Skip to main content

The Big Bang Theory

I'm thinking of the TV show now, not the actual theory.

One snippet of dialogue from an early episode sticks in my mind as a fine example of concise writing and character development.

In the character's world, they are fans of a reality teevee show about aspiring supermodels, and the various beautiful young women aspiring to that status all live together, "Big Brother" style, in a house in southern California.

One character, Howard, is determined that he will find the location of that house and visit the supermodels within the week.

The dialogue (I'm working from memory) goes something like this:

LEONARD: You'll never be able to get in there, Howard.

HOWARD: That's what they said to Neil Armstrong about getting on the moon.

SHELDON: No one said anything of the sort to Neil Armstrong. An entire nation spent a decade getting him there.

HOWARD: [Affecting a Kennedy accent]: Well, my fellow Americans, before this week is out, we will put a Wolowitz on one of America's supermodels.

RAJ: And thousands of people will believe it never happened.

By the way, I've since checked. IMDB has the exact transcript. And my memory was pretty good.

Click here

This snippet displays nicely the essence of each of the four central characters. Leonard is the skeptic of the group. Howard (until they remade him as a happily married man, and to some extent even after that) the combination of nerd and sleaze. Sheldon takes Howard's statement literally and, given that way of taking it, responds logically. Raj is a man of few words, but he makes them count when he does deliver them.


Popular posts from this blog

England as a Raft?

In a lecture delivered in 1880, William James asked rhetorically, "Would England ... be the drifting raft she is now in European affairs if a Frederic the Great had inherited her throne instead of a Victoria, and if Messrs Bentham, Mill, Cobden, and Bright had all been born in Prussia?"

Beneath that, in a collection of such lectures later published under James' direction, was placed the footnote, "The reader will remember when this was written."

The suggestion of the bit about Bentham, Mill, etc. is that the utilitarians as a school helped render England ineffective as a European power, a drifting raft.

The footnote was added in 1897. So either James is suggesting that the baleful influence of Bentham, Mill etc wore off in the meantime or that he had over-estimated it.

Let's unpack this a bit.  What was happening in the period before 1880 that made England seem a drifting raft in European affairs, to a friendly though foreign observer (to the older brother…

Cancer Breakthrough

Hopeful news in recent days about an old and dear desideratum: a cure for cancer. Or at least for a cancer, and a nasty one at that.

The news comes about because investors in GlaxoSmithKline are greedy for profits, and has already inspired a bit of deregulation to boot. 

The FDA has paved the road for a speedy review of a new BCMA drug for multiple myeloma, essentially cancer of the bone marrow. This means that the US govt has removed some of the hurdles that would otherwise (by decision of the same govt) face a company trying to proceed with these trials expeditiously. 

This has been done because the Phase I clinical trial results have been very promising. The report I've seen indicates that details of these results will be shared with the world on Dec. 11 at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology. 

The European Medicines Agency has also given priority treatment to the drug in question. 

GSK's website identifies the drug at issue as "GSK2857916," althou…

Francesco Orsi

I thought briefly that I had found a contemporary philosopher whose views on ethics and meta-ethics checked all four key boxes. An ally all down the line.

The four, as regular readers of this blog may remember, are: cognitivism, intuitionism, consequentialism, pluralism. These represent the views that, respectively: some ethical judgments constitute knowledge; one important source for this knowledge consists of quasi-sensory non-inferential primary recognitions ("intuitions"); the right is logically dependent upon the good; and there exists an irreducible plurality of good.

Francesco Orsi seemed to believe all of these propositions. Here's his website and a link to one relevant paper:

What was better: Orsi is a young man. Born in 1980. A damned child! Has no memories of the age of disco!

So I emailed him asking if I was right that he believed all of those things. His answer: three out of …