Thought and Thesis

In the Genealogy of Morality, Nietzshe talks on punishment in the past as being something that made the people feel good, how it brought them joy to see. This seems to be the case even today. All be it the system is different; we no longer draw and quarter, or boil people in oil, the judicial system does seem to have the same function as those systems of old. That is to make people feel better. This function also seems to work in a way in which it maintains peoples trust in what they, at least perceive as being an ordered society. Without the punishment people may come to think that anything could be done to themselves or their property, in a sense to their very sovereign nature, without having some kind of recourse toward that action. Plainly: the use of punishment, or in the modern era, the judicial system, makes people feel better about things. That while there has been an infringement in the social order, the order has been reestablished and those that have harmed it have been deal

There are two weeks left in the semester and stress is abound. It's that time of year were everything piles up and all you can do is hope for the best. On a positive note, the pile is as big as it's going to get, so now I all I have to do is try and get to the bottom. Fingers crossed. Work for the next two weeks includes: Paper for: History of Moral Philosophy Philosophy of the Mind Sociology of Law Cultural Ecology

So today I decided that I was in need to get out of town and into the mountains for a little bit. The weather has been nice and I've been planning on doing something like this for about a week or so but just didn't have the time to do it. For that matter I've been trying to get out into the mountains from months now, like since the summer, but through all fault of my own I never made the time. Shame on me. So with this intention in mind I finally did what I've been meaning to do for a while. I packed up myself, a few books to read, my Fivefinger, which wasn't all that hard to pack since they were already on my feet, and headed east of town. After traveling along Happy Jack Road for a while and only finding still snowed in areas I finally found a nice road to drive down in the Pole Mountain area turn off. After just driving down the road a ways I found a good place to park and walked over a few hills till I found a nice little place to sit down, read, and just quiet

So a number of years ago the idea of microloans came to the forefront with in impoverished countries. The idea was simple and very brilliant, give small loans to poor peoples so they could open businesses. In a New York Times article yesterday brings up what is a growing problem with microloans. The problem is many of the banks that are giving the loads. According to the article some banks are charging up to 100% on these loans. This is just another example of how the idea of capitalism and capitalism in action are wholly different. The whole idea of microloans was to bring more people into the system so their lives could be better, a really great idea. But as soon as any large company finds out that there is money to be made they go to any ends that they can to do so. How much clearer does it need to be for people to see that capitalism is not moral, and that it leads people to immoral acts? It is an unethical system thats main goal is the accumulation of the most destructive of abstr

Consequentialism says that the best action is to act in such a way that brings about the best outcome (consequence). Deontology says that the best act is one that has the best motivation, regardless of the consequences. Both of these theories have some major problems. On the former there is the chance, without a robust notion of justice, that the ends could always justify the means. The later, on the other hand, could lead, again without a strong notion of justice, to detrimental ends with no recourse to those that acted. There seems to be only one thing that can keep either one of these from unacceptable pit falls, that is justice. Of course any notion of justice is going to have problems of its own. Underlying almost every notion of justice there is some other philosophical principle. And underlying those there is some antecedent predisposition toward one way of thinking or the other. With this in mind philosophers have spent years trying solve this underlying problem and the answer

RBR-Renault: Always have like the team and was crossing my fingers for them and Brawn next year. Hopefully they will be able to overcome a hard start to the season, Malaysia was a good start. Force India-Mercedes: The little team that I'm really hope does well. Adrian Sutil is a good driver and its good to seem him with what looks like a good car that is getting stronger.

So, much to my distaste, I've had to listen to some of what Sarah Palin has been spewing recently. Durning these times a question has been forming in my head. Is Sarah Palin as stupid as she sounds, or is she just really condescending to the masses that she speaks to? More importantly, either way, stupid or condescending, what does it say about the people that hang on her every word?

Welcome to Thought and Thesis. I've decided that I am in need of having a open place that I could get out all the ideas that float around in my head on a daily bases. While not all of those ideas are, or will be, thought provoking, I hope that at least a few of them will be. Civil public discourse is often the only way in which progress can be made, So if anyone has any comments on anything that I welcome you to do so. Hopefully we can have a good conversation. Thanks for visiting.