Recommended Posts
Maggotry 0
Heh, yuo caught some. Doubt you'll hit 200 posts though. Your lure is good, but not *that* good.
What we have here ladies and gentlemen [shows item] is a classical example of something that seems inherently absorbed in itself, comes across as arrogant and might possibly have an inflated opinion of its worth - at least superficially. Well, that is probably a bit from the truth. But amusing, so I'll leave it at that.
Go a bit deeper under the layers and it is apparent that the need to converse in this manner stems from a need to be recognized which is funny because it's in conflict with the exaggerated belief in itself. Now, it isn't the classical thong wearing bikini attention seeker - much more sophisticated and entertaining than that.
Fear not! A discussion will not change anything, no matter what words are said or written. This, my honored audience, is a case of WWI trench warfare. There'll be no budging the border, but Battle of the Bulge's aplenty.
Aaah, at least it is entertaining to the generals
What we have here ladies and gentlemen [shows item] is a classical example of something that seems inherently absorbed in itself, comes across as arrogant and might possibly have an inflated opinion of its worth - at least superficially. Well, that is probably a bit from the truth. But amusing, so I'll leave it at that.
Go a bit deeper under the layers and it is apparent that the need to converse in this manner stems from a need to be recognized which is funny because it's in conflict with the exaggerated belief in itself. Now, it isn't the classical thong wearing bikini attention seeker - much more sophisticated and entertaining than that.
Fear not! A discussion will not change anything, no matter what words are said or written. This, my honored audience, is a case of WWI trench warfare. There'll be no budging the border, but Battle of the Bulge's aplenty.
Aaah, at least it is entertaining to the generals
ying 0
Crwtom; i’m glad that you enjoy this thread :) and i agree with everything you wrote. Except one thing. I think the logic i adopted isn’t responsible for the paradoxical conclusion i presented. The source of the paradox lies in Christian assumption that our bodies are a gift from God and should be therefore respected. Respecting one’s body means taking care of it and restraining from deliberate making harm to it which is an impossibility. Hence my conclusion that perhaps God is malicious.
Percentage evaluation of the extent to which people are suicidal wouldn’t be easy. But we may assume that those who engage in activities in which death is a matter of seconds are more suicidal than those who choose slow autodestruction. Therefore, as you wrote, skydivers are more suicidal than the red meat eaters even though a vegetarian skydiver may live much longer and healthier than someone who eats meat. Would you agree?
Unformed; NOOOO!!! IT CAN’T BE TRUE! YOU’VE ACTUALLY FOUND SPELLING MISTAKES IN MY POSTS! HOW AM I GOING TO SURVIVE THIS?! I CAN’T STAND IT! QUICKLY! WHERE’S MY GUN? I’LL BLOW MY BRAINS OUT IMMEDIATELY!
Heh. You really ARE sophisticated :) You sneer at a non-native speaker for her spelling mistakes. Well, this is really something. An ultimate meritorical argument! :) If i tried to convince you that my English is perfect i’d be completely devastated by your sneering. Unfortunately for you i’ve already publicly admitted that i think my English is pretty bad. So i’m affraid that your attack missed me by a mile.
Unformed, jeiber; as far as definitions are concerned. Basing one’s arguments on them is generally a good idea. However keeping to the dictionary definitions stiffly and relying on them thoughtlessly can be dangerous. Or at least misleading. The term BEAUTY is a good example for that. My dictionary describes it as: a delightful quality associated with harmony of form or colour, excellence of craftmanship, truthfulness, orginality, or another property. Now, armed in such a definition, try to explore other cultures. For instant African in which women make scares on their faces to look beautiful. Or South American in which women tattoo themselves moustaches – also to be attractive. Or Chinese in which men would get turned on by mutilated women’s feet. See what i mean? Words are only words but they affect our perception of things they try to describe. We should be therefore very careful.
Let’s look at the definition of the adverb INTENTIONAL; it means “done deliberately; intended.” And now let me show you how this single word makes the whole dictionary definition of suicide useless since it narrows it and excludes some suicide cases. I’ve already mentioned this. Socrates was sentenced to death and forced to drink poison. He did this himself. No one poured the liquid down his throat. He took the cup, drank what was in it and died. From the technical point of view he commited suicide, right? And yet according to your favourite dictionary definition he did not because he didn’t want to die. Now you see why a new, broader definition of suicide is necessary?
There’s another thing. You completely neglect the subconscious factor i wrote about. If our consious part is only a kind of a ticketless passenger to the rest of our mind then all decisions lie beyond our control and indulging in an activity such as skydiving can be easily interpreted as an outer manifestation of a sefl destructive drive. Will you polemicize with this? :)
Justinb138; correct me if i’m wrong but i guess you said you wouldn’t participate in this discussion any more? :) And yet you’ve posted THREE times in this thread sice then. What made you change your mind? Am i really that irresistible? ;)
Saying an average American knows less about the world than an average European is not the same as saying that an average American is less intelligent or stupid. Saying he or she know less means only that he or she knows less. You may speculate what is the reason for that. But i didn’t speculate. I just stated the fact. It was YOU who interpreted it. And you did this in your own way affected by your complexes. Americans have great achievements as a nation. But an average European is more curious about the world outside. And that’s what i meant.
As far as proving the above is concerned. Well, why won’t YOU try to prove it is me who’s not right? :)
About Poland making the news; you’re wrong. To give you some examples; seems like you overlooked the results of the contest for the best programmers in the world (organised by MIT, i suppose). Guess which country’s won ;) But that was a minor report.
It’s interesting that you haven’t heard about the 60th anniversary of the Auschwitz concentration camp liberation. There was a big scandal concerning the way it had been reported. Many foreign newspapres had referred to the event writing about “Polish concentration camps”. After our intervention they apologised. Some English writing newspapers made pathetic excuses that the adjective “Polish” dentotes only location and not the nationality of those who’d created and run the factories of death. Very convincing indeed :/ But then maybe Poles shouldn’t be surprised by this utter ignorance – afterall, even when the West finally found out about the Nazi concentration camps it did NOTHING to stop the genocide that was taking place there. The Resistance functioning inside the camp asked Alliants to at least bomb the crematories. They didn’t do anything. It’s the same now. Chechnia and Tibet for instance. They don’t make the news. Slaughters in Chechnia is the “inner problem of Russia”. 50 years of Tibet’s occupation is the “inner problem of China”. And Saddam’s dictatorship in Irak? Well....
From the latest news - the forthcoming anniversary of the end of the World War II and the contoversy surrounding it. How come you haven’t heard about it? Either the newspapers you read and programs you watch are totally America-oriented or.... you don’t read and watch carefully. Unless of course you’re simply disinterested because such knowledge isn’t essential to what you do at the moment :)
It’s really TRAGIC if the main source of your knowledge about the world is news. If the country doesn’t make the news it doesn’t exist, right? I’m affraid it’s a very common attitude. Now i won’t be surprised by anything you say :)
You don’t have to check who’s the president of Poland. (Especially he’s not MY president. I did not vote for him and i think he shouldn’t be our leader.) The thing is that i know more about your country than you know about mine. Some Americans really remind me of the ancient Romans at times....
Happythoughts; i didn’t quote you. You should have noticed. I just commented what you wrote. You accuse me of not being able to follow single sentence remarks? Oh, very funny :) Especially from a person who has problems with single words :) Wasn’t it you who wrote “people” and then expected everybody to believe that it really meant “gods”? :)
Communicational errors do occur. There’s nothing that can be done about it. The only thing we can do is to patiently explain what we orginally meant. If you lack such patience don’t engage in public discussions. Anyway in my opinion i understood you well. You wrote “if i make an offensive remark about all Poles....” This was a reference to the statement that an average American.... and so on. My comment to that was: do make offensive remarks if you want. Then i added: i THINK (which is a disclaimer denoting that the following statement is my PERSONAL speculation) that even if you actually wanted to insult Poles you wouldn’t be able to do this because of the insufficiency of your knowledge about my people and our country. Being offensive requires knowledge. I think you don’t have it. If you have it – prove it and send me a suitable PM.
Is there anybody willing to make a bet that Happythoughts is NOT able to write any serious insults adressed to Polish people? ;)
And finally about my “self-touted” skills; err... i can’t remember boasting or anything. I did say that i’m familiar with some facts concerning suicide. Perhaps you’ve mistaken me for someone else?
Regards,
ying.
Percentage evaluation of the extent to which people are suicidal wouldn’t be easy. But we may assume that those who engage in activities in which death is a matter of seconds are more suicidal than those who choose slow autodestruction. Therefore, as you wrote, skydivers are more suicidal than the red meat eaters even though a vegetarian skydiver may live much longer and healthier than someone who eats meat. Would you agree?
Unformed; NOOOO!!! IT CAN’T BE TRUE! YOU’VE ACTUALLY FOUND SPELLING MISTAKES IN MY POSTS! HOW AM I GOING TO SURVIVE THIS?! I CAN’T STAND IT! QUICKLY! WHERE’S MY GUN? I’LL BLOW MY BRAINS OUT IMMEDIATELY!
Heh. You really ARE sophisticated :) You sneer at a non-native speaker for her spelling mistakes. Well, this is really something. An ultimate meritorical argument! :) If i tried to convince you that my English is perfect i’d be completely devastated by your sneering. Unfortunately for you i’ve already publicly admitted that i think my English is pretty bad. So i’m affraid that your attack missed me by a mile.
Unformed, jeiber; as far as definitions are concerned. Basing one’s arguments on them is generally a good idea. However keeping to the dictionary definitions stiffly and relying on them thoughtlessly can be dangerous. Or at least misleading. The term BEAUTY is a good example for that. My dictionary describes it as: a delightful quality associated with harmony of form or colour, excellence of craftmanship, truthfulness, orginality, or another property. Now, armed in such a definition, try to explore other cultures. For instant African in which women make scares on their faces to look beautiful. Or South American in which women tattoo themselves moustaches – also to be attractive. Or Chinese in which men would get turned on by mutilated women’s feet. See what i mean? Words are only words but they affect our perception of things they try to describe. We should be therefore very careful.
Let’s look at the definition of the adverb INTENTIONAL; it means “done deliberately; intended.” And now let me show you how this single word makes the whole dictionary definition of suicide useless since it narrows it and excludes some suicide cases. I’ve already mentioned this. Socrates was sentenced to death and forced to drink poison. He did this himself. No one poured the liquid down his throat. He took the cup, drank what was in it and died. From the technical point of view he commited suicide, right? And yet according to your favourite dictionary definition he did not because he didn’t want to die. Now you see why a new, broader definition of suicide is necessary?
There’s another thing. You completely neglect the subconscious factor i wrote about. If our consious part is only a kind of a ticketless passenger to the rest of our mind then all decisions lie beyond our control and indulging in an activity such as skydiving can be easily interpreted as an outer manifestation of a sefl destructive drive. Will you polemicize with this? :)
Justinb138; correct me if i’m wrong but i guess you said you wouldn’t participate in this discussion any more? :) And yet you’ve posted THREE times in this thread sice then. What made you change your mind? Am i really that irresistible? ;)
Saying an average American knows less about the world than an average European is not the same as saying that an average American is less intelligent or stupid. Saying he or she know less means only that he or she knows less. You may speculate what is the reason for that. But i didn’t speculate. I just stated the fact. It was YOU who interpreted it. And you did this in your own way affected by your complexes. Americans have great achievements as a nation. But an average European is more curious about the world outside. And that’s what i meant.
As far as proving the above is concerned. Well, why won’t YOU try to prove it is me who’s not right? :)
About Poland making the news; you’re wrong. To give you some examples; seems like you overlooked the results of the contest for the best programmers in the world (organised by MIT, i suppose). Guess which country’s won ;) But that was a minor report.
It’s interesting that you haven’t heard about the 60th anniversary of the Auschwitz concentration camp liberation. There was a big scandal concerning the way it had been reported. Many foreign newspapres had referred to the event writing about “Polish concentration camps”. After our intervention they apologised. Some English writing newspapers made pathetic excuses that the adjective “Polish” dentotes only location and not the nationality of those who’d created and run the factories of death. Very convincing indeed :/ But then maybe Poles shouldn’t be surprised by this utter ignorance – afterall, even when the West finally found out about the Nazi concentration camps it did NOTHING to stop the genocide that was taking place there. The Resistance functioning inside the camp asked Alliants to at least bomb the crematories. They didn’t do anything. It’s the same now. Chechnia and Tibet for instance. They don’t make the news. Slaughters in Chechnia is the “inner problem of Russia”. 50 years of Tibet’s occupation is the “inner problem of China”. And Saddam’s dictatorship in Irak? Well....
From the latest news - the forthcoming anniversary of the end of the World War II and the contoversy surrounding it. How come you haven’t heard about it? Either the newspapers you read and programs you watch are totally America-oriented or.... you don’t read and watch carefully. Unless of course you’re simply disinterested because such knowledge isn’t essential to what you do at the moment :)
It’s really TRAGIC if the main source of your knowledge about the world is news. If the country doesn’t make the news it doesn’t exist, right? I’m affraid it’s a very common attitude. Now i won’t be surprised by anything you say :)
You don’t have to check who’s the president of Poland. (Especially he’s not MY president. I did not vote for him and i think he shouldn’t be our leader.) The thing is that i know more about your country than you know about mine. Some Americans really remind me of the ancient Romans at times....
Happythoughts; i didn’t quote you. You should have noticed. I just commented what you wrote. You accuse me of not being able to follow single sentence remarks? Oh, very funny :) Especially from a person who has problems with single words :) Wasn’t it you who wrote “people” and then expected everybody to believe that it really meant “gods”? :)
Communicational errors do occur. There’s nothing that can be done about it. The only thing we can do is to patiently explain what we orginally meant. If you lack such patience don’t engage in public discussions. Anyway in my opinion i understood you well. You wrote “if i make an offensive remark about all Poles....” This was a reference to the statement that an average American.... and so on. My comment to that was: do make offensive remarks if you want. Then i added: i THINK (which is a disclaimer denoting that the following statement is my PERSONAL speculation) that even if you actually wanted to insult Poles you wouldn’t be able to do this because of the insufficiency of your knowledge about my people and our country. Being offensive requires knowledge. I think you don’t have it. If you have it – prove it and send me a suitable PM.
Is there anybody willing to make a bet that Happythoughts is NOT able to write any serious insults adressed to Polish people? ;)
And finally about my “self-touted” skills; err... i can’t remember boasting or anything. I did say that i’m familiar with some facts concerning suicide. Perhaps you’ve mistaken me for someone else?
Regards,
ying.
Quote
However keeping to the dictionary definitions stiffly and relying on them thoughtlessly can be dangerous.
That makes no sense.
Quote
Socrates was sentenced to death and forced to drink poison. He did this himself. No one poured the liquid down his throat. He took the cup, drank what was in it and died. From the technical point of view he commited suicide, right? And yet according to your favourite dictionary definition he did not because he didn’t want to die. Now you see why a new, broader definition of suicide is necessary?
No.
Quote
Justinb138; correct me if i’m wrong but i guess you said you wouldn’t participate in this discussion any more? :) And yet you’ve posted THREE times in this thread sice then. What made you change your mind? Am i really that irresistible? ;)
No, you're not. It's been slow at work lately, and I can only clean my desk so many times before I get bored.
Quote
Saying an average American knows less about the world than an average European is not the same as saying that an average American is less intelligent or stupid. Saying he or she know less means only that he or she knows less. You may speculate what is the reason for that. But i didn’t speculate. I just stated the fact. It was YOU who interpreted it. And you did this in your own way affected by your complexes. Americans have great achievements as a nation. But an average European is more curious about the world outside. And that’s what i meant.
I think I already asked before, but if you feel so strongly that this is true, why not back it up with some sort of study, testing, etc....? I doubt you can, but if you do, I would find something like that interesting to read.
Quote
As far as proving the above is concerned. Well, why won’t YOU try to prove it is me who’s not right? :)
I didn't make that statement, you did. If you can show evidence of it, why not show it?
Quote
About Poland making the news; you’re wrong. To give you some examples; seems like you overlooked the results of the contest for the best programmers in the world (organised by MIT, i suppose). Guess which country’s won ;) But that was a minor report.
I must have missed that one. Oh well.
Quote
It’s interesting that you haven’t heard about the 60th anniversary of the Auschwitz concentration camp liberation.
Actually, I have.
Quote
Very convincing indeed :/ But then maybe Poles shouldn’t be surprised by this utter ignorance – afterall, even when the West finally found out about the Nazi concentration camps it did NOTHING to stop the genocide that was taking place there. The Resistance functioning inside the camp asked Alliants to at least bomb the crematories. They didn’t do anything.
Once again, please back up your opinion with fact, if you can. Also, there was a thread about this very thing a few months ago in SC, I recommend you check it out.
Quote
It’s the same now. Chechnia and Tibet for instance. They don’t make the news. Slaughters in Chechnia is the “inner problem of Russia”. 50 years of Tibet’s occupation is the “inner problem of China”. And Saddam’s dictatorship in Irak? Well....
It frustrates me when people like you complain about the US policing the world, and then complain when they don't.
Quote
From the latest news - the forthcoming anniversary of the end of the World War II and the contoversy surrounding it. How come you haven’t heard about it? Either the newspapers you read and programs you watch are totally America-oriented or.... you don’t read and watch carefully. Unless of course you’re simply disinterested because such knowledge isn’t essential to what you do at the moment :)
I have heard about it, but I didn't mention it because it didn't seem relavant in the discussion.
Quote
It’s really TRAGIC if the main source of your knowledge about the world is news.
Well, ruling out witnessing things first hand, it's the most effective thing for me. By news, I don't mean the TV news if that's what you were thinking.
Quote
You don’t have to check who’s the president of Poland. (Especially he’s not MY president. I did not vote for him and i think he shouldn’t be our leader.) The thing is that i know more about your country than you know about mine.
Ok, what's your point, do you want a cookie?
Quote
Some Americans really remind me of the ancient Romans at times....
I don't know what that is supposed to mean, but oh well.
Quote
Especially from a person who has problems with single words :)
Sounds like a personal attack to me. You might want to try wording your insults a little differently so that they are less apparent, like the rest of them.
Quote
Being offensive requires knowledge. I think you don’t have it. If you have it – prove it and send me a suitable PM.
I think most people here don't find you offensive, I don't. In fact, I think you're the least offensive person I've ever discussed anything with.
Quote
Is there anybody willing to make a bet that Happythoughts is NOT able to write any serious insults adressed to Polish people? ;)
I'm willing to bet there are many people here that don't care.
I still think you're a troll. You're pretty damn good at it, but a troll anyways.
unformed 0
QuotePercentage evaluation of the extent to which people are suicidal wouldn’t be easy. But we may assume that those who engage in activities in which death is a matter of seconds are more suicidal than those who choose slow autodestruction.
I beg to differ. I see it that those who engage in risky activities realize the brevity of life and want to make the most of it in the short time that we are here. Those that don't do anything risky, don't take chances, don't satisfy their rushes for adrenaline, are the boring people of the world. They are content with the mundaneness of everyday life ....
This has nothing to do with suicidal tendencies. The fact that we go up in the air with two parachutes. Most of us check our handles before every jump, so that we know that in a time of emergency we can correct the situation by instinct, without thinking, without being scared; the fact that we do all of this is enough to show that we are most definitely not suicidal.
I have been suicidal in my past. I have stood on the top of a bridge, ready to end my life then. The only reason I didn't was because it was not a sure thing. I was 17 at the time. I started skydiving about a year later, still in the depths of depression, but recovering. Skydiving gave me a whole new outlook on life. I realized that there is much more to life than the boring, mundane, everyday bullshit activities. Because I have been in the depths of depression, I appreciate life so much more now. I am about the exact opposite of suicidal as can be; I don't want to die; there are so many things I still need to experience. I would be willing to bet most skydivers (as well as other thrill-seekers) are along the same lines. But, on the other hand, death does not scare me.
QuoteTherefore, as you wrote, skydivers are more suicidal than the red meat eaters even though a vegetarian skydiver may live much longer and healthier than someone who eats meat. Would you agree?
As I said, far from it. Skydivers appreciate life, and enjoy it m ore so. Maybe they have been suicidal in the past. Actually I think read an article about a correlation between depression and thrill-seeking. However, that does not make us suicidal, since we are not intentionally harming ourselves. As stated we go out of our way to be as safe as we can be, while enjoying the adrenaline rush.
QuoteUnformed, jeiber; as far as definitions are
concerned. Basing one’s arguments on them is generally a good idea. However keeping to the dictionary definitions stiffly and relying on them thoughtlessly can be dangerous. Or at least misleading. The term BEAUTY is a good example for that. My dictionary describes it as: a delightful quality associated with harmony of form or colour, excellence of craftmanship, truthfulness, orginality, or another property. Now, armed in such a definition, try to explore other cultures. For instant African in which women make scares on their faces to look beautiful. Or South American in which women tattoo themselves moustaches – also to be attractive. Or Chinese in which men would get turned on by mutilated women’s feet. See what i mean? Words are only words but they affect our perception of things they try to describe. We should be therefore very careful.
From the American Heritage Dictionary
the definition of beauty is:
1 The quality that gives pleasure to the mind or senses and is associated with such properties as harmony of form or color, excellence of artistry, truthfulness, and originality.
2 One that is beautiful, especially a beautiful woman.
3 A quality or feature that is most effective, gratifying, or telling: The beauty of the venture is that we stand to lose nothing.
4 An outstanding or conspicuous example: “Hammett's gun went off. The shot was a beauty, just slightly behind the eyes” (Lillian Hellman).
All of the examples you give fit the definition of beauty. The definition does not need to be changed. You are however, changing the definition of "suicide" to meet whatever your motive is.
QuoteLet’s look at the definition of the adverb INTENTIONAL; it means “done deliberately; intended.” And now let me show you how this single word makes the whole dictionary definition of suicide useless since it narrows it and excludes some suicide cases. I’ve already mentioned this. Socrates was sentenced to death and forced to drink poison. He did this himself. No one poured the liquid down his throat. He took the cup, drank what was in it and died. From the technical point of view he commited suicide, right? And yet according to your favourite dictionary definition he did not because he didn’t want to die. Now you see why a new, broader definition of suicide is necessary?
No. It was technically a suicide, albeit forced. No definition of suicide requires a desire to kill oneself.
from the American Heritage Dictionary
suicide is:
1. The act or an instance of intentionally killing oneself.
2. The destruction or ruin of one's own interests: It is professional suicide to involve oneself in illegal practices.
3. One who commits suicide.
Exactly how do you want to broaden the definition?
This ad space for sale.
base311 0
QuoteWhat do you think?
Yawn. I'd rather watch turtles mate.
Gardner
Yeah, I know better.
PMS #341
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites