Ah, the silliness of religious disputes.

All this nonsense over whether we should say Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays is pure stupidity, and it prompted this blog entry. This is what people debate? This is the foolishness they worry about, when minds could be put to use figuring out a cure for Cancer, or how to solve world hungry? I think that people are free to believe, or not believe, whatever they want to believe. Why not show respect to others by allowing them the freedom to do just that?

Someone once held a belief that one must know all to know the all-knowing. The belief that one must be all-knowing to know the all-knowing is a fallacy. It is a contradiction. Human faith in a higher being that is all-knowing and all-powerful is based largely on absent proofs and the unknown. If you believe in a God the way Christians do, you also concede to the fact that humans are merely humans and cannot know all that God comprehends; but you also must understand that the very same individuals acknowledging this also believe indisputably in the existence of God. They do not possess God’s knowledge, but they know him. He is real to them. The believers’ belief in the existence of a God is proof in itself of His existence; it is unquestioned; it is unquestionably a very real entity. Faith can be construed as a matter of the mind—a difference of perception, which varies among individuals in both potency and process. The fact is, those with faith usually have little evidence of that which they believe in. They have personal evidences, but these are things others just do not share. I want to illustrate my point in a much clearer example that almost everyone can understand. This brings us to the scientist and the carpenter. The scientist grasps at knowledge of the world that the carpenter does not understand, but the carpenter may know the scientist, may befriend the scientist, and may love the scientist, without having an intimate understanding of thermodynamics. One may know another without knowing all that another knows. The opposite would imply that one could not know God, making that existence of God impossible to perceive.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays, everyone. May you take care and be safe in this most perplexing world of ours.

Been some time, eh?

One of the things that bothers me the most about a story is when the writers seem to downplay the intelligence of some characters to the point where it seems implausible. This is especially apparent of characters previously presented as brilliant and resourceful, even genius, characters, and is, from what I have seen, more prevalent in the writing of television programs. While it might not seem like much of a nuisance at all, I know at least a handful of other people that agree with my views of this writing issue that shows up every now and then. We wonder why it is that characters that are much more intelligent than we are cannot see something that seems so obvious to us. There are a few examples of this out there, but I am going to cite the television show Fringe as my prime example, since it is the most recent that I have noticed. Now, don’t get me wrong; I love Fringe. In fact, it is one of my favorite television programs of all time, and it will continue to be in my top hall of faves forever and ever. It is interesting, has a talented cast portraying the characters, marvelous characters, a good story; but I have noticed, during the latest arc, that something is wrong. As some of you may know, Fringe’s current story arc deals with the presence and threat of a parallel universe, another world just like our own, but with differences, deviations in history, changes, things that might have been, things there were not—you get the picture. The problem concerns the character Olivia Dunham in that during the past two seasons of the show, the alternate universe version of Ms. Dunham replaced our world’s Ms. Dunham as part of an undercover mission given to her by Walternate. Indeed, for a time, it seemed probable that Peter Bishop, Walter, Agent Broyles, and the rest would not notice the difference between the two Olivias, but over time, clues that practically leapt out in your face were presented, which made it hard not to notice that the Olivia in our world was not our Olivia at all… without insulting the intelligence of the characters, of course. Just one example was her considerably lesser memory.


I believe this was dragged on far too long, and it made the characters seem idiots compared to before. Quite a few of the cast are very close to Ms. Dunham, especially, from my observation, Peter and Walter Bishop, which tells me that it would be very likely that they know her quite well, making the fact that they did not connect two-and-two improbable. As a writer, I realize that in a story, there is a time and a place for everything, and now that we have had a look to a number of episodes ahead, up to the point where the alternate universe Olivia was exposed for what she truly is, I can see that there was a point to waiting this long. Had she been exposed before now, the story would not have moved along as it had. However, it just doesn’t sit right with me, regardless. I also realize that there are quite a few ways to write things, and that this didn’t seem all that… I don’t know… realistic. Granted, fiction isn’t real, but the characters probably follow similar ways that real people perceive things. So, I say, why is this? Shouldn’t they have noticed? It seems a bit botched to me, but hey, I’m an amateur writer, so it’s not exactly my place to be pointing fingers at professional work, now is it? Well, I love the program, and the story, so it doesn’t bother me to an irredeemable extent; I’m just irked by little details, is all. Here’s to a long and healthy lifespan for Fringe.