The Duhem-Quine Thesis and Underdetermination

It has been a little while since my last post. However, my readers can rest assured that I have not simply been loafing about. I have, as always, been attempting to learn. Before I launch back into my thoughts about Informationalism, I think it is appropriate to share some of my knowledge that I have acquired as of late. Perhaps it will reveal new biases that I might have acquired from my recent studies. Let us begin with my foray into the Philosophy of Science.


The Duhem-Quine thesis is an idea which undermines the idea of Falsificationism. This is a doctrine that I was quite fond of, I must admit, and so I was very sad to see it go.

Falsificationism

This is an ideology that was espoused by noted individuals such as Karl Popper. This is the basic premise:

1. Science works by the means of modus tollens. Scientists make statments such as "If P then Q". If we know that Q is incorrect, then we know that P is incorrect by modus tollens. This is a sample rule of logic.

For example: If I go to the store, then I will buy a carrot. If I did not buy a carrot, then we know that I did not go to the store. The fact that I go to the story is supposed to be the theory, and the fact that I bought a carrot is considered evidence for this theory. Thus, if I did not buy a carrot, the theory that I went to the store has been falsified. Science then works by getting rid of all the bad theories and sticking with the ones that don't get falsified.

Duhem-Quine Thesis

The thesis underminds falisifcationism by examining the structure of the antecedent. Which in "If P then Q" P is the antecedent and Q is the consequent. According to Duhem-Quine, a theory is much more complicated than the statement "I went to the store." A theory, such as Newtonian physics, has perhaps thousands of axioms and interpreatations of empirical observations. Thus, a better way to represent this statment would be "If P, R, S, T.....n then Q". Consequently, if it turns out that Q is incorrect, then ANY ONE OF THE ANTECEDENT STATMENTS COULD BE WRONG!. P, R, S, T...n could be incorrect in many ways. In fact, one could measure it mathematically by using combinations assuming there weren't an infinite number of antecedent statements. The more complicated the theory, the larger the number of combinations that could make the theory wrong.

Here is the kicker. If it turns out that Q, which is the consequent, is incorrect then it is equally valid for the researcher to assume that any of these combinations which falisfy the theory is correct. For example, if a planet is not where it is supposed to be in the Newtonian framework, a scientists could reject one part of Newtonian physics or just throw out the entire framework. This means that the theory has been underdetermined.

How in the face of such an observation is normal science to survive? The answer will be found in Kuhn's idea of normal science, which I will elaborate upon later.

Informationalism

What can Duhem-Quine and Underdetermination tell us about Informationalism? One must first determine how to categorize Informationalism. Is Informationalism a scientific theory?

This is difficult for me to answer at this point. I would prefer to say that Informationalism is a value-based method. A method that values science highly nonetheless. However, Informationalism is scientific in the sense that it is not afraid to be tested. If we do our best to increase both the amount and velocity of data in a society, the hypothesis is that this society will blossom with creativity. This creativity will manifest itsself in the increased ability of the society to manipulate its environment to attain ever higher concentrations and velocities of data. That is the theory, one must then determine the best ways to accomplish this, and perhaps debate philosopically whether that is actually the highest goal of humanity or not.

Informationalism takes this as a given. The production, accumulation, and distribution of Information is the highest goal of humanity.

How do we accomplish this?

1. The reduction of the terms of copyright laws and the extent of rights to intellectual property.
2. We continue to broaden the reach of the internet and teach people how to use it.
3. We invest in scientific research and development and ensure public education.
4. We pursue common forms of metrics and communication so that language and measuring barriers are reduced (while of course respecting the potential benefits of diversity locally).
5. By enforcing the concept of transparency in national and international politics, and between businesses and governments of the people.
6. Eroding national barriers to make capital, labor, and data more mobile.
7. Investing in infrastructure to increase the volume and speed of data, capital, and labor that can be transported and the distances that they can be transported.
8. By realizing and balancing the benefits of centralization with the benefits of diversity from decentralization. A kind of separation of powers.

That is all for now.

Alpha Centauri Secret Project: The Planetary Datalinks

"As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
-- Commissioner Pravin Lal, "U.N. Declaration of Rights"

I stress this lines and this short video quite often. Though they are the products of mere play and imagination, they are of grave importance to Informationalism.

Creative Response

In the spirit of my new blog, I thought I might discuss how the economic concept of creative response relates to Informationalism.

Creative Response is basically when the rules have been changed to create inefficiencies in a market. For example, an industry is excessively regulated to the point that it cannot supply the demand for its good. The response: black markets!

Take the War on Drugs for another example. Creative response is a perfect reason for the failure of the war on drugs. There is, of course, a demand for drugs. Our harsh drug laws have not eliminated the demand for drugs, they have only restricted the supply. When you restrict the supply, the prices increase! Thus, by not addressing the problem of the demand for drugs and trying to destroy the supply, our government has fostered the black market creative response that has made drugs a billion dollar black market.

You may ask, how on earth does this relate to Informationalism?

As I've stated earlier, the free flow of information is a prerequisite for the establishment of perfect competition and the resulting pareto efficiency. Without Informationalism, we cannot have perfect competition and thus inefficient markets become the rule and not the exception. If we wish to remove the need for creative response which yields billion dollar black markets that cost lives and money, then Informationalism must prevail.

Fundamental Investment Launched!

Hello everyone! I hope that you have all been well in my long time away. I've been doing a lot of studying and I am more convinced of the power of Informationalism than before! Things have been changing and progressing rapidly for me in my life, so much so that I haven't had much time to blog. But, here's a short update:

1. I've launched a new blog called fundamental investment. Why? Because the free flow of information is crucial to economics. The only way we can ever hope to reach pareto efficiency is if Informationalism is fully realized! If you don't know what pareto efficiency is, I'm sure I'll talk about it in due course. As long as we keep secrets such as: patents, government contracts, high transactions cost on certain kinds of information, and insider information, our economy will continue to function at levels below the optimum. I am not saying Informationalism will solve all of our economic woes, but it will certainly make things better!

2. I've finished one short story and began a second that have Informationalism as an underlying theme. I hope to publish them someday, and perhaps I can provide links for those interested on this blog. It's science-fiction, for those of you who like the genre!

May you all be frank with your friends, enemies, and yourselves!

I spend a lot of time on here talking about Informationalism, why I think it's the future. Why I think it has the power to free the minds of every human being on this planet one day. However, today I just want to offer some music. An important part of Informationalism is being able to sit back and absorb the Information. Everyone is a teacher, but likewise is everyone a student. What can you learn from this video?

Here are the Lyrics:

No Surprises: Radiohead

A heart that's full up like a landfill,
a job that slowly kills you,
bruises that won't heal.
You look so tired-unhappy,
bring down the government,
they don't, they don't speak for us.
I'll take a quiet life,
a handshake of carbon monoxide,

with no alarms and no surprises,
no alarms and no surprises,
no alarms and no surprises,
Silent silent.

This is my final fit,
my final bellyache,

with no alarms and no surprises,
no alarms and no surprises,
no alarms and no surprises please.

Such a pretty house
and such a pretty garden.

No alarms and no surprises (get me outta here),
no alarms and no surprises (get me outta here),
no alarms and no surprises, please.

Informationalist Plea for Burma (Myanmar)

I will try to not make this post long-winded. However, it is something I feel quite passionately about. I wish to present the Informationalist grounds for revolution in Myanmar, and why I think they deserve their idea of freedom. First, a short history of the region, which can be found in greater detail here.

We will begin for brevity's sake with decolonization. When WWII broke out the area of Burma was under the control of the British Empire. During the war it was taken and occupied by the Japanese for a time, and then retaken by the British before the end of the War. In 1948 as part of decolonization Burma gained independence from Great Britian and a Democratic Republic was set up known as the Union of Burma. This union lasted until 1962 when a military coup placed a dictator in power who ruled under the guise of Socialism.
In 1988 due to economic hardship and frustration the people rose up in pro-democratic demonstrations. This resulted in another military coup and an organization know as The State Law and Order Restoration Council or SLORC came into power. This body renamed Burma Myanmar and promised democratic reform.
Free elections were held in 1990 with the National League for Democracy lead by Suu Kyi winning a clear majority of the vote. The elections were annulled, Suu Kyi was put in jail and thousands were killed in the suppression that followed. Kyi remains in prison and the world has been keen to let the brutal suppression continue...until this month.
Demonstrations begun by monks who practice Burma's strand a Buddhism began protests in favor of the jailed President. These demonstrations have accelerated into an all out organized movement against the SLORC. However, SLORC has one again moved to violently suppress the rebellions. In our society where Information is becoming easier to come by, they have cut Internet access and taken many unspeakable steps to make sure word of the oppression stays inside Burma.

An article on the most recent events can be found here.

--------------------------------

As an Informationalist, I find this completely unacceptable. The SLORC is deliberately suppressing Information by violent means in order to maintain their grip on power. It is one of the most extreme examples of how the power of free Information is a dangerous to all forms of tyranny, be it over the mind, body, or both.
Also, as an Informationalist, I feel I must act in support of these people. So I implore the readers to do all you can to support this struggle. Write to your representatives, demonstrate. Gather all the data you can to bring to bear against this violent oppression. Remember, the good of the
I will be exploring ways in which action can be taken besides mere words on a Blog. I hope that you readers will join me.

All the best in this hour of human cruelty and possibility. individual cannot be separated from the good of the group. The group for Informationalists is all of humanity regardless of genetic makeup or gender. Perhaps this even applies to every sentient being.

New Addition to Theses of Informationalism

In reading the American President Woodrow Wilson's 14 points, I found the first point to be quite profound. In my opinion, it should form the basis of how Informationalism treats diplomacy. The ultimate goal of Informationalism, of course, is the end of nationalistic governments. But the establishment of an Informationalist state would likely occur in an environment of nationalist governments like our modern governments. Thus, as Informationalists, one must have a method for dealing with such entities that is consistent with Informationalism.

This thesis is my attempt:
"Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view."

-Woodrow Wilson; Point I

Peace should always be considered the starting point for Informationalists. Only if an entity seeks to harm or destroy an Informationalist or an Informationalist state does that entity put itself at war with the Informationalist or the Informationalist state. What should follow is the peaceful dissemination of Information to Noninformationalist entities in order to change its paradigm internally.

This harks back to my post on Technique Perfection and Initiative. The action of an Informationalist entity is perfecting the technique of spreading the free flow of Information. This comes from an initiative that must arise internally. Thus while the Informationalist state seeks to perfect the Informationalist method, an individual, society, or nation must ultimately choose for itself to do the same. This is called, self determination.

A Trip Through Logic (From an Informationalist's Perspective)

I learned a little bit of philosophy humor today in regards to contradictions. After thinking about it a little bit in depth, I came to conclude that perhaps what I learned could be useful in demonstrating the necessity of Informationalism. Let us begin with the simple statement: "Everything follows from a contradiction."

What is meant by this? I was exposed to this argument:

It is raining. It is not raining. Therefore, God exists.

Now, at first glance this argument appears as nothing more than nonsense. But in most sequential logic this argument is completely valid. Meaning that if the premises are true, and the conclusion follows from the premises. Then the argument is also sound! Here is the argument spelled out in sequential logic.

P= It is raining
Q= God Exists

1. Show Q Assertion
2. ~Q Assumption (Indirect Derivation)
3. P Premise
4. ~P Premise

In order to prove the validity of this argument, you need only create a contradiction that follows from the premises if we assume the conclusion is false. We have done that, thus the argument is valid. We can derive ANY conclusion from these methods. As long as we have two contradictory statements and a conclusion, the conclusion is always a valid one.

-------------------

Now, you may ask. Why on earth is this relevant? It will never been the case that at the same place and point in time it is both raining and not raining!

ABSOLUTELY! I would reply. But as an Informationalist one must look into the broader implications of this data.
What this actually says is: Someone who believes two contradictory statements at the same time must in order to be logical believe ANYTHING.

-------------------

Do people do this? I'm sure you have encountered individuals, maybe even yourself, that have believed two contradictory statements at the same time. Maybe you believe that it is wrong to steal. And then in some cases you think it was reasonable for someone to steal. Maybe you believe in only one god, but at times you think it's correct to believe in multiple gods. Inconsistency.

One of the goals of Informationalism is to explore the premises and conclusions that create the thoughts in our own minds. We try and look at what the data says and determine if the conclusions are valid. But this is very difficult if one believes two contradictory statements at the same time!

So, I ask once again. Explore your reasons for believing what you believe in your mind. Do you find contradictions? If so, remember that you now have no real grounds to dismiss the truth of any statement unless you rectify the contradiction. Choose the conclusion or premise best supported by the data, and go from there.

Attack on Public Research?


I was reading this article which has to do with an attempt of private organizations blocking the ability of the findings from public research to reach a public audience. The article itself which can be found here focuses on the National Institutes of Health, which is trying to put up a government website which "has encouraged researchers to place copies of their published works at PubMed Central, and has worked with publishers to facilitate this process while avoiding copyright issues." Congress has been exploring legislation to make posting of such research papers mandatory. Stating, "the results of publicly funded research should be accessible by the public that's paid for it."
However, some publishers such as the Association of American Publishers (AAP) are lobbying against moves by the government to make posting the research mandatory. It is their assertion that mandatory posting of the research papers is "an attack on peer review itself and that government-sponsored hosting is an invitation to censorship and manipulation." Thus, they have been lobbying to block passage of the legislation.

-----------------------

I am of the opinion that blocking such a move is fundamentally wrong. Even from our current Uninformationalist system, research done with public money should be used for public benefit without incurring further costs. If a company wishes to produce a new technology that was discovered through publicly funded research; they should be able to charge the consumer for their production costs; but they SHOULD NOT be allowed to collect royalty charges for the technology itself.

That being said, I am still of the opinion that all research is fundamentally public property. I would prefer to see the day when there are no patents or copyrights. But that is going to require a fundamental change in how we view information. Until then, I will settle with protecting the freedom of Information that we have.

Carl Sagan Speaks

Carl Sagan is, in my humble opinion, one of the greatest men in the history of the world. In all my readings rarely do I encounter an individual with such a passion for possibility. The possibility of a better life and a better world for everyone. He challenges our nationalism, our religious fervor, our own ethnocentrism in ways that to me make them seem indefensible.
When I hear him speak I a almost feel compelled to stand up and shout at that very moment: Do you not see, we are all one!
I am a firm believer in the technological ability and power of the human species to create a bright future for everyone who would embrace it. I hope those of you who read this feel the same.

I think this video provides a good example about how one should consider events from different perspectives. Informationalism is about trying to rationally and empirically explore all assumptions, especially our presuppositions. This man has obviously put a lot of thought into his opinions, and feels very strongly about them. While I prefer a little more open-mindedness even in the face of rational and empirical certainty, it is certainly preferable to unexplored assumptions.
We all possess ideas be they religion or just every day assumptions that are untrue. They might not be untrue, they might just be ambiguous, but we still view them as true. This is because we've never taken the time to sit down and explore exactly why we think the way that we do.
So, my challenge to you readers is this: Whatever it is you feel is true with passion-stop- analyze why you feel this way. Try to imagine the world if it were false. Does it being false cause the world to make more sense or create contradictions. If so, are these contradictions real, or are they again something you have imagined to be true? It is an iterative method that I feel might clean up some of the misconceptions we all have and maybe lead us to more exciting possibilities.
I like to think we make many of our assumptions as if we were operating in a dream. There are glaring contradictions in our thoughts all around us, yet we do not notice them. Thus I implore you to stop for a few moments and consider your thoughts. Notice.

I think this video speaks to some of the founding principles behind Informationalism. It took quite a bit of introspection and rational inquiry before I came to what I like to call the root cause. The root cause is my idea that all activity is ultimately for the purpose of the survival of the species. Every thought, every action, stems from a basic biological drive to proceed into the future. It is by acquiring more and more Information that we better our pursuit of this root cause.
This drive can be manipulated, redirected, or perhaps fooled by outside forces. But the drive remains, and its primary purpose is written in all of us. Informationalism is attempting to take this root cause to its logical conclusion. Through the free acquisition and distribution of Information we are able to explore which of our actions serve the root cause. Often, we may find that many things, even things like religion which we hold precious, are and have been used as tools to manipulate and deceive this primary drive.
But, as this song tries to reach out and tell us: we must explore ourselves from the inside. That is where real change begins. In my case, as my theory has led me to believe, we discover the paradox of our own simultaneous insignificance and indespensibility. Every human being is different. We all have different ways of processing information which allow all of us to contribute something new. Remember this.

Technique Perfection(An Example)

I made a post not too long ago about Technique perfection and Informationalism. The idea stemmed from some thoughts that I had while swimming laps. I was using my body to swim, a technique I've tried to refine, and at the same time working on mathematical calculations in my head whilst keeping up with my laps. It was a very trying experience, but I was successful, and here is why:

I devoted a great deal of time to refining my swimming technique. So much so that doing the activity no longer required much effort from my conscious mind. My conscious mind was free to practice other things.

So the conclusion that I drew was that it was good to focus on practicing some kind of technique until the delay between thought and action is erased. Then to build and refine other techniques while doing that activity. Building one technique upon another is, in my opinion, a great way to increase the flow of information.

So, without further ado, here is my real world example of absolute technique perfection. As well as a word of warning. Jimi Hendrix was without doubt the quintessential master of the electric guitar. Listening to what he created is a marvelous thing in my opinion. But it's also a reminder than singular obsession with an art has its dangers. While striving to become a "master" at something is good, it should not be the only goal of the individual. The goal is to try and "master" as many arts as possible. It is only then that we can explore the connections between the mind and the body in ways our current vocabulary cannot express.

Informationalism: What should supporters do?


Many of you have followed my posts over the past year or so. It's been an intellectual experimental journey that continues. I hope to be able to offer more of my thoughts, opinions, and possible solutions in the future as always. However, despite my hesitance, I would like to extend the experiment by thesis three of the current theses of Informationalism which states:

"3. "The question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question. Man must prove the truth — i.e. the reality and power, the this-sidedness of his thinking in practice. The dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking that is isolated from practice is a purely scholastic question."

-Marx; Theses on Feuerbach II

Thought is very important. But action is the most important part of a paradigm or philosophy. How well does it work in action.

--

So, what actions might the budding philosophy of Informationalism be able to take in order to demonstrate success, in practice?

I would like to begin the phase of discussion. As I stated in earlier posts, the beginnings of Informationalism arise when groups of people(or just an individual) are compelled to form a kind of free thought society or community. A group that serves as a temporary meeting place where ideas can be shared, conclusions drawn or explored, and overall knowledge increased. An individual can do this simply by engaging another group or individual in a conversation of these means.

Keep in mind, however, as always. That the telos of these actions and conversations is to gather information for the purpose of improving yourself, and your society. All this to the end of ensuring the survival of greater humanity. In an Informationalist conversation, never lose site of its purpose.


Therefore: those of you who are interested in Informationalism might consider forming a group with others that might feel the same way. Or simply engage others by yourselves. Ask them if they feel that the perpetual survival and development of the species is important. Ask them how this might be done. Exchange ideas, form new ones, and think of ways to put them into practice. And remember always that this hinges ultimately on the freedom of information. You must be frank, you must be open, you must truly be free.

**As always, these are my opinions regarding the philosophy of Informationalism. I feel that they show promise, and I desire to expand them into real world experimentation. For those of you who might desire to help me and others by doing this, I would be pleased. For those of you who feel differently, I respect your difference. And for any who might be hostile to what I have said here, know that I harbor no ill will towards any sentient creature.

INITIATIVE AND TECHNIQUE PERFECTION

It's been a while since my last posting. Safe to say I've been doing a lot of thinking about Informationalist philosophy of the past months. First I'd like to encourage you to check out a BLOG one of my friends made. It's an interesting idea that I think merits a little publicity.

There are two new concepts I wish to integrate into the Informationalist philosophy. The first is initiative.

Initiative in the Informationalist sense acknowledges the need of the shift of an equilibrium for an organism to adapt. It CANNOT be taught, but it MUST be learned. Central to the philosophy of Informationalism is the desire of the individual organism to survive. I have spoken in the past about the deep connection between the perpetuation of the individual and the perpetuation of the species, and how it is all wrapped up within the free flow of Information.

Thus, initiative becomes important to Informationalism. One must use information to change their surroundings in order to better meet their require equilibrium for their own survival. However, without ALL DATA the equilibrium constantly shifts due to unforeseen interactions in the universe. It is here that initiative becomes important. It is the initiative to master one's environment once again that makes the data and thus Informationalism perpetually important.

Technique Perfection in the Informationalist sense is something I discovered within the philosophy of Zhuangzi. It is the continual practice of an art so that the boundary between the conscious and unconscious mind is obliterated. For example, the simple action of typing on the keyboard. I am quite adept at my usage of "home row". So adept that I no longer have to think about the position of the letters that I am about to type. As I type this post, I can simply let my thoughts flow onto the screen via the keyboard. Due to my mastery of the skill, there is no visible delay between the processing power of my mind due to locating the letters on the keyboard. I simply know where they are.

Technique perfection is important because of its ability to allow individuals to successfully multitask. Being able to do this makes it possible to produce and acquire more information. It also gives the individual a greater power and understanding of the self and the environment. All of these things are crucial to Informationalism.

Another example of practicing technique perfection I found took place while I swam laps. As I swam I calculated the distance I planned to swim, and adjusted those numbers numbers into other units. I did all this while swimming and keeping up with the current amount of distance I had already covered. It was exhausting, but rewarding.

I would encourage those who read this to attempt to practice technique perfection. Even if you are not an Informationalist. Learn a skill so well you don't have to think about it when you peform it, and then master other tasks while performing that skill. This obviously has its limits, you cannot use a keyboard and weave something at the same time. But activities that do not seriously overlap could be mastered at the same time, increasing one's ability to multi-task and acquire new Information. I hope this has been helpful.

Carl Sagan - Pale Blue Dot

I think this right here pretty much says it all when it comes to the significance of humanity. We are wrapped in such a paradox. The earth is everything and yet it is just a pale blue dot. Humanity is everything and yet it is nothing. I use this for Informationalism because I think it shares the spirit of wonder that Informationalism tries to capture. It is with the knowledge that we are this "pale blue dot" that we should feel compelled to drop our petty stereotypes and strive to uncover the vast mystery of the universe in which we live.

Theses of Informationalism

Here I am going to attempt to outline the basic theses of Informationalism to better clarify the direction of my thought as I approach an issue. I hope you readers will find this helpful, as it may be my most important document thus far.

Term: Information- knowledge gained through study, communication, research, instruction, etc.; factual data.

1. The fundamental problem with materialism is that it does not take into account the influence of information. It is in the ability to record, pass on, and understand information that the advanced manipulation of material circumstances becomes possible.

2. The only way to value a species is by its ability to expand and perpetuate the information it acquires over time. A species that cannot do this must in time be overcome and eliminated by their material circumstances.

3. "The question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question. Man must prove the truth — i.e. the reality and power, the this-sidedness of his thinking in practice. The dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking that is isolated from practice is a purely scholastic question."

-Marx; Theses on Feuerbach II

4. Asymmetric Information leads to social distinction, especially within humanity. Oligopolies of materials and Information are inefficient. Thus a species with asymmetric information is not maximizing its value and risking its existence.

5. Ensuring free distribution and acquisition of Information is the only way to maximize the value of a society. Therefore the goal of a human society must be the freedom of information and the subsidizing of its acquisition in all fields.

6. The laws and structure of society must be formulated and adapted to the practical judgement of acquired Information. Society should be based on conclusions stemming from the best tested Information, and adapt to reflect the consensus of the Information.

7. "The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man; every citizen can then freely speak, write, and print, subject to responsibility for the abuse of this freedom in the cases is determined by law".

-11th Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (August 1789)

Richard Dawkins - "There is no such thing as a Christian Child"

I thought you all might find this interesting and insightful. I know that Informationalism is not explicitly atheist; my closest examination has led me to conclude that Spinoza-like Pantheism or weak Atheism are probably the best approaches to Informationalism. I posit a simple redefinition of the terms so that Atheism and Pantheism become one.

I feel this movie links up my last post, because it shows the harm that can come from forcing unfounded dogma onto children. I would not even condone labeling a child as a Informationalist child. It is a matter of choice that must be made at an age of consent.

I'm showing this in the hopes that all of you will take an opportunity to take another look at your own faiths; to try and discover where you may be dogmatic. I'm asking, as always, that you consider the benefits of the possibilities that come with Informationalism. Finally, it is my hope that some of you might decide to help pick up the cause, and embrace this progressive philosophy.

Why Our Country Needs Informationalism

I think this article says it all my friends:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070218/ap_on_re_us/evolution_jews

Here is the website: http://www.fixedearth.com/

State Rep. Ben Bridges of Georgia has been affiliated with a memo passed around the political scene which decries Science and attempts to replace it with the Pseudoscience of a man named Marshall Hall. Hall is the President of the "Fair Education Foundation". The name of the organization itself is an example of the disinformation that those frightened of the freedom of information will promote. There is no fair education for this man, there is only the age old attempt of those who fear the future and wish to silence it in the name of piety.
To sum up this ridiculous website promoted by a ridiculous excuse for a representative. It attempts to show the public how the modern model of the universe and evolution are mere products of a "zionist agenda". Of course, one wonders why they chose to lump these two areas of study together specifically. It is because they are both threats to Christianity.
Informationalism wishes to promote the freedom of information. There is no problem with the creation of such information, the problem is that this website parades incorrect information as correct information. By doing this it also engages in disinformation. The result? A deliberate misleading of the public. This website is fraud; it is an example of all that a society without freedom of information can be subjected to.
A final thought. Imagine if a child who knew little about the subject were to stumble upon this website. The influence that it could have upon their ability to think critically would be catastrophic. For the sake of free information and free society we must let it be known that fraud and disinformation cannot be tolerated.

Katrina Summary

The seminar on the situation in New Orleans, especially in the 9^th Ward in Eastern New Orleans, focused on the historical development of the flooding problem and the various paradoxes that contributed to the disaster. The speaker commented on the past makeup in the city, which was more in line with the natural makeup of the land. He then went on to discuss the changes, especially in the last century that led up to the paradox of attempting to safely develop unsafe lands. In the end it was shown that the government played an active role in promoting the unsafe policy, and the lack of communication and planning on the local and national level played a large role in the ensuing disaster.

The city of New Orleans in the 18^th and early 19^th century was centered largely on the banks of the Mississippi river. This is because, when the river floods, the heavier material falls first onto the banks and creates natural dunes. The rest of the area was a naturally bounded by Lake Pontchartrain to the North and Lake Borgne to the East. The area that became East New Orleans was also swampland, so for a time, the city’s growth was checked.

However, the city obviously had planned to grow, and so decided expansion and drainage of the swampland in coordination with development would be the best strategy to take. They undertook the paradox that the speaker referred to as making unsafe land safe. The swamp land was drained, causing the dried up soil to compress and sink below sea level. It was then placed behind levees for protection that were only designed to withstand category 3 Hurricanes.

The danger was realized, and the city was sued for failing to adequately maintain the pump systems to keep the water out. However, the development of East New Orleans continued until an economic slump brought it to a standstill. The city sat relatively silently on the national scene until Hurricane Katrina.

The area that had been swamp land which was developed quickly flooded as it was already under sea level. It should be noted that the area built on the natural dunes was spared a large amount of the destruction. The levees could not withstand a category 4 Hurricane, and so they broke. Since the levees were made in one large wall, a single breech caused the water to pool in the area below sea level and then become stuck, prolonging the flooding. This was also combined with failure to communication between the national and local level of government.

The results were that thousands were killed, billions of dollars in damage was suffered, and thousands of people were left homeless and forced to move outside of the city. All of this could have been avoided with proper planning. New Orleans had planned for growth but had not taken into account the natural limits of the growth of the city. Also, the failure in communication on the national and local level led to confusion in the area of exactly what needed or should be done to keep the residents safe in and unsafe area. The disaster was foreseeable and yet was ignored due to a one track focus on growth, which in the end was thwarted by inadequate plan for disaster. The speaker then suggested some ideas to prevent this in the future such as: not resettling Eastern New Orleans, putting up levees with multiple walls, and making the levees capable of withstanding category 5 Hurricanes. It is overall an example of the dangers that come with asymmetric information.