldn’t speak on behalf of anyone else as to what’s right and wrong.’”

● “Morality was once revealed, inherited and shared, but now it’s thought of as something that emerges in the privacy of your own heart.” (Emphases mine.)

Read the remainder of this entry »

121 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Musings

Wright’s Writing Corner returns

Posted September 21, 2011 By John C Wright

After a lengthy hiatus, Wright’s Writing Corner returns. Today, we have a guest blog by Rose Mccauley, who shares with us the moment when everything changed for her…when she went from being a writer who waited to an author with a contract!

http://arhyalon.livejournal.com/208624.html

 

Be the first to comment
Filed in Wisdom

If only Medea Lived Today

Posted September 21, 2011 By John C Wright

In Canada, a young mother kills her newborn baby by strangling it with her underwear, and throws it over the fence into a neighbor’s yard. The judge on appeal overturns a conviction for second degree murder, reducing the sentence to a three year sentence suspended, and based her ruling on the fact that since Canada does not outlaw abortion, this means that Canadians accept that unwanted pregnancy is onerous.

The child’s name was Rodney.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2011/09/09/edmonton-effert-infanticide-suspended-sentence.html

Queen’s Bench Justice Joanne Veit rejected the Crown’s call for a four-year prison term.

The fact that Canada has no abortion laws reflects that “while many Canadians undoubtedly view abortion as a less than ideal solution to unprotected sex and unwanted pregnancy, they generally understand, accept and sympathize with the onerous demands pregnancy and childrbirth exact from mothers, especially mothers without support,” she writes.

The judge noted that infanticide laws and sentencing guidelines were not altered when the government made many changes to the Criminal Code in 2005, which she says shows that Canadians view the law as a “fair compromise of all the interests involved.”

“Naturally, Canadians are grieved by an infant’s death, especially at the hands of the infant’s mother, but Canadians also grieve for the mother.”

I am not sure what the ‘without support’ here means. Other news reports say that teenagers was living with her parents at the time.

http://www.wetaskiwintimes.com/PrintArticle.aspx?e=3292751

Veit said there are many mitigating factors, including Effert’s youth, her lack of a prior criminal record, her remorse and her pro-social lifestyle since the killing.

Effert had been sentenced to life in prison in 2009 after earlier being convicted by a jury of second-degree murder for strangling her newborn son, later named Rodney, with a pair of orange thong underwear and tossing his body over a fence into a neighbour’s yard in April 2005.

However, the Court of Appeal of Alberta quashed the conviction in May, ruling the jury’s verdict was “unreasonable,” and substituted a conviction of infanticide.

It was the second time Effert was convicted of second-degree murder by a jury in the newborn’s death. In 2006, a Wetaskiwin jury found her guilty, but a new trial was ordered because jurors were given flawed instructions.

Read the remainder of this entry »

11 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Musings

AAARRRRGGGGGHHHHH!

Posted September 19, 2011 By John C Wright

My wife’s latest book, PROSPERO REGAINED, despite rave reviews from prestigious critics like Kirkus and Publisher’s Weekly, was not stocked in any Barnes & Noble in our area.  Borders is out of business.

And there is nothing the publisher can do. It is a decision made by some clerk or officer somewhere in the corporation of the book chain, and it mars my wife’s career at the outset.

I would like every man, woman and child of good will reading these words accepts a husband’s heartfelt and helpless plea.

Call your local Barnes and Noble, and ask for the book. Whether you go in to pick it up or not is up to you, but if you do not, it will end up on their shelves.

15 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Announcement

Leftopia

Posted September 16, 2011 By John C Wright

hat tip to Mark Shea:

Over 30,000 British schoolchildren, some as young as three, have had their names registered on a government database and branded “racist” or “homophobic” for using playground insults, infractions that could impact their future careers.

10 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Only Posting a Link

Plot Scarcity in Post Scarcity Paradise?

Posted September 16, 2011 By John C Wright

The fine fellows over at SfSignal asked to me join one of their ‘Mind Melds’ and answer a fascinating question. The had many replies, and posted the answers in two parts:

http://www.sfsignal.com/archives/2011/09/mind-meld-character-stakes-in-post-scarcity-novels-part-one/
and
http://www.sfsignal.com/archives/2011/09/mind-meld-character-stakes-in-post-scarcity-novels-part-two/

I answered with an essay when they only wanted a paragraph, and so they cut it down to size. For any reader interested in the full essay, I give it here below:

—————————————————-

Post Scarcity and Post Singularity novels have a problem of giving interesting conflicts to characters. When scarcity is no longer a concern (or sometimes even death!) what are the stakes for characters?

On one level, the question is easy to answer: think of every story you’ve ever enjoyed where the danger that the protagonist faced was not one which threatened him with poverty, penury or death. Any and all plot conflicts of those tales could be transposed into a post-singularity background with no loss of drama.

The recent movie THE KING’S SPEECH, for example, concerned a sovereign just at the dawn of the era of radio and mass media, and at the dawn of World War, attempting to overcome a speech impediment, and, by artful coincidence, his personal shortcomings. Had the exact same tale been set in a background where the Prince of Wales and his speech therapist and every other denizen of earth been granted the Fountain of Youth and the purse of Fortunatus, endless life and bottomless wealth, no events in the foreground would need be changed, because neither wealth nor deathlessness cure disabilities of speech (just ask Vidur the Silent, Odin’s son.)

On a deeper level, the question is hard to answer, because the concern of any science fiction story that is not mere fantasy is that the unrealistic premise or conceit of the tale be treated realistically.

When Lamont Cranston the Shadow, Sue Storm the Invisible Girl, or Frodo Baggins the Invisible Halfling decide to vanish, for example, clothing and gear conveniently vanish also, whereas Griffin the Invisible Man from the HG Wells novel of the same name must practice nudism to practice his vanishing act. Wells imagined logical details, and that makes it science fiction rather than merely a flight of imagination.

Likewise, the realism of unrealistic SF requires the author to invent the realistic details of a world where the limitations of the human condition have been banished by unimaginably sophisticated and powerful technologies, so that even death itself reduced to a curable medical condition. If the immortals of the Utopia of Tomorrow want for nothing, how can trivial things like speech impediments or personal shortcomings be serious problems to them? To wait a hundred years for a solution, to a deathless being, would be no more troublesome than to wait a million.

The supermen of futurtopia, if pictured realistically, should be incomprehensible characters in an unimaginable landscape: how, then, does an author lure a reader to imagine the unimaginable?

Read the remainder of this entry »

12 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Fancies

Almost thou persuadest me to be a Leftist

Posted September 14, 2011 By John C Wright

Once I wrote an article called ‘Eugenics and Other Evils’ whose title I stole from a book of the same name by GK Chesterton. But he, brilliantly, and I, not brilliantly, pointed out the evident inhumanity and glaring unreasonableness of a program of ‘scientifically’ managing human life, breeding men like dogs, and so on.

I received a crackpot letter in my spam filter, so I assume it is was sent out at random after some sort of automatic spambot found every article online from any source with the word ‘Eugenics’ in it.

It was addressed to me, but recoil at the thought that one of these filth knows my name, or feels familiar enough to address me, much less that he could mistake me or any Christian for one of him.

I am not going to reprint the letter, since I wish no publicity, even negative, to be given the dreary, predictable, lunatic, hateful and grotesque philosophy of that branch of modern secular thinking called National Socialism or Planned Parenthood or Nazism. I am sorry that a single partisan of that odious philosophy survived World War Two.

My dream is that Jews or Gypsies or Slavs or Blacks should shoot such vermin down in the street like the dogs they seek to breed us as, to perish in the gutter without benefit of law or benefit of clergy. Since I also dream that some day the United Nations building in New York will be trampled by a giant atomic-powered robot operated by the Israeli Secret Service, I will admit my dreams are better kept in dreamland. But I don’t have much sympathy for professional antisemitism.

I must, however reprint certain choice paragraphs of this rank dreck, to allow for that beneficent exercise of public scorn which may shame any lunatics in whom some vestige of conscience or humanity remains into silence.

Read the remainder of this entry »

25 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Musings
« Older Entries