Recently, the presence of my last priority registration date at BYU has got me to thinking about how I would do things if I was the president of the university. So, here are a few of the policies/procedures/general things which I'd change around at BYU if I had all power. (These aren't in any particular order, btw.)
1. The School of Family Life would officially be renamed the school of Marriage and Relationship Science. So, when freshman girls are asked, "So are you just here to get your MRS?" They can respond, "Well, yes actually." And possibly, a dude could chime in and say, "Yeah, I am too!" just to confuse the heck out of the questioner.
2. It would be perfectly legal/acceptable/encouraged to throw water balloons full of blue paint at anyone wearing University of Utah apparel on campus.*
3. Along those same lines, anyone attending a football game not wearing the colors of one team or another would be doused with blue paint.
4. The math department would be dissolved; any faculty and staff would be fired and the department would be rebuilt based on principles of the Gospel of Christ instead of on the principles of the plan of Satan.
5. The Honor Code would be modified slightly. Men would not be required to be entirely clean shaven, but would be asked and encouraged to keep facial hair trimmed and neat, avoiding excessive and extravagant styles. Women would also be required to have hair that extends at least below the collar, conversely to men's hair which must be trimmed above the collar.
6. AP, IB, and other college credit would still apply to graduation requirements, but any credit obtained before high school graduation would not apply to priority registration deadlines.
7. Women would receive a grant of $150 per credit hour of classes that she registers for that end in "En" and $300 per credit hour per semester for classes labelled "CS".
8. Bookstore managers would get caned once per dollar markup per book sold in the whole bookstore. ie If a book was marked up $4 and 30 of them were sold, each bookstore manager would get 120 canings for that book.
9. The university would add a Dental School, or "University Cash Cow" as I would call it. Tuition to go to this school would be $12,000 a semester and the school would house about 20-50 dental students at a time. (This is in case you're wondering how I'm going to pay for all of my other ideas ;)
10. Tickets for football games would be sold based on knowledge of football and fanhood. When one visited byutickets.com and was looking to purchase football tickets he/she would need to complete a quiz of randomly generated questions pertaining to the rules and strategy of football and well as his/her reaction in certain situations. The scores on this quiz would determine which seats a fan is eligible to buy. The prices would remain the same, but the quality of fanhood would multiply exponentially.
11. Any student using the term "Zion" as an adjective will be put on academic warning. Any professor using this term in this context will have his/her pay reduced by $10,000 per offense... unless he/she is a religion professor, then the reduction will be $20,000 per offense.
12. Professors will not teach the false doctrine of the superiority of the metric system. Offenders will have their parking permits revoked immediately.
13. All classroom seats in the JSB will be removed and replaced with something comfortable to sit in.
14. Students who graduate without getting married will be given awards for both endurance and individuality, and given special honors at the graduation ceremony.
15. The after-hours maintenance crew for on-campus housing will be entirely separate from campus police. No more students dialing 911 to report taking a massive crap and clogging the toilet.
16. The opinion section of the Daily Universe will be officially renamed the "Student Sarcasm" section in which readers may submit preposterous statements and insult one another. The content will remain more or less the same.
Well, these are just a sample of things I'd institute if I were president of this university. Don't get me wrong, I think this university is awesome and for the most part is being run well. However there are indeed a few things I'd do a little differently.
*This policy would need to be voided on game day in order to avoid a quite literal holy war.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Interpolation
This post is a follow-up on a previous post titled: Extrapolation.
So, at the more or less midway point of the semester, I figured I'd give an update of how classes have been going thus far.
CE En 321-Structural Analysis: As predicted, this class has been a whole lot of fun and somewhat of a challenge at the same time. We have closed our review of statics and are drawing near to a close on our work with virtual work and flexibility. Thus far I've been pwning this class like a dirty n00b due to my above average knowledge of statics and Castigliano's theorem (virtual work). Though I expect to be put on upset alert when the final for this class rolls around, just like in 103, 204, 270, and 332... but we'll see.
CE En 305A-Metals, Woods, and Composites: This class has all but come to a close. I found that there were several key concepts on the curriculum for this class which I learned, but mostly I just learned all the things that I should have learned in Mechanics of Materials, but didn't, which is certainly valuable in and of itself. Dr Dumb@$$ turned out to not be quite as bad as initially supposed. His knowledge of the material and his ability to at least somewhat communicate it, as well mercy for misunderstanding resulting in me having a much higher final opinion of him than the initial.
CE En 305B-Aggregates: This class has just begun, but I am actually fairly excited about it. I find that I have quite a high nerd propensity for concrete, asphalt, and any other sort of composite mixture of the sort. At this point the only thing that I can really say against my professor is that his first name is actually William, but he goes by his middle name... Spencer. Needless to say I find this appalling. Other than this, however, I find that he will be a good instructor who truly knows the material and how to apply it.
CE En 562-Traffic Engineering: This class has been relatively good thus far. Not that I pay attention in lecture, for Dr Saito does not speak fluent English. But I've enjoyed gaining knowledge about the concepts of transportation engineering beyond the simplicity of the Greenshields model and the four steps of transportation planning. Though I'm still not entirely sure how these topics would be properly applied in industry, but that's what going into industry is for. :)
Bio 100-Principles of Biology: I think I'm going to get a C in this class based on the fact that it is far too easy. I go into class and teacher says, "Well, did everyone take the quiz?" and I'm like "Holy $h*7, there was quiz, when did this happen?" I actually haven't taken any tests in this class yet, so we'll see how it goes after that, but yes... far too easy of a class consider the difficulty of the rest of my schedule.
Rel C 234-LDS Marriage and Family: This class is somewhat less exciting than I initially thought it would be. Generally just regurgitation of doctrine that I've heard about once a month since 2005, nothing incredibly profound. But what to you expect from religion classes?
Bus M 380-Executive Lectures: The only negative thing that I can possibly say about this class is that the executives which we've seen have been fairly low-level executives at relatively unimportant companies. Other than that's it's been pretty flippin' awesome.
CE En 300A-Stupid Semen-ar: Yep, still stupid.
So, at the more or less midway point of the semester, I figured I'd give an update of how classes have been going thus far.
CE En 321-Structural Analysis: As predicted, this class has been a whole lot of fun and somewhat of a challenge at the same time. We have closed our review of statics and are drawing near to a close on our work with virtual work and flexibility. Thus far I've been pwning this class like a dirty n00b due to my above average knowledge of statics and Castigliano's theorem (virtual work). Though I expect to be put on upset alert when the final for this class rolls around, just like in 103, 204, 270, and 332... but we'll see.
CE En 305A-Metals, Woods, and Composites: This class has all but come to a close. I found that there were several key concepts on the curriculum for this class which I learned, but mostly I just learned all the things that I should have learned in Mechanics of Materials, but didn't, which is certainly valuable in and of itself. Dr Dumb@$$ turned out to not be quite as bad as initially supposed. His knowledge of the material and his ability to at least somewhat communicate it, as well mercy for misunderstanding resulting in me having a much higher final opinion of him than the initial.
CE En 305B-Aggregates: This class has just begun, but I am actually fairly excited about it. I find that I have quite a high nerd propensity for concrete, asphalt, and any other sort of composite mixture of the sort. At this point the only thing that I can really say against my professor is that his first name is actually William, but he goes by his middle name... Spencer. Needless to say I find this appalling. Other than this, however, I find that he will be a good instructor who truly knows the material and how to apply it.
CE En 562-Traffic Engineering: This class has been relatively good thus far. Not that I pay attention in lecture, for Dr Saito does not speak fluent English. But I've enjoyed gaining knowledge about the concepts of transportation engineering beyond the simplicity of the Greenshields model and the four steps of transportation planning. Though I'm still not entirely sure how these topics would be properly applied in industry, but that's what going into industry is for. :)
Bio 100-Principles of Biology: I think I'm going to get a C in this class based on the fact that it is far too easy. I go into class and teacher says, "Well, did everyone take the quiz?" and I'm like "Holy $h*7, there was quiz, when did this happen?" I actually haven't taken any tests in this class yet, so we'll see how it goes after that, but yes... far too easy of a class consider the difficulty of the rest of my schedule.
Rel C 234-LDS Marriage and Family: This class is somewhat less exciting than I initially thought it would be. Generally just regurgitation of doctrine that I've heard about once a month since 2005, nothing incredibly profound. But what to you expect from religion classes?
Bus M 380-Executive Lectures: The only negative thing that I can possibly say about this class is that the executives which we've seen have been fairly low-level executives at relatively unimportant companies. Other than that's it's been pretty flippin' awesome.
CE En 300A-Stupid Semen-ar: Yep, still stupid.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Lies, D@mN3d Lies, and...
Disclaimer: this blag post is based on this essay.
Why I Will Never Have a Girlfriend
Reading this first will make this blag post make much, much more sense.
So inspired by the essay posted by one Tristan Miller, I have decided to do my own statistical analysis which addresses my perpetually single status. Unlike his essay, however, this post will be slightly less empirical with a few more anecdotal assumptions thrown in. The primary difference will be related to Miller's analysis of age groups which I found to be rather questionable. Thus, I will endeavor to make some more baseline assumptions concerning age groups.
Membership of the LDS Church (as of December 31st 2008): 13,508,509
Unlike Miller's essay, I will start off with a somewhat smaller demographic. Since I am Latter-day Saint myself, and therefore have a high standard of morals and virtue as well as a desire to be married no other place than an LDS temple, this is a proper way in which to start.
...who are active: 10,266,467
According to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, the activity rates of church members is around 76%. I have certain doubts that this number is quite this high (since these were self-identified) , but in this scenario it is a conservative estimate, so I will go with it.
...who are female: 5,133,233
Here I made the basic assumption that half of Latter-day Saints are female. There have been certain reports which have shown that it's more like 52-55%, but this would be a very specific assumption to make for such a broad problem as this. Thus I used a standard 50-50 ratio.
...who live in developed nations: 2,566,616
Like Tristan Miller, I have no plans of living in India or Outer Kreplakistan, so limiting potential mates to residents of North America, Canada, English Speaking Europe, and Australia. It is estimated that approximately 46% of LDS church members live in the US and Canada. I will also lump in with this the idea that any woman who I would want to have a romantic relationship with would also have to speak fluent English. Along these lines I'm assuming that about half of LDS women are English speakers who live in developed nations.
...who are (as of 2009) 18 to 25 years old: 384,993
In his essay, Miller ends up with about 10% of the populous which had not already been eliminated being with the proper bounds of age. I think that this is somewhere in the neighborhood, however I'd be will to bet that the distribution of ages of women listed are somewhat more right-skewed than he supposed, giving closer to 12-15% of women in the proper range. I have thus chosen a more conservative value of 15% of women who would be in the appropriate age range. It is also helpful to note that I am the exact same age now as Miller was when he composed this essay, which makes the transition quite simple.
...who are "beautiful": 61,098
As Miller stated in his essay, it is not necessary to define beauty in any anecdotal sense, save saying that whatever necessary traits would be normally distributed among the population. Seeing as the traits which I would find to be "beautiful" are somewhat more common among the population of LDS women than would be those of most men, I will say that a woman possessing such traits would need to fall above one standard deviation above average. This gives a value of approximately 15.87% of the populous which hasn't already been eliminated.
...and intelligent: 1393
Seeing as my intelligence is somewhere between 3 and 6 standard deviations above average, I would suppose that, in order to have any measure of happiness with a particular woman, she would need to also be at least 2 standard deviations above average in terms of intelligence. This gives a value of 2.28% of the population.
...and not already married: 418
Citing the same survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, approximately 70% of Latter-day Saints are married. These numbers might not be entirely homogenous between genders, but in all honesty, from what I've seen of Mormons, it seems about right.
...who are also interested in me: 66
For this calculation, I assumed that I was about 1 standard deviation below average in traits which LDS women find attractive. This is probably somewhat of a conservative assumption on my part considering that I'm a non-RM, Enginerd with mommy issues. In all reality this is probably somewhere between 1 and 2 standard deviations, but I'm giving myself the benefit of the doubt. As already mentioned 1 standard deviation gives a value of 15.87%.
Since it will general be quite apparent which people are LDS, English-speaking women who live in developed countries, I will take my base population pool out of 384,993 women. As was mentioned by Miller in his essay, the one of the best ways to get to know a potential partner is with a pre-planned activity which will generally occur about once a week; generally on weekends. (If you can't tell, I'm trying to avoid using the d-word.) If one of these occasions was to happen every week, it would take 5833 weeks or 112 years before I could be guaranteed to find a woman with whom I'd be mutually compatible. At the current rate of one of these encounters every 6 months, it would be in the neighborhood of 2917 years. So, I suppose that my odds of finding "The One" or perhaps, "One of the Sixty and Six" aren't very good in this life... and to tell you the truth, the millenium isn't looking too sure either. :P
Why I Will Never Have a Girlfriend
Reading this first will make this blag post make much, much more sense.
So inspired by the essay posted by one Tristan Miller, I have decided to do my own statistical analysis which addresses my perpetually single status. Unlike his essay, however, this post will be slightly less empirical with a few more anecdotal assumptions thrown in. The primary difference will be related to Miller's analysis of age groups which I found to be rather questionable. Thus, I will endeavor to make some more baseline assumptions concerning age groups.
Membership of the LDS Church (as of December 31st 2008): 13,508,509
Unlike Miller's essay, I will start off with a somewhat smaller demographic. Since I am Latter-day Saint myself, and therefore have a high standard of morals and virtue as well as a desire to be married no other place than an LDS temple, this is a proper way in which to start.
...who are active: 10,266,467
According to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, the activity rates of church members is around 76%. I have certain doubts that this number is quite this high (since these were self-identified) , but in this scenario it is a conservative estimate, so I will go with it.
...who are female: 5,133,233
Here I made the basic assumption that half of Latter-day Saints are female. There have been certain reports which have shown that it's more like 52-55%, but this would be a very specific assumption to make for such a broad problem as this. Thus I used a standard 50-50 ratio.
...who live in developed nations: 2,566,616
Like Tristan Miller, I have no plans of living in India or Outer Kreplakistan, so limiting potential mates to residents of North America, Canada, English Speaking Europe, and Australia. It is estimated that approximately 46% of LDS church members live in the US and Canada. I will also lump in with this the idea that any woman who I would want to have a romantic relationship with would also have to speak fluent English. Along these lines I'm assuming that about half of LDS women are English speakers who live in developed nations.
...who are (as of 2009) 18 to 25 years old: 384,993
In his essay, Miller ends up with about 10% of the populous which had not already been eliminated being with the proper bounds of age. I think that this is somewhere in the neighborhood, however I'd be will to bet that the distribution of ages of women listed are somewhat more right-skewed than he supposed, giving closer to 12-15% of women in the proper range. I have thus chosen a more conservative value of 15% of women who would be in the appropriate age range. It is also helpful to note that I am the exact same age now as Miller was when he composed this essay, which makes the transition quite simple.
...who are "beautiful": 61,098
As Miller stated in his essay, it is not necessary to define beauty in any anecdotal sense, save saying that whatever necessary traits would be normally distributed among the population. Seeing as the traits which I would find to be "beautiful" are somewhat more common among the population of LDS women than would be those of most men, I will say that a woman possessing such traits would need to fall above one standard deviation above average. This gives a value of approximately 15.87% of the populous which hasn't already been eliminated.
...and intelligent: 1393
Seeing as my intelligence is somewhere between 3 and 6 standard deviations above average, I would suppose that, in order to have any measure of happiness with a particular woman, she would need to also be at least 2 standard deviations above average in terms of intelligence. This gives a value of 2.28% of the population.
...and not already married: 418
Citing the same survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, approximately 70% of Latter-day Saints are married. These numbers might not be entirely homogenous between genders, but in all honesty, from what I've seen of Mormons, it seems about right.
...who are also interested in me: 66
For this calculation, I assumed that I was about 1 standard deviation below average in traits which LDS women find attractive. This is probably somewhat of a conservative assumption on my part considering that I'm a non-RM, Enginerd with mommy issues. In all reality this is probably somewhere between 1 and 2 standard deviations, but I'm giving myself the benefit of the doubt. As already mentioned 1 standard deviation gives a value of 15.87%.
Since it will general be quite apparent which people are LDS, English-speaking women who live in developed countries, I will take my base population pool out of 384,993 women. As was mentioned by Miller in his essay, the one of the best ways to get to know a potential partner is with a pre-planned activity which will generally occur about once a week; generally on weekends. (If you can't tell, I'm trying to avoid using the d-word.) If one of these occasions was to happen every week, it would take 5833 weeks or 112 years before I could be guaranteed to find a woman with whom I'd be mutually compatible. At the current rate of one of these encounters every 6 months, it would be in the neighborhood of 2917 years. So, I suppose that my odds of finding "The One" or perhaps, "One of the Sixty and Six" aren't very good in this life... and to tell you the truth, the millenium isn't looking too sure either. :P
Monday, October 12, 2009
Boo Metric, Hooray Beer!
Let me just state as a disclaimer first of all that the purpose of this post is not to somehow prove that the US Customary system of measurement is superior to the Système International d'Unites. Au contraire, my goal is to express my opinions as to why the metric system is not necessarily superior to US Customary units.
I should start off by saying that I truly despise those "metric purists" who were born as Americans, but somehow, due to their exposure to academic idealists, have turned into metrosexual Frenchmen prancing around speaking of how nice the weather is when it's 15 degrees out. I can understand if you're from a country that uses metric as its primary system of measure and actually have an anecdotal mindset about what metric values mean, that's all good. But if you're just an invertibrate who follows whatever your professors tell you, you should act like the lemming that you are and jump off a cliff.
The most compelling evidence that I've found in my own experience as an engineering major that the metric system is not particularly superior to US customary units is that the frequency of error is reduced only marginally and the magnitude of error is increased drastically. Due to the ease of using a decimal system in metric, there are some errors which are prevented by use of the metric system. These errors, I've found, are generally made by those who are not paying an incredibly great amount of attention to what they are doing and could often be prevented by more careful analysis. The tradeoff here is that when errors are made in the metric system (and trust me, they are) they are often of much greater magnitude than they would be under the US customary system. I've frequently said that with US customary units errors are generally on the order of a factor of 2-4, while errors made while using the metric system are by factors of 2-4 orders of magnitude, or 100-10000.
To put this in a little bit of perspective, I'll use the anology of structural engineering. Let's say that there's an office building which is supposed to sustain a load of 500 kips or 2.22 MN of force is to be designed. Naturally this building would hold plenty of people and property which is of great worth. Let us now suppose that an error in calulation has been made while using US customary units such that the engineers suppose that the building will only need to sustain 167 kips of force, an error of about 3x. Structural engineers often used what is known as a "safety factor" which essentially multplies the calculated values for load, stress, etc by a set value in order to prevent failure in the case of error. These safety factors are generally between 1.5 and 5 depending on the project. For something like an office building, a factor of about 2.5 would probably be used. As you can probably see, this safety factor will not entirely accomodate for the error in calculation, however, depending on the material, this structure would remain safe for long enough to remove all persons and all essential property, and would probably stand long enough to be demolished and rebuilt.
Now let's assume that the same structure was designed using metric units and a very simple error which is common amonst undergrads is made of saying the building will support 2.22 kN instead of 2.22 MN. In this case, a safety factor has no chance of redeeming the error made by this engineer. The most likely situation is that this structure would collapse while still under construction and kill a relatively few construction workers who were on-site at the time. The worst-case scenario would be that it is able to sustain the dead loading of its own weight, but not able to sustain the live loading of people and furniture, which would indeed be tragic.
At this point you're probably thinking of submitting a comment that reads, "Well William, if the metric system is so inferior in this particular aspect, why aren't buildings collapsing all over Europe and Canada?" And you would be justified, because the failure rates of buildings are very low both in and outside the US. As I already mentioned, the simplicity of the decimal system used in metric helps to moderate both the number and severity of errors which are made. In addition, those who have lived all their lives under the metric system tend to be more proficient than American undergrads who just like the metric system because it requires less mental effort. Finally, I would submit that structural engineers are very good at what they do. These problems are checked and rechecked for accuracy and precision before they are ever submitted to be built.
I submit to you that there is at least one gaping hole in the supposed perfection of the metric system. The magnitude of error which can occur when using metric units is just one piece of evidence that the metric system is not universally superior to US customary units, or any other system of measure.
I should start off by saying that I truly despise those "metric purists" who were born as Americans, but somehow, due to their exposure to academic idealists, have turned into metrosexual Frenchmen prancing around speaking of how nice the weather is when it's 15 degrees out. I can understand if you're from a country that uses metric as its primary system of measure and actually have an anecdotal mindset about what metric values mean, that's all good. But if you're just an invertibrate who follows whatever your professors tell you, you should act like the lemming that you are and jump off a cliff.
The most compelling evidence that I've found in my own experience as an engineering major that the metric system is not particularly superior to US customary units is that the frequency of error is reduced only marginally and the magnitude of error is increased drastically. Due to the ease of using a decimal system in metric, there are some errors which are prevented by use of the metric system. These errors, I've found, are generally made by those who are not paying an incredibly great amount of attention to what they are doing and could often be prevented by more careful analysis. The tradeoff here is that when errors are made in the metric system (and trust me, they are) they are often of much greater magnitude than they would be under the US customary system. I've frequently said that with US customary units errors are generally on the order of a factor of 2-4, while errors made while using the metric system are by factors of 2-4 orders of magnitude, or 100-10000.
To put this in a little bit of perspective, I'll use the anology of structural engineering. Let's say that there's an office building which is supposed to sustain a load of 500 kips or 2.22 MN of force is to be designed. Naturally this building would hold plenty of people and property which is of great worth. Let us now suppose that an error in calulation has been made while using US customary units such that the engineers suppose that the building will only need to sustain 167 kips of force, an error of about 3x. Structural engineers often used what is known as a "safety factor" which essentially multplies the calculated values for load, stress, etc by a set value in order to prevent failure in the case of error. These safety factors are generally between 1.5 and 5 depending on the project. For something like an office building, a factor of about 2.5 would probably be used. As you can probably see, this safety factor will not entirely accomodate for the error in calculation, however, depending on the material, this structure would remain safe for long enough to remove all persons and all essential property, and would probably stand long enough to be demolished and rebuilt.
Now let's assume that the same structure was designed using metric units and a very simple error which is common amonst undergrads is made of saying the building will support 2.22 kN instead of 2.22 MN. In this case, a safety factor has no chance of redeeming the error made by this engineer. The most likely situation is that this structure would collapse while still under construction and kill a relatively few construction workers who were on-site at the time. The worst-case scenario would be that it is able to sustain the dead loading of its own weight, but not able to sustain the live loading of people and furniture, which would indeed be tragic.
At this point you're probably thinking of submitting a comment that reads, "Well William, if the metric system is so inferior in this particular aspect, why aren't buildings collapsing all over Europe and Canada?" And you would be justified, because the failure rates of buildings are very low both in and outside the US. As I already mentioned, the simplicity of the decimal system used in metric helps to moderate both the number and severity of errors which are made. In addition, those who have lived all their lives under the metric system tend to be more proficient than American undergrads who just like the metric system because it requires less mental effort. Finally, I would submit that structural engineers are very good at what they do. These problems are checked and rechecked for accuracy and precision before they are ever submitted to be built.
I submit to you that there is at least one gaping hole in the supposed perfection of the metric system. The magnitude of error which can occur when using metric units is just one piece of evidence that the metric system is not universally superior to US customary units, or any other system of measure.
Friday, October 9, 2009
It's Been a While
So, I've decided that it's been a long while since I sat down and wrote a good, old fashioned, song parody. So I did. :D. I've always thought that the band "Green Day" had a good sound, which is generally good enough to sell a bunch of records, however I'm the type of guy who likes to actually listen to the lyrics of songs. (What a concept, right?) I'd tell you why I dislike Green Day's music, but I think the parody song that I wrote says it much better. :D
"Hate America"
What Green Day Really Wants to Say.
Composed by William White
Parody of "Know Your Enemy"
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Morals like your charity,
They're such a rarity;
Why must you cause this parity? wah hey!
Prudence is an atrophy,
On all humanity,
Practiced in a bland sobriety!
We rise up in our stridency,
Against democracy,
To give the foreign terrorists control!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Really commies in disguise,
With our hair over our eyes,
We'll bring America to its demise!
Well, morals are a rarity, oh ay, oh ay,
Well, life is the eternity, oh ay, oh ay,
Well, prudence is an atrophy, oh ay, oh ay,
So rise up in your stridency and gimme gimme autocracy!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Prudence is an atrophy,
On all humanity,
Practiced in a bland sobriety!
We rise up in our stridency,
Against democracy,
To give the foreign terrorists control!
What Green Day Really Wants to Say.
Composed by William White
Parody of "Know Your Enemy"
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Morals like your charity,
They're such a rarity;
Why must you cause this parity? wah hey!
Prudence is an atrophy,
On all humanity,
Practiced in a bland sobriety!
We rise up in our stridency,
Against democracy,
To give the foreign terrorists control!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Really commies in disguise,
With our hair over our eyes,
We'll bring America to its demise!
Well, morals are a rarity, oh ay, oh ay,
Well, life is the eternity, oh ay, oh ay,
Well, prudence is an atrophy, oh ay, oh ay,
So rise up in your stridency and gimme gimme autocracy!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Do you hate America?
Do you hate America?
You're gonna hate America. wah hey!
Prudence is an atrophy,
On all humanity,
Practiced in a bland sobriety!
We rise up in our stridency,
Against democracy,
To give the foreign terrorists control!
Monday, October 5, 2009
The One You Wish Was the One
Over the past few weeks/months/...eh probably not years... I've found my heart in possession of a woman with whom I have somewhat regular companionship, yet not an incredibly deep relationship of any sort. This is most definitely nothing new to me. I've found that the 6th grade (for most people, more like the 8th for me ) has continued more or less indefinitely until the present day. I find myself applying an intricate methodology for assessing the desirability of a woman analytically. When I find one who scores high in my own mind it's only natural that I would want to make her mine. Yet, all this analysis has omitted one of if not the most important factors in building relationships, emotion. Thus there is total dissonance between the formulated desire to form a relationship and the actual entrance strategy. In more plain terms, my mind is telling me, "Heck yes, hit that!" and my heart is telling me, "Whoa, back off there cowboy, them's choppy waters up ahead." I'm not sure my analogy really worked there, but I'm going to run with it anyway.
So, back to the story with which I started this blag post. There's been one particular woman on whom I've been crushing on like a dirty, 6th grade n00b. In my own mind she's just perfect. She's about the kindest person on the face of the Earth. Our senses of humor are very compatible. She's at about the optimal height for a man of my height. She has a valiant testimony of the Lord. She has achieved an optimal physical attractiveness, one which attracts me very much to her, but doesn't result in a dudefest at her apartment every night. And the best part is that she makes me want to be a better man than I currently am, both with her example of testimony and with just the woman that she is. I suppose that we would make a very good (not to mention cute) couple. And thus I present to you my analysis.
The emotional side of my relationship with this woman is quite the contrast from the analysis which I just described. When I'm around this particular woman I feel like my shoulder devil is a full grown man and my shoulder angel is out to lunch. There seems to be a voice whispering in my ear, "William, you know that you don't deserve a woman who's made of pure awesome like this one." or "You couldn't even keep that woman entertained, much less happy... bwahahahaha!!!" (PS-I know who that voice is, I need no council there. I did call him my full-grown shoulder devil after all. :P) Looking at these claims analytically could and would disprove them, but there is little if any analytical cognition when in the presence of women made of 100% pure awesome, it's all emotion. And as long as the emotion reigns there seems to be my full grown... maybe even morbidly obese, shoulder devil there to deter me.
As previously touched upon, I'm not entirely sure what the solution to such a problem would be. I'm sure that with faith in the Lord all things are possible. I have faith that he will guide me and aid me in everything that I need to do. I've felt that he also wants me to struggle with such a trial as this in this life so that I might be able to learn valuable lessons about the gospel and the principles of exaltation and eternal increase. As such, it is up to me to decide when I am willing to make the necessary sacrifices to be able to overcome these trials with the Lord's help. Will this happen in a timetable which will allow me to woo the woman who currently holds my fancy? Probably not. Will it be worth it in the long run? Certainly.
So, back to the story with which I started this blag post. There's been one particular woman on whom I've been crushing on like a dirty, 6th grade n00b. In my own mind she's just perfect. She's about the kindest person on the face of the Earth. Our senses of humor are very compatible. She's at about the optimal height for a man of my height. She has a valiant testimony of the Lord. She has achieved an optimal physical attractiveness, one which attracts me very much to her, but doesn't result in a dudefest at her apartment every night. And the best part is that she makes me want to be a better man than I currently am, both with her example of testimony and with just the woman that she is. I suppose that we would make a very good (not to mention cute) couple. And thus I present to you my analysis.
The emotional side of my relationship with this woman is quite the contrast from the analysis which I just described. When I'm around this particular woman I feel like my shoulder devil is a full grown man and my shoulder angel is out to lunch. There seems to be a voice whispering in my ear, "William, you know that you don't deserve a woman who's made of pure awesome like this one." or "You couldn't even keep that woman entertained, much less happy... bwahahahaha!!!" (PS-I know who that voice is, I need no council there. I did call him my full-grown shoulder devil after all. :P) Looking at these claims analytically could and would disprove them, but there is little if any analytical cognition when in the presence of women made of 100% pure awesome, it's all emotion. And as long as the emotion reigns there seems to be my full grown... maybe even morbidly obese, shoulder devil there to deter me.
As previously touched upon, I'm not entirely sure what the solution to such a problem would be. I'm sure that with faith in the Lord all things are possible. I have faith that he will guide me and aid me in everything that I need to do. I've felt that he also wants me to struggle with such a trial as this in this life so that I might be able to learn valuable lessons about the gospel and the principles of exaltation and eternal increase. As such, it is up to me to decide when I am willing to make the necessary sacrifices to be able to overcome these trials with the Lord's help. Will this happen in a timetable which will allow me to woo the woman who currently holds my fancy? Probably not. Will it be worth it in the long run? Certainly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)