Resumption of Service (Ha, and indeed, Ha)

The Tee-Hee Resumtion of Service One person not a family member said I should resume this blog. So, for EA, I do so. For the rest of you (a miniscule band of accidental visitors)blame EA, not me, for the fleeting ennui your distracted click may bring. Leave immediately. You have a duty to mitigate your loss. Any damages for mental suffering you subsequently claim for will be limited to millisecomds of anguish as a result of this warning. And you will need money. This disclaimer will severely restrict your access to lawyers who are willing to bring bad claims on a no win no fee basis. There are, I hasten to add, no such lawyers. John Terry For Fuck's Sake On a more topical note, Terry is now officially not a racist despite the words that he admitted saying. In America, the tribunal of fact would have been examined pre-trial on any sporting affilliations or other prejuduces precluding them from determining matters impartially. I support that idea and would apply it to both juries and magistrates. I am not, of course, suggesting any impropriety in the Terry case. My point is general.

I Despair

I have just been listening to the Moral Maze on radio 4 and questioners and answerers were just simply swapping prejudices. It is a question of applying scientofic method but that is only another descriptive term for thinking and speaking logically. It is also important to think first.

The Missing Question

I was just listening to Any Questions and there were no answers. For instance, "I am absolutely opposed to nuclear power" is apparently an acceptable answer. Similarly, "We should derive all our power exclusively from wind farms" is an acceptable rejoinder. They are not. 2 + 2 = 4 may be said unencumbered by detailed reasoning (unless you ase talking to a child, who deserves more respect) but anything more complex requires at least a minimal attempt at answering the qesrion Why? The paradigm should be I believe x because y. Thus: I believe in God because [fill in irrational gobbledygook of choice]. Even better, state facts but include the magic "because" word: There is a God because there is fairy dust on the moon [or the bible says so and I am a credulous fool]. Then at least we can have an argument, even if only about the existence or otherwise of fairy dust and its presence (or otherwise) on the moon. Fairy dust obnviously does exist and there is a plentiful supply of it on the moon because that is where fairies live. so it is possibly a bad example.