Tuesday, January 03, 2006


Horns win by double digits against a top 5 team, on the road. I should be ecstatic, but I can't get over our turnover rate, or for that matter our turnover to assist ratio, especially from the frontcourt. Gibson, Abrams, Paulino, and Tucker have a collective ratio of 151-127 (A-TO). And really, it's only that good because Paulino is 43-21. Without him, the other three are a sad 108-106 - effectively one to one. It's really painful to watch. Also, I know it would fuck up the rotation a bit, but can we please move P.J. back down to the 4 spot? The man was born to post up. Set him and Lamarcus on the blocks and let them get to work. Please. These are the two must-fix issues on my list. I'll call Rick tomorrow and let him know.


I was out at lunch a few weeks back with a couple guys I work with. For some reason, everyone was in pretentious mode and decided the conversation would measure just how cultured each of us were. The majority of the first half was a name slinging contest of hipster Midtown restaurants. Blah. I sat through and listened to them list off one after another. Eventually, talk shifted to reading lists. Ahh, I win.

"Vince, what do you like to read?"

"Well, I go through phases. History, popular science, literature, science-fiction and fantasy. I always seem to return to theology and philosophy, though."

"Wow, theology and philosophy? Aren't those contradictory tastes?"


Where to begin with a question like that? It is a constant source of amazement to me that people so easily brush off the idea that a common truth can be reached from two different starting points. Such is the nature of the explorations of both theology and philosophy, yet whence was this truism lost? Probably at about the same time that Pilate's question was left on the table for atheists, post-modernists, and deconstructionists (synonyms?) to dissect and destroy, and that truth as a reality was abandoned to the wind.

The effective definition of a word is a powerful thing. When modern philosophy is defined and studied in such a way as to exclude God, as both a premise and possible conclusion, the effects are far-reaching. So are we presented with the modern pseudo-dilemma of reconciling science and religion. Science - that great lens of the metaphysical - has always been intimately connected with philosophy. An analagous claim can be made regarding theology and religion. Tragically, as a result of a steady decoupling of God from his created world over the past few centuries, we are left with science in its modern incarnation - as hollow a thing as the philosophy that drives it.


At 12:23 PM, January 03, 2006, Blogger angel, jr. said...

I think people who have to say "I'm cultured" really aren't.

At 4:20 PM, January 03, 2006, Anonymous bass said...

"Pilate's question was left on the table for atheists, post-modernists, and deconstructionists"
??? i was positive that the atheists prefer tae bo and the modernist were all about the jazzercize.

At 5:20 PM, January 03, 2006, Blogger Vince said...

And deconstructionists... well, they really push the South Beach Diet.


Post a Comment

<< Home