And thanks to iCal events, whenever I bring up my Dashboard I will receive the same information, since I don't always open up iCal to get a glance at my schedule.
You're welcome.
no one on the corner got swagger like us.
Posted by
Louis
at
1:35 PM
0
comments
Blog Label: Tech Tips and News
Technorati | Del.icio.us | Furl | DiggIt! | Reddit | Stumble It!
Posted by
Louis
at
5:08 PM
2
comments
Blog Label: The Little Things
Technorati | Del.icio.us | Furl | DiggIt! | Reddit | Stumble It!
Posted by
Louis
at
6:36 PM
7
comments
Blog Label: Reflection
Technorati | Del.icio.us | Furl | DiggIt! | Reddit | Stumble It!
Posted by
Louis
at
11:47 AM
1 comments
Blog Label: Things I Hate
Technorati | Del.icio.us | Furl | DiggIt! | Reddit | Stumble It!punk |pə ng k|
noun
1 informal a worthless person (often used as a general term of abuse).
• a criminal or hoodlum.
• derogatory (in prison slang) a passive male homosexual.
• an inexperienced young person; a novice.
2 (also punk rock) a loud, fast-moving, and aggressive form of rock music, popular in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
• (also punk rocker) an admirer or player of such music, typically characterized by colored spiked hair and clothing decorated with safety pins or zippers.
3 soft, crumbly wood that has been attacked by fungus, sometimes used as tinder.
adjective
1 informal in poor or bad condition : I felt too punk to eat.
2 of or relating to punk rock and its associated subculture : a punk band | a punk haircut.
DERIVATIVES
punkish |ˈpəŋkɪʃ| adjective
punky |ˈpəŋki| adjective
ORIGIN late 17th cent. (sense 3) : perhaps, in some senses, related to archaic punk [prostitute,] also to spunk .
Posted by
Louis
at
5:56 PM
0
comments
Blog Label: The More You Know
Technorati | Del.icio.us | Furl | DiggIt! | Reddit | Stumble It!
Posted by
Louis
at
6:22 PM
8
comments
Blog Label: Gun Control
Technorati | Del.icio.us | Furl | DiggIt! | Reddit | Stumble It!
Posted by
Louis
at
8:49 AM
1 comments
Blog Label: Education, Philosophy of Science
Technorati | Del.icio.us | Furl | DiggIt! | Reddit | Stumble It!For all inferences from experience suppose as their foundation that the future will resemble the past and that similar powers will be conjoined with similar qualities. If there is any suspicion that the course of nature may change, and that the past may be no rule for the future, all experience becomes useless and can give rise to no inference of conclusion. It is impossible, therefore, that any arguments from experience can prove this resemblance of the past to the future, since all these arguments are founded on the supposition of that resemblance. Let the course of things be allowed up to now ever so regular, that alone, without some new argument of inference, does not prove that for the future it will continue so. In vain do you pretend to have learned the nature of bodies from your past experience. Their secret nature and, consequently, all their effects and influence may change without any change in their sensible qualities. This happens sometimes and with regard to some objects. Why may it not happen always and with regard to all objects? What logic, what process of argument secures you against this supposition? My practice, you say, refutes my doubts. But you mistake the purport of my question. As an agent, I am quite satisfied in the point, but as a philosopher who has some share of curiosity--I will not say skepticism--I want to learn the foundation of this inference. No reading, no inquiry has yet been able to remove my difficulty or give me satisfaction in a matter of such importance.
- David Hume. An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section IV: Part II.
The thing I mean can be seen, for instance, in children, when they find some game or joke that they specially enjoy. A child kicks his legs rhythmically through excess, not absence, of life. Because children have abounding vitality, because they are in spirit fierce and free, therefore they want things repeated and unchanged. They always say, "Do it again"; and the grown-up person does it again until he is nearly dead. For grown-up people are not strong enough to exult in monotony. But perhaps God is strong enough to exult in monotony. It is possible that God says every morning, "Do it again" to the sun; and every evening, "Do it again" to the moon. It may not be automatic necessity that makes all daisies alike; it may be that God makes every daisy separately, but has never got tired of making them. It may be that He has the eternal appetite of infancy; for we have sinned and grown old, and our Father is younger than we. The repetition in Nature may not be a mere recurrence; it may be a theatrical encore. Heaven may encore the bird who laid an egg. If the human being conceives and brings forth a human child instead of bringing forth a fish, or a bat, or a griffin, the reason may not be that we are fixed in an animal fate without life or purpose. It may be that our little tragedy has touched the gods, that they admire it from their starry galleries, and that at the end of every human drama man is called again and again before the curtain. Repetition may go on for millions of years, by mere choice, and at any instant it may stop. Man may stand on the earth generation after generation, and yet each birth be his positively last appearance.
- G. K. Chesterton. Orthodoxy, Chapter 4: The Ethics of Elfland.
Posted by
Louis
at
3:40 PM
2
comments
Blog Label: Philosophy of Science, Think About It
Technorati | Del.icio.us | Furl | DiggIt! | Reddit | Stumble It!
Posted by
Louis
at
10:10 AM
2
comments
Blog Label: Think About It
Technorati | Del.icio.us | Furl | DiggIt! | Reddit | Stumble It!Verse:
John 3:16; Jn 3:16; John 3
Keyword:
Salvation, Jesus, Gospel
With Operators:
AND, OR, NOT, “ â€