One shot from the Final Four.

Some interesting facts:

1) Sunday night, after we beat Georgetown, Davidson College was the #1 Google Search. Laughably, Davidson University was #4.

2) The Trustees fully funded any Davidson student who wanted to go to the game, including ticket, bus fare, and hotel. That story alone made espn.com.

3) Stephen Curry had over 2,000 facebook friend requests the day after we beat Georgetown.

4) The College Union Bookstore averages daily sales of $1,700. Last week daily sales averaged $35,000.

5) Davidson's transfer rate increased 1,200%, and one person even sent in a full blown regular application. The application deadline was January 2, son.

6) LeBron James loves Stephen Curry.

7) President Tom Ross just met with Barack Obama. The first thing Obama said to him was "Those Wildcats...Steph Curry is really something."

Meanwhile, I've run 83 miles in the past 7 days of running and my body is tired.

So I'm sittin here listening to T.I. and Prince (rare find) reading about Texas.

I found an interesting race, the Marathon 2 Marathon Marathon in Marathon, Texas. Marathon, Texas is located in Brewster County in West Texas about 70 miles south of I-10 at Fort Stockton. It is home to 2,455 people. I then went to the hompage of the Marathon 2 Marathon Marathon. At the top of the page it reads, "THE HARD PART IS GETTING THERE." Mmmm, this should be good.

Race description: 2,800 square miles of mountains and canyons broken by sand dunes and forests. Surrounded by Mexico and invaded by smugglers, cacti, and mountain lions. Home to deer and elk, sandstorms and outlaws. Loved by many, despised by others, but home to the adventuresome. A harsh country with the gentle touch of a desert shower. A blossom among the rocks. A tarantula waiting for its next meal. The cry of a peregrine, the wail of a young javelina chosen as a meal by a passing coyote. Destination for the adventurous.

I can't wait to run this race.

I noticed their high end hotel, the Gage Hotel, and then I saw that Marathon is 70 miles west of Sanderson on Texas State Highway 90, where I know that land is sold for 100 dollars an acre. Something in my brain clicked, and I realized that I have been to Marathon before and I have been in the Gage Hotel. It must have been in route to Big Bend National Park many years ago, but I've definitely been there. It was a strange revelation, but quite interesting. One never knows what one will find perusing the Internet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Marathon_texas_gage_hotel.jpg

http://www.marathon2marathon.net/

In the College Union basketball goals have been set up and there are loose basketballs floating around everywhere. Today Alea and I played STEPHEN instead of the traditional HORSE.

Had Nietzsche been a distance running coach, he would have endorsed the workout I did today. I did the start out at the course/Pines/Greenway/River Run/Grey Road combo but with a twist. I got to the two major hills on Grey Road at around 13 miles at regular pace. Then I increased pace up and and back down those two hills for the next 45 minutes. It was tough. I passed a biker on one of the uphills, the both of us huffing and puffing. It was prolly a 20 mile run.

I did this to simulate the Boston course, which is steadily downhill from the start to mile 16, but from mile 16 to 21 you regain half the elevation you lost in the four 'infamous' strategically/critically/cruelly/evilly placed Newton Hills, of which Heartbreak, the fourth and final, is over half a mile long. 16 to 21 miles of running is also the range in which the human body switches from using available free glucose, convertible simple sugars, and stored glycogen to fat reserves. Runners call this "hitting the wall" and at that point running becomes significantly more difficult. Cruelly placed indeed. A lot of my training has been on hilly terrain and I should be well prepared.

Anyways, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

Davidson a 7, 8, or 9 seed? Shit son....

Dr. Robb, the chair of the Philosophy Dept at Davidson, comes into Summit Coffee on a regular basis and orders a large black roast. He moves smoothly but languidly, as if asking his immediate environs "Do I have to move now?.....now?.....now?" He talks in a similar manner. His demeanor and mannerisms are prototypical of a philosophy chair. He teaches Philosophy of Mind.

Alea, who's in the class, informed Dr. Robb that I, her boyfriend, serves him coffee every morning. She also told him that I read more for the class than she does and that she has trouble finding texts and handouts because I misplace them. Allegedly he was impressed when I got excited about a Dan Dennett handout. He told her, "If he brings me coffee he can sit in on class."

Score.

And these guys really have it going on.

I just finished Keith Campbell's "Body and Mind." I figured I would expose myself to alternate theories but, surprisingly, the read did nothing to convince me that reductionism, or central-state materialism, as he calls it, isn't the ticket. He concocts an 'epiphenomenalism', believing that certain inner states of mind are indistinguishable from behavioral diagnoses and outer investigation, such as types of pain. For example, we can deduce that a man is experiencing a burning pain if he acts in burning-pain-alleviating ways and if he describes his pain in burning-pain terms. But we cannot really know that he describes it as such and acts in the same manner and experiences the same pain, and not, for example, a crushing pain. He may be an 'imitation man', and there is no way of knowing.

I credit Campbell for diagnosing a problem, but his solution is more of the same, in my opinion. There is no way of knowing what another man's mind is truly like. However, the more logical route is to acknowledge that science, inductive reasoning, and physical observation has not produced the answer yet. Though that is unsatisfactory to the ears, or eyes, guessing that there is a spiritual, non-physical cause and basis is more of the same and will likely meet the same end that similar guesses have endured since the rise of science. Moreover, why assume that another man's mind and inner states, with reference to his behavior, are significantly different in the first place? If a man has burned his finger, is crying in pain, puts ice on his finger, treats it tenderly....I think it is safe to assume that his burning sensation is quite like my burning sensation. Why assume a significant difference?

Dualism and the rest aren't really worth mentioning.

The Mind-Body problem arises from (4) incompatible propositions, while any (3) are mutually compatible:

(1) The body is a material thing
(2) The mind is a spiritual thing
(3) The mind and body interact
(4) Spirit and matter do not interact

I reject (2)

The mind is the brain, and nothing more.

I want to have a drinking contest with my girlfriend. An appropriate handicap would be introduced, of course. I've realized that it's prolly stupid to just drink until someone can't drink anymore....cuz that's too predictable of an outcome. I'll blackout relatively early on and Alea will throw up at some point. The determination of who 'won' would be a bitter memory for Alea and a non-existent one for me. It's also a tad dangerous.

So my new thought is a set limit on the number of drinks consumed, including the handicap. Now, I initially thought that a 1.5 to 1 drink ratio would be good, but then I had a better idea, at least to my liking. A 2 to 1 ratio, but the type of drink and even method of consumption changes every time. The handicap plays to Alea in terms of ratio, but to me in terms of stomach - Alea's limiting reagent being her stomach, mine being my susceptibility to blackout. So it would proceed something like....Alea 1 shot of tequila. John 2 shots of tequila. Alea bongs 1 beer. John bongs 2 beers. Alea drinks bottle of streetwine. John drinks 2 bottles of streetwine. I think this would be more fun.

With this handicap and a set limit on drinks consumed, or I guess rounds would be a more adequate term, throwing up could be grounds for winning for the non thrower upper, as well as blacking out for the non blacker outer, since a set amount of time would transpire between rounds. If neither of these two things occurred, which I predict is likely with a set number of rounds, then it is likely that it would be obvious who was the drunker, and the other is declared victor. If it is ambiguous, everybody wins, because that would necessitate another contest.

Why do this? you may ask.

The only question in life that is superior to the question "Why?" is "Why not?"

One of the greatest feelings, and one of the most enjoyable things I do, is shower. But it's not really showering, because I usually sit down. But it's not really a bath, because I don't stop the drain. I just let the water run over me while it drains. It's a bawer, or a shath...your choice.

The advantages are numerous. Most notable, the water doesn't cool off after a period of time like stagnant bath water, and I don't have to stand, something I'm more or less against....standing. Sitting is underrated. We're not even 'designed' to stand, but that's a subject for another time. Moreover, my legs are usually tired from running and standing is the last thing I want to do - showering is supposed to be relaxing.

Usually I turn the water on, adjust to an appropriate temperature, then sit down in a hunched over position with my arms on my knees. I let the water run over my head and face and body until I feel sufficiently water-saturated. Then I slowly lean back until my back rests against the further lip of the tub and my head rests against the wall. Then I use my toes to turn the water temp up until I reach the range that is just beyond comfortable but not hot enough that my skin turns red. Then I wait for my body to adjust to the hot temperature - the best part. Sometimes I start laughing to myself as overly contented people are apt to do.

Today a thought occured to me. I love the shower so much, why not incorporate other aspects of my life into showering? I am usually hungry when I shower because I either shower just after waking, feeding time, or after running, also feeding time. Several options come to mind. I'll indulge one.

Imagine waking, stumbling into the bathroom, cranking up some Bob Dylan, stepping into the tub, and turning on the water. Then imagine doing a 180 and opening a slit in the back wall. Out pops the mini-stove. Turn on. The pantry to the side affords a small pan, the mini fridge to the side of that, the bacon. Apply bacon to heating pan. 180, soap yourself, rinse hands. 180 again, remove bacon and place on clean plate. Remove eggs from mini fridge, crack over pan. 180, shampoo, rinse hands. Back to the eggs (they're done now). Scrape onto clean plate. Remove salsa from mini-fridge. Apply liberally. Eat breakfast while the suds rinse off.

The best part is that this could be a leisurely endeavor, because you're multitasking, which allows for more time.

A girl I had a crush on about 3 years ago has turned out to be bi and now has a crush on my girlfriend.

How should I feel? Thwarted? Offended? Defensive? Tittilated? Jubilant?

You tell me.

Strep throat sucks. If it ever comes knocking at your door, answer it, but shout "I know from a trustworthy source that you blow hairy goat balls" and then slam the door in its face.

Carl Sagan's dream theories are frikkin sweet. They agree with Freudian principles; the neocortex competes with the midbrain and brainstem for control just as the ID and superego battle to win influence with the ego. Basically, the neocortex was built on top of the primitive brain. Because this occured relatively recent in evolutionary history, the brain is inefficient as both parts are trying to direct the organism. The neocortex triumphs, at least most of the time - only a few of us are rapists and murderers. But just because the neocortex triumphs consciously and while we are awake doesn't mean that it does so all the time.

Carl Sagan believes that the primitive brain, or the Reptilian complex (R-complex, brainstem, the structural equivalent of a small mammalian brain that was preoccupied with avoiding ominous reptiles), takes over during our sleep. His primary evidence is dream content. In our dreams we experience the emotions associated with falling from heights, fleeing from someone or something, encountering snakes, spiders, and other dangerous animals, having sex, vague anxiety-provoking themes, and confusing hodge-podges of all the above - essentially the life of an arboreal dwelling ancestor with little neocortex to interfere. While awake, the neocortex spends energy suppressing the R complex constantly, for example, when we come across the hot blonde on the street or watch Al Gore accept a Nobel Peace Prize. When we sleep we lose conciousness, that is, the neocortex takes a break and lets the old pilot fly again. R-complex activities, now unhindered by the suppressions of the neocortex, emerge forth to dominate our thoughts. Or in Sagan's words, the "dragons come out."