Kyle at Rather Be Shopping tagged my for the “7 Random Things About Myself” meme. So here goes!

1. I’ve got an addictive personality.

Chocolate, tv, internet, writing…anything’s a possible addiction. *sigh* So I try to keep stock of how things I do a lot are influencing me socially, financially, personally, physically, and psychologically. Whether I could easily give them up and what to do if I’m addicted.

2. My favorite breakfast is Pepperidge Farm Cinnamon Bread buttered then toasted.

We try to buy the whole-grain version when our ghetto Giant carries it. I absolutely love the mix of butter and cinnamon, the warmth…it’s great stuff! But I don’t think I’m addicted to this one.

3. I would like to be a famous writer.

I’d like to write novels or theological works. Unfortunately, I haven’t yet written either. I did have a huge senior project on theology which I want to turn into a book.

4. I applied to the Library of Congress today.

Two positions, actually. One which I might be under-qualified for but think I could do and one which I’m definitely qualified for. The latter is part-time but pays $30k+ per year. I’d love to get it because that’s what I’m making now, but it would only be part-time work. Then maybe I could get a job shelving at our local library for 10 hours a week or so (their pages work ridiculously few hours!) and get extra money. I think I’d prefer both jobs to what I’ve got now. I love shelving and would do it as a profession if it paid well enough, I think.

5. I’m scared I’ll be a bad mother.

Self-explanatory, really. I’m scared of screwing up any kids I have.

6. I may be angry with you for no reason at all.

For no good reason, anyway. Sometimes I just feel unreasonably angry with people in general. I’m working on that.

7. I’m a comment-whore.

Seriously. To everyone who comments, you make my day each and every time!

A few bloggers who I’d like to know more random stuff about:

Frugal Habits
Frugal Zeitgeist
Flamingo House Happenings

Well, there’s more of you, but the 8th random thing is that I feel guilty about asking people to do stuff. So I’m going to limit the guilty feelings. πŸ˜‰


Amanda September 30, 2007 at 7:50 pm

Every mom is scared she’ll be a bad mom. At a baby shower a friend gave this advice: Don’t worry about screwing up your kids, they already are. πŸ™‚

Mrs. Micah September 30, 2007 at 7:56 pm

Thanks Amanda. I’m looking forward to being an auntie in a couple weeks! (well, not a new auntie, but really getting to meet baby Nathan)

frugal zeitgeist September 30, 2007 at 8:30 pm

Thanks! It might be a few days before I can get to this, but I’ll give it a shot.

Denise September 30, 2007 at 8:47 pm

Dang. I saw your meme and I thought “she’s gonna tag me, I know she is…” sure enough, you did. I’m on my way to play now, darn it.


Mrs. Micah September 30, 2007 at 8:48 pm

Thanks, Frugal Zeitgeist and Denise! (FZ–I totally understand, I wrote this before knowing how sick you were!)


Catherine Lawson September 30, 2007 at 10:04 pm

Hi – I hope you get the job. Sometimes the highest qualified person isn’t the best person for a particular job – so you never know.

As for the novel – I am much the same. I have made a few attempts but didn’t like any one of them enough even to submit to a publisher or an agent!

In a way – it’s not a bad thing. Your reading tastes tend to improve as you get older. I used to read a lot of chick lit when I was younger, and I’m really glad I didn’t become a well known chick lit author.

Andrew Stevens September 30, 2007 at 10:15 pm

What was your senior project about? Those of us with an interest in theology are dying to know.

Mrs. Micah October 1, 2007 at 12:40 am

@ Catherine: Actually, I wouldn’t mind becoming a chick lit author. But not well-known under my real name. I just have a fun idea for a story in that genre.

@ Andrew: It was on creeds. Specifically, that accepting something as orthodoxy necessarily leads to orthopraxis (right action). Unfortunately, people don’t present creeds in this light. So I make a logical and historical argument then show how it can be lived out.

I feel that too often, people are just taught to “think” the right thing and not expected to live it as well. Or that they’re taught that all we NEED to do is think the right thing, but can you think it if you don’t live it?

Andrew Stevens October 1, 2007 at 2:29 am

I’m not sure I’m following. The first paragraph and the second seem to contradict each other, so I’m sure I’m not understanding something correctly. When you say “accepting something as orthodoxy necessarily leads to orthopraxis,” did you mean that orthodoxy ought to lead to orthopraxis or that it automatically does lead to orthopraxis? I would ordinarily think you mean the latter, but your second paragraph seems to imply you meant the former.

If you mean that orthodoxy does automatically lead to orthopraxis, Socrates said something similar in Plato’s Protagoras, arguing that no human being chooses to act poorly or against his better judgment. Aristotle famously disagreed and struggled with the whole problem of akrasia (weakness of the will) and I think virtually everyone agrees that he failed to resolve it satisfactorily. I am inclined to side with Aristotle that akrasia does actually exist.

However, I don’t think that’s what you were actually saying. I assume you mean that it ought to lead to orthopraxis, in which case I certainly agree. Indeed, it is puzzling why it doesn’t always and was one of the major topics of both ancient and medieval philosophy.

Mrs. Micah October 1, 2007 at 2:32 am

Ought. Not does. Well, I believe that people act based on their true beliefs. I just don’t think that people take the beliefs they’re supposedly holding seriously enough. And the gnostic turn which Christianity has taken (e.g. say the right words/think the right things and you’re good to go. “works” are of the devil) doesn’t teach the implications.

Andrew Stevens October 1, 2007 at 5:16 am

I thought that was what you must have meant. It is, of course, probably the most divisive Christian theological question of all time.

I’m not convinced that people always act on their true beliefs. I think it is quite possible, for example, for a person to genuinely hold the belief that he ought to quit smoking and yet continue to smoke. Socrates was right that this is a puzzlement, but I think he was wrong to say it’s an impossibility. I can think of several cases in my life (all of them regrettable) in which I have acted in ways inconsistent with my beliefs about how I should act. I don’t think it’s the case that I actually had other true beliefs which I wasn’t consciously aware of. I think it’s more likely that in some respects our rationality is simply at odds with our irrational desires. The charioteer cannot always control the bad horse.

Hilda October 1, 2007 at 8:28 am

I hope you get the job. That would be so cool. Good luck!

Chitown October 1, 2007 at 2:45 pm

Number 7 cracked me up!!! LMAO

I am afraid of being a mom as well. I always said that if I couldn’t be half as good a mother as my mom, I shouldn’t even think about it.

Kyle October 1, 2007 at 4:43 pm

Great job on this list. I’m glad you had fun with it. And good luck on the Library of Congress job, it sounds like a great opportunity!

SavingDiva October 1, 2007 at 6:33 pm

I can’t’ lie. I’m also a comment whore…and I also have an addictive personality…knitting, working out, chocolate, etc…I everything way over the top. I even get on my own nerves with the focus.

Jon October 1, 2007 at 7:17 pm


Do you feel that the will is defined by your rational desires, or that the will is a separate entity from your conscious mind and is influenced by rational and irrational desires as well as physical realities?

Also, by “true belief” do you mean a belief that you actually hold and don’t just state, or a belief that is true? Is one possible without the other? For instance, do you think it’s possible for a person to *truly believe* that he can fly, only to find out that he can’t?

Interesting discussion, hope I’m not intruding πŸ™‚

Mrs. Micah October 1, 2007 at 8:42 pm

Hi Jon. What a big party!

I would say that if he truly believes it, his actions will reflect it–namely he’ll try to fly. Which probably means someone should keep an eye on him.

I do see people acting on what they know they shouldn’t be doing and don’t “want” to do. It’s a valid point.

But I also think that people haven’t taught enough in Christianity that beliefs are even supposed to be followed by actions. They’re too afraid of works without seeing that works are the necessary result of faith (even if it’s not a completely perfect transformation yet). But my argument is more elegant. πŸ˜‰

It all started when I was wondering where the teachings of Jesus fit into the creeds.

I’m hoping to turn it into a book and also a Sunday School curriculum. Because if you want to change church thought, infiltrate the Sunday School!

Andrew Stevens October 2, 2007 at 7:20 pm

Mrs. Micah, forgive me, but I must ask. Are you a Catholic or a Protestant? (I assume you’re a Protestant based on this discussion.) How much one is taught about the importance of post-faith works vitally depends on the answer.

Jon, I believe the will is defined by the conscious mind, but not wholly by the rational desires. It is influenced by both rational and irrational impulses. I used Socrates’ metaphor of the chariot in my earlier post. The will is the charioteer with the bad horse representing our irrational and immoral desires and the good horse representing our rational and moral desires. (I believe the rational and the moral are in complete harmony, unlike some philosophers.) In Socrates’ formulation, the gods are distinguished from us because they have two good horses.

As for “true belief,” I was using Mrs. Micah’s formulation, i.e. a belief that is actually held, not one that is necessarily actually true. (This is a sloppy formulation, though. It does mean that someone can “truly believe” they can fly, even though they can’t. Perhaps we should use the term “actual belief” to avoid confusion.) Personally, I disagree with Mrs. Micah. I don’t think people can have beliefs without being aware of them. I.e. I don’t think the man who believes that he ought not to smoke, but smokes anyway actually believes that he ought to smoke. I think his actual belief is the one he consciously holds; it’s just that his will is weak. (He is “akratic” or incontinent to use the terms philosophers tend to use, following Aristotle.) There is nothing wrong with Mrs. Micah’s perspective. Economists tend to adopt this perspective, that we can tell people’s actual utility functions by their behaviors, not by what they say they want. I regard this as a useful fiction, since economists are more interested in predicting future behavior than they are in the philosophy.

Like Mrs. Micah, I too have an addictive personality, so I have a great deal of regrettable personal experience with akrasia. (For example, I am a smoker, a relic of my juvenile delinquent past, even though I know that I ought to quit smoking.) One of my addictions is analytical philosophy, which is why I had to ask about Mrs. Micah’s theology.

Debi October 4, 2007 at 3:26 pm

I’m commenting, I’m commenting…so please don’t be angry with me!

Mrs. Micah October 5, 2007 at 1:17 pm

Lol, Debbie.

Andrew, my husband is an analytic philosopher as well. πŸ™‚ I’m Protestant with Catholic leanings.

When it comes to beliefs and actions, I think I’m a bit more nuanced than I let on.

That is, I know people can believe one thing and act a different way.

What I’m critiquing in theology is that people are taught “you need to believe that Jesus is God and Savior” without being taught “and believing includes action, not just thought.”

If what I’ve read is correct, the first Christians already knew the latter part. As Paul says, we still do what we hate, we don’t fully live out our beliefs. But we try, just as smokers try to cut back on cigarettes or give them up periodically based on the belief that it’s bad, though they don’t have the strength to quit.

Andrew Stevens October 5, 2007 at 11:22 pm

Your husband probably actually is (or is going to be) an analytic philosopher whereas I am strictly an amateur. Professionally, I do mathematics.

After I wrote the previous comment, I had made up my mind from perusing your blog that you must be a Catholic after all (due to your deep interest in Franciscans), so I was surprised to see your comment here that you’re a Protestant. I tend to agree with you on your reading of St. Paul, but Martin Luther (and others) would vehemently disagree. It always seemed to me that Luther and the Church were talking past each other. Both agree that man is saved through grace alone and Luther, in claiming Paul’s authority for sola fide, seemed to be looking at Paul’s rejection of the Law, not all works. (Paul railed against immorality in First Corinthians, at the very least.)

Also, I was sure you were more nuanced than that. Forgive me if I sounded critical. I only commented on it because it’s not unknown for people to think that it’s not possible to believe one thing and do another. Plato apparently thought that (and it’s hard to be in better company). Aristotle’s refutation (which I agree with) was essentially that we can observe through introspection that we do sometimes believe something and yet still act contrary to our beliefs. I think this is due to our emotions, so that it’s quite possible to believe that A is better than B (rationally) and yet still want to do B more than A.

Comments on this entry are closed.

WordPress Admin