For my birthday this year, my parents got me a Beethoven biography written by renowned Beethoven scholar Maynard Solomon. What was great about this book was it combined stories from him life with an analysis of his music at the time, a very interesting read! Much of it was academic to the non-musician, but here are three interesting facts I learned that you may not know!
1) Beethoven's deafness was not a sudden event, as widely believed, but was rather an extremely gradual process. In his twenties, he developed tinnitus, which is a constant ringing or buzzing of the ears, but apart from this his hearing was still fine. Through his thirties and forties, this gradually worsened, to the point where he had trouble hearing most notes on the piano and stopped performing in public. However, he kept this a secret from all but his closest friends, terrified of what would become of his career if people found out he was going deaf! It was not until his the last decade of his life, however, where he finally became completely deaf. During this final period of his life, he could only communicate with his peers through writing in journals with them, which became an invaluable resource to historians. The exact cause of Beethoven's progressive deafness remains unknown.
2) Beethoven never married, but he had a habit of falling desperately in love with unavailable women. Typically, he fell in love with one of his students or a daughter of one of his benefactors, all of which were aristocrats and outside of his social standing. However, Beethoven's perennial bachelorhood cannot be completely blamed on the social hierarchy of the times, as a part of him was always afraid to get married. He was so enraptured by his art that he knew he would not be willing to compromise his time, which could explain why he was never able to make a relationship work. In fact, the love letters he wrote to his "Immortal Beloved" (now believed to be Antonie Brentano, a married woman) were actually reciprocated by her, but in the end he decided to reject her rather than risk all for love. From that moment on, he abandoned all hope of marriage and was even involved with prostitutes at the local brothel, whom he mysteriously referred to as "fortresses" in his letters. It was likely that Beethoven felt great shame over his debauchery, as he championed virtue more than any other quality.
3) Beethoven had an older brother who died in infancy. Interestingly, Beethoven refused to accept his own certificate of baptism (which in those days also served as a birth certificate) as legitimate, and instead assumed the birth date and identity of his deceased brother, claiming that he was the firstborn son. Indeed, for his entire life, Beethoven steadfastly insisted that his birthday was a couple of years older than it really was, and even claimed to have noble ancestry when that was not the case. Many historians think that this conspiratorial thinking arose in Beethoven due to his hatred for his father, who was a drunk and an incompetent parasite to their family. Beethoven's mother was reputed to have gotten her first pregnancy through adultery with another man, so perhaps Beethoven fancied his older brother's identity to avoid being related to his father!
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Opium of the people?
Karl Marx is perhaps most famous for his quote that: "Religion is the opium of the people."
Now unfortunately, I have not yet read up on Karl Marx myself, so I cannot comment on his politics or philosophy as a whole. However, my general understanding of this quote is that religion is invented by people to give them emotional/spiritual comfort in life, much like opium (which contains morphine) can give comfort to somebody in physical pain.
Here, I thought it would be interesting to reflect on how not only religion (namely, Christianity) but also atheism can give comfort to people's lives. I did not become a Christian until college and have read several manifestos by atheists and humanists, so I have a reasonable understanding of both a secular and a Christian worldview. Please note that this blog post is not concerned with which worldview is actually correct, it is only examining the comforts and challenges of each worldview's claims. Let's start with Christianity:
Comforts of Christianity:
1) Heaven - "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away" (Revelation 21:4). It is fairly obvious how the Christian belief of heaven can give comfort to people living challenging and fragile lives. The Christian concept of heaven offers not only life after death, but even the end of suffering and mourning. It also provides the hope of seeing loved ones who have already passed away.
2) Purpose - The idea that humans are made in God's own image gives people the comfort of being special and having purpose in life. It means that we all have the divine nature of God living inside of us, our very soul and consciousness is a testament to God's goodness and purpose. It also means that the love we feel for life and for others is not merely a chemical feeling, but an objective reality that reflects the loving nature of God Himself. This is undeniably a more comforting worldview than that of naturalism, which posits that we are an accidental byproduct of blind and indifferent natural causes, with no objective truth or purpose.
3) Justice and grace - Christians believe that God will judge every human soul with fairness and grace. Every sinner who remains unrepentant of their actions will be eternally separated from God and His kingdom, never again able to inflict injustice on his/her victims. This promise of divine justice is crucial, as it frees Christians from a need to obtain their own justice/vengeance in their lives, and leaves it up to God in the next life. This is perhaps the only comfort possible when your life (or the life of somebody you love) is maliciously wounded by the sins of another. Trusting in God's justice for all is the only sure-fire antidote to hatred. After all, if there is no God, then hatred is completely justified, as only your own hatred and revenge can punish the wrongdoer. The grace offered to all by Jesus Christ is also an enormous comfort, as it means that you have not lost hope for salvation and righteousness even if you have made mistakes in life.
Comforts of atheism (or secular humanism):
1) Freedom - In the New Testament, the evangelist Paul often refers to himself as "a prisoner of Christ," which clearly indicates the amount of servility and sacrifice necessary for Christians. Many atheists, however, freely admit that they strongly prefer a life where they are free to do whatever they please (Christopher Hitchens, for example). In other words, they want to drink when they want, have sex when they want, act how they want, and don't want to be told what they can and can't do. God is seen as an oppressive straight-jacket, Hitchens even went so far as to label this biblical God a "celestial dictator." Clearly, not believing in this restrictive God provides an enormous comfort to many unbelievers, as they can revel in their freedom without being subjected to accountability or judgment from God.
2) Personal Authority - This is closely related to freedom, but has some subtle differences. Unlike Christians, who must humbly defer to biblical authority to define their morality and guide their life goals, an unbeliever has the authority to use their own personal compass through life. They get to define for themselves what is right and what is wrong. They get to decide what they would like to do with their time. In other words, an unbeliever not only gets freedom to do what they want, they even have the authority to proclaim that their own desires and morality are perfectly fine. This allowance for personal authority is highly desirable to secular humanism, which heavily promotes moral and cultural relativism and detests submission to authority, particular to a divine authority.
3) Capability - If there is no God, then humans are the pinnacle of all of existence. We are the most highly evolved form of life, there is nothing above us. This allows us the pleasure of reveling in our own intelligence and capability. In fact, many atheists, such as Richard Dawkins, elevate the capability of the human brain to a God-like status. The ability to do science and to think critically is seen as the ultimate form of being. A coworker of mine once even commented that "science is my God." This grandiose perception of our capability can be quite comforting, as it is often difficult as a Christian to acknowledge that we are nothing compared to God and His love and His power. By atheism, our brain power is the best the world has to offer, and there is no need for humility.
In conclusion, I would suggest that both Christianity AND secularism can serve as an "opium of the people." Therefore, this argument does not seem convincing for debunking either side's worldview. It would seem to be a draw. There may even be a slight advantage to Christianity, because I have never met an unbeliever (if any exist, I would love to talk to you!) who strongly desires for God to be real, but I know many Christians (myself included) who often struggle with the difficulty and inconvenience of living for God and sometimes wish He were not real.
Now unfortunately, I have not yet read up on Karl Marx myself, so I cannot comment on his politics or philosophy as a whole. However, my general understanding of this quote is that religion is invented by people to give them emotional/spiritual comfort in life, much like opium (which contains morphine) can give comfort to somebody in physical pain.
Here, I thought it would be interesting to reflect on how not only religion (namely, Christianity) but also atheism can give comfort to people's lives. I did not become a Christian until college and have read several manifestos by atheists and humanists, so I have a reasonable understanding of both a secular and a Christian worldview. Please note that this blog post is not concerned with which worldview is actually correct, it is only examining the comforts and challenges of each worldview's claims. Let's start with Christianity:
Comforts of Christianity:
1) Heaven - "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away" (Revelation 21:4). It is fairly obvious how the Christian belief of heaven can give comfort to people living challenging and fragile lives. The Christian concept of heaven offers not only life after death, but even the end of suffering and mourning. It also provides the hope of seeing loved ones who have already passed away.
2) Purpose - The idea that humans are made in God's own image gives people the comfort of being special and having purpose in life. It means that we all have the divine nature of God living inside of us, our very soul and consciousness is a testament to God's goodness and purpose. It also means that the love we feel for life and for others is not merely a chemical feeling, but an objective reality that reflects the loving nature of God Himself. This is undeniably a more comforting worldview than that of naturalism, which posits that we are an accidental byproduct of blind and indifferent natural causes, with no objective truth or purpose.
3) Justice and grace - Christians believe that God will judge every human soul with fairness and grace. Every sinner who remains unrepentant of their actions will be eternally separated from God and His kingdom, never again able to inflict injustice on his/her victims. This promise of divine justice is crucial, as it frees Christians from a need to obtain their own justice/vengeance in their lives, and leaves it up to God in the next life. This is perhaps the only comfort possible when your life (or the life of somebody you love) is maliciously wounded by the sins of another. Trusting in God's justice for all is the only sure-fire antidote to hatred. After all, if there is no God, then hatred is completely justified, as only your own hatred and revenge can punish the wrongdoer. The grace offered to all by Jesus Christ is also an enormous comfort, as it means that you have not lost hope for salvation and righteousness even if you have made mistakes in life.
Comforts of atheism (or secular humanism):
1) Freedom - In the New Testament, the evangelist Paul often refers to himself as "a prisoner of Christ," which clearly indicates the amount of servility and sacrifice necessary for Christians. Many atheists, however, freely admit that they strongly prefer a life where they are free to do whatever they please (Christopher Hitchens, for example). In other words, they want to drink when they want, have sex when they want, act how they want, and don't want to be told what they can and can't do. God is seen as an oppressive straight-jacket, Hitchens even went so far as to label this biblical God a "celestial dictator." Clearly, not believing in this restrictive God provides an enormous comfort to many unbelievers, as they can revel in their freedom without being subjected to accountability or judgment from God.
2) Personal Authority - This is closely related to freedom, but has some subtle differences. Unlike Christians, who must humbly defer to biblical authority to define their morality and guide their life goals, an unbeliever has the authority to use their own personal compass through life. They get to define for themselves what is right and what is wrong. They get to decide what they would like to do with their time. In other words, an unbeliever not only gets freedom to do what they want, they even have the authority to proclaim that their own desires and morality are perfectly fine. This allowance for personal authority is highly desirable to secular humanism, which heavily promotes moral and cultural relativism and detests submission to authority, particular to a divine authority.
3) Capability - If there is no God, then humans are the pinnacle of all of existence. We are the most highly evolved form of life, there is nothing above us. This allows us the pleasure of reveling in our own intelligence and capability. In fact, many atheists, such as Richard Dawkins, elevate the capability of the human brain to a God-like status. The ability to do science and to think critically is seen as the ultimate form of being. A coworker of mine once even commented that "science is my God." This grandiose perception of our capability can be quite comforting, as it is often difficult as a Christian to acknowledge that we are nothing compared to God and His love and His power. By atheism, our brain power is the best the world has to offer, and there is no need for humility.
In conclusion, I would suggest that both Christianity AND secularism can serve as an "opium of the people." Therefore, this argument does not seem convincing for debunking either side's worldview. It would seem to be a draw. There may even be a slight advantage to Christianity, because I have never met an unbeliever (if any exist, I would love to talk to you!) who strongly desires for God to be real, but I know many Christians (myself included) who often struggle with the difficulty and inconvenience of living for God and sometimes wish He were not real.
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Master morality vs. slave morality
In my previous post, I talked about how the alpha animals desire to crush and oppress the weak animals, for the sake of the domination of their genes. These natural instincts go beyond mere survival, as many alpha males use their power to forcibly take as many females, food, and land as possible even when their basic comfort and survival are already secured.
Clearly, we see similar tendencies among humans. Dictators with absolute power are notorious for hoarding power, sex, and wealth beyond any practical necessity and at the great expense of their subjects. Until very recently, every civilization in human history has utilized slavery to enable the powerful to profit at the expense of the weak. Dynastic empires feel entitled to invading weaker countries, often even pillaging their resources and brutally abusing the people of the conquered nations. Aristocrats and businessmen are often exclusively concerned with their accumulation of resources, often content to completely ignore or even exploit the needs of the less fortunate. Criminals feel entitled to using brute force to steal goods from others and even to traffic human beings into sex slavery.
Willfully engaging in this sort of behavior, which is primal and selfish in essence and clearly mirrors the way of the animal kingdom, is what Nietzsche coined as "master morality". In short, master morality values pride, strength, nobility, and self-indulgence.
To modern Western civilization, master morality seems barbaric and completely inhuman. Yet it is essential to look back at history and realize that until the rise of Christianity, the mantra of master morality was widely adopted by nearly every civilization on the globe. This should not be surprising, because master morality is a very natural and instinctive worldview for people (like any animal) to possess. It took something supernatural, something that cared more about mere survival or selfish domination, to subvert the mantra of master morality.
The notion that weak, poor, and unlikable people should be selflessly and unconditionally loved and provided for is a key tenant of Jesus' teachings and is what Nietzsche termed "slave morality". Slave morality cherishes Christian values, such as kindness, charity, forgiveness, and compassion. It is called slave morality because it actually benefits the powerless, rather than the powerful. It is an inversion of the natural order.
Modern Western civilization has assumed the morality of slave morality, as evidenced by the widespread existence of churches, hospitals, non-profits, aid to disadvantaged nations, and government programs for the poor and handicapped. Indeed, Christianity has been so successful in spreading slave morality that it is easy to to forget that this way of thinking didn't even exist to most cultures before the revolutionary Jesus diffused his radical teachings around the world.
The most epic battle between "slave morality" and "master morality" culminated in World War 2. Hitler believed in the natural order of things, in the survival of the fittest and the removal of the weak. Hitler once said to his inner-circle that “The law of selection justifies this incessant struggle, by allowing the survival of the fittest. Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure.” Thankfully, the "slave morality" of the Christian nations in Europe and North America won over the Nazi party, and for the better part of a century has remained the de facto standard of ethics.
But will slave morality last forever? Over the past few decades, Europe and now North America have become increasingly secular. For the most part, secular humanists and atheists have clung to the Christian notions behind slave morality, but can these values survive divorced of their Christian inspiration? Nietzsche, among many other philosophers, believed that once nations moved past the influence of Christianity, their compassion for the weak would also perish. I challenge people who do not believe in Jesus but value compassion and charity, do these values derive from the natural world, or do they transcend nature? I would assert that atheism and naturalism must lead inevitably back toward the "master morality" cherished by Nietzsche, Hitler, and the animal kingdom. Only Christianity seems to provide the logical framework and divine nature that justifies the "slave morality" that even many non-believers hold so dear.
Clearly, we see similar tendencies among humans. Dictators with absolute power are notorious for hoarding power, sex, and wealth beyond any practical necessity and at the great expense of their subjects. Until very recently, every civilization in human history has utilized slavery to enable the powerful to profit at the expense of the weak. Dynastic empires feel entitled to invading weaker countries, often even pillaging their resources and brutally abusing the people of the conquered nations. Aristocrats and businessmen are often exclusively concerned with their accumulation of resources, often content to completely ignore or even exploit the needs of the less fortunate. Criminals feel entitled to using brute force to steal goods from others and even to traffic human beings into sex slavery.
Willfully engaging in this sort of behavior, which is primal and selfish in essence and clearly mirrors the way of the animal kingdom, is what Nietzsche coined as "master morality". In short, master morality values pride, strength, nobility, and self-indulgence.
To modern Western civilization, master morality seems barbaric and completely inhuman. Yet it is essential to look back at history and realize that until the rise of Christianity, the mantra of master morality was widely adopted by nearly every civilization on the globe. This should not be surprising, because master morality is a very natural and instinctive worldview for people (like any animal) to possess. It took something supernatural, something that cared more about mere survival or selfish domination, to subvert the mantra of master morality.
The notion that weak, poor, and unlikable people should be selflessly and unconditionally loved and provided for is a key tenant of Jesus' teachings and is what Nietzsche termed "slave morality". Slave morality cherishes Christian values, such as kindness, charity, forgiveness, and compassion. It is called slave morality because it actually benefits the powerless, rather than the powerful. It is an inversion of the natural order.
Modern Western civilization has assumed the morality of slave morality, as evidenced by the widespread existence of churches, hospitals, non-profits, aid to disadvantaged nations, and government programs for the poor and handicapped. Indeed, Christianity has been so successful in spreading slave morality that it is easy to to forget that this way of thinking didn't even exist to most cultures before the revolutionary Jesus diffused his radical teachings around the world.
The most epic battle between "slave morality" and "master morality" culminated in World War 2. Hitler believed in the natural order of things, in the survival of the fittest and the removal of the weak. Hitler once said to his inner-circle that “The law of selection justifies this incessant struggle, by allowing the survival of the fittest. Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure.” Thankfully, the "slave morality" of the Christian nations in Europe and North America won over the Nazi party, and for the better part of a century has remained the de facto standard of ethics.
But will slave morality last forever? Over the past few decades, Europe and now North America have become increasingly secular. For the most part, secular humanists and atheists have clung to the Christian notions behind slave morality, but can these values survive divorced of their Christian inspiration? Nietzsche, among many other philosophers, believed that once nations moved past the influence of Christianity, their compassion for the weak would also perish. I challenge people who do not believe in Jesus but value compassion and charity, do these values derive from the natural world, or do they transcend nature? I would assert that atheism and naturalism must lead inevitably back toward the "master morality" cherished by Nietzsche, Hitler, and the animal kingdom. Only Christianity seems to provide the logical framework and divine nature that justifies the "slave morality" that even many non-believers hold so dear.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Beyond survival
In my previous post on nature and free will, it was commented that much of the "cruelty" we witness in nature is necessary to the animal's survival. This is an excellent point, and in many cases is certainly true! Recently, however, I have been watching a plethora of nature documentaries by the BBC (Planet Earth, Life, Frozen Planet), and have been fascinated to learn that often this type of behavior goes beyond survival! Let me give a couple of examples, and then draw an important conclusion from this:
1) Gorillas in the Congo jungle live in tribal colonies. Each colony stakes a claim to a certain territory in the jungle, and the territory of a rival clan must be taken by force. There are several interesting aspects to this behavior. First of all, gorillas go out of their way to overtake a rival's camp even when they already have enough territory of their own. In other words, it's not that they necessarily NEED this land, they just want MORE land at the expense of their peers. Secondly, when a rival's camp is successfully taken over, they do not stop at merely chasing off or killing the rival gorillas. They actually EAT their captives raw, often while they are still alive.
2) Many animals, such as bears and seals, are not satisfied with simply winning the affections of a single female. The alpha males are prone to claiming the entire harem of females entirely to themselves, even at the expense of any other male having any other mate. Clearly, this goes far beyond mere survival, as a single female would certainly suffice if one's goal was mere survival and procreation.
3) There are baboons that live in a very harsh arctic mountain environment. There are precious hot springs in these mountains that provide much needed warmth. While these springs are large enough to fit the entire clan of baboons, only the alpha male and his wives and children are allowed in the spring. Other baboons are violently beat out of the spring, even though they could easily fit.
Here are the conclusions I draw from this:
1) Most male animals do not desire to merely survive, they desire to utterly dominate. They desire as much power and authority as possible, as many female mates as possible, and as much offspring as possible. In many cases, this could even mean the entire local population of females, even if this means that no other male gets a chance. In short, alpha males want to be gluttons when it comes to their authority and their genes.
2) The desire to have your genes dominate is only half the story. Animals also want their weaker rivals to suffer and die. Let me explain: it is not enough for an alpha male to simply win as much land and females as possible. They actually want to remove opportunities for their weaker peers to survive and reproduce. Going back to the hot spring example: the alpha male has already won the respect of his peers and the affections of all of the females, none of this would be threatened by allowing the beta males to join him in the hot spring. However, he actively desires for the beta males to sit out in the cold and suffer, possibly even to their deaths. He would also go to almost any length to ensure that they will not reproduce.
This sounds incredibly cruel, but it also seems to be the simple truth. In short, the strong and fit in the animal kingdom instinctively desire for their genes to dominate and for the genes of the weak to perish. In my next post, I will try to explain why this is, and to what extent this behavior should be tolerated in humans.
1) Gorillas in the Congo jungle live in tribal colonies. Each colony stakes a claim to a certain territory in the jungle, and the territory of a rival clan must be taken by force. There are several interesting aspects to this behavior. First of all, gorillas go out of their way to overtake a rival's camp even when they already have enough territory of their own. In other words, it's not that they necessarily NEED this land, they just want MORE land at the expense of their peers. Secondly, when a rival's camp is successfully taken over, they do not stop at merely chasing off or killing the rival gorillas. They actually EAT their captives raw, often while they are still alive.
2) Many animals, such as bears and seals, are not satisfied with simply winning the affections of a single female. The alpha males are prone to claiming the entire harem of females entirely to themselves, even at the expense of any other male having any other mate. Clearly, this goes far beyond mere survival, as a single female would certainly suffice if one's goal was mere survival and procreation.
3) There are baboons that live in a very harsh arctic mountain environment. There are precious hot springs in these mountains that provide much needed warmth. While these springs are large enough to fit the entire clan of baboons, only the alpha male and his wives and children are allowed in the spring. Other baboons are violently beat out of the spring, even though they could easily fit.
Here are the conclusions I draw from this:
1) Most male animals do not desire to merely survive, they desire to utterly dominate. They desire as much power and authority as possible, as many female mates as possible, and as much offspring as possible. In many cases, this could even mean the entire local population of females, even if this means that no other male gets a chance. In short, alpha males want to be gluttons when it comes to their authority and their genes.
2) The desire to have your genes dominate is only half the story. Animals also want their weaker rivals to suffer and die. Let me explain: it is not enough for an alpha male to simply win as much land and females as possible. They actually want to remove opportunities for their weaker peers to survive and reproduce. Going back to the hot spring example: the alpha male has already won the respect of his peers and the affections of all of the females, none of this would be threatened by allowing the beta males to join him in the hot spring. However, he actively desires for the beta males to sit out in the cold and suffer, possibly even to their deaths. He would also go to almost any length to ensure that they will not reproduce.
This sounds incredibly cruel, but it also seems to be the simple truth. In short, the strong and fit in the animal kingdom instinctively desire for their genes to dominate and for the genes of the weak to perish. In my next post, I will try to explain why this is, and to what extent this behavior should be tolerated in humans.
Top 5 in Tennessee
Thanks to those who posted some interesting comments on my last post, it has already given me some new ideas for future topics of discussion. However, I thought it might be nice to take off my philosopher cap for a while and catch friends and family up on what's been happening in Tennessee. Here are my top 5 moments so far, in no particular order!
1) Frisbee golf: there is a gorgeous frisbee golf course in Oak Ridge. What differentiates this course from the one I played in North Carolina is the sheer expanse of the area: nothing but rolling hills as far as the eye can see. The fields are populated with majestic willows and oaks that are common enough to provide some challenge, but sparse enough to enable uninterrupted views. So far I have played with Shanda, with our friends Andrew and Holly, and also with my dad. There is something very relaxing about the whole experience, perhaps I finally understand the appeal of golf after all! That being said, I think I will stick with the frisbee variation, as it seems to be much easier on the wallet and on the time. Funny story: one day I threw an errant frisbee over a fence, only to discover this was no ordinary fence but a security perimeter for the Y12 nuclear storage facility! Being older and wiser than I once was, I decided not to risk climbing it.
2) Dollywood: Shanda's sister Mandy and her husband Kevin visited us near the end of summer, and we had an awesome time at the Splash Country water park in Dollywood. Apparently, Dolly Parton is so popular around here that she has her own theme park! This was most likely the best waterpark I have ever been to, and we managed to go down just about every slide in the park. My favorite was a fierce tube slide that was so intense that your back got a little raw by the end of it!
3) Shanda surprised me by taking me to the Museum of Science and Engineering in Oak Ridge. We learned a lot about the history behind the Manhatten Project, which of course took place primarily in Oak Ridge during World War II. Interesting fact: most of the workers operating the equipment that was enriching the uranium were in fact women. Since this project was so sensitive and confidential, most of them didn't even know what the levers and buttons they were pressing were actually doing! They only knew that the numbers on the gauges shouldn't pass a certain value, and to control the numbers by pushing certain buttons.
4) I have finally finished my last paper from graduate school at Duke! As some may know, I have been working two jobs for the better part of the last few months, so it was a huge relief to finally be finished with my Duke paper! I have already felt a lot more rested and balanced and am excited to finally be done with school and part of the real world!
5) The Lost Sea: when our friends Andrew and Holly were here, the four of us went to the Lost Sea in Sweetwater, Tennessee. This is the largest underwater lake in all of North America! First, the tour guide walked us through the trails of the largest, most expansive cave I have ever seen. Then, near the bottom of the cave, we got to take a boat ride around the lake! There were some trout in the water that were artificially introduced, it was actually quite unsettling since they seemed so out of place there. Fun fact: during Prohibition there were Speakeasy parties held in this cave. People didn't realize that the change in pressure would make it harder to feel the effects of alcohol, so they often drank past their capacity, and several hours later the alcohol would finally hit them so hard they had to get rolled out of the cave. I would definitely be up for a party and live music in a cave sometime!
Thanks to everyone who has visited us so far and helped us get settled in Tennessee! Thanks to Mary Clare for helping us move in and unpack, and thanks to everyone else for visiting and making it easier to forget that it takes time to make new friends after a move!
1) Frisbee golf: there is a gorgeous frisbee golf course in Oak Ridge. What differentiates this course from the one I played in North Carolina is the sheer expanse of the area: nothing but rolling hills as far as the eye can see. The fields are populated with majestic willows and oaks that are common enough to provide some challenge, but sparse enough to enable uninterrupted views. So far I have played with Shanda, with our friends Andrew and Holly, and also with my dad. There is something very relaxing about the whole experience, perhaps I finally understand the appeal of golf after all! That being said, I think I will stick with the frisbee variation, as it seems to be much easier on the wallet and on the time. Funny story: one day I threw an errant frisbee over a fence, only to discover this was no ordinary fence but a security perimeter for the Y12 nuclear storage facility! Being older and wiser than I once was, I decided not to risk climbing it.
2) Dollywood: Shanda's sister Mandy and her husband Kevin visited us near the end of summer, and we had an awesome time at the Splash Country water park in Dollywood. Apparently, Dolly Parton is so popular around here that she has her own theme park! This was most likely the best waterpark I have ever been to, and we managed to go down just about every slide in the park. My favorite was a fierce tube slide that was so intense that your back got a little raw by the end of it!
3) Shanda surprised me by taking me to the Museum of Science and Engineering in Oak Ridge. We learned a lot about the history behind the Manhatten Project, which of course took place primarily in Oak Ridge during World War II. Interesting fact: most of the workers operating the equipment that was enriching the uranium were in fact women. Since this project was so sensitive and confidential, most of them didn't even know what the levers and buttons they were pressing were actually doing! They only knew that the numbers on the gauges shouldn't pass a certain value, and to control the numbers by pushing certain buttons.
4) I have finally finished my last paper from graduate school at Duke! As some may know, I have been working two jobs for the better part of the last few months, so it was a huge relief to finally be finished with my Duke paper! I have already felt a lot more rested and balanced and am excited to finally be done with school and part of the real world!
5) The Lost Sea: when our friends Andrew and Holly were here, the four of us went to the Lost Sea in Sweetwater, Tennessee. This is the largest underwater lake in all of North America! First, the tour guide walked us through the trails of the largest, most expansive cave I have ever seen. Then, near the bottom of the cave, we got to take a boat ride around the lake! There were some trout in the water that were artificially introduced, it was actually quite unsettling since they seemed so out of place there. Fun fact: during Prohibition there were Speakeasy parties held in this cave. People didn't realize that the change in pressure would make it harder to feel the effects of alcohol, so they often drank past their capacity, and several hours later the alcohol would finally hit them so hard they had to get rolled out of the cave. I would definitely be up for a party and live music in a cave sometime!
Thanks to everyone who has visited us so far and helped us get settled in Tennessee! Thanks to Mary Clare for helping us move in and unpack, and thanks to everyone else for visiting and making it easier to forget that it takes time to make new friends after a move!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)