Comments by wodecki

Comment #231752 by wodecki on August 17, 2008 at 2:12 am

I think it could be fun(ny) to animate some of the more ridiculous aspects of these publications in cartoon form. Criticising them verbally can be illuminating, but the type of people, I fear, who could benefit most from a revelation of the dishonesty contained within their pages are the same folk who find it too difficult to read. Do we have any generous-minded, skilled animators out there who may be willing to (i) read through this utter bollocks (I must confess, it hurt my brain to plough through this midrash) and (ii) devote many hours of their time and effort for the benefit of those who find it too difficult to read intellectually honest publications?

2. Divine Impulses: Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #192761 by wodecki on June 14, 2008 at 12:39 am

Thank you, Fanusi Khiyal. I just wanted to have clear in my mind, the interpretation you were placing upon that rather tawdry piece of journalism. Personally, I didn't infer the ideas you did. Let's try to be careful here. "Rode into parliment on a wave of anti-immigrant sentiment" is perhaps an example of hackneyed, lazy writing but it doesn't neccesarily imply (let alone mean) that Ayan Hirsi Ali was cynically taking advantage of that "wave".

3. Divine Impulses: Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #192726 by wodecki on June 14, 2008 at 12:05 am

Fanusi Khiyal, it's hard for me to see what brand of injustice was being committed by The Economist on that occasion. Can you elaborate, please? Thank you.

4. Divine Impulses: Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #192702 by wodecki on June 13, 2008 at 11:31 pm

lastgreekstanding,

your apostrophe implies you think you know something we don't, but I'm having some difficulty guessing what it is. Could you please provide a little detail for my benefit? Thank you.

5. Happy Birthday, Richard Dawkins!

Comment #150131 by wodecki on March 26, 2008 at 1:31 pm

Dear Richard Dawkins,

I hope this day finds you to be in good health, fine spirit and comfortable prosperity - happy birthday!

For all creatures (unless I'm mistaken) music has utilitarian value that must outweigh its cost (in evolutionary terms) or music would not exist (it is not difficult to imagine the variety of fatal attractions that the production of music by a creature in a wild environment may inadvertently engender). Many species employ music during courtship displays, effectively enhancing their likelihood of success with a mate and humans, as far as I can tell, are not an exception - from the jumping music of the Masai to John Cusack's (character's) cassette-tape compilation in the comedic movie "High Fidelity". Enhancing likelihood of success with a mate could be thought of as the most valuable activity (in terms of its genetic legacy) that any creature could undertake and so it would be surprising if evolutionary processes had failed to endow conscious creatures with such a valuable attribute.

Music comprises an architecture that is copied (and only slightly modified) from creature to creature and over successive generations. And some creatures use (either by mimicry or through slight modification) the music of others within their environment to 'piggyback' on the success of the author (I believe populations of Blackbirds have been known to do this, Lyre birds seem to thrive on something ostensibly similar and humans proliferate in this regard, vide supra my Hollywood example) In relatively modern times (I'm thinking about the swathes of female 'aristocrats' who reputedly collected Franz Liszt's cigar butts, or Gene Simmons's proclaimed proclivity for orgiastic encounters with 'groupies' during his time as the painted protagonist of the Rock band 'Kiss') it is possible to discern a correlation between musical prowess and an ardent following (usually) by the complimentary sex. And without wishing to seem immodest, I also have experience of such.

At the risk of appearing hackneyed and maybe even vulgar (unsolicited dedications may not be your favourite cup of tea) my purpose is to attempt to properly thank you for being the best teacher I was ever exposed to (mostly through reading your books) and consequently one of the most significant influences upon my personal development to the present. In the absence of a more detailed explanation and for the avoidance of over-sentimentality, I hope you can appreciate why I should wish to dedicate to you, a piece of music I have written entitled Introduction and fugue for large string ensemble (20 parts/20 desks). No, it has nothing (in a directly dedicatory sense) to do with mating. I will confess that it was tempting for me to construct a "nucleotide fugue", arbitrarily selecting a pitch to represent T, but I needed a longer string of "bases" (groan) to enable the lyrical quality of the work to emerge. The very least we may agree upon is that this piece constitutes evidence of elaborate contrapuntal music that does not spring from a divine source, or even a religiously inspired mind - I can explain exactly how and why each note has been arranged (by me) in the way that it has, without any need of divine counseling, or inspiration from an unearthly origin. Your vision of the world, Richard Dawkins, is a constant source of inspiration to me. Thank you very much.

I will mail the score...

6. The Present Threat of the Religious Right to Our Modern Freedoms

Comment #54598 by wodecki on July 8, 2007 at 3:43 am

Here's a link to Frank Zappa, twenty-one years ago, defending freedom of expression and warning of an impending theocratic America:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8ISil7IHzxc

7. Hitchens on Falwell, Part 2

Comment #43748 by wodecki on May 22, 2007 at 12:19 pm

Comment 43 mentions an important point. Respect is an emotion - we "feel" respect for people and ideas - that is why it cannot be demanded from another person, but must be earned, provoked, inspired, etc.

e.g.
during this discourse, I heard the following:
"we ought to show respect"

Well, as Mr. Hitchens tried to point out during that interview ("that isn't what I feel")there exists no reason to support the proposition that he "OUGHT to [show] respect", as long as we may agree that, as I think comment 43 alluded to, respect is only meaningful if it is genuinely intended.