How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 Thinking, Aching   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Thinking, Aching

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Toad
Member
since 06-16-2002
Posts 247


50 posted 08-24-2002 08:48 AM       View Profile for Toad   Email Toad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Toad


To be honest I thought that Brad was referring to me with the ‘it’ and ‘thing’ comment.

I took it to be part of the debate and an example of life without thought rather than an example of a lack of respect towards me as an individual. I guess it just goes to show how easily language and meaning can be misunderstood when using this medium which lacks the subtle inflections and supporting visual signals of face to face conversation. I still think I got the meaning spot on but the fact that I misinterpreted the target proves how easy it is to grasp the wrong end of the stick based upon a few words.

Back to the topic

I’m sure Essorant didn’t want a world totally devoid of thought, my understanding of the initial thread was that a mad rush towards technological and advancement was a bad thing if not balanced by compassion towards humanity and the environment. The stumbling block seemed to be the method that was suggested, namely thinking less, equating a lack of thought with compassion (and respect).

Essorant wants more humanity not less, but unfortunately MORE thinking not less would seem to be the answer.

The later post about doing all our thinking at night as we sleep seems to turn that stumbling block into a veritable mountain, we cannot remove or divorce thinking from acts of compassion, or humanity, thinking is the vehicle that gets us there in the first place.

There is though some evidence to suggest that things can be purposefully overcomplicated a sort of reverse Okham’s razor theory. Two examples I remember reading about concerned the space race, both NASA and the Russin space agency had different ways of solving the same problems. NASA threw money and technology around like confetti, Russia, on a fixed budget went retro. The first problem was that the helmets worn by the astronauts/cosmonauts had to be checked for a complete seal front and back while in flight. NASA designed and implemented a sophisticated system of miniature CCTV cameras that each Astronaut could use to check their helmets. The Russians fitted two mirrors. The second problem was that they needed to take a lot of notes during the flight, unfortunately gravity, or the lack of gravity, meant that standard pens wouldn’t function. NASA commissioned pens that pump the ink to the tip, regardless of orientation or gravity. You may have seen the spin off in your local shops, pens that write even upside-down. The Russians gave their cosmonauts pencils.

Btw Brad

I think the fear of weapons of mass destruction is due in part to the fact that we don’t have much choice as to whether they’re used or not. A computer in their study is controllable and avoidable if that’s what they want, 500 ICBM’s in the hands of God knows who is neither controllable nor unfortunately avoidable.
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


51 posted 08-24-2002 01:12 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Hey guys,

     I'd really like to address some of the points that Craig and Brad made, and bring in some other concepts, but I'm working the weekend (I'm an RN and work long hours -weekends only)... so bear with me.  I'll be back monday evening.

Stephen

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


52 posted 08-25-2002 02:18 AM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Brad,
No matter how much I can't help disrespecting a disrespect you might show forthright toward not a flaw I seem to show, a thought, my saying/philosophy, but me- myself, I am not going to think about and question a wisdome I have already learnt and established about respecting you personally nothwithstanding. You were not born disrespectful ,evil disposed, it can only be a wretched thought in you that displaces and ravages your nature.  I will point my smites and reproach at that exeriorizing and outstanding, but my respect to you yourself abides in educated impulse forever, it is an oath I made ages ago already and I am not prepared to trample it, poke you in the eye just because you poked me in the eye, even if you did it thoughtfully, poking eyes just moves to poking eyes right out eventually when I would rather have us see each other and respect each other better.

[This message has been edited by Essorant (08-25-2002 02:36 AM).]

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


53 posted 08-25-2002 09:18 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

First, as Toad knows well, I did not intend any disrespect, I was trying to show you the world you want. You assume that a world without thought has no disrespect, I assume that there can be know respect without thought. Does a lion or a wolf respect an antelope or a deer?

Do they say I'm sorry before they eat?

That is the natural way of things.

Second, you can't be offended by what I say unless you think. A cat will see black and white and nothing more (and there is evidence to believe that they don't even see that). You are not encouraging an unthought, you are encouraging a specific type of thought. Your belief in Nature is destroyed by the fact that you were indeed offended. You can't deny that you were offended, therefore you are not practicing what you preach.

I was just trying to show you what you preach. You could have jumped on it, you know? I gambled and thought would do exactly what you did.

I'm not angry at you, I do have respect for you, but you must realize, I hope, the folly of attempting what you are trying to attempt here.

To attempt this is mistaken.

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


54 posted 08-25-2002 02:48 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Sorry.  I deleted my comment.  I will be back later after I have a hot bath, to restore my wits if thats possible.

take care,
Essorant

[This message has been edited by Essorant (08-25-2002 04:33 PM).]

The Napkin Writer
Member
since 06-28-2002
Posts 72


55 posted 08-26-2002 11:28 AM       View Profile for The Napkin Writer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for The Napkin Writer

I understand some of the points that Essorant is trying to make here, but I also think that like me, sometimes too many words can delude the actual point that is being made.  I wasn’t sure at first how to get into this thread without voicing support of something that wasn’t that clear to me, and at the same time respond to something that is easily recognizable.  

Older people could probably remember nighttime soap opera Dynasty.  Well there was this big debate over one of their shows, where Linda Evans was to call Joan Collins a bitch.  Up unto that point in television history the mere thought of using such four-letter-words on television was “a no no!”  Today, at almost any point throughout ones day, they can turn on the television and find some woman groping, and twisting her body in some form of sexual submission.  Even in our commercials there is a certain amount sexual disobedience we as society has invited into our homes.  I would consider asking myself how did we get to the point where it’s okay to turn on the television and accept the “four-letter-words” and “sexual influences” to influence our children to believe that this is the norm of societal morality, when it’s not.  And then everyone is running around saying things like; “we don’t know what’s wrong with our children!”  

There is a certain television commercial that is sports related, where three cheerleaders are running from the field, and as the camera focus on them running down the tunnels at the end of the commercial, you can clearly see this woman butt, (and I don’t mean a cheek-peek either)!  Now she may have been wearing a thong, but she clearly wasn’t wearing any panties.

I was talking with one of my twenty-one year old nephew a couple months ago about girls.  We got into this debate over how men talked to women in my day, compared to today, and got close to them, (if you know what I mean).  He was laughing at the style of dress of the women of my day.  I was telling him that I “thought” there was nothing left to be desired of most women today, that everything you may want to desire, can get entangled sometimes in the lust you may feel at your first meeting.  So how are men to look at women, except as a sex object?  That it is in general, like going to a deli, or something.  With the styles that women wear today, you know everything before you even know their names.  You can see all the once tattooed men names she’s had removed from her body.  Her private parts are just about jumping out at you.  The clothes are so tight they can barely bind over to tie their own shoes, (if they are wearing clothes that day and not underwear).  The hairpieces are stacked so high on top of their heads they have to stoop to get through doorways.  And some have on so much make-up, you have to carry a switchblade, and become a wood carver to see what they look like.  The sad part in this is that a lot of men accept it, except when it comes to their woman, or wife, and then men want to beat on them for it, yet, they go to clubs and influence it!  Maybe I should use a couple of “we’s” in this, but I don’t get into that, so I won’t take possession of it.  

I don’t mean this as a harsh thing against women, I love women, but turn on your television to one of that so-called reality shows, open your window and watch the little children in your neighborhood imitating what they are seeing on television.  Turn on the news and listen to the amount teenage pregnancy around the nation.  We have become a shallow nation with no regards as to what we are passing on to our children, as long as we get what we want.  The ideal that a child has to be dressed up, get made up, or go lying up, to be liked, is exactly what our children are learning, why; because that’s what we are teaching them, that’s what they see on television and that’s what they see us do.  Between the trashy reality shows and infomercials, I barely have a choice but to go watch PBS.  And I know that somewhere there are people praying that enough of these kids come out all right to run this country in the coming years, because at the rate we’re going, a lot of us aren’t going to make it.              

I think what Essorant is trying to say is that morally we have lost our edge of influencing morality in our children, each other, and the rest of the world.  And if that isn’t what she is trying to say, that’s what I get from her initial thread, and subsequent “likenesses” of defenses.  

As far as the amount of money someone makes in their profession, I think it’s stupid for someone to pay one man one hundred million dollars a year to play baseball.  This ball player is being paid one billion dollars over a ten-year period, to play baseball.  This one man can’t pitch the ball and then run out to center field and catch the hit, and throw the ball to second base, and run down and catch it!  Now one man cannot win you a championship, but one man can be the catalyst to spark your team to a championship, like Karem in Milwaukee and later in L.A., and Michael in Chicago.  The sad part is when you think, what in the blue blazes do this particular man have to strike about?  What more can you give him?  And if they do get more, who’s footing the bill, the fans right?  Now if I was a professional athlete, and someone offered me a one billion dollar ten year contract, would I take the money?  Hell yes!  Would I strike?  I may not be on the picket line, but I wouldn’t cross that picket line either.  

But, while I do understand what I get from the original thread, I really wouldn’t want to turn back the hands of time, to a time of darkness in the wilderness.  I wouldn’t want to go out onto the edge of the Forrest a dig out-house holes.  I don’t want to go back to the days of the horse and buggy either, but I do understand what I believe you are trying to say Essorant.  “We have changed the meanings of words so much over the years that morality doesn’t mean morality any more.  As to what it means now, pick one, any one definition you want!  If you ask a thousand people what morality is suppose to mean today, you are almost guaranteed to get a couple hundred different definitions!  

I think Essorant has honor in this thought, but that just isn’t the way most of society “thinks” anymore.  I believe that our thinking has been diluted with greed, lies, disrespect, dishonor, evil, uncaring, and mostly a bunch of confused individuals who don’t know what to “think!”

Essorant, this is just my opinion, but I “think “ a career in the non-profit sector, could have your name written all over it, if, you are not already there.  

Anyway, God bless you; you truly are a dying breed in your “thinking.”
Toad
Member
since 06-16-2002
Posts 247


56 posted 08-26-2002 12:15 PM       View Profile for Toad   Email Toad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Toad


quote:
mostly a bunch of confused individuals who don’t know what to “think!”

I personally have no idea what to think but strangely enough I find myself compelled to continue. It doesn’t make me any less confused, but it seems better than the alternative.

Napkin Writer

Are you describing a sudden erosion of moral values or a gradual evolution or change?

It sounds as if you believe that morality has remained constant; one universal list of right and wrong that every man possesses, which has only recently been abandoned or ignored.
The Napkin Writer
Member
since 06-28-2002
Posts 72


57 posted 08-26-2002 05:08 PM       View Profile for The Napkin Writer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for The Napkin Writer

One of the reasons I try not to quote someone unless I believe I have to, in getting a point across, is that sometimes people are easily offended by an opinion that they are not responsible for.  

My opinion is what “I think” not what the world or any individual has to cling to.  I gave my opinion of what I believed Essorant was saying.  It doesn’t necessary means that it is what the original thread meant, but it’s what I got from it.  

If Essorant replied to me saying no, that’s not what I meant then I would have to accept the fact that, that just was not what was meant.  Sounds confusing?  The point is I can’t give Essorant an opinion, I can only voice my own, but if you have some knowledge that we can benefit from, by all means share it with us.  Because there have been times when an event took place in my own environment, and I didn’t know what to think of it, but that in itself was “the process of thinking.”  Confused thinking, but never the less, “thinking,” so please enlighten us.

As to what I said, it cannot stand alone without everything else that I believe, because this part of what you quoted is supported by everything else I said.  

I think Essorant has honor in this thought, but that just isn’t the way most of society “thinks” anymore.  I believe that our thinking has been diluted with greed, lies, disrespect, dishonor, evil, uncaring, and mostly a bunch of confused individuals who don’t know what to “think!”

And even this paragraph cannot stand alone without some sort of explanation.

If you take a look around at the recent events over the last year, you will find that people are still confused as to what to make out of these events.  I try to keep up with events of the day.  I watch the news shows where experts are called in to give the listener a better insight of these events, and there have been times when the experts don’t know what to “think.”


Toad
Member
since 06-16-2002
Posts 247


58 posted 08-26-2002 06:42 PM       View Profile for Toad   Email Toad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Toad

Napkin Writer

Ok so you think the quote was taken out of context, it’s not the part that interested me the most in any case so ignore it if that helps, I'm still a little confused as to who is supposed to be offended though but that’s normal.  

Here’s the bit I was interested in.

Was your earlier post describing a sudden erosion of moral values or a gradual evolution or change?

It sounded as if you believe that morality has remained constant; one universal list of right and wrong that every man possesses, which has only recently been abandoned or ignored.

[This message has been edited by Toad (08-26-2002 06:43 PM).]

The Napkin Writer
Member
since 06-28-2002
Posts 72


59 posted 08-27-2002 09:55 AM       View Profile for The Napkin Writer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for The Napkin Writer

What would my reply to the original thread have “you think” of a sudden erosion of moral values or a gradual evolution or change?
  
Are you getting this?  
It’s what you think, not what I think!
Because what I think is mine!

Do you have your own thoughts on this matter?
  
I am not going to take responsibility for your questions to the world, nor am I going play this game of bait with you!

If you have an opinion, give it!
If not, move on to someone else!
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


60 posted 08-29-2002 09:29 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Toad,

you replied to Napkin writer ...

"It sounds as if you believe that morality has remained constant; one universal list of right and wrong that every man possesses, which has only recently been abandoned or ignored."


I still find it amazing that one might believe humanity's moral value systems so fundamentally different that one underlying moral influence would be incredible.

consider this quote ...


"I know that some people say the idea of a Law of Nature or decent behavior known to all men is unsound, because different civilizations and different ages have had quite different moralities.  But this is not true.  There have been differences between their moralities, but these have never amounted to anything like a total difference.  If anyone will take the trouble to compare the moral teaching of, say, the ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Hindus, Chinese, Greeks, and Romans, what will really strike him will be how very like they are to each other and to our own.  Some of the evidence for this I have put together in the appendix of another book called The Abolition of Man; but for our present purpose I need only to ask the reader to think what a totally different morality would mean.  Think of a country where people were admired for running away in battle, or where a man felt proud of doublecrossing all the people who had been kindest to him.  You might as well try to imagine a country where two and two made five.  Men have differed as regards what people you ought to be unselfish to- whether it was only your own family, or your fellow countrymen, or everyone.  But they have always agreed that you ought not to put yourself first.  Selfishness has never been admired.  Men have differed as to whether you should have one wife or four.  But they have always agreed that you must not simply have any woman you like."
_C.S. Lewis, from "Mere Christianity"

I still assert that the evidence is in overwhelming favor of a fixed moral value system within us all, imperfectly percieved, though still recognizable as a continuity.


Stephen.

[This message has been edited by Stephanos (08-29-2002 09:30 PM).]

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> Thinking, Aching   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors