Mormon Malcor?

Google Books has some amazing stuff. And it integrates really well with the Google Notebook and Blogger. I have discovered that many Malcors were also coal mine inspectors (and it lists their ages and post offices as well as the date they were certified.)

This next discovery needs more connection, "Clement" isn't a family name I'm familiar with:

Journal of History By Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints: "organist Morgan John Smith stake president was with them November 12 to 15 By nomination of a priesthood meeting recommendation of the branch and approval of the stake authorities Clement Malcor was ordained a teacher and David J Williams a deacon January 3 1904 On December 24 the Sunday school gave a cantata entitled Santa Claus at his best netting $27.50 It was repeated the following evening for the benefit of William Erb now in the hospital at Des Moines netting $26.50 The branch has lost six members by removal"

Ultimate Treehouse

Some things just ring true....


When I was a kid did have a cool tree full of wood and chairs and stuff. It was far from "Ultimate Treehouse" (that is better developed in your brain [where there is no building code]).

:-Dan

Scientist vs. Engineer

This really speaks to me:

---

Sad Truth: Most "mad scientists" are actually just mad engineers

---

Same goes for confusing science with technology....

:-Dan

Defining science

I just started reading: The Mind's I: Fantasies and Reflections on Self and Soul by Douglas R. Hofstadter and Daniel C. Dennett. It has been on the shelf for a while and really needs reading.

In the Introduction on page six we have (in my opinion) both a good and a bad use of the word "science" (it really does not matter what the surrounding text says):

Good: "It took science to discover the answer."
Bad: "Science teaches us that there are no such things as souls."

It is best to viewed science as a method, that can be used to discover answers. Once we start talking about what science teaches we are heading for trouble (and a possible accusation of scientism).

We might say that there has been no evidence for souls that the methods of science can work on. Or that science has been used to disprove every testable theory for how something like a soul might work (I'm thinking of things like Descartes' suggestion that the pineal gland was the seat of the soul).

Typing this (AKA: Thinking with my Fingers), reminds me that defining "science" is a non-trivial topic and even if I were qualified to pursue it, I would not produce anything both simple and generally agreed upon. Take this as personal preference.

:-Dan

Note: I so dislike reading the word "science" in proper case that I reworded every sentence where I started with "science", just to avoid the capital "S". Maybe I have issues :-).