Advent

Oh yes.

The March of the Penguins

'The March of the Penguins' "is not just a story of survival, it is a story of love.” But "not so fast, penguin breath. I am prepared to admire animal mating lust, animal sacrifice for the survival of their species and even, as we see in the movie, animal cooperative behavior as they construct a living, moving mass penguin scrum to help them survive the freezing Antarctic blasts. However, I am not prepared to believe that penguins or any animals actually fall in love the way we as humans understand romantic love. That's where I get off the iceberg."
And here Rabbi Marc Gellman does indeed get off the iceberg saviour of free thought into the frozen ocean of religious doctrine. Marc beleives that God created the world (in seven days, no less), and specifically gave humans abilities far greater than the other animals, such as the human capacity for love.
I beleive strongly in evolution. This leads me to question why humans love, why emotions exist at all. They evolved, like everything else, for the benefit of the genes which specify them. Emotions were selected as the increased the proliferation of their parent genes, either through increased survival (suspicion), increased procreation (lust) or increased survival of offspring (due to increased care and cooperation through love). Emotions push us to do things we can't rationally justify- Dylan Evans calls this "emotional intelligence". Sometimes daft, like that crush who you never could've dated anyway, but often very sensible. The dodgy guy on eBay who had six Paypal accounts, the three-card guys on Liebknecht Brücke. Everyone who bets wins, except you. Your emotional intelligence tells you it's dodgy, don't bet. Five minutes later, you figure out that all the winners are plants.

What compels the penguins to lead such a fragile life? Emotions. Emotions draw them into relationships, lead them to starve themselves for weeks, help them evade predators hunting, and to then give all their food to their child. Lacking the cognition to see that they need to raise a child, for the survival of their species and for the continuation of their genes, emotional intelligence and real love is all they have.

More Thoughts on Surveillance Cards:

Previously, I wrote to my MP regarding the compulsory introduction of ID cards. Here is his response:

"Dear Henry,

Thank you for your letter of 15th November concerning ID cards. As you rightly assume from researching my voting record on the subject I do not object to the proposed introduction of ID cards in the UK.

As you will appreciate many European countries operate a ID card system without adverse consequences to individual citizen's liberty or rights. In an age when, as you say, many private companies have very detailed information on our movements, our shopping habits, our use of the telephone and so on, I do not see a problem in a carefully regulated system under which an individual's identity is officially recorded by an ID card.

True, but the ID card database scheme provides a platform for all privately gathered information to be tied together to form something much more pervasive and useful from a surveillance standpoint. That said, I think the effect on most individuals will be minimal; however I have heard that personal expression against Government policy can affect job applications to the civil service.

We do live in an age when identity poses a growing problem both in terms of criminal activity and in evasion of immigration controls. We also know that more detailed biometric information is being required by some other countries without which passports will not be accepted. It makes sense in my view to use the more detailed information required for new passports as the basis for a national ID card system which I do believe will help to control crime, fraud and illegal immigration. That is not to say that I have no concerns about the current proposals. There is an obvious issue about the cost of the ID card. While the LSE estimates are probably an exaggeration, it is nevertheless imperative in my view that the scheme is introduced in a cost-effective way which does not impose unreasonable charges for a passport/ID card. The commitments which the Home Secretary has given on capping the costs to the public are therefore welcome.

1. "I do believe will help to control crime, fraud and illegal immigration." Any justification for this belief? And is the huge cost of the scheme worthwhile?
2. The LSE estimates probably are exaggerated, but the Government's costings are also probably played-down.
3. Although the Home Secretary has capped the price of the card to any individual, the cost is still effectively picked up by the individual through taxes. It also seems unfair to introduce a compulsory card, then make individuals pay for it. I would suggest that the card is free (although a fee to replace lost cards would discourage negligence.)

There is also the question of the reliability of the biometric data and the capacity of the Home Office to introduce a complex new IT based system such as this without mishaps. I can assure you that I will be keeping a close watch on developments with these concerns in mind.

I hope these comments are helpful."

All in all, I think a fair answer. My MP has to balance his views against his career in line with the party whips. His letter effectively says: I respect your opinion, but I have mine. Unless the situation changes, I have my reasons, and this is how I will be voting.
Despite incomplete arguments, my opinion is changed slightly in favour of ID cards.
I think that the biometric aspect and database aspects of the scheme are inevitable. These will be required for passports to remain relevant. However I still have issues with the compulsory nature of the scheme. Why is it necessary? Being forgetful myself, I can imagine having to pay fines for not registering a change of address within the allotted time. For the scheme to be relevant, the time allowed for registration following change of details would have to be short. But keeping the Government informed is probably not a priority for many, especially when office opening hours are (something like):

• Monday to Thursday: 07:00 to 12:00
• Except Tuesday: 10:00 to 16:00
• Friday: 13:00 to 18:00
• Closed for lunch between 12:00 and 13:00

but when you get there you find the website hasn't been updated since 2001, and Wednesdays are appointments only, nevermind you took the time off work.