Pursuing praxis

February 14, 2008

Protest, by Katie

Filed under: Political comments

I went to the protest over the Marine recruiting center in Berkeley. I went to support Nick Provenzo of the Capitalism Center, in his pitch about the constitutionality of the situation. (See previous post). A friend and I arrived at about 5:45pm and met up with Nick. As expected, the loonies had shown up in full force, on both sides of the false dichotomy, probably over a thousand of them. The liberal lunatics didn’t interest me, and they were jammed at the front besides. But boy, the conservative crazies were pretty scary too. One guy held a sign that said "Waterboard the liberals." Genius, dude, you’re really helping your cause.

Nick told us about a protest by some Objectivists in Philadelphia. "A what??" I said, incredulously. Apparently this was some time ago - like ten or maybe 15 years ago, and had to do with a movement at the time for "mandatory volunteerism" for the military. I liked one of the cheers they came up with. I think it’d make a good sign: "Just because it rhymes, doesn’t mean it’s true!" (Is that in iambic pentameter? I never did quite master that).

I thought of a couple other good signs. "Blowhorns are for bullies", "Please ask me about my petition", "Think for yourself", "Invective is not reason", "’Reason is the life of the law’ - Edward Cooke". Signs would only be in black or white on gray, to symbolize the necessity of stark reason in unclear situations.

Something to think about.  

Update posted here. 

February 12, 2008

Berkeley vs. the Marines, and more

Filed under: Political comments

Nicholas Provenzo of the Capitalism Center will be speaking at the Berkeley City Council meeting regarding the Council’s actions against the local Marine recruiting center. You can read his recap of the situation here, and what he will present at the meeting here. Mr. Provenzo started an on-line petition, which can be read here. Unlike most other positions and views, the petition addresses the legal and constitutional issues involved. The petition has garnered a surprising amount of signatories and attention, and Mr. Provenzo has been asked to speak at the Berkeley City Council meeting tomorrow night.

I, for my part, decided to write a letter to the editor (or three). If published, they won’t be as timely as would be ideal, but hopefully this situation doesn’t just evaporate overnight - and since when does anything associated with the war in Iraq evaporate quickly in Berkeley? So, we’ll see.

——-

            The considerable local and national attention paid to the Berkeley City Council’s resolution to eject the Marine recruiters is thoroughly warranted – but not for the reasons so far discussed. The Council’s actions should not be evaluated in terms of the war in Iraq, or in terms of freedom of speech or assembly. There is a more fundamental issue involved: the power of local government to oppose the raising of the US military. 

            This issue is described in a national petition that has quickly garnered broad support. The petition was drafted by Marine veteran Nicholas Provenzo. As he points out, no local government can oppose the national government in its task of building a military. Article I, Section VIII* of the Constitution charges Congress with the responsibility of raising and supporting an army. Running the recruiters out of town would hinder a legitimate function of the national government and thwart a mandate of the US Constitution. This is no small matter.

            By its nature, the military as such is a non-political entity. It is charged with upholding the Constitution and the laws passed by Congress – whatever laws those may be. To point out the obvious, as a national organ of defense, the military continually protects and defends of all areas of the US, in wartime and in peacetime, regardless of residents’ political views. Additionally, recruiters cannot recruit for specific wars or missions per se, and few if any military personnel are assigned to only one mission in the course of their service. The Council’s actions are therefore short-sighted in the extreme, if not selectively blind. Such actions, whether concrete or symbolic, suggest that the Council and its supporters wish to have their cake and eat it too.

            When different levels of government disagree, the proper place to resolve it is in the courts. Political opinions, no matter how strongly held, cannot trump the proper organization and delimitation of duties among levels of government. To do so willfully would be an act of lawlessness and subversion. After two weeks of passionate disagreement, one can only hope that all parties will remember that “reason is the life of the law” - at all levels of government.

* edited 2/16/08. Originally I had written Article I, Section VII, which was a typo in my source information. Thanks to a reader for pointing it out to me.

February 8, 2008

Darwin Day photo contest

The musuem and department are celebrating Darwin Day this weekend and early next week. Darwin was born on February 12th (as was Abraham Lincoln). Conveniently, he published Origin of the Species when he was 50, so we get to celebrate nice even numbers of his birthday and the publication of the Origin simultaneously. I am sure this will be ground into your memory come next year, the 200th anniversary of Darwin birth, and the 150th anniversary of the book.

Anyway, someone decided to organize a photo contest for the festivities this year. For once I had something artsy and sciencey and I dreamt up something Darwiny to say about it. Here’s the pic and my blurb about it:

This is a photo of a male mandrill (Mandrillus sphinx) from the San Francisco Zoo, taken in November 2007. Mandrills exhibit strong sexual dimorphism, and the bright facial coloration and larger body size in males is thought to be the result of sexual selection. Darwin originated the concept of sexual selection, and in his 1871 book he uses many examples of sexual dimorphism in primates to build his case.

But when it comes to evolution, many people are still as cognitively trapped as this mandrill is by his cage, comfortable and natural though it might seem. Some people look at primates and think that shared ancestry is a slur on mankind. But no fact changes an ever-present identity, and wonderment is not diluted when extended to facts at all scales of time and space. As Darwin so famously concluded, "There is grandeur in this view of life, . . . ; from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved."

February 4, 2008

Lilac breasted roller

Filed under: Pics, Critters

Regular readers of my blog (at least during my trip to Africa) know that my favorite African bird (so far) is the lilac breasted roller. I got some ok shots of them when I was in Namibia, but nothing that quite satisfied me. Field guides don’t usually capture a bird except anatomically and quasi-ecologically. I tripped across this photo of an LBR and it’s perfect. I love it. Maybe you can see why they’re my favorite.

He has some more which are great. Seriously, it’s hard to get more colorful without being garish. I totally want one.

Roller1
Roller2
Roller3

February 2, 2008

Quotes from G.G. Simpson

I’m reading biographies of George Gaylord Simpson - his autobiography, Concession to the Improbable: An unconventional autobiography, and Leo LaPorte’s George Gaylord Simpson: Evolutionist and Paleontologist. I don’t know whether I stopped reading La Porte’s book because I wanted to read Simpson in his own words first, or if I just happened to order and receive Simpson’s autobiography ’round about that time.

To cut to the chase - I have no pithy summations, crusading opining or otherwise synthesized thought on the subject yet. I find Simpson fascinating and extremely rewarding to read and read about. In the various mentions of Simpson that I had come across in my previous readings, he was frequently described as irascible, though brilliant, and left at that. I read tonight that Simpson far preferred the written word - on both the giving and receiving ends - to the spoken word, given or received. There is the occasional tetchiness, but it is a tiny minority of the time. That said, I find it funnier when the anecdote is crabby, so there is a selection bias in the quotes copied below. Enjoy.

I was reminded of my short vacation in Egypt, and the few days in Cairo. While I saw less wildlife in the streets than described by Simpson on his (first) round-the-world trip in 1951, I think it’s only apt to cite that long-used, much-discussed maxim (which dates to at least Aristotle’s time): natura non facit saltus [nature makes no leaps]. My experience of streets in Cairo was similar in the feeling, if not in all the particulars. He wrote (pg. 149):

The streets of Cairo are dirty, noisy, and dangerous. As I wrote at the time, "The streets and roads are jammed with pedestrians, camels, donkeys, water buffaloes [Argh! I’m 50 years too late.], bullock-carts and horse-carts, jeeps, Coca Cola trucks, baby carriages, bicycles and motorcycles, crawling infants, dogs, cats, and in short everything imaginable that can move or be dragged with the possible exception of reindeer sledges, and it would not really surprise me to see one of those. There seems to be a slight statistical probability that cars will pass to the right if this is convenient, but otherwise no traffic rules seem to be applied."

 

For some reason, the following quote (at the very end) is my favorite so far (pg. 157):

It [Life of the Past, a "fairly short and not unduly technical book on general paleontology"] had some good reviews, and one bad one by a British zoologist who objected violently to the illustrations, which I had drawn myself during that winter at [his seasonal home in] Los Pinavetes [New Mexico]. I admit that my drawings are crude and inartistic, but they have a certain amateur freedom that some people find attractive or at least amusing. What did annoy me a bit was that my critic had also illustrated some of his publications and that his drawings were just as crude and inartistic as mine, and moreover that he had the poor taste to die before I could point that out to him. 

 

Simpson made several expeditions to South America over several decades. At the start of his last field expedition there, the woman in charge of the guesthouse where he and his team stayed for some time went to some length to counter the stereotypes about the town, Cruzeiro do Sul, "effectively the last outpost of civilization in that direction [in Brazil]" (pg. 166). About her he wrote (pg. 167):

A nice woman, talkative and a booster for her home town: "Those people down in Manaus think we are savages up here, nothing but forest and jaguars. Why! Jaguars rarely come into town. This is the healthiest place in Brazil. Almost no tuberculosis and only a few dozen lepers. The malaria is not bad this year. This is real white man’s country. It takes a little planning to get food, is all."

For those of you who don’t know, Simpson spent most of his life married to Anne Roe, a psychologist and for a time also a professor at Harvard (both Simpson and Roe joined Harvard at the same time, and left at the same time, as far as I know). They co-authored a couple of books together, both very good: Quantitative Zoology (1939) and Behavior and Evolution (1958). Simpson recounts the origin of the latter book, and indeed the field of study it spawned (pg. 177):

Another book in the 1950s resulted from a different and delightfully intimate form of collaboration. The idea came to Anne and me sometime in 1953. We remember the incident clearly but are not sure of the date. It was probably a Sunday because she and I were lying late in bed one morning talking about the universe and other things. Psychology is in the main a study of behavior, but up to that time most psychologists took observed behavior as given and paid little or no attention to the fact that it must have originated at some time in the evolutionary history of the species being studied, then usually rats and humans. Such evolutionary concepts as were currently in psychology struck me as generally naive, outdated, or simply wrong. On the other hand, evolutionists were studying mostly morphology, genetics, or to some extent ecology. Some of them did recognize that behavior is also relevant to evolution, but their concepts of behavioral studies in psychology struck Anne as generally naive, outdated, or simply wrong. We decided to something about this, got out of bed, and set about doing so.

[. . .]

That was a seminal work. It strongly influenced the direction of studies both of behavior and of evolution, as attested not only by those who had attended the conferences [organized to promote these kinds of studies] but also many of their colleagues and students. . . .  

The lesson of all this is that an effective method for getting really interdisciplinary studies under way is for students of different disciplines to wake up in bed together.

 

I will stop here with the quotes tonight. As you can see, I can’t even copy other people’s words briefly.  






  • li>
  • Get free blog up and running in minutes with Blogsome
    Theme designed by Hadley Wickham