Powered by glolg
Display Preferences Most Recent Entries Chatterbox Blog Links Site Statistics Category Tags About Me, Myself and Gilbert XML RSS Feed
Friday, Aug 01, 2008 - 03:29 SGT
Posted By: Gilbert

Change Increasing

Inflation?

-----------------
Allocated Modules
-----------------

Module Code: CS4213
Module Title: Game Development
Bid ID: B0000XXXXXXX
Your Bid: 2001
Winning Bid: 743

Module Code: EC3361
Module Title: Labour Economics I
Bid ID: B0000XXXXXXX
Your Bid: 101
Winning Bid: 17

----------------------------------
Modules Not Successfully Allocated
----------------------------------

Module Code: EC3312
Module Title: Game Theory & Applications to Economics
Reason: Outbidded
Bid ID: B0000XXXXXXX
Your Bid: ????
Winning Bid: 1217

Module Code: EC3341
Module Title: International Economics I
Reason: Outbidded
Bid ID: B0000XXXXXXX
Your Bid: ????
Winning Bid: 869

 Forget grades, oil or the local economy, the CORS bidding system is getting hit by inflation too. Okay, perhaps not, since I didn't pay attention to the FASS Module Preference Exercise despite getting two emails about it. Then again, a fellow Econs major reported that he had not managed to get any modules preallocated to him despite taking part, which is backed up by the fact that nine out of thirteen level three EC modules appear to be oversubscribed, so perhaps I haven't missed much.

Thing is, I am not overly concerned yet as several more slots have historically been opened up in Round 2A and beyond, and this time I am prepared to dump 2000++ points into EC3312 just to make sure. Not getting EC3341 off the bat could actually be a blessing in disguise, since I discovered that EC3322 Industrial Organization I and EC3353 Health Economics I both fit into my schedule too, and have better hours to boot. Can't bid for LSM1301 till Round 3A, but I'll have no further use for my General Account points, so I guess I can show my hand (and possibly fuel bid inflation slightly, but that's a senior's prerogative, haha).

This might have been avoided had I been in anti-sniper mode at the close of Round 1A, instead of being overcomplacent. Bidding's better than NTU's fastest-finger-first system I suppose, but the NUS authorities should seriously consider bringing it to the next level.

Evolution!

Got assigned to man the booth for CVWO at the NUS Matriculation Fair on Wednesday afternoon, which was an eye-opener by default since I matriculated in Semester Two unlike the vast majority of students.

The booth wound out being directly opposite those of the NUS Buddhist Society, Flight and Space and NUS Invest, and was flanked by the NUS Muslim Society and NUS Electronic Gaming (which had a laptop running DotA replays :D).

It was also mutually backed to that of the Nam Wah Pai (南華派), though the 掌門人 happened not to be there. The atmosphere was lively thanks to skilled banter from the Radio Pulze student DJs, and all in all there are far worse places to spend four hours of one's life, such as in an Army training shed.

Personally, the most noteworthy part of the whole gig was the humourous notices displayed by the Muslim Society - among them "Dear Mr. Darwin, there's a difference between feet and fin" and "Only Darwin believes that Man is descended from apes". This perspective is hardly unique to Islam, of course; The Scopes Monkey Trial was fought in the USA way back in 1925, as a response to a law being passed upholding Creationism in education. Myself, I vaguely recall a kindergarten teacher deriding evolution by questioning why the (now sorely missed) Ah Meng didn't become human, and indeed why no monkey-kin ever did so, which is a pretty poor objection as they come.

Keeping in mind that there doesn't need to be a chasm between religion and evolution - in the USA, 39% of the general populace believe in "God-guided evolution" compared to 44% for Creationism and just 10% for plain old evolution - the subject is still ripe for discussion.

Notably, the corresponding figures are 40% (Both)/5% (Creationism)/55% (Evolution) for American scientists, which could have been expected, since the dissonance caused by riding roughshod over hard evidence would likely be harder to bear for those who continually apply a robust methodology in their professional life. After all, it is not much fun when dogma (when it is precise enough to be pinned down) butts heads with facts - no religion exists that I know of claims to allow its followers to fly, for example. Gravity and the unyielding base of a cliff quickly dispels such delusions. Of course, it could be argued that a superintelligent force ensures the falling of objects, but certainly God is known to gracefully acquiese when His immutable Laws are followed.

As an agnostic, my Maybe-God-Which-Does-Not-Care-To-Be-Known-As-God, is one that, if it existed, set all other existence into motion, and then retired evermore. This worldview was endorsed by no less than Einstein, and great presidents such as Jefferson and Lincoln, among others, subscribed to a similar Deist philosophy - "God's greatest gift to humanity is not religion, but the ability to reason." And what greater gift could there be?

Anyhow, the specialness of the Creationism vs. Evolution contest is that it involves an argument that is not easily followed or verified by the layman, has no direct immediate impact on daily life, and appears in clear contradiction to sacred teachings.

In general, religions stay clear of making claims against easily verifiable facts. Prayers are frequently offered to aid in the healing of not-fully-understood cancers (though their actual effect is hazy to say the least) and miracles proclaimed when remission occurs (with the efforts of any doctors involved slightly overlooked), but not for amputees to regrow limbs (or even a mere fingertip), to the best of my knowledge. Clearly, believers who profess that their God is perfect and all-powerful still place (well-founded) limits on his abilities, which at least indicates that they retain some rationality. A more in-depth discussion on amputee discrimination can be found here, which points to the same website as the last link but which I repeat just because it's worth it.



But here, with the development of life, there seems some room for doubt. Not too much, it seems, as evolution as a theory converges towards Truth, with Darwin's rough manuscript being refined much as Newton's mechanics was polished into Einstein's relativity; And God is Truth, most religions would agree. Still, I would expect mainstream religions to settle the issue in their traditional way, as they usually do:

  1. Oh noes! No way that is true or acceptable! Keel it with fire!
  2. (Evidence mounts) Nah, still not true. But what do you know, advanced reading of our holy texts could open up a new interpretation in a related area. Just to let you know.
  3. (Enough evidence is amassed for further objection to look rather stupid) How about we split it half-half (maybe like so?)


    Our theory may yet be true, it's all written down in a book that's thousands of years old, for heaven's sake!
  4. This was God's intention all the while. (Some disgruntled members split to found fundamentalist offshoots to keep the old way)
  5. Repeat from 1. with new scientific discovery.


In fairness, no knowledge is absolute - we have no way of knowing if God will decide to overturn all His Laws in the next instant, or in fact created the universe last Thursday, with our memories all loaded appropriately. It is technically impossible to disprove an assertion that God created the Earth five thousand years ago, but planted fossils and twiddled with radioactivity decay rates just to test our faith. Such is the parable of the invisible gardener.

But why have organized religions flourished for much of recent human history? Ironically, the framework of evolution has its bit to say. Religion admittedly can provide a certain purpose and zest, and provide a ready fellowship with fellow adherents, with the concomitant in-group benefits. Crusading spirits and swords can achieve much, not the least through the alienation, oppression or outright slaughter of those not of the fold. The lure of being "correct" by fiat is not inconsiderable, and the inability of many to survive as a heretic in a religious community or country reinforces religious propagation. Indeed, leaving the flock can be prohibited by weight of law as a last resort.

Still, just as a guy who walks around claiming to be the latest prophet of God often ends up wrapped snugly in a straitjacket and deposited in a padded room, religions never dare come close to taking their beliefs all the way, despite usually claiming their absolute righteousness. Those who believe must tread an amorphous line, between the world according to their faith, and the world as it is. I suppose it gets easier once one is used to it, and in fact the assumption that humans are meant to be perfectly rational beings may be a poor one, which can explain a lot.

So, here we have belief systems that, while being demonstrably untrue in some respects, have thus far been rather fit in terms of aiding survival. Will this state of affairs last indefinitely? Probably not. In much the same way that developing the capacity for trigonometry instead of more powerful leg muscles would be silly in an age when one is chased by sabre-toothed tigers, not taking a religious side would have been irrationally dangerous for many centuries.

I doubt that religions will suddenly vanish, but they do change, if slowly, as they have been changing; Practices have come and gone, and indeed those from a dozen generations ago might not accept or even recognize what their creed has become. The abominations of previous eras transform into the merely discouraged, then into common behaviour, and finally even that memory fades into obscurity. So be it I hope with those of our days, mellowing into a gentle, thoughtful deism, and thereon perhaps into mere agnostism, but really it need not go that far. If the urge to worship remains overwhelming, I do have a beautiful faith to recommend:


(Source: 4-4-2)



comments (0) - email - share - print - direct link
trackbacks (0) - trackback url


Next: Joint Jam


Related Posts:
Davydov And Pratchett
Midmidterm
Logic's Swansong
A Puff Of Logic (Part One)
Weekend B-activities
Back to top

Copyright © 2006-2025 GLYS. All Rights Reserved.