It is almost weekend, thou I need to do work this weekend.
I went to bed yesterday around 1 AM, and first woke up at 7:40 AM.
I still need to adjust those time. The mistake was to aim to rest few minutes more. I actually I git up at 9:10 AM. Extremely late.
I spent at home the morning, and arrived at 1:20 PM to campus for lunch.
I did some readings, search for additional data, I need for mapping.
I invested about an hour in the late afternoon trying to figure out how to solve Bootcamp for Windows. I have not run ArcGIS in my Mac, I usually do it in the PCs on campus, but this week is a transition between the Spring and Summer session, so the labs are were not available.
I forgot the Windows password that I set in the BootCamp in this computer, a while ago. I deleted the BootCamp. I actually will run Windows here with a VMWare. One of the problems is that I was not allowed to download another version of Windows with educational license because it seems that we can get just one. Tomorrow, I need to check those things on campus or rather get a license for saving time.
The research path, on the other hand, is getting a clear path. Now, it is time to get efficient to it. Many academics advance a lot during Summer time.
I got home at 8 PM for dinner. I have some leftovers from the succulent lunch for dinner, which I added French potatoes, cooked not fried, and some fruit mix.
I had also some time to reflect in the night to some life events tracing back to the end of elementary school, and my teenagehood. I will type some of these events in the draft section. If I have time some day, I will make a post.
Now it is time to sleep. The newspaper deliver person left it in front of the building sometime between 6 AM to 7:30 AM. Sometimes that I have checked at 7:00 AM is not there.
In any case, the person has been extremely kind to write in the bag ‘do not steal’ followed by my studio number. The problem is that about 7-10 to times the newspapers since February the newspaper has not been there. Last time was on Tuesday, which is understandable, because I checked it late. I need to get the exact timing of the newspaper delivering person, to who I am also grateful for doing a good job.
Last thing on the day, I am reporting my daily activities from an audience or to myself.
My brain is a bit tired, though now. I will try to make a coherent post.
I apologize that last post, from May 20, I just went off from my daily journal to reporting which videos I have watched or skimmed over the last days. While I went on with the topic about debates between theists and atheists; and about the profiles of people I found very interesting to follow, and read more, the post did not have a coherence. Well it is a reminder to the purpose of this blog. I keep a journal of life, see the front page. Writing and getting out that is a very good healing process. Also those posts are first drafts. I usually do not reread them. Sometimes, if I recall something, I make an update, which is indicated in brackets.
Yesterday and today, I broke bad waking up times record, and bed sleeping times record. 11 AM. The problem was that on Tuesday, I slept at 4 AM, and today at 3 AM. While yesterday, my biological body wake up at 6 AM, I needed some extra sleep for get things on the day. Those are of course embarrassing awaking times. My role is to bring them back to normal 5:30 AM. Today, I was appointed a meeting either at 11:30 AM or 12 PM in an e-mail that arrived at 5:40 AM. After reporting myself in the morning, I said I will arrive at 11:40 AM, which actually was 11:53 AM.
I reported my work and grading. I had lunch around 12:40 PM, and further was able print and organize reports, which from a lack of a reminder or second announcement, we had most only in digital format.
It was a good afternoon, though, I need to organize printing material that is standing on my desk. Most are materials from teaching, and from the prior exam preparation.
I invested some time on sending an important message.
I wrote a short essay as well.
This week is a recession week on campus between the Spring semester and the first academic session of the Summer. I need to access to a PC for accessing to software for mapping. While I can do that with a bootcamp in my computer; under the time restrictions, tomorrow I will use the PCs of the Engineering Library at 9 AM, as Wurster Library will be opened at 1 PM, and the computer rooms are closed this week.
If I need to do further mapping work over the weekend. Then, I can invest the additional time on setting it up on my computer.
I should get rid of that habit because the morning start late as well then.
I checked the newspaper at breakfast. Opened a framed cork board that I bought for pining up my schedule and to do list. Still I need to get some nails for hanging it in the wall.
I stayed at home in the morning. I prayed, read Thomas Aquinas, comment on a post from a friend, had lunch, and left to campus.
I did grading during the afternoon, and took a 20 minute nap.
I submitted my grading, and tried to buy 100 percentage chocolate, but the Berkeley Student Food Collective store is close until May 28.
I was able to get to the Poulet to get some food for dinner.
It was interesting to listen a podcast from William Lane Craig, who is prominent Christian Philosopher, apologist, and created a program called Reasonable Faith. He is a very good debater. You can check out many of his debates against the Atheist. What I was listening was about his story on how he met his wife and his life with her. https://www.reasonablefaith.org/media/reasonable-faith-podcast/when-bill-met-jan/
The lesson was great about the time commitment that he put aside for his wife. This time was nights and weekends. He respected the commitment. Then, his wife, Jan, give a lot to him, while she was more flexible during finals. The limit time pushed Dr. Craig to be more effective at work.
I definitely have a lot to learn from Dr. Craig, and I am grateful with him for evangelizing in a short assessment I did. However, still for the protestants, I do not have a clear reason, why they left the Catholic Church, which track back his origens to Jesus, who delegated it to Peter. The Catholic Church also acknowledge the Judaism, as it is based in the Old Testament, and acknowledges that Jesus came to correct it. Beyond this clear data and evidence, one can push for reforms, but I did not see the need to leave from it, unless there is a major event.
I skimmed, or passed quickly, an interesting dialogue between Bishop Barron and Dr. Craig from 2018. Both are very respectful, and they agreed to made it a dialogue rather than a debate. Both are very active evangelist. From them I have learnt about the Apologetics, and Bishop Barron have opened my curiosity about Saint Thomas Aquinas, who I am reading currently.
In that dialogue, I learned that both of them wake up at 5:30 AM.
I learned about a bit more how to pray, and they opened my curiosity about the Fathers of the Church.
Dr. Peter Kreef is a charismatic speaker, who was raised as Calvinist. He thinks that the best two things in his life was to convert to Catholicism and to marry his wife. Following a short introduction about him. He has the fame to be a prolific and productive author. I have not read his books yet, but just here I have mentioned three excellent contemporanean authors. He had studied Thomas Aquinas, and write a book, which extract the best from Aquinas’ books. It could have same some time, but I happy, I am reading piece by piece Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles, which consists on 4 volumes in 5 books. I also got 2 volumes from Saint Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae.
Some things to read, in separate time, without hopefully investing too much time on these videos, which I can say are illustrative.
I have seen plenty of debates of these people among others, against the Four Horsemen of Atheism: clockwise from top left: Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, and Sam Harris.
I reviewed more carefully video 4. Dr. Craig is a great debater. I think they got a great team in 2010, and had strong points against the atheist. Many atheist fear Dr. Craig in general, if you search him in the web. He is a great Evangelist. I sustain my theory that as we continue evolving we continue understanding and exploring our question about God. D’Souza in 2009 also had strong arguments that made me reflect, and I think made reflect the opposition as well. He was debating at that time against three out of the four Four Horsemen of the New Atheism. I need to read more about them as well. Those are men of morals, who have not allowed themselves to humble and seek for God, and for wisdom and understanding through prayer. They limit knowledge to science, and everything else is uncertain. I disagree that it is a holistic view of the Universe, and our purpose. There are morals, wisdom, and knowledge that does not come from science. Check Saint Catherine of Siena.
Still, as I said, I will read a bit more about Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, and Sam Harris to can talk about them. Bishop Barrons endorsed Christopher Hitchens (+) as a unique character, defending his values, and a person of morals, and passionated about what he defended. In a random search, some heaters accuse him from alcoholism. He, as seems, a transparent man, did not hold back, and spoke about the benefits of alcohol consumption in his life. He said “alcohol makes other people less tedious, and food less bland, and can help provide what the Greeks called entheos, or the slight buzz of inspiration when reading or writing.” I do not agree with that, but I after skimming that article, I admire his efficiency. He has been a highly productive writer. He said he never had missed a deadline. He had never arrived late. He produced thousands of printable words per day. He gives about 4 lectures per month. Still, I do not know that much about him.
Richard Dawkins rather seems a bit arrogant. Still, I do not too much about him. All of those are some impressions, on some procrastination, where I build my arguments and faith.
About Andres Roemer, organizer of the event Ciudad de las Ideas, seems to be an interesting character. He did his PhD in Public Policy at UC Berkeley. He had brought those debates to the public discourse as he explores his own believes. When I watched the 2010 debate, (Video 4), I though that he should have been more prepared about the introduction to the speakers. I thought he just was a showman. In that introduction to the speakers he praised Dr. Dawkins, and kind of asked to the others who you are and what books you have read. I think the moderator should introduce himself to the speakers. He also praised too much Prof. Michio Kaku. I am not against praising them. They deserve due to their hard and influential work. However, he had 6 speakers, so please treat all of them equally respectful.
Richard Dawkins have declined to debate against Professor William Craig for several occasions. Why?
Dr. Sam Harris seems to be a rational persons, however, lacks of emotions or passions in his debates. Still, I do not that much about him, and his writings, rather two videos that I have seem him, which I even passed quickly. He did debate against Dr. William Craig in 2011 at University of Notre Dame.
Dr. William Craig also debated Christopher Hitchens, on April 4, 2009 at Biola University, about the question Does God exist? It seemed to me a great debate. Both are good debaters. I did not watched all the arguments in detail, but Dr. Craig seems that was much more convincing. I did not check if there was a verdict. I think he won the debate from what I saw. Beyond that the point is that they bring important questions to the table and to rationality of faith, and hopefully to open some seeking to God to the unbelievers, who have not search for Him, and rather want a probe, often in the podium.
I forgot to mention from the debates from Ciudad de las Ideas, video 4 and video 5, that I do not like the center agnostic please. I hope that they take the decision to move forward to a side, but they cannot argue that both sides are wrong. Dr. Michio Kaku did that in 2010, and Robert Wright did that in 2009. The parts I listened from Dr. Wright were not that convincing. At least I would prefer to take a position.
I have not read that much about Dr. Daniel Dennett. there is a TED talk I watched few minutes of it some time ago. This is the second time that I see him in a debate (Video 5). He looks a respectable man. His age made him look with some wisdom. I cannot recall the video, I saw long time ago , in video 10, I see in the beginning he said let’s teach about religion. It can be in that TED talk or in other, were he still took an insulting position to religions. Well, that is his position. He is one of the 4 horseman of the new atheism, who have not allowed themselves to go beyond rationality and search for god in the prayers.
Regarding the other speakers in the ciudad de las ideas. I did paid more attention to the 2010 event. Rabbi David Wolpe looked passionated and emotional. Honestly, I skimmed so I cannot recall his arguments. He seems that took personally a point. He as the others next speakers, I know even less than the ones I referred before, but it is fair to at least give my impressions.
Douglas Geivett seemed that had some points and was well prepared. I might look further about him. Michael Shermer seems to be an author that I will also look further more. He was in the atheist site, but raised some interesting points. I cannot recall the arguments by Matt Ridley, while he seemed a good scientist, I got an impression that the fields of Theology and Philosophy looked unfamiliar to him, same as to Dawkins in that debate. It might be just an impression as I do not that much about those authors.
In the debate from 2009, the speakers that I had left to mention were Rabbi Shmuley Boteach and Nassim Taleb. Rabbi Shmuley Boteach was passionated but it got personal and lost. I did not watched in detail the 2009 debate, beyond some strong points from D’Souza. Rabbi Boteach seems that did not acknowledged well the theory of the evolution. That is a mistake. The theological debate cannot be traced back centuries. He need a good scientific background. In general the current theological thinking is that the theory of evolution also supports God. At least, in my personal opinion, there is not conflict between science and God. The problem is that some scientist want to reduce knowledge and wisdom to science. I do not think that Nassim Taleb did that well, but again I just skimmed the debate.
Back to the Catholic professor champion, Dr. Peter Kreef, he interestingly highlighted very good points about Muslim in a conversation in this topic against one of his former students. (Video 11). That video came across, and I myself, have read few pages (56) of the Koran. I mentioned this, because my impressions from the 2009 debate are not because of the religious affiliation of the speaker that I mentioned. Well, I can be able to talk more about Dr. Kreef, after I learn more from him, and to talk after the Koran after I finish it. However, I do agree that it rescue some good points from the Old and New Testaments. Interestingly, Dr. Kreef was playing the role of defending Muslim in that conversation. Beyond what they have covered there, which again, I just skimmed, in one of the curiosity procrastinations to learn about Dr. Kreef, I respect the five times of praying from the Muslim in a day, and their strength during the fasting period, which I can tell from some Muslim friends. [Following an update on 5/21/2019]: The problem I have with Muslim, is why Mohamed restricted his followers to read the Old and New Testaments? Why we tried to change them? Those changes and restrictions of Bible, which is catalogued as Divine, made me skeptical from Mohamed. Was there any divine intervention to him, or was it just his idea. Why to restrict his followers to read the Bible? (Aquinas, ~1250)
Finally, actually second last, a debate that I really enjoyed the part I watched. It was in the early years from Dr. William Lane Craig, June 27, 1993. The debate was about Atheism vs. Christianity: Which Way Does the Evidence Point?, where Dr. Craig debated Frank R. Zindler, at Willow Creek Community Church, South Barrington, IL.
Finally, a Catholic defensor champion, Ann Widdecombe. She participated in 2009 in a debate in London, about The Catholic Church is a Force for Good in the World (Video 13). I just watched her opening speech, which was kind of a rebuttal to Hitchens as well. The panel of speakers was conformed by Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens on the atheist site, against Archbishop John Onaiyekan and Ann Widdecombe over the defense of the Catholic Church. Ann Widdecombe speeach was very conving. Since, then I look forward to learn a bit more about her as well.
The content of this post obviously changed from a report from the day, to a report of sources to authors about theism and atheism. Those influential authors, and those debates, have expanded my curiosity and knowledge about God, and hopefully have prepared me better to explain my arguments to support my faith and the Catholic Church, in addition to my personal experience, which is an important argument as well.
I have learned, still a bit, about these group of Apologetics, which seems to be the people contributing with knowledge to Christianity. I think that there are also branches of apologetics in Christianity, which you can explore by Googling Christian Apologetics. To finish this with one quotes from a site, which seems to be discontinued, Catholic Apologetics Academy: “”always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks you for the hope that is in you, but do it with gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15-16). It also encourages us to “earnestly contend for the Faith” (Jude 1:3).”
Regarding videos, I embedded here, so you can further check in YouTube for the source. Regarding some citation in the text, those were mainly from websites, except full book names that I also mentioned in the text, the author and name of the book. Links to websites, when I referred to them are embeded. Finally, a reference to an audio interview is also embedded.
I acknowledge that this is not the best way to cite. I ended up writing a long post of many sources I have checked over the last 3 weeks. I do not want to invest more time, on formatting the citations, and there might not be need for it here. I am glad I put these sources here for some reference at some time. However, I will focus next on my own work, and on some of the reading material I mentioned here.
[The following reference updated on 5/21/2019]:
Aquinas, T., 1975. Summa Contra Gentiles: Book One: God, translated by A. C. Pegis. University of Notre Dame Pess.
You can skip this post. What a start, but this is only to update that I moved the last two posts from the drafts to public.
One was on March 25. A day I felt I did not good work. So I was expressing the guilty of day, which lasted few days, but anyways. I do not why I did not posted right away. I remembered it was a Monday. I ordered food at home, so I left Wurster fast. I made wanted to add something else, but at the end things tasks that are not finished on that moment are delayed forever. That is why I like the philosophy of my blog of posting my first drafts. Although, I might be transitioning to more research oriented topic, and not just related with my research that I do at sun light, but still using electricity.
I am switching the next couple of posts to answer and to post some of the questions that I have in mind. Those are in the field of theology, philosophy, and the later would be more cultural. Still, simple questions, where I aim to continue exploring a reasonable faith, but still unconditional.
Another draft that I left on hold, says May 7. It was an update on my research, and how acknowledging mistakes, allows one see. I just shared an experience from last week. I think I went to a review session, by the point that I was writing, but now a week after, I better post as it was, rather to add something to it. That post belonged to the daily updates.
Although I made a mistake last night to rest for a bit in the night in the bed, which turned on to fall asleep until about 2 AM, where I washed my face turned lights off, and slept properly, today was a fairly enriching day.
I check the newspaper in the morning, had breakfast, went to the 11 AM mass. Then, I explored a part of Berkeley that I have not been before. I went to to buy fish at Monterey Fish Market, North West area from Berkeley. i had lunch in that area, and packed dinner as well.
The area has a good residential atmosphere.
In the afternoon, I went to campus. I finished a map, from my prospectus. Although, those are little steps. It felt good to make some progress.
It was also good to be working in the computer lab with a diverse group of Architects, Urban Planners, Landscape Architects, and Environmental Planners. I will recur more often to that place.
Unfortunately, I had to decline a dinner invitation. It was not expected to have that one, but I had to work. It was a good decision. Despite I do not like to decline invitations.
The week ends. Among the highlights, i accepted a job offer, starting on August 1.
My current job, ends on May 31. I will invest my full June and July working on my qualification exams.