<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0" 
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
  xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
  xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
<channel>
<title>thinking reed</title>
<link>http://www.blogigo.co.uk/felix</link>
<description>miscellaneous reflections of a traditional Catholic </description>
<language>en</language>
<dc:creator>felixthedude</dc:creator>
<dc:publisher>felixthedude</dc:publisher>
<pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2005 11:35:54 +0100</pubDate>
<sy:updatePeriod>daily</sy:updatePeriod>
<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
<item>
<title>Reflections on the Revolution in France</title>
<description>  It is not a civil war  
  There&#039;s been wide-spread rioting but it&#039;s not civil war. &amp;nbsp;  There   is no clash of rival political or ideological systems.  
    
  Tragically, one person has been killed so far.&amp;nbsp; But the fact there has been only one death shows the limited nature of these events. &amp;nbsp;    
    
  It is not an Islamic uprising  
  The rioters are Muslims, but they are not acting from Islamic motivation. &amp;nbsp;  In fact, leaders of the French Islamic community have been condemning the riots. &amp;nbsp;    
    
  However ...&amp;nbsp; If these young men have no prospects and no status, they are prime candidates for the jihadist ideology. &amp;nbsp;  As Wahabis, they can have meaning to life and feel superior to a society that rejects them.  
    
  What should the French authorities do?  
    
  Order is the first imperative.&amp;nbsp; The police should be allowed to shoot rioters. &amp;nbsp;  If this fails, the army should be called in.  
    
  And afterwards? &amp;nbsp;   
  Re-introduce...</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2005 11:35:54 +0100</pubDate>
<link>http://www.blogigo.co.uk/felix/Reflections-on-the-Revolution-in-France/4/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.blogigo.co.uk/felix/Reflections-on-the-Revolution-in-France/4/</guid>
</item><item>
<title>fundamentally, ID doesn&#039;t work</title>
<description>  
 We were talking about Intelligent Design at lunch. &amp;nbsp;   
 As I understand it, ID says the changes involved in the evolutionary model are so unlikely that they can’t have resulted from a purely random process, of the kind which required by classic Darwinian theory. &amp;nbsp;   
 This kind of argument starts quite scientifically. &amp;nbsp;  It gives a statistical analysis of empirical data, and concludes that there must have been a trans-biological mechanism. (Which is not to say that the analysis is actually correct.) 
 But the argument doesn’t establish the nature of the intervening mechanism. &amp;nbsp;  While the mechanism would have to be over and above genetic mutations, the ID people don’t prove that it   is   God. &amp;nbsp;   
 And the only way they can show this is by doing the classical arguments for God’s existence. &amp;nbsp;  
 &amp;nbsp; </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 08:31:14 +0100</pubDate>
<link>http://www.blogigo.co.uk/felix/fundamentally-ID-doesn-t-work/3/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.blogigo.co.uk/felix/fundamentally-ID-doesn-t-work/3/</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Do we dream in music ?</title>
<description> Last night, I dreamt that I was telling a friend that a hymn was being sung too slowly, so I started singing it at the right speed. &amp;nbsp;   
 The point of this story? &amp;nbsp; To show t hat we can dream music. &amp;nbsp;  (Probably no news for a musician, but I haven’t noticed this before.) &amp;nbsp;   
 The background to the dream? &amp;nbsp;  Perhaps because the choir was singing a hymn too slowly last Sunday. &amp;nbsp;   
 The hymn (that I was singing)? &amp;nbsp;  Wesley’s  Christ the Lord is risen today . &amp;nbsp;   </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2005 01:14:50 +0200</pubDate>
<link>http://www.blogigo.co.uk/felix/Do-we-dream-in-music/2/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.blogigo.co.uk/felix/Do-we-dream-in-music/2/</guid>
</item><item>
<title>a criterion for sanity?</title>
<description>  I&#039;ve got four cases at work involving people who have loose contacts with reality.&amp;nbsp; They irrationally spend heaps of energy in pursuing unwinnable causes.&amp;nbsp; And they&#039;re into conspiracy theories.&amp;nbsp;   
  I was commenting on this to a colleague, when he cheerfully asked, &quot;And what makes you think you&#039;re sane and they&#039;re not?&quot;  
  Well, one answer is that I take that&amp;nbsp;question seriously.&amp;nbsp; While these people can&#039;t even entertain the possibility that their thinking processes might be faulty.&amp;nbsp;   
     So there&#039;s an  empirical&amp;nbsp;test for checking whether you&#039;re sane:&amp;nbsp; can you question whether you might be wrong?    
   &amp;nbsp; </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:59:32 +0200</pubDate>
<link>http://www.blogigo.co.uk/felix/a-criterion-for-sanity/1/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.blogigo.co.uk/felix/a-criterion-for-sanity/1/</guid>
</item></channel>	
</rss>