Conservatives use Windows, liberals use Mac OS.

NASA's head talks about different reasons for exploring space:

Real Reasons are intuitive and compelling to all of us, but they're not immediately logical. They're exactly the opposite of Acceptable Reasons, which are eminently logical but neither intuitive nor emotionally compelling. The Real Reasons we do things like exploring space involve competitiveness, curiosity and monument building.

So I see an attractive girl at a party. I'm really supposed to go up to her and say "If you could be any cartoon character, which one would it be and why?" Do I say hello first, or just launch right into that question?

Steven Pinker on the problems of understanding conciousness:

The Easy Problem, then, is to distinguish conscious from unconscious mental computation, identify its correlates in the brain and explain why it evolved.

The Hard Problem, on the other hand, is why it feels like something to have a conscious process going on in one's head--why there is first-person, subjective experience. Not only does a green thing look different from a red thing, remind us of other green things and inspire us to say, "That's green" (the Easy Problem), but it also actually looks green: it produces an experience of sheer greenness that isn't reducible to anything else. As Louis Armstrong said in response to a request to define jazz, "When you got to ask what it is, you never get to know."

Andrew Sullivan and Sam Harris are having a debate about well, religion, and in particular the relationship of religious moderation to extremism. It's worth reading.

The 2007 Edge question is up: What are you optimistic about? Why?

I paid a fair bit of attention to the Edge question last year, so it's been interesting to compare answers from the two years. For instance, regardless of the question, the answer seems to be "Religion is bad and science will replace it" for Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and Andrew Brown. Fair enough, but doesn't saying the same thing over and over get boring? I feel like they could have written their responses before hearing the question. To his credit, Sam Harris says something at least a little different this time around.

Some of the pieces really do address the question, and offer real optimism: Steven Pinker, Esther Dyson, and Geoffrey Carr, all of whose responses I really liked. On the other hand, Susan Blackmore doesn't seem to understand what optimism is.

I have to point out the mathematicians, Keith Devlin who says 3D graphics will revolutionize math education (I think he's wrong, unfortunately), and Steven Strogatz, who talks about sleep. His response is the kind I like, focused on a small but interesting area, not feeling the need to speak grandly about all of civilization and society.

The good news on the medical front is the discovery of a cheap, simple drug that's effective against may cancers; the bad news is that TB may be making a comeback.

Neil Gross says anti-Americanism in the world isn't as bad as you think. Andrei S. Markovits says it's worse. From Markovits:

Anti-Americanism constitutes a particular prejudice that renders it not only acceptable but indeed commendable in the context of an otherwise welcome discourse that favors the weak.

In Guatemala I met a Canadian who said something bad about Americans, added to me, "Of course, I don't consider you an American," and thought it was a compliment.

Seed asked several scientists where their field was heading in 2007. Note particularly the responses of Nathan Wolfe and Paul Bloom.

I'm back. After the first 36 hours or so, Guatemala was terrific; I'm a little disappointed to be back, not least because the high in Guatemala City is 75 and in Boulder it's 15. You can read a little bit about the trip from a fellow traveller's perspective on this blog.