Final day of work for 2006 tomorrow. I had today off as well. Will then have to finish off all the Christmas stuff in a hurry, as usual! The works do was pretty cool. I did go down Burnley, but I liked the first place we went to so much, I decided to call it a night when everyone moved on from there. Wetherspoons apparently have this novel idea that it should be possible to actually talk to each other on a night out, so they leave the music off! I was quite impressed... Anyway, was good - just got to hang out with people a bit.
Have finished reading 'The Hunchback of Notre Dame'. Pretty depressing - definitely nothing like the Disney version! Doubt I'll read it again - not that it was bad (although it was slow in places) but I just didn't enjoy it much! Maybe I'll change my mind though - after all, I've read 'Wuthering Heights' a few times!
Apart from Christmas, I'm gearing up for Phil's arrival (on Friday, he reckons) and our New Year's Eve Praise Concert Thingy. Both very cool things, even if the latter will prevent me from being alone with God on the stroke of midnight, which I've been doing for a few years now. Guess I don't really want to be making my own traditions, so it's okay really - after all, the important thing is spending time with him throughout the rest of the year!
Another thing I've been doing is searching around the internet for arguments intended to debunk C.S. Lewis. The thing is, I've read a few of his books now, and I rather like them, and I think he makes some interesting points. But I've come across a fair few people (apparently with some knowledge of philosophy) slagging his work off, so I'd quite like to know why. And I do prefer to check out both sides of any argument wherever possible! Problem is, thus far the only thing I've found that looks at all like a reasoned objection uses a mass of (presumably) philosophical jargon that I don't know the meaning of! Not very helpful, although I can think of some reasons why it might be necessary. It does give Mr. Lewis one mark in his favour, though - he at least makes a real effort to be comprehensible to everyday people. So I guess this'll take longer than I thought, while I learn the meaning of a lot of long words, and investigate some (apparently) well-known philosophical concepts. Nonetheless, I do think it's worth doing - apart from anything else, it offends me a little to see people pulling apart the work of a man who can no longer defend himself, and I'd feel better if I was at least certain that the objections (supposedly crushing) are fair.
One thing I did understand (to a point) was the concept of 'Indeterminate Materialism'. I'm trying to work out if such a thing makes sense. It may be tied to Quantum Physics, which I've always had issues with. Hmm.