AAAHHHHHHHH LAPLACE I LOVE YOU
(Don’t worry, Leibniz, you’re still my #1!)
“We may regard the present state of the universe as the effect of its past and the cause of its future. An intellect which at a certain moment would know all forces that set nature in motion, and all positions of all items of which nature is composed, if this intellect were also vast enough to submit these data to analysis, it would embrace in a single formula the movements of the greatest bodies of the universe and those of the tiniest atom; for such an intellect nothing would be uncertain and the future just like the past would be present before its eyes.”
YES! YES!!!!! This is EXACTLY how I’ve always thought of it, I’ve just never found a quote so close to my viewpoint!
I now forgive the distribution named after you, even if it is a pain.
Freaking yay.
Today’s song: Boy with a Coin by Iron and Wine
OH CRAP
WE FORGOT MILLARD FILLMORE’S BIRTHDAY!
What is wrong with us?!
Emergency Millard Fillmore Belated Extravaganza Week COMMENCE!
Crap.
Today’s song: Mucha Mujer para Ti by Cristina
Good lord…
I think Sir Ronald Fisher is the statistics equivalent to Leibniz in my mind. Check it:
…this paper laid the foundation for what came to be known as biometrical genetics, and introduced the very important methodology of the analysis of variance, which was a considerable advance over the correlation methods used previously.
The freaking ANOVA, people.
In addition to “analysis of variance”, Fisher invented the technique of maximum likelihood and originated the concepts of sufficiency, ancillarity, Fisher’s linear discriminator and Fisher information. His 1924 article “On a distribution yielding the error functions of several well known statistics” presented Karl Pearson’s chi-squared and Student’s t in the same framework as the Gaussian distribution, and his own “analysis of variance” distribution Z (more commonly used today in the form of the F distribution). These contributions easily made him a major figure in 20th century statistics.
Do you know what the Z distribution is? It’s used for setting confidence intervals around correlation estimates. Since a correlation is bound by -1 and 1, any sampling distribution with a mean correlation other than zero has a skewed distribution, and thus requires unsymmetrical confidence intervals to be set. Fisher’s Z distribution is a non-linear transformation of correlations that FORCES THEM INTO A NORMAL DISTRIBUTION in which you can set symmetrical confidence intervals, and then you can TRANSFORM THOSE LIMITS BACK and get confidence intervals in the original sampling distribution of correlations.
Seriously, that’s pretty freaking amazing. This guy rocked. Go search him in Wikipedia and see the massive list of “see also” pages.
Ha!
Leibniz’ crater on the moon is bigger than Newton’s.
This makes me happy.
Yes, I’m that obsessive, deal with it.
A Public Service Announcment from Your Local Bored and Slightly Horny Blogger
Holy crap, Muse’s drummer is HOT.
Cute blonde on the right.
Haha, sorry, I’m hyper tonight and I just noticed this.
GOD IS A MONAD
Alright bitches, today is Leibniz’ birthday, so you know what that means: 363 years ago today the coolest person in the universe was born. And as if you haven’t already heard enough about him from me, today I shall remind you all of a few of his contributions to the world:
- Monads. The ultimate fundamental elements of the universe that all act independently but yet appear to act cohesively.
- Optimisim. The best of all possible Leibniz contributions.
- Pre-Freudian psychology. Namely, the differentiation between the conscious and the unconscious.
- Library science. No joke.
- Choco Leibniz. Sure, they’d still be here, but they might have been called Choco Pascal or some such if Gottfried hadn’t been around.
- The freaking BINARY SYSTEM.
- That wig. Dear god, that wig.
- And let’s not forget calculus. Yeah, you hear that, Newton?! CALCULUS!
I adore you, Gottfried.
It’s a slow month, give me a break
I have developed a sudden interest in Tesla. I mean, more than before, ‘cause I’ve always kinda liked the dude.
This awesome article, which starts out with, “Thomas Edison was a cranky American asshole who was sort of involved with the invention of the light bulb. Nikola Tesla was a crazy Serbian who was instrumental in harnessing electric power. Also, he blew shit up with lightning,” didn’t help the obsession much.
EX
Dammit Jules Verne, I want you.
20,000 leagues into my pants.
Journey to the center of my heart.
David Hume Looks Like a Buffalo
Hahahaha, check it:
This is a buffalo.
This is David Hume.
They look exactly the same. This is great.
And no, it’s not because he’s a little chunky. It’s his face—he’s got that placid, buffalo-esque look to it. How cool is that?
You know how I feel about the chunky guys, anyway.
NEEEEEEEEEEEEEWTOOOOOOOOOOOOOON!!!!!!!!!!!
As told through MSN Messenger. Of course.
I’m going to start measuring everything in Newtons
Because the guy came up with three seperate scales for three seperate things…if he’d have lived longer, I’m sure everything would be measured in some Newton or another
Heck, I wish I knew his height so I could use it for a length measurement
Marching band would be great
“Forward march 13 Newtons, then adjusted step 4.33 Newtons”
It’ll also give me more chance to rave about the season finale of Metalocalypse, anyway
Haha, “I give it 5 out of 5 Newtons”
Claudia’s Top 5 Sexiest Men of the Enlightenment
Here are five instances where beauty and brains do occur simultaneously. Also, I adore the fashion of this era.
(2-years-later-retrospective-observation: HOLY CRAP, I posted this on Leibniz’ birthday!)
1. This man wears the best of all possible wigs, and he wears it well. Leibniz did everything—mathematics, linguistics, philosophy, logic, engineering, law, natural science—you name a topic, he probably dabbled in it. Polymathy is hot, and so are ostentatious wigs.
Eye candy AND brain candy.
2. Anyone who knows me knows that I think Voltaire is the sexiest man ever to live. I slobbered all over Candide when I first read it, and I see it as a proof of God that such wit could be combined with such good looks.
He can satire his way into my heart any day.
3. It feels fundamentally wrong to me to have Leibniz and Newton inhabiting the same list, but you have to admit—the guy looks badass. Setting aside the calculus issue, there are very few things Newton can’t take at least some credit for in the world of science. Plus, he shoved a darning needle behind his eye and moved it around to see if it distorted his vision. That’s dedication.
“I am the CALCULATOR…I will divide you by zero!”
4. Hume has a very confident look about him. And why shouldn’t he? After all, he did—single-handedly—take down the notions of induction and causation. And he did it while looking good. That jacket looks very sexy on him.
The missing shade of awesome.
5. I don’t know much about this attractive young man named d’Alembert, but he apparently studied vibrating strings, which sounds (no pun intended) really cool. He did argue, incorrectly, that the probability of a coin landing heads increased with each time it landed tails, but since that seems like common sense to most people, I can respect that.
“Mmm…strings.”
Yeah.
It’s 4:45 AM…do you know where your daily blog is?
Right here!
So I’m done with all the actual tests for finals week, but I still have my written final for Modern Philosophy due tomorrow. Or today. Whatever the hell you qualify 5 in the morning as.
Yes, I stayed up this late (early) ‘cause I had basically NO TIME to write this final until about 4 this afternoon, and, me being me, I procrastinated until about 11. The essay on Hume I cranked out in like 15 minutes, but I’ve been slowly and painfully churning out this damn Berkeley essay for the past six hours.
But now I’m done! DONE WITH FINALS WEEK! So of course, since I did my Modern final tonight, I felt it necessary to list the philosophers we covered in order from my favorite to my least favorite. Hmm, what will my #1 be…?
1. Leibniz
I LOVE THIS MAN WITH ALL MY SOUL. I really, really like the way he works through the logic of his philosophy, even though his writing style basically looks down its nose at you, insulting you under its breath because it’s not totally obvious to you right away. But yeah, this guy has taken over my life.
2. Kant
Kant freaking rocks, and not just because his name can be used in a lot of stupid puns. I loved the way he demonstrated that math is not something of which we have a priori knowledge, and I just love the way he basically redefined how we should go about doing philosophy.
3. Hume
I like Hume, but I’m not a fan of the way he argued his way down to that there is no such thing as causality (cause and effect…if I hit the billiard ball with the stick, it will move forward), but because that’s the only way we can get around in the world, we can rely on it. But he does aggressively argue against something that we all take for granted to be true.
Take that, causality!
4. Berkeley
Berkeley interests me, and I don’t really know why. I think it’s because I totally disagree with his “to be is to be perceived” idea, and therefore I want to argue against it. So Berkeley would be in pretty good standing on this list, except for the fact that I had to write something like this at 4:30 in the morning because of him:
“The ‘common sense’ factor of Berkeley’s philosophy is explained as this: it is not simply the lack of direct perceptions of material substance that causes the belief that it doesn’t exist—it’s also the fact that there is no way to explain its existence. There is no reason for the material to exist if perceptions are sensory and can be linked to something that already has reason to exist, like the mind. Qualities do not need something on which they must be projected if they already exist in and out of the senses and are perceived that way. The absence of the material world preserves the parsimony Berkeley so strongly desires.”
5. Spinoza
AAAH SPINOZA! Despite the fact that I don’t know what to think of his philosophy (his logic works out so that his philosophy proves itself), he’s a cute, innocent looking little guy who was excommunicated ‘cause of what he believed. Poor little Spinoza. I sympathize for him.
6. Descartes
I love Descartes. Descartes is great. He’s the founder of modern philosophy, guys! But the reason he’s so far down on this list is because of his whole “evil deceiver” thing. Yes, the extreme doubt is good, but seriously, Rene…the evil deceiver? Ah, well. He had to get his ideas past the church somehow. Sneaky little guy.
7. Locke
Locke bothers me. I don’t really know why; I didn’t really pay that much attention those few days we were covering him. They were right before Spring Break. Haha.
So there you go.
Leibniz: a Short and Mildly Subjective Explanation of Why I Love the Man
So it’s now common knowledge that Leibniz was the coolest philosopher ever to me, right?
Good.
I figure now is a good a time as any to actually attempt to explain (briefly, cause I could go on for reams) why I like him so.
Frivolous reason first: have you seen that wig? Dear LORD, that’s amazing. Go to Wikipedia and check it out. It will change your life.
Now serious reasons.
Though Leibniz gets crap for his “best of all possible worlds, pre-established harmony” ideas, the way he justifies them makes perfect sense to me. Why is this? Well, it’s because, I realized a few days ago, that if you remove the God factor from Leibniz’ ideas, you essentially have what I’ve always thought of the universe.
Demonstration:
Leibniz says: we live in the best of all possible worlds because God, being omnipotent and in possession of moral and metaphysical perfection, could not possibly choose and create anything but the best. It is impossible for God to have chosen anything but what has been chosen, because that would imply he chose things that are less than the best. God can’t do that—he’s got moral and metaphysical perfection! Also, Leibniz explains the pre-established harmony in a way that basically states that God has “pre-aligned” all of the different substance’s actions so that they work in harmony together, making it seem like we interact with each other when we really don’t.
I say: we live in the best of all possible worlds because the mere existence of what is essentially nullifies and “cancels out” the existence of any other possible things. We live in the best world because it’s the only one we’ve got—the way things are are the way things are, and because they are, they cannot be anything else. Anything else that could be considered “better” simply cannot exist, because that would mean that it would take up the same space as what already exists, and that’s not really possible. As for the pre-established harmony thing, the fact that things exist and the fact that things will play out in exactly the way they’re going to play out (I know that’s vague and confusing, I’ll clear it up in a later blog) eliminates the possibility of all other occurrences. If we were to have a priori knowledge of all the courses of action every single atom in the universe were to take, we would essentially have knowledge of pre-established harmony. It’s pre-established in the sense that what is going to happen is going to be the thing that happens. If we have two choices, A and B, and we choose A, then we essentially eliminate the possibility of B ever occurring, and thus eliminate all branching off probabilities from that one probability.
Yeah.
Like I said, I’ll clear this up later.
I just wanted to give you the main reason why Leibniz is so appealing to me. So there you go!
Blog 660: Leibniz, Leibniz, Leibniz! (Get out of my pool!)
OH.
MY.
GOD.
You all know my love of Voltaire and his absolutely brilliant novella Candide, correct? Of course you do. If you didn’t by this point I’d be seriously disturbed.
Well anyway.
You all know (maybe) that the main target of Voltaire’s satire was Gottfried Leibniz’ philosophy, particularly his now infamous claim that we live in the best of all possible worlds (Pangloss in Candide preached this philosophy throughout the whole book, you may recall).
Let me tell you something: you have not LIVED until you actually sit down and READ Leibniz, particularly his Discourse on Metaphysics. The thing is so absolutely ridiculous and nonsensical that it is quite possibly the best piece of philosophical work in existence.
Let me elaborate:
God is an absolutely perfect being who has metaphysical and moral perfection, according to Leibniz. That is, he has perfect power and knowledge and does everything for the best. He criticizes Descartes and Spinoza respectively for putting subordinate to god’s will his intellect and putting subordinate god’s intellect to his will. Leibniz says that god’s will and intellect are both substantial and perfect; thus, it is not possible for god’s will to be indifferent, and because he has moral perfection, it is incompatible for god not to have chosen the best things in the world in which we live (and we are driven to assume that this is the best of all possible worlds because of this).
This is all well and good, in my opinion. Leibniz still sounds rather rational in comparison to Spinoza (freaking Spinoza…).
Just wait.
To leave us simply with this definition of god is rather inadequate. Therefore, Leibniz further develops his ideas as the Discourse goes on. He next goes on to establish what he believes to be the way that god interacts with the substances—namely, us humans. Leibniz labels us all as individual “substances”—things created by and subsequently put into harmony with one another by god. He kind of relates this to Aristotle’s ideas of the primary substance, which I won’t really get into save to say that Leibniz elaborates on it a little further—he states that we—each of us, individually—are individual substances and “complete beings.” Ourselves, our substances, include our entire history and our future of everything that has occurred or will occur to the substance (us). Basically, we’re everything that we’ve ever done, everything we’ve ever experienced, everything we’ll ever do, and everything we’ll ever experience. We cannot know about our substances a priori, but god can. Thus, god sees from every individual substance’s viewpoint (every individual human) all at once, and all their lifespan can be seen at once by him.
That’s still okay, pretty much, right?
Okay.
Now imagine this scenario: I walk up to you tomorrow and give you a good slap on the cheek. Common sense would tell us that the substance that is “I” just hit the substance that is “you,” right? In other words, two substances just interacted, correct?
Not to good ol’ Leibniz!
There are no interactions between substances, he says. Substances are entirely independent of each other. Each is simply a perspective on the entire universe that is free of any influence of any other substance. But then how on earth, you may be asking yourself, does it appear that we substances interact with each other on a daily basis?
Simple!
Remember when I said Leibniz felt that god could know every individual’s substance in its entirety, from way back at the beginning of its history to the moment it dies? And remember how he said god could see every single substance’s perspective?
This is where Leibniz makes the claim of the century: because of god’s ability to see everybody’s history and future, he can essentially “align” everybody’s what I’m going to call “linear time and action paths” (pretty cool-sounding, eh?) so that it appears that subjects are interacting.
So remember when I said imagine me giving you a good slap to the cheek a few paragraphs ago? Yep, god planned for that. He “saw it coming,” I guess you could say, and “aligned” our two linear time and action paths so at the very moment when my substance (“me”) was making a move as if to slap, your substance (“you”) feels as if they were just slapped. All without no interactions between substances whatsoever!
This freaking blows my mind for several reasons:
1) I’m actually shocked more satires weren’t produced off of this guy. I mean, Candide didn’t even touch this “god pulls on the matrix of life so that everything’s lined up perfectly and we’re all kept in this illusion that we’re actually interacting” thing.
2) Why in the world is this guy even in our repertoire of “famous philosophers we should study”? Why is this horribly fantastical philosophy still even considered? Is it because it’s such an epic failure? Seriously, the thing has a “WTF” factor to rival scientology. In fact, it may surpass scientology. Observe:
3) This was the one and only cartoon-worthy thing I could think of. I’m disappointed in myself. It’s so dumb.
Leibniz, I freaking love you, man. I’m totally adopting your philosophy as my religion. Leibnizm.
He is now the frontrunner in “the philosopher Claudia is going to dress up as” for my little party. And he edges out Voltaire only because he’s primarily considered a philosopher and Voltaire’s primarily a writer/satirist/sexy man.
Rousseau, you sneaky, sneaky man!
Jean-Jacques! You surprise me! Have you dared to sneak a jab at my beloved Voltaire in your Confessions?
Ah, I do say it may be so—in reading your book today for the second time I came across within the first fifteen pages a phrase I’d missed the first time—the phrase, “…we ceased to cultivate our little gardens…”
A trifle, my good readers say? Ah! But if you look at the last line in Voltaire’s Candide you will see the (rather famous) phrase, “‘that is well said,’ replied Candide, ‘but we must cultivate our garden,'” expressing Voltaire’s ideas that to have a good life, one must work without philosophizing too greatly.
Considering Rousseau finished his Confessions in 1770 and Voltaire’s Candide was completed in 1762 (the latest date I could find), and taking into consideration the strained relationship between the two men that is evident in their correspondences between each other, this arises suspicion in me as to whether or not this was a deliberate yet subtle jab at Voltaire’s Candide.
Is this a glossed-over quip? Or am I just blathering on in my usual manner?
Who’s to say?
Though I vote on the latter.
HOLLY CARP IS REAL
Holly Carp now has a Facebook. And in case you weren’t there and are wondering what the hell I’m talking about and what the big deal is, Holly Carp is an individual Maggie and I discovered on the night before the band trip down to Boise, the night we stayed up all night and were IM-ing each other while sitting right next to each other.
And in case you’re not on Facebook and want to know of this wonderful being, here is her profile:
Activities: being awesome, quoting the Bible verbatim, quoting the fish equivalent of the Bible verbatim, confounding the most genius of the human species, swimming, looking for a mate to fertilize my eggs, making fishy faces at confused passers-by, holding talk therapy groups for sharks confused about their sexuality, marketing my self-help video entitled “Who Needs a Doral Fin When You’ve Got a Name That is Commonly Confused with the Word “Crap”?”, bumming rides off of people, DJ-ing, playing solitaire, solving live’s mysteries, calling the operator and having lengthy discussions about why they chose their career, convincing people I’m real, being a stunt double for Dr. Phil, eating whatever the hell carp eat, break dancing.
Interests: philosophy, contact sports, optometry, humans’ depletion of natural resources and how we’re all screwed, Nebraska, the “Holly Carp Is Real” Campaign, WSU and their fascination with large cats, WSU and their placement of the cattle breeding pen in close proximity to the captive bear area, volleyball, other carp.
Favorite Music: Katrina and the Waves, The Backstreet Boys, Kenny G.
Favorite TV Shows: The Dr. Phil Show
Favorite Movies: Finding Nemo
Favorite Books: The World According to Carp, How to Keep Koi, Goldfish and Other Carp, Carp Fishing on Valium, Die Like the Carp!, Carp in the Bathtub, Richard Scarry’s Best First Book Ever.
Favorite Quotes: “Holly Carp is real.”
About Me: I am Holly Carp. I am real. I type in all-caps because I’m just that important. I enjoy long walks on the beach, or preferably in the water itself, me being a carp and all.
I am all-knowing and all-powerful. My powers of logic and deduction astonish even the most intelligent of men, including Stephen Hawking, one of many whom I have single-handedly beat at swimming.
I won the gold medal in Awesome in the first Olympic games.
I alone built five miles of the Great Wall of China.
I fantasize nightly of a schooner whose love I was lucky enough to possess one lonely night when the waters were still and our hearts were a-flutter with true love.
I’m looking to find a man of similar interests and who has big gills. Seriously though, gill size doesn’t matter. But I’d like his to be big.
Like, huge.
Seriously.
I also noticed a few minutes ago that in the religious views is typed, “I worship cod,” which rhymes nicely with “I worship god.”
I’m funny.
“Historical Figures I Would Marry: An In-Depth Study”
Finished my studying/homework early. Sitting here watching a PBS documentary on hippopotami. Chatting with Nick. And blaming Nick for what’s to come in this blog.
I was planning on having a nice, quiet, philosophical discussion with him tonight, but that plan backfired faster than a hunting trip with Dick Cheney, so instead I bring you this:
Historical Figures I Would Marry: An In-Depth Study*
1. Voltaire
Top 3 Reasons
1. He’s witty
2. He criticized the Catholic Church
3. Satire is sexy
Advantages
-The conversation! Think of it!
-Letters to each other! Letters to each other!
Disadvantages
-He seems the type to be difficult to get a straight answer out of
2. Socrates (this is based off of Plato’s interpretation of Socrates in his writings)
Top 3 Reasons
1. He died for his beliefs. That’s dedication, people.
2. He taught Plato!
3. He claimed to have a divine voice in his head.
Advantages
-We could talk forever.
Disadvantages
-He’d probably question everything I’d say. That would get old.
3. Rousseau
Top 3 Reasons
1. “Penpal” to Voltaire!
2. Basically came up with the autobiography.
3. “The Social Contract!”
Advantages
-Oh, I think we’d have fun.
Disadvantages
-I think the whole “Romanticism” thing would get to me after awhile.
4. Plato
Top 3 Reasons
1. Oh, come on, he’s Plato!
2. Philosopher.
3. Writer.
Advantages
-Oh, the rhetoric!
Disadvantages
-Our relationship would probably be strictly platonic.
5. Freud
Top 3 Reasons
1. He’s the father of psychoanalysis. I mean, come on.
2. He analyzed EVERYTHING.
3. Have you read The Interpretation of Dreams? Wow.
Advantages
-Again, think of the conversation!
-We could collaborate on things.
Disadvantages
-Neither one of us would ever shut up. Seriously.
6. Millard Fillmore
Top 3 Reasons
1. Best president ever.
2. Last words = “the nourishment is palatable.”
3. In the election of 1856 he won one of the highest popular vote percentages of any third-party candidate.
Advantages
-My goodness, everything!
Disadvantages
-None, if you don’t mind never being remembered. Ever.
Yeah. I should have gone with Matt, Lindsey, and Gary for movies.
*not nearly as in-depth as it could be, so be thankful for that. And there are only six.
Oh no! It can’t be!
People, I am a horrible human being. I have a confession to make: I…I…
I forgot Millard Fillmore’s half-birthday yesterday!!
I’m crying on the inside.
I’m sure I’ll be haunted for this.
Machiavelli! No more bran muffins for you, young man!
I have a question for the ladies…and the guys, too, I guess, it doesn’t matter.
What’s the big deal with Johnny Depp? Am I seriously the only one who thinks he’s butt ugly? Orlando Bloom, too. There were these girls who came into the restaurant today and were all, “OMG JOHNNY DEPP IS HOT LOL I WANNA MARRY HIM AND HAVE HIS BABIES!”
Ugh. I don’t get it.
But don’t pay any attention to me; I’m writing this at 3:00 in the morning. I barely have time to blog anymore, what’s up with that?
Rock ‘Em Sock ‘Em Hobos
I got this little message tonight at 6:25 from Nick on Messenger:
It’s a blasé day says: if you could be an historical figure—any historical figure from any time in history—who would you be?
This, of course, was a forefront thought in my mind all night (well, one of many). After several hours of careful deliberation, I present to you my top 10 list of historical figures I would like to have been in the past (most desirable listed first):
1. François-Marie Arouet (Voltaire)
Voltaire rocked. This guy was a freaking awesome writer with an incredible wit and ability to dodge censorship and confuse and insult his enemies. And I don’t care what you say—Candide was an awesome book. Overall, an extremely smart man and an awesome writer. I would love to have been Voltaire.
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
2. Sigmund Freud
Ah, yes. The father of talk therapy and psychoanalysis. Despite the controversy (or should I say the overwhelming popular opinion) that his theories were wrong, I strongly support Freud’s basic ideas and the idea of actually talking about problems to figure them out. I’ve also rather enjoyed his id/ego/superego construct for some time. Plus, after slogging through the 700-page “Interpretation of Dreams,” I have newfound respect for this man based solely on how long he can ramble.
“From error to error, one discovers the entire truth.”
3. William Shakespeare
Would have possibly been number one or two if it weren’t for the fact that he didn’t really come up with the ideas for his plays but rather adapted them from already existing stories. Not the biggest crime, of course, but still…knocks the Bard down a few pegs on my list. Still, though, I wouldn’t mind being considered the creator of such plays as “Hamlet” or “Much Ado About Nothing.”
“Be great in act, as you have been in thought.”
4. Thomas Jefferson
The author of the Declaration of Independence. What more needs to be said? Yes, yes, there was the whole hypocrisy thing with the slaves, but aren’t we all hypocrites in one way or another? This guy just happened to have his more publicized. Wouldn’t it rock to have authored the freaking Declaration of Independence? I think so, yes.
“I cannot live without books.”
5. Jean-Jacques Rousseau
A kind of counter-player to Voltaire, Rousseau wrote “Confessions” and basically started the Romanticism movement. How cool is that? And it talks about sex! And peeing! Back in the 1700’s! Scandalous! Also, he does a lot of work with political philosophy. If you can’t be Voltaire, you can be the guy he was pen-pals with.
“Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.”
6. Benjamin Franklin
Probably the horniest historical figure America has seen (Clinton aside, haha). Also, he was pretty much a renaissance man. What didn’t he do? Who didn’t he do? Franklin owns.
“Hide not your talents, they for use were made. What’s a sun-dial in the shade?”
7. F. Scott Fitzgerald
I love Fitzgerald and everything he’s written (at least, everything I’ve read that he’s written). His characters are really, really, awesome. I’ve done at least five biographies on Fitzgerald over the years, and all I can say is the guy is pretty damn incredible. All bow to the Fitzgerald!
“Sometimes it is harder to deprive oneself of a pain than of a pleasure.”
8. Albert Einstein
Good old Einstein. Would have been higher except I cannot fathom myself going, “Oh yeah, here’s the mathematical answer for mass-energy equivalence!” In fact, I can’t see myself coming up with the mathematical answer for anything, except maybe a bunch of fake proofs I came up with in 9th grade during math. Where was I?
“The important thing is to not stop questioning.”
9. Socrates
Okay. One, he was a philosopher. Two, he got executed for his philosophy. Three, his name is “Socrates.” The whole Socratic method thing? Awesome. An ‘A’ for you, Socrates!
“The unexamined life is not worth living.”
10. Aristotle
Wrapping up the list is Aristotle, the guy famous for saying, “if you get me mixed up with Socrates, I’ll beat you over the head with this Greek newspaper.” I don’t really have much to say here; another seemingly renaissance-type.
“Pleasure in the job puts perfection in the work.”
Waiter! There’s a Creationist in my Primordial Soup!
I don’t know what’s up with the presidents lately. Must be a new phase. Anyway, here’s this thing with the zodiacs, assassination attempts, and why Aquarians are basically screwed if they become president. I’ve done this before, but I don’t think I’ve ever put out an entire list of the presidents and their zodiac signs. So pick either your favorite presidents or your zodiac sign, and get to it! Damn you Capricorns for taking Millard Fillmore!
Assassination Key of Fun!
* Assassination attempt
** Successful assassination
George Washington: Pisces
John Adams: Scorpio
Thomas Jefferson: Aries
James Madison: Pisces
James Monroe: Taurus
John Quincy Adams: Cancer
Andrew Jackson: Pisces*
Martin Van Buren: Sagittarius
William Henry Harrison: Aquarius
John Tyler: Aries
James K Polk: Scorpio
Zachary Taylor: Sagittarius
Millard Fillmore: Capricorn
Franklin Pierce: Sagittarius
James Buchanan: Taurus
Abraham Lincoln: Aquarius**
Andrew Johnson: Capricorn
Ulysses S Grant: Taurus
Rutherford B Hayes: Libra
James A Garfield: Scorpio**
Chester A Arthur: Libra
Grover Cleveland: Pisces
Benjamin Harrison: Leo
William McKinley: Aquarius**
Theodore Roosevelt: Scorpio*
William Howard Taft: Virgo
Woodrow Wilson: Capricorn
Warren G Harding: Scorpio
Calvin Coolidge: Cancer
Herbert Hoover: Leo
Franklin D Roosevelt: Aquarius*
Harry S Truman: Taurus*
Dwight D Eisenhower: Libra
John F Kennedy: Gemini* *
Lyndon B Johnson: Virgo
Richard M Nixon: Capricorn
Gerald R Ford: Cancer* *
Ronald Reagan: Aquarius*
George Bush: Gemini*
Bill Clinton: Leo* *
Of those that were assassinated/almost assassinated, there was/were:
1 Taurus
2 Geminis
2 Cancers
1 Leo
1 Libra
2 Scorpios
4 Aquarians (WTF??)
1 Pisces
I love how there were no assassination attempts until Jackson came along. I also love how all Aquarians were assassinated/almost assassinated save one (William Henry Harrison, but honestly, who gives a crap about William Henry Harrison?).
Just a bit of fun for you all.
The Ranking of the Presidents!
HAHA! I’m actually doing this within a week of President’s Day. And for my 301st blog post. Pretty damn good, if you ask me.
Here is my official ranking of the Presidents, according to my own dorky opinion.
It basically goes: best presidents à presidents who didn’t do anything à bad presidents à really crappy presidents à Bush
Enjoy!
Millard Fillmore
Hell yes! Of COURSE Millard Fillmore, “The American Lois Philippe,” tops my list. Wow, M.F. rocks my world. He totally owned the Compromise of 1850 and preserved peace for a little longer in order to delay war. Wow…Millard Fillmore, you can manifest my destiny any day.
George Washington
When I was younger, I used to have a thing for George Washington. I don’t really know why. He was basically like the first waffl—before the first waffle (bear with me, here: it’s crappy analogy time), no one knew quite how to make waffles, or how to go about eating them. The first waffle, however, proved as a template for all future waffles, in both the process of making them and eating them. America watched as George Washington was made, and then ate him.
Or something like that.
It worked out in my head.
But yeah. Go George!
Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson rocks. He just rocks. He doubled the size of the United States with the Louisiana Purchase, advocated the separation of church and state (he got this from Locke, I believe), and he was basically a total Renaissance man. Plus, he flippin’ DRAFTED THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. I love you, Thomas Jefferson.
Theodore Roosevelt
Woo! Roosevelt! This awesome guy gets an automatic fourth from me, just cause the documentary I saw on him was very interesting and he seemed like a very cool guy. Truly an excellent, excellent president. Where’s this guy when we need him today?
Abraham Lincoln
Woo! Lincoln! Oregon voted for him! He did a rather spiffy job of dealing with the Civil War, both during and after. Too bad he didn’t hear that the play got bad reviews.
Harry S. Truman
Poor Truman. He gets stuck with the bomb. Then the Soviet Union. I feel sorry for this dude…no one liked him until his terms were over. WTF, United States? WTF. Alaska and Hawaii are blameless.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Hurrah for the New Deal! Hurrah for the liberal judge packing of the Supreme Court! Hurrah for the dealing with of Pearl Harbor, save the internment camps! I like this guy. He did pretty well in his dealings with the Depression. Too bad his middle name wasn’t “Delanor” instead of “Delano” though, cause then we’d have an “Eleanor Delanor Roosevelt” and that would be awesome.
Ulysses S. Grant
Ah, I love Grant. He’s a man’s man. He smoked like hell, fought a bunch of guys in the Civil War (not to mention he accepted Lee’s surrender at Appomattox), and enjoyed scandals in office (Whiskey Ring fun!). Proof that, if you gain power, you should not select your moron friends to be your cohorts.
Thomas Woodrow Wilson
You’ve gotta watch the hell out for a guy whose nickname is “Schoolmaster in Politics.” He was all, “No child labor, bitch!” and “No more Manifest Destiny fun! Get your butts in line, America!” and “Oh damn, a war.” He proposed a League of Nations, which failed, but got the Nobel Peace Prize for it, anyway. He was rather productive. An ‘A’ for you, W. Wilson.
William Howard Taft
Taft had to follow Teddy Roosevelt—not an easy task. He did rather well, though, and I don’t think he ever got caught in the bathtub for too long. Have you seen this guy? A school bus! His nickname was “Big Lub,” which is enough right there to push him higher on my list.
John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Ugh, I’m gonna stay away from this one due to sheer fear that I’m going to insult someone (I mean, even more so than normal. This presidency’s like a loaded canon). I will say one thing though—I find it rather funny that Lee Harvey Oswald gets a big “oh no you DIDN’T” in prison by being shot by Jack Ruby. I guess little Ruby thought, “hey, I’m already in prison, and this guy shot the prez!”
William Jefferson Clinton
Lemme tell you something…for all the crap Clinton’s gotten for the whole Monica Lewinsky thing, he’s been the one break in this Republican insanity that my peers and I have been experiencing for our entire lives (mid- to late-Reagan administration to Bush II now). Yes, his personal life sucked, but he was a good president. And I find it sad that we’ve decided to judge him almost solely on his personal life.
James Knox Polk
“Who is James K. Polk?” Apparently, that’s what everyone was asking back in 1844, because that was what his campaign slogan was. Way to go with the question-asking, Polk, you got people’s attention. If he were alive today, I’m sure thousands of us on Facebook would be getting Poked by Polk. It would be like an hourly thing. Anyway, Polk gave us a butt-load of territory but also divided the country even greater over the issue of slavery. Plus, he basically retired from the presidency, took a little buggy ride home, and died.
Stephen Grover Cleveland
First, points must be deducted for his using “Grover” instead of “Stephen.” Second, points must be added because this guy was somehow able to serve two nonconsecutive terms (with that little weirdo Harrison in between). Third, Idaho voted for the Populist’s candidate when they first become a state. What the hell? Who the crap was Weaver? Wait, what was I talking about? Oh yeah. Cleveland. More points go to him cause Aneel lives on Cleveland St.
Chester Alan Arthur
You wanna talk mutton chops? No? Okay, I’ll review Chester Alan Arthur instead. This guy’s hilarious. First off, the quote at the top of this page about him reads, “I may be president of the United States, but my private life is nobody’s damned business!” Plus, one of his allies, upon hearing he won, said, “Chet Arthur? President of the United States? Good God!” He pretty much ignored everybody and did things his own way. It was a short little run, but hey…we can call it a sprint.
John Adams
This poor guy—he had to follow George and he didn’t really want to be in the position of mediating between the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans in the first place. Plus, I don’t think Jefferson liked him very much. Hamilton didn’t either. Same with all the anti-French. I want to hug him.
Gerald Rudolph Ford
This guy was the first non-elected vice AND non-elected president, which makes him basically go “Oh shi—” when getting the presidency. He pardons Nixon, works to restore the economy, and attends the Helsinki conference, all to end up with America still disliking him enough not to reelect him. How’s that for a shot in the butt?
Ronald Wilson Reagan
Oh noes! Reagan! Minnesota hated him, and for a good reason—after ever major even in Reagan’s life (even before he became President) was followed relatively closely by a world problem: Reagan’s born; WWI begins. Reagan begins acting career; WWII begins. Reagan marries; Pearl Harbor gets bombed. Reagan gets divorced; North Korea invades South Korea. This is tragic, but really damn hilarious. He moves up on the list just because of this.
James Monroe
This guy kicked Quincy Adams’ butt in the election of 1820—231 electoral votes to 1. It must have been nice to be president during the “Era of Good Feelings.” Hey, it got him “Era-of-Good-Feeling President” as a nickname! His only real issue was kind of ignoring slavery with hopes that it would just go away.
James Madison
I love the fact that his two nicknames are, like, polar opposites of each other: the big, strong, important-sounding one, “Father of the Constitution,” and this one: “Little Jemmy.” It’s also kind of strange that he was a Federalist but didn’t really want a central U.S. government power. I don’t quite know what to think of little Mr. Madison—should I like him or hate him?
James Buchanan
He seemed rather reasonable and responsible, but yet the Confederate states began to secede from the Union while he was president. Poor Jamesy-James. Have you seen pictures of this guy? He looks like a hard-ass. I’m surprised he didn’t keep S.C. in line with a slap or two. “I’m James Buchanan, bitch!”
William McKinley
Apparently, his nickname was “Idol of Ohio.” I would’ve made it “Willy McKin’ey” cause that sounds a whole lot better. He was the first person Idaho voted for when it became a state. I think this guy needed some balls. Badly. “Oh no, I’m getting pressured by the media…I guess I’ll invade Spain, but I’ll do it hesitatingly and with a crumpet in my hand…” And what’s up with the tariffs, McKinley? Seriously…what is up?
Zachary Taylor
Good ol’ “Rough and Ready” apparently wasn’t rough enough to live for more than a year serving as president. But hey, that’s okay—you know why? MILLARD FILLMORE TOOK OVER FOR HIM!! WOOOO!!!
William Henry Harrison
This guy made the longest inaugural speech ever. This was his undoing, for he died of pneumonia a month later. I will honor his memory with a nice short ranking.
John Calvin Coolidge
He is considered one of the lesser presidents. Why? He didn’t really do anything. He sat in his little chair for six years and didn’t really get the whole concept of these “farm” things that were all across the country. He did do that thing with the Federal Radio Commission, though, but he failed to acknowledge the skyrocketing stock market, which was one of the main reasons the Depression occurred. Hm…the “stock market.” Must be farmer jargon or something.
Rutherford Birchard Hays
Ah, what would the United States have done without Rutherford Birchard Hays? Wait…who was Rutherford Birchard Hays? I dunno, but his nickname was “His Fraudulency.” Nobody liked him, probably because he was honest. He had to reign in crazy Grant’s administration’s work! Plus, he only won by one electoral vote and lost the popular…sound familiar?
Franklin Pierce
Haha…”Handsome Frank” has got to be the best nickname in the universe. Although Pierce really didn’t do anything. Nothing. His whole presidency can be summed up in one sentence: “The Compromise of 1850 rocked, at least until those new states showed up—I’m just gonna sign this act and then fade into obscurity, okay?”
Benjamin Harrison
Another president who really didn’t do anything—no scandals, even! That’s…scandalous! I think he just sat there day after day on the porch, occasionally saying, “I think I’d like some lemonade” or “I have to take a poo.” Seriously, his life was basically womb to Indianapolis to D.C. to Indianapolis to grave. Wee.
John Tyler
Mr. Tyler was the first to become president without being elected to the post. He kinda screwed up in the beginning by creating a Bank of the United States, which caused all but one of his cabinet members to resign. He did help with Texas…oh wait.
Dwight David Eisenhower
Truman felt he lacked a backbone, Nixon loved the hell out of him (not literally, though). He was a segregationist, which knocks him down a few pegs, but he also brought in the troops to help stop the blocked desegregation of Central High in Little Rock, so that brings him back up a few. How do you get “Ike” out of “Dwight David Eisenhower,” though? Back down a peg.
James Abram Garfield
Ah, Garfield—with your tabby hair and fondness for lasagna. How Jon puts up with you is a mystery. What would the daily paper be without your antics? You’re the best cat in the world.
Oh wait.
James Earl Carter
Carter’s been put in the bottom 10 for most of these presidential ranking things, so just because of that, he’s my 11th bottom. Haha. He brought integrity and simplicity to the White House, but he also had that whole thing with the hostage crisis in Iran. And that whole Soviet Union thing.
Lyndon Baines Johnson
Kennedy is assassinated. This guy steps in as president. He attempted the Great Society and ended up with failing in the Vietnam War. He did have a couple civil discussions with MLK Jr., though.
Herbert Clark Hoover
This guy did not like war veterans…he seemed to be allergic to them. This guy handled the Depression like an eggshell handles a brick. This guy basically was pessimism embedded in a president. Basically, he sucked (haha, get it? Hoover vacuums? Hahaha…).
John Quincy Adams
This guy had the future in mind when he became president. However, he basically failed at everything he did. He had no social skills, no loyal supporters, and died on the floor of the House (that musta sucked). But we must cut him some slack; he was only number six, guys…we had to wait until number 13 (Millard Fillmore) to get the art of the presidency down.
Martin Van Buren
This is one weird-looking fellow. What the crap did he do? “Rose from obscurity…uh-huh…no qualms about supporting slave-holding states…uh-huh…”Martin Van Ruin”…haha…avoided war over Canada…damn…” Interesting. I don’t know if I approve of you, Van the Man…
Warren Gamaliel Harding
Nice! Another president upon whose street we’ve lived on! Harding invented the term “normalcy” and apparently the word “scandal”—he was involved in about six million during his presidency—Teapot Dome, anyone? Damn you, Interior Secretary Albert Fall, damn you!
Richard Milhous Nixon
Aahahaha …the nose…no nickname…Watergate…this guy should have been a comedian. But instead, we got this non-crook, ex-lawyer, SALT-I promoting Pinocchio as a president. Good times back in the 1960s…good times.
Andrew Johnson
Oh, snap! Impeachment! Misunderstanding, or pure jackassery? I’d say the latter, though it all could’ve been based on looks. This guy looks like Buddy Hackett on heroine. Seriously.
George Herbert Walker Bush
Ah, the lesser of two evils—the way the first third-degree burn is better than the second one. Wait, this guy passed the Clean Air Act?! WTF? Ah, well. I honestly don’t remember this guy being president. Sure, I was 1-5 years old during his term, but I remember my first sippy cup, and I don’t think I got that at age six. Anyway, his nickname was “Poppy,” and I can only conclude with laughter as I imagine the nicknames certain parts of his body must’ve had…
Andrew Jackson
How this guy got on the $20 bill, I don’t know. He vetoed the hell out of everything and basically used his power to block Congress if he thought it was wrong. Plus, he was a total ass to the Native Americans (not really an unusual thing back then, but hey…he was a real jerk). He did all this after promising the opposite in his inaugural address, by the way.
George Walker Bush
How this hobo got elected twice is beyond me. I guess it just shows the true stupidity of at least half this country. I don’t have much more to say…you all know THIS story.
“You’re a fool, Marianne! A horrible, hopeless fool!”
Francis Tovelty: I’m finding myself liking this guy. No one’s ever heard of him. Though I’m not sure I agree with some of his ideas, he makes a few good points. I might post one of his longer writings on here later, but here are a few quotes:
~”There are no deities, there are no destinies. There is only darkness, and within it the relentless parade of man’s ideas, grasping for truth and meaning.”
~”Men, of all the creatures on earth, place the most emphasis on perfection and strive for it our entire lives. Yet men, of all the creatures on earth, find perfection the least often.”
~”Had I been born a fish, I would have led a life filled with more intellect, self-exploration, and interest than the lives of half the characters in popular books today.” (this is so true, especially today…)
~”It is humans alone who suffer the malady of conscious thought. Through it, we blindly seek truth. It is conscious though that has elevated us above natural naivety and propelled us into a world caught between the animal and the divine. Therefore we must ask—why must such injustice be inflicted upon souls so unready?”
ANEEEEEEEEEEEEL!!
Sharma? It’s your BIRTHDAY?! OMG!
Ahem.
Anyway, here’s a list of random births/deaths/crap that happened on your birthday in history! And go!
~Sharon Stone is born (1958)
~Comet Shoemaker-Holt 2 makes its closest approach to Earth (1.9245 AU) (1997)
~O. J. Simpson jury reaches decision on $25M in punitive damages (1997)
~U.S. performs nuclear test at Nevada Test Site (1989)
~28 skiers perform backflips while holding hands, Bromont, Quebec (1982) (Gahahaha….)
~”Da Ya Think I’m Sexy?” by Rod Stewart peaks at #1 (1979) (Aneel’s theme song!)
~WW II peace treaties signed (1947)
~Tom and Jerry created by Hanna and Barbera debut by MGM (1940)
Have a happy B-day!
Eigenblogger 