Cats Killed My Parents

Detroit Police Department
Evidence File # 962JT700-1
Filed: November 24. 2012
Category: Recovered Journal Entry
Subject: Adrian Henske
Date: Unknown/Unspecified

Cats killed my parents 37 years ago. There hasn't been a night that's gone by that I don't think about it. Revenge has consumed me. My innocence is gone. My single, solitary thought is bent on finding them. I'll do whatever it takes...

I've begun taking on particular behaviors to try to get inside the mind of a cat. I groom myself by licking my hand and patting my hair down, then repeating this process several times. Yeah, I know it's not very sanitary. Sometimes I wake up with a bad hair day, and no amount of saliva can get my hair to stay down. I don't know how they do it, but I think I'm getting closer...

Questions haunt me. Why cats? Where have they gone? How do I find them? I don't know! My Kitten's Mittens® scratching post provides me little relief from this never-ending torment.

I know what they say. They try and tell me that a cat's average life span is 15 years, and that the cats who killed my parents couldn't possibly be alive today, but there's just something in my gut, this sick feeling, something I can't ever get rid of, that tells me they're out there somewhere, walking around, meowing, occasionally falling off things, yet landing on all fours. Yeah, they're out there all right. And I'm gonna' find them...

End of journal entry.

In Transition

I'm still trying to figure out who I am. I'm in transition and it's hard to deal with. I want to be an organized, responsible, disciplined person in order to effective for God's ministry and for life. I used to be lazy, disorganized, irresponsible and selfish. God has shown me that in order to function spiritually on even a basic level I have to embrace these disciplines. When I do, I thrive. The problem is I don't really know how to do this. I'm in the midst of a complete reprogramming.

For most of my life, I've lived in laziness and selfishness, so it's so easy to default back to these things. Not only that, but I know almost nothing else, so it's very hard for me to move forward because I have no preexisting format or example to follow.

And here I am, living a lifestyle that demands ultimate discipline because of the realistically limited time I have: I'm a full-time student, I work 15 hours a week (which includes rather concentrated shifts, not just spread out nicely throughout the week), I have to commute, and my dietary restrictions don't afford me the convenience of being able to quickly throw together a meal; I have to spend a good amount of time cooking and preparing most of my food in advance. I've got a lot going on that leaves little room for distractions. So I pay for it if there's any time spent not being utterly responsible. Time is so precious right now that I have very little wiggle room. Arguably I don't actually have enough time, so often time has to be created at the expense of lost sleep. This is especially true if I want to fulfill my expectations for my performance in school, specifically excelling and getting A's. (I should mention that "A's" aren't necessarily important, but my understanding and grasp of the material, as well as my engagement with it is reflected by higher grades.)

The problem is, I'm so disorganized, easily distracted and terrible at effectively using my time that too much time is wasted by either doing nothing or doing stuff that isn't that important. This is a problem because I honestly cannot afford to lose any time, and am likely failing most of my classes as a result. FAILING.

I have periods where I do really good, but it's usually inconsistent or never permanent. It'd be one thing if I was mostly consistent in my discipline and occasionally had periods where I got off track, but unfortunately the exact reverse is true. I cannot afford this.

So here I am, stuck in transition, at a time where I need to be disciplined, yet am not, and have to watch it all unfold before my eyes, to my utter horror. This is incredibly frustrating. I want to be a good student. I want to be disciplined and excel in my schoolwork. I can technically afford to get bad grades because it's all on me. I'm the one who stands to fail, and no one really goes down on this ship with me but me. But I want to be effective for God's ministry. I cannot afford to be behaving like this if I expect to be employed and participate at a professional level. For the real world, I can't get away with this. I'll be fired or never hired.

Aside from the secular things, I don't want to be ineffective for God. When people are lost and dying, I don't want to be sitting around wasting my time with television or video games (or insert your selfish distraction of choice) when that could be time spent honing my writing--for example--or doing something similarly Christ-minded. This I cannot afford. Time is too short. We have to live desperately for Christ or the world is lost.

So I don't want to wait for things to slacken to become effective for God. I don't want to wait to have less responsibilities to allow myself a better focus. I want to be a good steward of where God has me now. It's doable.

Lord, I need your strength to get me through this. I need your providence to build me up and make me effective for you. I can't do this without you.

Lord, thank you for transition. Even though I'm frustrated at where I'm at because I know and can see where I need to be, it is transition towards that person. You are molding me into the man you need me to be, and this is just the journey towards that. Thank you Lord that this transition is in constant continuum, that daily you are renewing me and that you will finish your good work in me.

Unasked-For Advice 1

Today's unasked-for advice: Freshmen probably shouldn't date.

Why Men Pull Away

I just saw an ad titled, "Why Men Pull Away," hinting at the hidden secret to heal repeated heart-break. There wasn't any explanation or description, they just want you to click on the link and find out the answer to this "mystery." But why not try to really answer this question instead of compensating for it? Let's start at the source and stop trying to redirect the blame for men's action onto the women for something they did or failed to do. Let's call men to account. Let's stop excusing men's irresponsibility. Let's stop being okay with women being treated as anything less than God's beautiful creation. The honest truth is, too many men are selfish and immature, so they cannot even begin to grasp what it means to pursue a woman (thus leaving women to the task of this displaced duty), and women don't seem to realize that their individual worth is of a much higher value than what is indicated by the way men often treat them.

Sure, there are things people can always improve about themselves, especially in selfless consideration of the other person. But there needs to be a healthy and realistic understanding of true self-worth before any consideration is ever given to any sort of "solutions." If we start there, at that bare minimum with no concessions, then we'll begin to understand that the answers we seek from the world to mend our broken, weary hearts will never satisfy. In their eyes, you'll never be good enough. Let's turn to God and who He says we are: meticulously and wonderfully crafted, made in His image. If a man can see that, he's not going to be able to pull away.

Summer Writing Scraps Vol. III

I'm trying to accomplish some writing this summer. I'll be posting some tidbits here, though most of my more serious, potentially final work won't make it on to the internet.

***

[Currently Untitled]

Harold checked his watch. Half past two. She was late. She was never late. Out of all the "meetings" they had had together in the past three months, she was never late--except for now.

Harold shifted in his seat. He had no choice but to wait. After all, she had something he wanted. It was a pity he'd have to take it from her like this. He'd bgun to enjoy their little relationship, but after this it would have to end.

Harold knew very little about her. Theirs was a business relationship, after all. Corrine was the name she gave him, but he doubted it was her real name. She herself only knew him as "Mr. [Temps]," a name he had used before in these particular situations. His real name was Gordon. Gordon Thomas.

Summer Writing Scraps Vol. II

I'm trying to accomplish some writing this summer. I'll be posting some tidbits here, though most of my more serious, potentially final work won't make it on to the internet.

***

This was an exercise from a writing book I have. Apparently the first sentence of a story is what often draws the reader in, so I was supposed to come up with ten different "first sentences." I tried for the most part to just write what first came to mind.

1. Nikki laid in bed, breathing in the still night air, wondering what would happen if she pulled the moon in closer.
2. It was mid-September before Jim Jenkins realized he had not a dime left to his name.
3. If only Carlson had remembered to shut the door after he left, he would still have a home to come back to.
4. The fire had taken everything, even those miserable drapes.
5. Midnight was a terrible time to be waiting for the bus.
6. Jonathan boarded the plane, giving one last glance to the home he would never see again.
7. Eric knew that the fractured and splintered window was the only thing keeping the creature on the outside, but right now that was the least of his worries.
8. "Don't stop for nothin'," Charlie warned Sharon, "even if it means you gotta' take some of 'em with you."
9. Judging by his slow, menacing pace and the way he shifted his weight from side to side, the man coming straight at Peter was carrying something heavy in that pack of his.
10. The stars all seemed to blink at once, in one simultaneous chord.

Philisophical Issues Paper: Why I Don't Have To Write This Paper

This is a paper I wrote for my philosophy class where I take a philosophical standpoint arguing that I don't actually have to do the assignment. The paper is titled, "Why I Don't Have To Do This Paper." This was a research paper and I am TERRIBLE at research papers (though hopefully getting better?), so I'm quite pleased at how this turned out. Despite the humorous theme, it's not exactly a light read as it is filled with all sorts of philosophical mumbo-jumbo. I haven't looked at this since I finished it in May, and even rereading it just now didn't really lock my attention. But if you enjoy philosophy stuff or maybe just philosophical arguments then hopefully you'll enjoy reading this.

I do want to take a moment to make a couple of disclaimers: first, I recognize that this isn't a argumentatively sound paper. I'm not a philosopher and all I've really accomplished is making a almost tautological inductive argument, though one that I think is difficult to refute. I also admit (though not to my professor) that I may have taken one of my source's arguments slightly out of context. If you're the kind of person to go and check my sources to weigh my arguments, you might find this to be true.

Second, this is what I would consider a rough draft. In my own perfect little world I would have all the time I'd need to work on a paper (which I'd probably take way too much advantage of) and hone this baby to perfection, but I don't feel like I was able to accomplish that, or at least meet my own level of standards, and that is why, if you're paying real close attention, my paper my not be completely sound. Basically, I wrote it and never looked back, hoping for the best lol. I chose to post it in its "finished" state--with only minor grammatical adjustments--because I felt that if I did decide to spruce it up it wouldn't be the original paper that I was proud of I would sacrifice some integrity in the process.

One last note, I address "Dr. Gurney" in both my introduction and my conclusion. Dr. Gurney is a professor here at Multnomah University and the person to whom this paper is directly addressing.

***

Adrian Henske

PHL 102

Philosophical Issue Paper

5/10/12

Why I Don't Have To Write This Paper

What I am about to propose to you, Dr. Gurney, is that the completion of this paper is completely unnecessary and I have no obligation to write it. I cannot reason with any amount of certainty that any consciousness other than my own exists, including your own, and therefore your requirement for this assignment is [unnecessary]. There is no concrete empirical evidence to prove your existence, and for all I know you are nothing more than a manifestation of my own consciousness. Subsequently, this assignment does not exist and I do not have to do it.

The reasoning behind my position is that of solipsism. Theodore J. Everett states, "Solipsism is the view that only myself, or my mind and its contents, is real. There are no other minds; there is no external world at all--just me and my sensations, plus their strictly internal relations" (213). I am the only one who can think my thoughts. I am the only one who can feel my pain. These things are personal and distinct to me; they are a mirror of my own consciousness and, because I can experience them, I can validate my existence through them. However, I cannot experience pain or thoughts of anyone else. People can tell me about their thoughts, or they can relate their pain, but I cannot experience it in a personal way like I do my own. Because I have "no direct awareness of the mental states of others" I cannot be sure that anything "exists apart from [my] own mind and mental states" (Craig).

However, Everett uses the argument of "second-order induction" to try and validate the consciousnesses of others without the presence of actual tangible evidence. "If, for example, all... statements found in the Encyclopedia Britannica which I have verified so far have turned out to be true, then I have inductive reason to believe that all of the statements in that work are true. If I then discover the statement, 'all ravens are black', in the same encyclopedia, I will have an inductive reason to believe that this new statement is also true---hence, that all ravens are black. This inference succeeds, even if I have never seen a single raven myself--indeed, even if I am blind, and even if I do not know exactly what a raven is. In this way, second-order induction can function as an indirect means of confirming propositions which are otherwise unverifiable" (214). Applied to the concept of solipsism, second-order induction would reason that if someone were to tell me that I'm about to experience pain, and I do, I can "discover in this way that certain other people are reliable sources in general" (Everett, 215). Given their track record for reliability, if a person were to assert that they indeed have consciousness, I would be inclined to believe them.

Second-order induction has a couple of significant flaws, though. First, it asserts validity based on a sampling of reliable sources. Just because someone has proven themselves to be accurate and honest a number of times (even a high number), it does not guarantee perfect consistency, but only gives us a high statistical probability of its success. If it were possible to measure every assertion and action to ever exist, both past and future, of a particular individual, then we could believe beyond a reasonable doubt in the trustworthiness of that person. However, no such method of measurement exists, and besides, who can honestly say they've ever encountered someone or something that carries such an absolute level of consistency? To imbue a fallible human being with such an unrealistic trait is absurd.

Even if I were to accept the testimony of a person who claims to be "real" based on their consistent reliability, there is a radical difference between my choice to do so and the actual validation of their claim. If everyone I ever met told me that giraffes speak fluent Chinese, I would have no initial reason to doubt them. Solipsism is not a justification for skepticism for the sake of being a skeptic. Until am able to observe whether or not a giraffe can indeed speak Chinese, and prove it beyond a reasonable doubt (do all giraffes speak Chinese or only some?, etc.), this claim remains unverified and cannot be accounted for with any degree of certainty.

Next, in the earlier example, second-order induction suggests that by a person stating to possess traits that, so far, only you can claim to have—namely a tangible, verifiable mind and consciousness—indicates that they arrived at the knowledge of personal traits without prior consultation with you. In other words, if the other person wasn't real, how could they possess knowledge and experience about what it means to be real? By this logic, by possessing such information, information that you, a thinking, verifiably real person also possess, and arriving at said information separate from your own experiences, offers validity for their testimony to their own existence.

But let me propose an alternative scenario. What if, say, there is some higher source of knowledge that is influencing your own mind and experiences. Everett concedes, "As far as each of us can tell subjectively, after all, he might be a proverbial brain in a vat, being fed his subjective experiences through a set of wires" (213). Given this scenario, and if we continue to entertain the idea that we are the only verifiable consciousness, then it not implausible to assume that this other "person" is just a manifestation created by your consciousness, and, because they exist solely in your mind, they share the same knowledge and experiences that are being fed to you through these "wires". This would account for their claim to share similar experiences to your own, because, by extension, they are you. It is no less difficult to disprove this scenario than it is to prove that the others around me are indeed real and tangible.

Christine M. Korsgaard proposes the idea of "public reasoning" to refute the idea of solipsism. The idea behind "public" reasoning is that we are motivated beyond our own desires because we acknowledge, through the interaction and consideration of others, that they indeed exist. Korsgaard's argues that if it were true that we were the only consciousness, then we would not bother to consider the wellbeing of others, since it would be irrelevant. Because of their existence, we are prompted to interact accordingly (Korsgaard). Public reasoning is basically a moral reasoning for the justification of other minds. As Mary Clayton Coleman states, citing Korsgaard, "...She argues that, given the practical identities we happen to have chosen, some of our reasons happen to be public. For example, given that I have chosen to be a teacher, that is, given that I have chosen this identity, some of my students’ needs give me direct reasons to act" (Coleman, 319). To elaborate, if I possess a desire that directly correlates to someone else, say, as a teacher I choose to stay up late finishing tomorrow's lesson, motivated more for the sake of my students' understanding than my own body's desire to sleep (Coleman, 318) , then perhaps this suggests a validity of the existence of my students. The success of this argument—whose goal is to support the existence of additional consciousnesses—is dependent upon the other mind (my students) initiating my desire for their wellbeing, thereby acting as the catalyst for my concern for them. If this plays out appropriately, then I will have reacted to something external to my own mind, and if I previously held the view that I am the only consciousness, then I am in serious need of reconsideration of my views since it seems unlikely that I would be compelled to react to something that doesn't exist.

In a nutshell, Korsgaard is arguing that the exterior consciousness, that is, the evidential representation of an "other mind," precedes my decisions, thus proving their existence. This argument sets out to answer the question, "Which came first? The chicken or the egg?", though in this situation it's trying to differentiate whose consciousness originated my moral obligation to my students. Korsgaard claims that the responsibility lies with the students, but I would argue otherwise.  If it had not been for my desire to become a teacher then I would never have a need to be concerned for their wellbeing. Their existence, whether internal or external to my consciousness, did not trigger me to become a teacher. My desire for personal fulfillment (achieving my dream of teaching) was the first cause of this situation, and had nothing to do with the individual students. The only viable way my students could exist as an exterior consciousness is if they initiated my desire for their wellbeing. However, my moral obligation to them in no way proves their existence; it is merely a result of my own personal decisions, not one initiated by external factors.

This entire argument becomes a moot point when referenced, again, to the brain in a vat scenario. Even if the students indeed initiated my desire to help them, it doesn't guarantee their existence. It only states, matter-of-factly, my capacity for selflessness, which is hardly related to a case for external consciousnesses. For all I know, they too are manifestations of my mind, sent to me as suggestions through the wires plugged into my brain, or, at the very least, created within my mind.

In the end, there is no concrete evidence to prove that any other mind exists other than my own, and any attempt to refute solipsism only leaves me with vague probability and rough speculation. By default, I see no other choice but to accept solipsism for what it is: that I am the only verifiable consciousness and everything else is too uncertain to warrant my undying belief. I can with no good conscience accept that you, Dr. Gurney are real, and, by association, neither is this assignment. As being such, I can see no mandate to complete it, nay, to even start it. Oh... oh no... I went and wrote it, didn't I? Shoot...

Works Cited

Bitbol, Michel. "The problem of other minds: A debate between Schrödinger and Carnap."

Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 3. (2004): 115-123. Print.

Coleman, Mary Clayton. "Public Reasons and Practical Solipsism." The Southern Journal of

Philosophy. Vol. XLIII (2005): 317-336. Print.

Craig, Edward. "Solipsism." Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 1998. Web.

Everett, Theodore J. "Other voices, other minds." Australasian Journal of

Philosophy 78.2 (2000): 213-222. Print.

Korsgaard, Christine M. The Sources of Normativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

1996. Print.

Minar, Edward H. "Wittgenstein on the Metaphysics of the Self: The Dialectic of Solipsism in

Philosophical Investigations" Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 79. (1998): 329–354. Print.

Putnam, Hillary. "Wittgenstein and Realism." International Journal of Philosophical Studies

16.1 (2008): 3-16. Print.

Summer Writing Scraps Vol. I

I'm trying to accomplish some writing this summer. I'll be posting some tidbits here, though most of my more serious, potentially final work won't make it on to the internet.

***

Theodore

Theodore was a boy like any other little boy. He had doting parents who loved him. He went to school everyday just like other children. He lived in a normal house in a quiet neighborhood. He participated in the neighborhood games the other children would play after school. But there was one thing about Theodore that set him apart from all the rest of the children (or from anyone else, for that matter).

A Vanilla Smoothie

I just wanted a vanilla smoothie. That's not so much to ask for, right?

Shawn and I have been making fruit/protein smoothies for some of our meals, so in the spirit of things I thought I'd make myself a quick vanilla smoothie. Just a basic, non-complicated vanilla smoothie. I had ice, non-dairy milk, and vanilla extract. This was supposed to work.

Did anyone ever make that ice cream in a bag when you were a kid, where you put basically those three ingredients (except I think it was rock salt, not straight ice) in a Ziploc bag and shake it until it turned into ice cream? This was sort of the same idea--at least with having the same ingredients.

So I'm pouring the vanilla in and it's not really having much of an effect. I know you don't need much, but there was a lot of the ice and milk, so I kept pouring more in, trying to get a more potent, recognizable vanilla flavor. Well I ended up having to dump the entire bottle in (it was a tiny one anyway) and it still didn't taste like a vanilla smoothie. In fact, it tasted really bitter. It was terrible. So I've got a blender full of what should be vanilla smoothie and no more vanilla to try and improve it.

So I grab for the honey, something Shawn and I have been adding from time to time in our own smoothies to get a sweeter taste. I think I put way too much because now it really tasted like honey. I thought I would try and balance it out with some pancake syrup (sugar, right?), but this additional ingredient actually made it taste even worse than the vanilla.

So in a desperate attempt to reset my smoothie I poured a ton of more honey into it, obliterating the syrup (and every other flavor as well).

Great. Now I had a stupid "vanilla smoothie" that just tasted like I was drinking cold honey. I tried sucking it up and just drinking it, but I knew if I did I would wind up with a terrible head ache and probably just generally feeling sick.

As a last ditch effort to save my smoothie, I tried throwing in some peanut butter, hoping it would override the other flavors and make my smoothie okay (I had dramatically lowered my expectations by this point). But it was clear the honey wasn't planning on going anywhere, as the peanut butter only helped to make it a little creamier, but nothing else.

So I said to heck with it and threw a whole bunch of more ingredients into the mix. First I tried Johnny's Seasoning Salt (Shawn has said you can put it on everything. He's a liar. It's terrible in a smoothie). Then I threw in some baby spinach, mostly because I've had it for a week and haven't touched it yet, so I've been feeling rather guilty about that.


Yeah, it was terrible.

Morning Sunlight

Sun, I don't appreciate you
Peaking out
From underneath my curtains,
Reminding me it's morning
And that I should be asleep.
I'm not ready for you yet.

I wish I were an owl.
I would hire someone
To fight the rooster
So the sun wouldn't come up.
Then, when I went to sleep,
I wouldn't feel so miserable
About it being daylight.