-Mitchell Kapor

- Socrates

-Bill Cosby

You know the game. You lay a deck of cards out in a certain way, and you attempt to sort them out using a set pattern. Like any game, solitaire has rules. You have to start each pile at the top with an ace. You can only fill the seven lower piles in a certain way, and you can only turn over a face-down card in the lower row when there isn’t a face-up card on top of it. There is an element of luck in solitare. if the deck has a disposition such that the cards fall in a certain way, it is impossible to win.

Unlike other games, in solitaire, you are playing by yourself. This means that, if the fact of following the rules of the game means that winning is impossible, you don’t necessarily have to follow them. Your “cheating” doesn’t affect anyone but you and your card game. The only time it matters is if someone is watching, and then only if they care enough to say anything to you.

Where did the rules for the game come from, anyway? Why are they there? Someone had to make them up, and they’re there to make the game more challenging than just arranging the deck by suits. The rules are kind of arbitrary, but they’re there to make the game both challenging and enjoyable.

But life is also very unlike solitaire. In the game, the rules never change, even if you decide to break them. They’re always the same. You don’t get new rules after you reach a certain point. There’s no one telling you that “okay, now that you’ve revealed all of the kings from the stack, you have this eighth stack that you can place your cards in. Nothing like that happens in the game. Solitaire is also the same no matter where you are. It doesn’t matter if you’re in Indiana, Texas, or in Maine; you play solitaire the same way in all three places.

I’m not at all sure what all of the allegory means, but it seems very elegant to me.

You don’t have to go very far to find a blog or six describing why god doesn’t exist and why those who do are irrational lunatics. These people were often religious in a previous chapter of their lives, but something drove them away from believing in god. They have various reasons for leaving, which usually involve disliking some practice of their church or another, or deciding that they couldn’t come to grips with the apparent discrepancies between religion and science. They then use logic, reason, and a little science for good measure, to argue against god and religion.

These blogs will inevitably draw various readers who disagree with their position on god, and will tell them in no uncertain terms why they are wrong, talk about praying for their eternal soul, or, in the case of those who have left religion, attempt to reconcile their beef with religion and draw them back into the fold. In basically all cases, the blogger then uses derision and scorn to belittle their unfortunate reader.

Just a few clicks away, you can find extremely religious blogs, who talk about extremely religious things. These blogs can take two basic forms: inspirational blogs that post things that are supposed to buoy believer’s spirits, and those that talk about how evil the rest of the world is. Some are both. Whatever their message, they use god as their reason and means for everything. The most common phrases on these blogs are “Because god said so,” and “God will do this for me.” They are never in so many words, but that is the basic message. If god said something, it is unequivocally  true, and if you need something, the only thing you need to do is to ask god, and he will provide it for you.

These blogs also attract people of the opposite mindset, who comment with derisive things similar to what you would see on a blog dedicated to such things. Depending on the timbre of the blog, however, there are two possible responses – the “benevolent preacher,” where the blogger talks about how misguided the poster is in very benign language and offers invitations to prayer and communion, and the “fire and brimstone,” where the blogger tells the poster that he’ll burn in hell for the things he’s said.

Now that I’ve gone through this lengthy (but definitely not exhaustive) description of the two types of “religious” blogs, one might see a common thread to both of them. If someone with a differing opinion to their dares to post a reply stating their contradictory viewpoint, then almost all pretense of reason or civility are cast aside in favor of the blogger’s favorite cudgel. In the case of the atheist religious blogger, it’s science and “reason.” In the case of the religiously religious blogger, it’s usually the Bible.

This happens almost whenever I have seen religion (read: Christianity) crop up in any discussion. Unless the entire group shares the same viewpoint on the subject, the “discussion” quickly devolves into a shouting match where nothing of value is put to the table to discuss and all that is accomplished is to separate otherwise affable people into two diametrically opposed groups.

I guess that’s why that religion is one of the two things that you never discuss.

This warrants further investigation.

Edit:

According to this website: joe-ks.com

“Crack” can be used as a noun meaning a statement or comment. Consider the term “wise crack”.

As a verb “crack”, dating back to the 15th century, was to praise or boast. If you “cracked up” something you sang its praises. Therefore something that is “not all it’s cracked up to be” is something that is not as good as you were told.

Now you know.

In other news, It’s August! I now move in in two weeks. Excitement galore.

If you came to this page from a search for one of the words on this list, congratulations! I caught you.

wholesome
soapstone
valid
false teeth
recumbent
prop
true-blue
scrapbook
application
hedonism
defeat
combine
gel
mollycoddle
malnourished
midge
tailpipe
direct current
trilogy
shortsighted
sorrel
out-of-bounds
Greek
senior citizen
scalene
opposite
canoeist
emasculation
marjoram
bloodless
pastrami
tuneful
those
stoke
cup
vanity
truffle
overdone
patent medicine
lackluster
hedgehog
funeral
slam dunk
well-advised
bellows
extinction
ravage
Noah
Catholicism
apogee
sedative
fatherhood
neigh
capability
leadership
mace
SEC
buyer
seam
logrolling
costume jewelry
suffice
ad-lib
broker
revulsion
speechless
pay dirt
Latin America
hydrogen
enable
polar
plurality
world-weary
transience
subsequent
speller
unceasing
restriction
burnout
rearward
cantankerous
space heater
resurrection
cleric
bide
monkey business
fuzz
mascara
urinalysis
full
rearrangement
confirm
displeasure
South African
frigidity
furtherance
reciprocal
nonstop
yell
seven

I’ve kind of let this thing stagnate for almost half a year now. I figure the best way to catch up all my readers (I know you’re out there!!!) would be to give them a college update (yay!).

I’ve decided to attend Ball State university, and I’ll be double-majoring in Music Performance and Composition. I have been accepted into the honors program there, and I’ll be staying in DeHority complex. I’m very excited about this development, because DeHority has suite-style dormitories, meaning I won’t have to share a bathroom with a whole floor of people. Also, the building has a music practice room. Score!

Anyway, I don’t know if I’ll have a roommate, since the last time I stayed in a suite-style room, I had a (rather small) room to myself.

Oh, yeah. I’ve completely ruled out joining the Marines, at least in the immediate future.

I then thought that I should email them to ask.

Fortunately, I realized just how crazy that was before I sent it.