Sunday, August 9, 2009


The onslaught of logic versus emotion rampages in the realm of ideas.

Logic controls the day. Emotion controls the night. They do seep through and affect the other. The balance is often broken. A landslide one way or another.

The algorithm of logic analyzes and dissects, until humanity is torn to pieces and looks nil. There is no room for anything but reason. The emotion that makes it through is dull and on life-support.

Emotion finds it strength and attacks when the body is put to rest. The intensity of dreams is made 10 fold. When sense is lost, logic is roused. Although, there are times when emotions tip-toes its way pass without loosing its mimic of reality.

A never-ending metaphysical battle. A never-ending nightmare.

Saturday, October 25, 2008

A short essay -Purpose can only be attained by human reason.

Jared Armstrong
Professor ...
Philosophy 101
10 October 2008
Purpose can only be attained by human reason.
Purpose is something set up as an object or end to be obtained. (Merriam Webster) This is not the only definition of purpose, but seems to be the most appropriate one. I find the idea of purpose fascinating. There are many implications when you talk about purpose; what is my purpose? Can a person have more than one purpose? Is a purpose a choice? What is the purpose of (insert noun here)? Does everything have a purpose? “Can there be a principle or law at work [in the universe] without a purpose or goal?” (Velasquez, 199) I would say yes. Principle or laws aren’t purposeful. How can objects have purpose? Purpose can only be attained by an object, law, or principle by human reason.
Humans apply purpose to things. Take for example a piece of wood with some metal coming out one end. When this object is in a drawer of my kitchen, it has no end to be attained. Although, when I need to make a steak I just fried up on the grill into smaller pieces, this object has the purpose of cutting my steak into smaller and more manageable pieces to be consumed. So this raises the question, is purpose permanent? Let’s take this same wooden object with metal coming out one end and use it to maim a person. Have we not changed the very purpose of this object? This leads me to believe purpose is not permanent, and can be dynamic. While you can change the purpose of an object, what you change the purpose to might not be the orginally intended purpose of that object. Such as taking a steak knife and maiming someone with it.
When people apply purpose to inanimate objects, it comes off to me as hypostatization fallacy of sorts. For example, the sun’s purpose is to warm the earth. How can the sun, which is basically a flaming ball of gases, have a purpose? Well, if we think about it a little more critically, people give the sun that purpose. Purpose is observer relative, because without humans there to perceive the sun having the purpose of warming the earth, it really has no purpose or goal to attain. It’s just a big hot ball of gas. If humans weren’t around, would the sun still have a purpose?
Social reality might play a part in the idea of purpose and goal. Based on agreement, this piece of paper in my wallet with some ink on it is money and can buy me something. We agree that it’s money, and that it has value, and we use it to trade for an object that we wish to attain. The purpose of money is to buy things. The goal of money is to attain something through trade. Beyond that, does that piece of paper with some ink on it really have a purpose other than the one we give it? I would say no. It’s only true because we agree it’s true. It’s epistemically objective, but ontologically subjective, in the sense of social reality.
There is the argument, “God(s) gave everything a purpose,” and I might be considered an infidel for saying this, but considering there is no proof at all of the existence of some omnipotent being, I really can’t find a justification for that argument. For the sake of this paper, I shall refute this argument in a logical way, and assume the existence of some omnipotent being for but a moment.
If God created all things, and gave all things purpose, he may be omnipotent, but that just means he created these things for a purpose. If the purpose was given, (we’ll use the sun for example.), does it really have a purpose of its own? That may sound confusing, so let me rephrase. The sun has been given purpose by God, but the sun on its own can’t have purpose or goals, because it doesn’t have the cognitive ability (That I am aware of.) to do such things. Purpose and goals cannot exist without reason; whether it is the reason given by some omnipotent being, humans, or even apes.
“Can there be a principle or law at work [in the universe] without a purpose or goal?” (Velasquez, 199) Again, I say yes. The only reason the idea of purpose exists, is because humans see a connection between things. Humans ask “why is this, this way?” The answer we have come up with is purpose. It is sadly satisfactory for the common person, and not looked at with more critical thinking behind it. Purpose and goals are applied by reason. Without the ability to reason, things such as purpose and goal cannot exist.

Works Cited
“Merriam Webster Dictionary.” Merriam Webster Dictionary.
14th Century. Unknown location. Unknown. < >

Velasquez, Manuel. Philosophy: A Text with Readings 8th edition. Belmont: CA
Wadsworth, 2002

All rights reserved to the Author (Jared W. Armstrong). You may not use this essay or the contents herein without the sole permission of the Author.

Thursday, April 24, 2008

X-Box Live: Where not just idiots are

It seems like anywhere that people can communicate on the internet, there is a skew of morons, idiots, racists, and jerks, to actually corgile, friendly, good gamers. I'm sure you've read about them one time or another, especially if you play on XBL. XBL can have some of the most idiotic people that behind that head set. Well, this isn't about them. This is about those people who no matter win or lose say, "Good Game." The people who try to help the team.
I just started gaming again. It's been a couple-few months, and just recently, I've decided to pick up my controller again. I started off slow with some Oblivion, and I found the lack of interaction got boring, so I hopped on XBL.
I've always been an online gamer. The first game I ever played online was World of Warcraft II. Against my brother, who was at his friends house while I was at home. After that I was pretty much hooked, and I moved on to an early Bungie series, Marathon. It was Marathon that taught me there is nothing more satisfying then landing a long distance rocket. Marathon, Quake (I, II, and III!), then I made the move from PC to console with my original Playstation. Now I understand the early consoles didn't have online connectivity, but who can deny the awesome games?
Anyways, tonight I got home from work, and decided I wanted to play me some Halo 3. Me, being the social creature I am, chose to play Social Slayer. Where I got grouped with decent, corgile, good gamers. We communicated well, we could joke, and we won several games together. It was good.
I've found that getting grouped by chance with some good people online is more satisfying then any headshot, multiple kill, stick, or running streak. It makes playing online incredibly more enjoyable. I don't care what online game you're playing. If you get along, and are of equal skill, it can be a really good time.
I just want to give a shout out to all those people who play online that are actually intelligent, decent people, thank you. Thank you for continuing to play, and not giving into all the morons online. If it wasn't for the decent gamers out there, I doubt I'd still play online. So thank you, and I hope to see you online sometime!

Monday, March 31, 2008

Is PC Gaming dying?

There has been some talk in the industry that PC Gaming is slowly dying off. It somewhat intrigues me with the certain arguments presented on the topic, that not only seem vague, but null all together. For instance retail sales of games. Naturally, between the DS, PSP, PS2, PS3, X-Box 360 and of course the Wii, the number of games sold is incredibly high compared to PC. Better yet, when they talk about retail sales of PC's, it seems a bit ridiculous to me to include ALL PC's that are sold compared to Gaming consoles. Of course more PC's are going to be sold than consoles alone. That just seems to vague to me considering you don't know what PC's are actually Gaming Rigs.

It's hard to say that PC Gaming isn't doing well with titles such as the Sims, and obviously World of Warcraft. World of Warcraft is pushing 10 million unique subscribers at $15 a month. That alone tells me PC Gaming is not hurting at all, but what it also tells me is that growth, and more importantly variety has somewhat flat-lined.

Being the avid gamer I am, I play 3 different consoles, and on my PC. From what I can tell, PC Gaming isn't getting shoved out by Consoles. I foresee an integration of Console and PC. To think of them as one may seem far-fetched, but if you look at the similarities between Gaming Consoles and PC's, the line is getting thinner between the two. The only real major difference I see between Consoles and PCs is how you interface with the machine.

This is not to say that PC Gaming isn't thriving like it once was, but it certainly isn't going away anytime soon. I think what has happened, is that Consoles are just more user friendly than PC's. It's also less expensive. Take for example the game Crysis. It's a very graphic intensive game. You will probably need to upgrade your PC's RAM, and Graphics card to even enjoy it on the games lowest settings. RAM isn't cheap, and neither is a Graphics card. You're looking at least a couple to a few hundred bucks to have a gaming rig capable of handling the game. When you look at consoles in regards to their games, the games are designed around what the console can already handle. So no upgrades, and less nitty-gritty to actually play the game, you just pop in the disk, and blam! You're good to go.

So what I see has happened is Gaming Consoles has opened up the Gaming market to more casual gamers, or in other words, less techno-knowledge to just enjoy a game. Although, either way you look at it, their are draw backs to both.

PC Pros:
Optimizing controls
Optimizing Graphics
More freedom (I.E. Modders)

PC Cons:
Low variety of games
Have to know more about technical stuff (I.E. RAM, Graphics, etc...)

Game Console Pros:
Less techno-knowledge required
More user friendly
High variety of games

Game Console Cons:
As systems get better, they become more vulnerable too breaking (I.E. RROD)
Interface is not optimizable
System Backwards compatibility (I.E. 3 different PS3's)

So if you were to ask me if PC gaming is dying, I would absolutely say no. Even though Gaming Consoles have seen major growth, and PC rigs have not, the market for PC Gaming is still huge, but constant.

Sunday, March 30, 2008


To any people who actually read this thing, sorry for the lack of posts. My life has gone hay-wire on me. Between a bad break up, being homeless for a month, and all out social chaos, I haven't put much into my blog. Expect to see an actual post soon.

Monday, February 4, 2008


After watching the following video, I messed my pants up... It's so damn hawt...

Watch it.

I wonder how much one of these would run me?

Sunday, February 3, 2008

The Norton Virus

So, semester started last Monday. I'm taking a few basic classes, Philosophy 101, IS 101, English 101, and CCNA 121. Two of the classes are online, and one of them is web based, and my English class is more of an actual class. For my IS 101 class, (Which is crap, but I need the 3 credits, but that's a whole other blog...), Word 2007 is mandatory. So I got myself a copy, (boot-legged that is...), and installed it on my desktop PC, and my Laptop.
When school is in occurrence, I use my Lap Top A LOT. Like several times a day. It's nothing fancy at all, I mean, it's a Compaq Presario 2200. It has a Celeron M 1.4GHz processor, not even half a gig of ram, and about 40gigs of Hard drive space, (Which most of is used, all but about 2 gigs...). Like I said, nothing fancy, in fact, you could call it crap. Yet, it does what I need it too do, such as use the Internet, and word processing sort of stuff.
Well, I installed Word 2007 on this beast, and it worked fine, but for awhile now, I've had problems with my Anti-virus. Norton 2005. It decided one day it wasn't going to work right. It tries to install every time I open a word document or start up my Lap Top. It's super annoying, because it tries about three times than gives up.
Today, I decided to do some homework for English class. Well, when I started up my lap top, it still does this install crap that fails, so I finally said fuck it, finished up my assignment, and decided to fix the problem.
I decided that the easiest way to fix it was to just start up MSCONFIG and turn off the services and start up files for Norton. Psh, that didn't work at all...
After making the changes, I tried to open up my homework again, and it would do that install crap, than I would get an error from word that said that the command failed because dialog boxes were open. What dialog boxes? There were none.
So I tried turning the services back on, and do a restart so they would take effect. No good. I made the changes fine, but my Lap top wouldn't restart. So I just hard booted the damn thing. I played around with it for about an hour, and finally I just uninstalled Norton 2005 completely. It solved ALL of my problems. Besides making my start-up go so much slower, it bogged my entire system down. Since uninstalling the damn thing, my Lap Top is running smooth as a new born babies behind!
I recommend using AVG, it's free, and it's easy, and it works well without hindering my lap top. Even though it's about 4 years old now.