»
Discussion
»
Philosophy 101
»
Evolution.
| Philosophy 101 |
|
Evolution. |
|
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
The originating word from the word "Evolution" is intertwined with several different words that form the meaning "unfold". Therefore I conclude that the creater of this word must have known a great deal more about evolution than most people who studied in the same area who started a great deal later. The meaning of this word is correct, I think, because we humans have had our potentials since our very first days, all we are doing through life is finding tools and new ways of unleashes this potential. Therefore no one has a BAD brain, but someone CAN have an untrained brain. Scientific fact (fairly new): we only use 5% (average) of our brain. What are your thoughts on evolution? |
||
| © Copyright 2004 croyles - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
quote: No, that's a myth. |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
i dont know where you get your resources from but it sounds pretty true. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
From what I have studied, I definitely believe in the evolution process of the humankind. "I have gone away. The bed is cold and empty. Trees bend their boughs toward the earth. And nighttime birds float as black faces. |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
Brad is correct it is a myth, its roots partly lie from a time before the human brain had been fully mapped and its processes understood. There is a fantastic book I think you'd enjoy on this very topic. The Future of the Human Body by Michael Murphy is full of information/history as well as offering some interesting theories on human potential and what may lie ahead. By the way, little known fact, Darwin, never used the term evolution. Darwin stated 'descent with modification' and only used the word evolved as the last word in his Origin of the Species...well I found it interesting shrugs |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Now what are we going to use as an excuse? |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
I, for one, believe that humans do not understand nor have used the total use of their brains. Many "outer-body" experiences" the beliefs in "spirits" are a part of the brain's imagination. "I have gone away. The bed is cold and empty. Trees bend their boughs toward the earth. And nighttime birds float as black faces. |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
maybe its not 5%, but i do definetly believe that we dont use our whole brain yet, if we use all of our brain, how do you explain the fact that we are getting more intelligent all the time??? Brad, thats the worst website ive ever seen!!!!! Just because we might only be using 10% of our brain doesnt mean its all swept neatly into one corner. It was completly biast too, no trustworthy source is that biast. |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Well, because we are able to record our findings for posterity, subsequent generations don't have to reinvent the wheel every 40-50 years. We're not necessarily getting more intelligent as much as we're building our knowledge base. We're not getting smarter ... our tools are getting better. Jim |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Huh? It's a subsection of nueroscience for kids. If there is a bias (and there always is), it's a bias for honest science. Who is getting more intelligent? |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
what do you mean "who is getting more intelligent"? We are, because of what me AND jbouder said. jbouder, yes we are learning to use our tools better, to let our intelligent side out, that was my point as i already mentioned it in my original post, I didnt think it would be necessary to mention that again.´ But I dont think all our modern thoughts have only evolved from our advanced knowledge base. Knowledge is important, every single judgement is made by knowledge, even if its only a speck. Now you might think: Why would evolution not just GIVE us the full potential of our brain? Cells are not GOD. "Furthermore, from an evolutionary point of view, it is unlikely that larger brains would have developed if there was not an advantage." When have you ever seen something perfect? I dont think growling apes needed what we have today, but after years and years, trying not to become extinct and using tools to assure we wont. I am no scientist, and i definetly cant say im an expert at this, but all I believe is that we havnt managed to use the full capacity of our brains. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
It would be difficult to prove that we are getting more intelligent. It is obvious, however, that we are getting more knowledgeable. As jbouder pointed out, each generation is able to build upon the knowledge of their predecessors. The fact that we are able to do that is certainly a sign of intelligence. But our distant ancestors also had that same capability. They just didn't have the already accumulated knowledge base to start from. |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
That is a good point, but I think the rate at which how well we can pick up things raises constantly; We didnt become so prosporous only because there is more knowledge in the world to pick from, but also because we pick it up easier and faster than however many decades or centuries ago. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
If anything, I would suspect the opposite is true. Where are the Newtons and da Vincis of today? The accumulation of knowledge has led to an age of specialization exactly because we can't personally absorb information any easier or faster. The Renaissance Man appears to be extinct. |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
Ron how about Stephen Hawking? I think they exist it's simply a matter of coverage. Science, and the things that matter, rarely get coverage in modern media which means its not human capabilities but human values that limit a new rennaisance. Think about the internet and communications techonolgy, at no time in human history since Alexandria or the Rennaiscance has a wealth of information been so readily available to humans but what are we doing with it? It's a matter of focus, I think humans are capable of incredible transformation and now is a great time to plant its seeds. At the same time it can be equally argued that the internet and other technologies are leading to our regression. This is where survival of the fittest comes into play, the fittest will evolve from this and the rest will fade. I hope. |
||
|
Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-08-02
Posts 8296Purgatorial Incarceration |
are you sure it's a myth? the 10% theory would sure explain some of the people i've encountered. |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Christopher: I think the problem is that some people spend all their time trying to use the 90% that doesn't work.  Jim |
||
|
Krawdad Member Elite
since 2001-01-03
Posts 2597 |
Let us not forget that it is those who reproduce most successfully that beget the most survivors. That is not about intelligence. It is about leaving the most survivors. Ironic in these times, that those who seem to have a consciousness about the state of human overpopulation are not the ones reproducing the most children. That at least suggests an inevitability of a human population crash. Then, of course, there is that other human element, the possibility of the intelligent ones, though fewer in reproductive numbers, "suppressing" the more populus genetic pool. Perhaps the intelligent can survive. |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
Nah Chris they use it all, but 100% of nothing is still a 100% |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: An absolutely brilliant man, Raph. Genius, even. But seemingly still a specialist? quote: If you're talking about society, I can't necessarily disagree. I don't think you're describing individuals, though. Always remember Sturgeon's Law: Ninety percent of everything is crap. quote: Ever use 100 percent of a philips screwdriver on a ten-penny nail? Me, either, but I suspect the results would be very similar to using only 10 percent of the screwdriver.  |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
quote: I get the distinct feeling that you feel there's some kind of far flung purpose to evolution. The only way I can imagine what you present is something like saltationism (massive shifts in the genome creating new species virtually over night), but that's not evolution. As has been pointed out by Aenimal and Crawdad, evolution doesn't work by magic. You ask, why wouldn't evolution give us the full potential of our brains? But the question misses the point of why we have a larger brain at all. Given the amount of energy that goes into actually using this gray stuff in between our ears, it doesn't make sense, from an evolutionary perspective, to see it as only partially used. Two quick questions: 1. When you say potential, the potential to do what? 2. Isn't it your turn to offer a website, a scientific one, that backs up your claims? |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
Brad, whats your problem? f*** this im outta here. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Did you post in the wrong place? |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I dunno about getting smarter--but I have definitely gotten quieter... (or izzat more quiet?)  |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
forget it brad. |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
oops sorry, double post. Brad, if you have no idea why i said that then im sorry for the inconvinience. |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
Which brain is it that we seemingly only use 10% of? The human brain is a network of specialized processing centers. Interestingly enough -- the really creative endeavors seem to be accomplished by those who CAN use 'less' of their brain -- those who can shut off the 'noise' in their head and focus on something. This has been evidenced by brain scans of persons performing tasks -- when brain activity was minimal -- persons were able to perform creative tasks better. Children mostly use the more primitive areas of the brain -- even geniuses-- which is the area also responsible for emotion -- which suggests why children behave as they do. It isn't until the onset of adulthood that the neo-cortex actually comes into play -- which is also the processing center for judgement. We don't absorb information faster than our forebears -- we're just bombarded with more of it at exponentially higher rates. Retention is very low. The average person has to be exposed to a message repeatedly before they remember it, or understand it. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
I think quieter works fine, K. But I still don't believe it |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Pete?  and she's ba-ack....grin... |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
Perhaps we need a philosophy lite forum for new members -- let's face it -- how many of us are at 101? Unfortunately nasty thread evolution. |
||
|
Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-08-02
Posts 8296Purgatorial Incarceration |
quote:Once. For what it's worth, I ended up using the handle, not the nib (you can imagine how much difference that made...).  |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
i dont think thats right, local rebel. The brain is divided by the left and right hemisphere. Left: Language, reading, writing. Ratio/logic Rules/Laws Analysis of text and phrases. Detail. Science. Numbers, Data. Facts. Linear - step by step. Time. Stolid off-by-heart learning from isolated individual-information. Right: imagination in pictures. body language. intuition/emotions. creativity. Coherences. Overview. Art - Music - Dance. Sound, Tone, language melody. Rhythm of language. Mimic, gesture. Not linear - integrated (thoughts etc) No one can live without either of these hemispheres. Most people however, have a dominance of one side, this can explain a lot of characteristics of humans, and a lot of stereotypes (people should stop stereotyping, its like racism) are the ones that are so simply (in films) divided by left and right. Without those "Imaginative pictures" we cannot understand anything. We listen to people and and bring up past pictures and experiences to comprehend what is said or shown or smelt, etc. The creative and imaginative side isnt when we use our brain less, but use different part of it, the right hemisphere. I went to a very famous institution in Germany - Stuttgart, where they examine people's brain waves, I had pretty well trained brain apparently, although I havnt managed to prove that, lol. I knew I was right brain dominant from the start of my life, therefore I have trouble with arguments and to show my actual point in writing and speech, and I think it would be an insult to me and all other right brain dominant people to say that we our using less of our brain. If, for example, we hear a doctor talking about Obstipation or any other medical state, we cannot always pick pictures of our past expiriences, and thefore do not really understand what the heck they are on about. A LOT OF PEOPLE, after hearing something like that, just think they are stupid and chew on theyre self esteem, while really there is no need to. There is such a thing, that is famous in pschology, as a Blind-Spot. This is when a person cannot see something for they cannot take any past expiriences and pictures to form that object (Thats all I know about Blind-Spot, Im sure you guys are gonna have some criticism about it, and I dont know any arguments against those criterea, cause I see some dilemmas too (what happens at birth for example), but i still believe it.) But no one can do anything without training in the left brain too, just imagine that. Search the net for "brain hemispheres" and you will get a lot of sites that are similar to my point, but a lot of sites have a different order of the characteristics that I mention above, I found this one, I my and all my families expiriences to be the most accurate in our point of view. There are different brain waves that show different kinds of power (this might be the reason of what you though local rebel). There are alpha waves, omega waves and so on. Local rebel - I think we do pick up information faster. If we get more info chucked at us, we become more custom to picking up things, and therefore keep on learning faster. There is a point thought, when there is too much learning going on and you cant take no more. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
True intellegence comes from the  |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
YES!!! thats also true essorant!!! Here are some of my definitions of what people mark as intelligent (its gonna take me some time) - 1 - The sum of our mental abilties. 2 - Our thinking and perception abilities. 3 - The ability to find solutions. 4 - A good and healthy knowledge of humand nature, emotions etc. Btw, it is said in a lot of websites that emotions are whole brained, I think that is morea accurate. Check this site out for more info. http://autism.about.com/cs/behavorialissues/a/emotions.htm Just keep that quatation (from my link) from Vingerhoets in your head: "We are trained in it" |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
My heart pumps blood. It can be removed and replaced with a mechanical pump. Unless there is damage done to my brain from a lack of oxygen during the process -- my intellect will remain in the same state. You are not incorrect in stating there are hemispheric differences in information processing -- but there are 11 distinct areas of the brain. The four main components though are the spinal chord, brain stem, cerebellum, and forebrain. You can peruse these sites to absorb more information. Evolutionary components and the role of the limbic system; http://www.epub.org.br/cm/n05/mente/limbic_i.htm Diagram of emotion centers: http://www.epub.org.br/cm/n05/mente/struct_i.htm Interesting article on brain evolution: http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/Teachers/brainevolution.html Theory on conciousness http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20020909/brain.html Complete primer on the brain at how stuff works; http://health.howstuffworks.com/brain.htm Have fun learning |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
let me see, i know a littl about the spinal cord, it is the pathway of communication between the two hemispheres. i think the Corpus Collosum is a sort of back up pathway. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
quote: Said what? As far as I can tell, and I could be wrong, but you don't have a clear idea of evolution. So, Brad, why don't you ask? What do you think evolution is? |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
Brad, from my personal characteristics that I have talked about right and left brain hemispheres, you know that my ideas are unorganized!! Yes! I have the same problem with poetic plots!! That does not make me inadequate for participating in the philosophy forum, for this is a good start to listen to all your opinions and maybe sort my own ideas out. If you think im unreliable because of that, you may be true, all Im asking is for people to listen to me, and CONSIDER whever anything I say has any meaning at all. I already told you what i thought it was and thats that, I have no hard evidence, just opinions from a regular human being. So if your asking me again, "what is evolution", then that means your probably just trying to get at me with you highly educated mind. http://www.dietandbody.com/alternativemedicine/article1050.html Heres another interesting site. P.S "brad if you have no idea why i said that.....", that had nothing to do with my idea about evolution, that was the way i percieved your attitude from when you said "did you post in the wrong forum", which is always difficult in a forum. |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
Intelligence does not come from the heart, but from the mind. Yet, it is over-rated. Wisdome - the ability to critically think is more important than intelligence, alone. I know many people that can express themselves with obscure words and whom have read much literature, but they find themselves drowning in the knowledge they have collected. "I have gone away. The bed is cold and empty. Trees bend their boughs toward the earth. And nighttime birds float as black faces. |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
doesnt anyone know that the phrase "true intelligence comes from the heart" is a metaphor, it implies that if you enjoy all intelligent subjects and so on, you will learn and generally do better. Opeth, you are right about that, people see that as intelligent, and then try to get as much of it as possible. What some people often forget that comes into play, is imagination/ideas etc. Thats what i think. |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
quote: You're right, but I think that's a fault of science, it's become too compartmentalized. It's not a lack of potential in humans but a lack of cross fertilization between the different fields of science. What Newton and DaVinci had in common was hermetic and alchemical thought which linked all aspects of science, psychology and medicine into a whole. quote: I should have been more specific, I am actually speaking about individuals. I'm reffering to capabilites within the human species. Society as a whole is a hole. The key is in the individual. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
quote: Ahhh, thanks for clarifying that. The only reason I asked if you posted in the wrong forum is that this one tends to be a bit more advesarial than others (here at Piptalk), and people can sometimes get a little rattled with the sudden change in mood. By all means, share your ideas. Even if they are still 'in process' -- I do the same thing on occasion. But I still don't think you understand evolution and the mechanisms involved. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
quote: Unfortunately, that's not what it means here. 'Heart' is, often enough, contrasted with mind or thought in such a way that minds and thoughts are actually seen as a detriment to 'what you really think' as opposed to being too rational (cold, unemotional, etc.). |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
quote: I think it's both actually Raph. Building on information succesively from one generation to the next gets to the point of precluding multi-disciplinary capability in a single individual. Which is why cross-functional teams are becoming more and more essential to problem solving. This is why you often catch me saying what seemingly looks like higher order is more likely higher disorder -- entropy wins. There are reniasance men around -- we tend to marginalize them as either ego-maniacs or loons. I like Hawkings -- but -- comparatively speaking (in accomplishment) he was no Einstein.. or Newton, or even an Edison. |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
It would be helpful to get some terms defined here; Knowledge -- Specific information, data, or the sum of same. Intellect -- The capacity to store/retrieve knowledge or learn and understand. Also the ability to think abstractly. Wisdom -- The ability to judge or apply judgement -- applied knowledge and intellect -- the ability to plan a correct course of action for instance. A function of intellect. |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
I understand what you're saying I still don't think it's a lack of potential in the species, just a lack of progressive practices. |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
i never said it was a lack of potential, i said our potentiol was unused. |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
"I like Hawkings -- but -- comparatively speaking (in accomplishment) he was no Einstein.. or Newton, or even an Edison." ~ But the "jury is still out" regarding Hawkings. He can't be equally compared to Newton, Edison, or Einstein until the "jury reaches its verdict. Besides, Mr. Hawkings did appear on an episode of The Simpsons - Newton never did that! "I have gone away. The bed is cold and empty. Trees bend their boughs toward the earth. And nighttime birds float as black faces. |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
croyles the last comment wasn't meant for you Opeth actually Newton made an appearance, well his legs did lol Professor Frink managed to teleport half of him into the present. |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
Actually the jury is kind of moving on. But Hawkings did something even more important than appear on the Simpsons... He was ON (not drawn) Star Trek Next Gen... |
||
|
croyles Member
since 2004-01-27
Posts 102 |
anyone read the books (forgot the author) that revolves around Newton solving murders with his science? I didnt, but they sound good. |
||
Local Parasite
since 2001-11-05
Posts 2527Transylconia, Winnipeg |
quote: This is very true. Or there could be a "read before posting to get some idea of where people in this forum are at" disclaimer. I came around here with a different username when I was younger and got laughed out. Even now I only speak up from time to time. Sigh... smart people are so intimidating. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
I'm not sure I understand what people are asking for. If you look at other philosophy forums, their 'primers' are really nothing more than surveys of surveys. I don't see how that can help anybody. Perhaps, philosophy isn't really about being smart, but more about being able to withstand being called stupid. |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
Well I wasn't seriously suggesting that Brian.. but, I was hinting that we ought to look at a person's capacity before pouncing on them with everything we have. Old story about a farmer who shows up for church one Sunday and he's the only one there besides the preacher -- the preacher tells him they might as well go home -- but the farmer says that if only one of his cows were to show up at feeding time he'd still feed him. The preacher goes on with his whole sermon and an hour later the farmer gets up, puts his hat on, thanks the preacher and says -- "well -- I said I'd feed that cow but I wouldn't give him the whole load of corn." Not a perfect analogy -- but maybe you can see where I'm going with this. I'm not real fond of Brad's take on this either because I don't see where calling someone stupid gets us anywhere -- or having the resiliancy to withstand being called stupid, in not so subtle terms, since -- after all -- it is verbotten here.. I had a conversation not too long ago with someone who didn't think they were cut out for philosophy because -- fill in the blank here -- to which my reply was -- she was perfectly cut out for it because she comes to it with questions instead of ideas. As soon as we become enamored with an idea we're a step further from truth. We should be looking at the aesthetic of the idea instead of it's rightness or wrongness. And be ready to learn something from everyone. Sometimes we don't know enough about a new person so we have to feel them out a little bit -- in this particular case I was really pointing to the fact that the thread originator may have indeed wandered over the line (which I hadn't seen when I made my initial post) but that perhaps those of us who regularly haunt the place are a little bit culpable -- ultimately though-- he, or she, is responsible for his/her own behaviour -- but they still may not be getting what they expected based on the name of the forum. Doesn't it get boring watching me and Stephen go at it all the time? We need some different perspectives -- that's all. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Hmmm, except that's not what I meant. I was thinking more along the lines of discussion as a dialectic. As the process continues, ideas get better and the originator worries less and less about ownership of said idea. |
||
|
Local Parasite
since 2001-11-05
Posts 2527Transylconia, Winnipeg |
The internet is terrible---I really should have used a winking smiley. I think Brad's just proposing we take a bit of a socratic attitude towards discussion in here, instead of coming in and saying "THIS is what I think!" having a sincere attitude towards seeking out truth, or whatever--- Although sadly, I do see a lot of people simply yammering back and forth trying to prove how right they are, but I won't name names... LR, I see what you're saying and fully appreciate it... I wasn't complaining so much as I was agreeing with the fact that it's unfortunate how many people are scared away rather than guided into this forum. Although I (and I imagine most new members) lack the devotion to any topic I see in here to spend as much of my time engaged in discussion as you two, for example, do. Which I don't mean as an insult, I'm just a bit busy in my camel stage--- |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
Truth is difficult to ascertain, perhaps even unattainable. The path towards truth, however, is usually predictable, especially the first few steps on the path, and is often littered with clichés long since explored and discarded. "There is no spoon," only sounds profound the first few hundred times it's been heard. I doubt Philosophy 201 would take us any closer to any truth. It would probably just exchange one set of clichés for another set. |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
quote: No arguments with that -- and if that's what you said -- so be it (but I've looked at your post upside down and sideways -- and shook it even -- and I couldn't find that in there ) quote: Is that true?  But, no -- I don't think 201 would even get us different cliche's -- all I'm suggesting is that if a man stumbles into a saloon and mouths off that he's the fastest gun in town without even knowing who's in the saloon -- if Wild Bill happens to be sitting in the corner -- he's under no obligation to come out slinging. If the guy actually starts drawing down on people -- then -- it's a different story. But -- if it's a 12 year old kid -- that's another story altogether. That said, and what Brian said -- how do we get people to be not afraid? Um.. Brian...Camel stage? |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
