philosophy
- Thread starter haldir
- Start date
shereads
Sloganless
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2003
- Posts
- 19,242
amicus said:
You really, really don't want to answer the question, do you, Amicus. This one: How, other than by means of legal restrictions, do you solve the problem of a property owner using his property in a way that makes the property of his neighbors unlivable?
In plain words, of the two of us, only one has ever expressed any concern about the loss of human life in the service of someone's political amibition, and it wasn't you.
Last edited:
amicus
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 14,812
http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/twhp/wwwlps/lessons/5johnstown/5setting.htm
Setting the Stage
The Johnstown Flood National Memorial in Pennsylvania commemorates the most devastating flood of the 19th century in the United States and the greatest national catastrophe in the post-Civil War era.
The Johnstown Flood was caused by the giving way of the South Fork Dam and is an example of what can happen when people disregard principles of engineering and hydrology. The flood has provided a vast literature with important lessons for environmental management today.
At present, all that remains of the historic earthen dam (originally about 900 feet long and 75 feet high) are the north and south abutments, the spillway cut around the north abutment to carry off excess water, and a few remnants of wood and culvert foundation stones representing the location of the control mechanism.
The story of the break of the South Fork Dam begins innocently enough. The dam had been built between 1838 and 1853 by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to provide water for the operation of the Western Division of the Pennsylvania Mainline Canal between Johnstown and Pittsburgh.
Located some 12 miles east of Johnstown at a point where the South Fork branch of the Little Conemaugh River and several mountain streams converged, the dam created what was, at the time, one of the largest artificial lakes in the nation, more than two miles long and nearly a mile wide in some places. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company purchased the entire Mainline works in 1857 and left the dam and the reservoir virtually unattended.
In 1879 a group of wealthy industrialists formed the South Fork Fishing and Hunting Club and bought the dam and the reservoir for a private summer resort. By 1881 the dam had been repaired–without benefit of an engineer–and the reservoir filled to capacity to form the now nearly three-mile-long Lake Conemaugh. A clubhouse with 47 rooms fronted the lake.
From its large porch, members could watch the club's two steam yachts setting off on excursion trips. A number of club members built large cottages nearby.
For the next eight years the summer resort offered fishing, hunting, boating, and other recreational opportunities for club members, until, in 1889, the dam broke and sent some 20 million tons of water crashing down the valley towards Johnstown. When it was over, the flood had claimed more than 2,000 lives.
“The dam had been built between 1838 and 1853 by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to provide water for the operation of the Western Division of the Pennsylvania Mainline Canal between Johnstown and Pittsburgh.”
Reading above, it was 32 years after the purchase that the dam failed.
I have no particular axe to grind, I do not blindly support all that was done in business or by each individual claiming to be a business man, however…
The dam was built by ‘the government of Pennsylvania’ and sold to a Railroad Corporation.
Are you implying that the ‘wealthy gentlemen’ who purchased and improved the land, ignored it on purpose to as to cause havoc death and destruction?
Do people, peons and the wealthy alike, ignore ‘safe engineering practices from time to time?
Do we learn from our mistakes?
Does a system of justice exist to right wrongs done by ignorance?
To condemn a generation of industrialists and entrepreneurs and eventually a whole system for a reason such as this…is not rational.
I will go look for the next example you listed and I rather think I will find a less pejorative explanation than the one you posted.
Again, it is not a blind faith in support of capitalism or an ideology, it is a knowledge that reason, logic and rationality is the only path to human freedom and a better life for all. This I know, I need not ‘believe’ in it, it is self evident.
amicus the incurable optimist...
Setting the Stage
The Johnstown Flood National Memorial in Pennsylvania commemorates the most devastating flood of the 19th century in the United States and the greatest national catastrophe in the post-Civil War era.
The Johnstown Flood was caused by the giving way of the South Fork Dam and is an example of what can happen when people disregard principles of engineering and hydrology. The flood has provided a vast literature with important lessons for environmental management today.
At present, all that remains of the historic earthen dam (originally about 900 feet long and 75 feet high) are the north and south abutments, the spillway cut around the north abutment to carry off excess water, and a few remnants of wood and culvert foundation stones representing the location of the control mechanism.
The story of the break of the South Fork Dam begins innocently enough. The dam had been built between 1838 and 1853 by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to provide water for the operation of the Western Division of the Pennsylvania Mainline Canal between Johnstown and Pittsburgh.
Located some 12 miles east of Johnstown at a point where the South Fork branch of the Little Conemaugh River and several mountain streams converged, the dam created what was, at the time, one of the largest artificial lakes in the nation, more than two miles long and nearly a mile wide in some places. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company purchased the entire Mainline works in 1857 and left the dam and the reservoir virtually unattended.
In 1879 a group of wealthy industrialists formed the South Fork Fishing and Hunting Club and bought the dam and the reservoir for a private summer resort. By 1881 the dam had been repaired–without benefit of an engineer–and the reservoir filled to capacity to form the now nearly three-mile-long Lake Conemaugh. A clubhouse with 47 rooms fronted the lake.
From its large porch, members could watch the club's two steam yachts setting off on excursion trips. A number of club members built large cottages nearby.
For the next eight years the summer resort offered fishing, hunting, boating, and other recreational opportunities for club members, until, in 1889, the dam broke and sent some 20 million tons of water crashing down the valley towards Johnstown. When it was over, the flood had claimed more than 2,000 lives.
“The dam had been built between 1838 and 1853 by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to provide water for the operation of the Western Division of the Pennsylvania Mainline Canal between Johnstown and Pittsburgh.”
Reading above, it was 32 years after the purchase that the dam failed.
I have no particular axe to grind, I do not blindly support all that was done in business or by each individual claiming to be a business man, however…
The dam was built by ‘the government of Pennsylvania’ and sold to a Railroad Corporation.
Are you implying that the ‘wealthy gentlemen’ who purchased and improved the land, ignored it on purpose to as to cause havoc death and destruction?
Do people, peons and the wealthy alike, ignore ‘safe engineering practices from time to time?
Do we learn from our mistakes?
Does a system of justice exist to right wrongs done by ignorance?
To condemn a generation of industrialists and entrepreneurs and eventually a whole system for a reason such as this…is not rational.
I will go look for the next example you listed and I rather think I will find a less pejorative explanation than the one you posted.
Again, it is not a blind faith in support of capitalism or an ideology, it is a knowledge that reason, logic and rationality is the only path to human freedom and a better life for all. This I know, I need not ‘believe’ in it, it is self evident.
amicus the incurable optimist...
shereads
Sloganless
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2003
- Posts
- 19,242
Amicus, honey, before I read your less than artfully evasive non-response, I am inviting you to visit the Smoove B Interplanetary Cocoa Love Boidoir to share a romantic dining experience and some pointless chuckles with some of your fellow Literoticans.
Come the revolution, we'll all be cowering under the same rock outcropping, in one way or another, so why not enjoy this lovely free pornography site for a few minutes? You're probably a nice enough guy, right? My dad, God bless him, was the sweetest bleeding-heart ultra-conservative you could ever hope to meet, and his political views were similar to yours. He didn't mean it, but he knew it made my sister's in-laws mad at dinner parties, and that seemed to make him happy.
Follow the signs to the Smoove Boudoir. Refine your technique and later you can seduce everyone in the forum over to the side of good.
Come the revolution, we'll all be cowering under the same rock outcropping, in one way or another, so why not enjoy this lovely free pornography site for a few minutes? You're probably a nice enough guy, right? My dad, God bless him, was the sweetest bleeding-heart ultra-conservative you could ever hope to meet, and his political views were similar to yours. He didn't mean it, but he knew it made my sister's in-laws mad at dinner parties, and that seemed to make him happy.
Follow the signs to the Smoove Boudoir. Refine your technique and later you can seduce everyone in the forum over to the side of good.
Last edited:
amicus
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 14,812
http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/rcah/html/ah_086800_triangleshir.htm
TRIANGLE SHIRTWAIST FIRE
One of the nation's worst industrial tragedies, the Triangle Shirtwaist fire had a profound impact on women's unionism and job safety and affected local and national politics in the process. On March 25, 1911, a fire swept through the Triangle Shirtwaist Company in the Greenwich Village section of New York City, a sweatshop where workers, mostly women, did low-paying piecework in a building with no safety precautions.
The blaze killed 146 workers who were trapped by the lack of fire escapes and management's practice of locking all the exits to keep workers from leaving the job for breaks. The factory's owners were indicted, but a jury acquitted them, fanning the outrage over the tragedy.
The fire led to stepped-up efforts on the part of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union, which had been founded in 1900 to organize the women who worked in the Triangle factory and improve working conditions in sweatshops. The public outcry also prompted the creation of a state commission, which investigated both the factory in question and industrial working conditions generally.
In 1914, its report called for widespread changes. New York's state legislature balked at first but finally acted under pressure from Tammany Hall and its boss, Charles Francis Murphy, and two lawmakers who would go on to prominence, State Senator Robert Wagner, later a U.S. senator, and Assemblyman Alfred E. Smith, later governor and a presidential candidate. New laws imposed tougher municipal building codes and more stringent factory inspections in New York and elsewhere.
See also Labor.
http://www.uh.edu/~jrosin/Triangle.Fire.Website.Rev.htm
Issues to Consider:
Who were the authors of the websites? Could the content be influenced by a particular point of view or political agenda?
What part of the site did you find most interesting or impressive?
What kinds of sources are presented in the web site? Primary? Secondary?
What were relations between workers and management during the Gilded Age?
What sort of responsibilities did management and owners have toward their employees?
What role did government play in regulating the work place during this period?
What role did immigrants play in the American labor force during this period?
What was the role of women in the American labor movement?
What was the public response to the Triangle Fire?
How did Big Business and government respond to the tragedy?
Who was assigned the legal responsibility for the tragedy?
What interest groups united in order to press for reform?
Did any meaningful reform result from the tragedy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
I chose not to copy an article which implied the fire was set by those attempting to Unionize the Ladies Garment Industry, for obvious reasons.
Now, you believe, and you are asking us to believe, that the 'Robber Barons' the factory owners and the investment bankers behind them were so immersed in a chase for profits that they knowingly risked the lives of many people, destroyed a building and a business, brought the wrath of government and the labor movement down upon them, on purpose?
Take into consideration that most of the workers were jewish immigrants from all over Europe who were being coerced to join Unions for higher wages...
On a wider scale, even in current times, there are cases of nightclub and high rise fires that needlessly take lives because someone did not install a sprinkler system, a back up elevator, another exit...
Do people make mistakes? Are there criminals in the business community" Do they cut corners?
Of course, all that happens...but let us not throw the baby out with the soiled bathwater....
As you can determine, both of these examples have been highly publicized in college classes to illustrate just what you have been led to believe: namely, that it is 'capitalism' the free market system, the 'robber barons' who are to blame for the tragic events you listed.
Do you really buy that?
Mankind makes mistakes, we used rivers as sewers until we learned better....we used ddt for better crops until we learned the consequences. Life is not always fair, it is trial and error and sometimes terrible errors.
Do not penalize the entire concept of freedom for a few bad apples and a few natural mistakes.
amicus
TRIANGLE SHIRTWAIST FIRE
One of the nation's worst industrial tragedies, the Triangle Shirtwaist fire had a profound impact on women's unionism and job safety and affected local and national politics in the process. On March 25, 1911, a fire swept through the Triangle Shirtwaist Company in the Greenwich Village section of New York City, a sweatshop where workers, mostly women, did low-paying piecework in a building with no safety precautions.
The blaze killed 146 workers who were trapped by the lack of fire escapes and management's practice of locking all the exits to keep workers from leaving the job for breaks. The factory's owners were indicted, but a jury acquitted them, fanning the outrage over the tragedy.
The fire led to stepped-up efforts on the part of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union, which had been founded in 1900 to organize the women who worked in the Triangle factory and improve working conditions in sweatshops. The public outcry also prompted the creation of a state commission, which investigated both the factory in question and industrial working conditions generally.
In 1914, its report called for widespread changes. New York's state legislature balked at first but finally acted under pressure from Tammany Hall and its boss, Charles Francis Murphy, and two lawmakers who would go on to prominence, State Senator Robert Wagner, later a U.S. senator, and Assemblyman Alfred E. Smith, later governor and a presidential candidate. New laws imposed tougher municipal building codes and more stringent factory inspections in New York and elsewhere.
See also Labor.
http://www.uh.edu/~jrosin/Triangle.Fire.Website.Rev.htm
Issues to Consider:
Who were the authors of the websites? Could the content be influenced by a particular point of view or political agenda?
What part of the site did you find most interesting or impressive?
What kinds of sources are presented in the web site? Primary? Secondary?
What were relations between workers and management during the Gilded Age?
What sort of responsibilities did management and owners have toward their employees?
What role did government play in regulating the work place during this period?
What role did immigrants play in the American labor force during this period?
What was the role of women in the American labor movement?
What was the public response to the Triangle Fire?
How did Big Business and government respond to the tragedy?
Who was assigned the legal responsibility for the tragedy?
What interest groups united in order to press for reform?
Did any meaningful reform result from the tragedy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
I chose not to copy an article which implied the fire was set by those attempting to Unionize the Ladies Garment Industry, for obvious reasons.
Now, you believe, and you are asking us to believe, that the 'Robber Barons' the factory owners and the investment bankers behind them were so immersed in a chase for profits that they knowingly risked the lives of many people, destroyed a building and a business, brought the wrath of government and the labor movement down upon them, on purpose?
Take into consideration that most of the workers were jewish immigrants from all over Europe who were being coerced to join Unions for higher wages...
On a wider scale, even in current times, there are cases of nightclub and high rise fires that needlessly take lives because someone did not install a sprinkler system, a back up elevator, another exit...
Do people make mistakes? Are there criminals in the business community" Do they cut corners?
Of course, all that happens...but let us not throw the baby out with the soiled bathwater....
As you can determine, both of these examples have been highly publicized in college classes to illustrate just what you have been led to believe: namely, that it is 'capitalism' the free market system, the 'robber barons' who are to blame for the tragic events you listed.
Do you really buy that?
Mankind makes mistakes, we used rivers as sewers until we learned better....we used ddt for better crops until we learned the consequences. Life is not always fair, it is trial and error and sometimes terrible errors.
Do not penalize the entire concept of freedom for a few bad apples and a few natural mistakes.
amicus
amicus
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 14,812
shereads...trying to answer so as to not be accused of evasion, although I am pressed to keep up...
you said:
"You really, really don't want to answer the question, do you, Amicus. This one: How, other than by means of legal restrictions, do you solve the problem of a property owner using his property in a way that makes the property of his neighbors unlivable?"
That is why we have a court system, to adjudicate rights.
In this case, property rights.
It is a jumble, what with land grants to railroads, and charter grants to the colonies, and spanish land grants in the southwest and a really funny situation in formerly French Louisiana..however....
Property rights, properly spelled out would solve most of the problems of adjacent occupation and even downwind and downstream property owners.
The first step be to removed the cities, counties, states and the feds from owning any land at all.
All land should be made available for sale, or held in stewardship until it was needed and then sold, or even homesteaded or given away.
At that point, then the individual or the corporation (an individual by definition) has both property rights and responsibilities.
Once you 'own' something and have the 'right' to use it in any way that does not 'disturb' adjacent or downstream owners, then the legal uses become clear as do the illegal uses.
And the courts and resolve the differences.
As it is, we have a hodgepodge of public, private and corporate laws, each with different influence on the courts and local enforcement authorities.
Not an easy solution and surely fraught with pitfalls...but you did ask for a logical, rational answer.
amicus
you said:
"You really, really don't want to answer the question, do you, Amicus. This one: How, other than by means of legal restrictions, do you solve the problem of a property owner using his property in a way that makes the property of his neighbors unlivable?"
That is why we have a court system, to adjudicate rights.
In this case, property rights.
It is a jumble, what with land grants to railroads, and charter grants to the colonies, and spanish land grants in the southwest and a really funny situation in formerly French Louisiana..however....
Property rights, properly spelled out would solve most of the problems of adjacent occupation and even downwind and downstream property owners.
The first step be to removed the cities, counties, states and the feds from owning any land at all.
All land should be made available for sale, or held in stewardship until it was needed and then sold, or even homesteaded or given away.
At that point, then the individual or the corporation (an individual by definition) has both property rights and responsibilities.
Once you 'own' something and have the 'right' to use it in any way that does not 'disturb' adjacent or downstream owners, then the legal uses become clear as do the illegal uses.
And the courts and resolve the differences.
As it is, we have a hodgepodge of public, private and corporate laws, each with different influence on the courts and local enforcement authorities.
Not an easy solution and surely fraught with pitfalls...but you did ask for a logical, rational answer.
amicus
amicus
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 14,812
Okay...last research of the evening and now I have forgotten who and where...and cannot seem to locate the perpetrator.
Someone said the income gap between the poor and the rich was getting wider and wider...I had my doubts, thus:
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/2000/cb00-158.html
Poverty Rate Lowest in 20 Years, Household Income
at Record High, Census Bureau Reports
The nation's poverty rate dropped from 12.7 percent in 1998 to 11.8
percent in 1999 the lowest rate since 1979 and real median household
income reached $40,816, the highest level ever recorded by the Census
Bureau (household income data were first recorded in 1967), according to
two reports released today by the Commerce Department's Census Bureau.
"Every racial and ethnic group experienced a drop in both the number of
poor and the percent in poverty, as did children, the elderly and people
ages 25 to 44," said Daniel Weinberg, chief of the Census Bureau's Housing
and Household Economic Statistics Division. "Declines in poverty were
concentrated in metropolitan areas, particularly central cities. And, on
the income side, this was the fifth consecutive year that households
experienced a real annual increase in income."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~``
Also take into consideration that approximately half the American population has an investment in the stock market. That means they have 'spendable income' above and beyond the necessities.
It would seem to me that the above information indicates a healthy and growing economy that provides for all income levels.
It may be 'statistically true' that the Gap between the lowest and the highest is widening, I did not find source material to refute that, however...the income level and the standard of living of the poorest is rising, as the census bureau indicated above.
Thus the 'gap' you point to, is irrelevent in any meaningful way.
amicus has earned a stiff drink, settles back with an aged brandy of good quality and a big fat cigar, raises his feet for the mistress to massage and puffs away....
(I be bad)
Someone said the income gap between the poor and the rich was getting wider and wider...I had my doubts, thus:
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/2000/cb00-158.html
Poverty Rate Lowest in 20 Years, Household Income
at Record High, Census Bureau Reports
The nation's poverty rate dropped from 12.7 percent in 1998 to 11.8
percent in 1999 the lowest rate since 1979 and real median household
income reached $40,816, the highest level ever recorded by the Census
Bureau (household income data were first recorded in 1967), according to
two reports released today by the Commerce Department's Census Bureau.
"Every racial and ethnic group experienced a drop in both the number of
poor and the percent in poverty, as did children, the elderly and people
ages 25 to 44," said Daniel Weinberg, chief of the Census Bureau's Housing
and Household Economic Statistics Division. "Declines in poverty were
concentrated in metropolitan areas, particularly central cities. And, on
the income side, this was the fifth consecutive year that households
experienced a real annual increase in income."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~``
Also take into consideration that approximately half the American population has an investment in the stock market. That means they have 'spendable income' above and beyond the necessities.
It would seem to me that the above information indicates a healthy and growing economy that provides for all income levels.
It may be 'statistically true' that the Gap between the lowest and the highest is widening, I did not find source material to refute that, however...the income level and the standard of living of the poorest is rising, as the census bureau indicated above.
Thus the 'gap' you point to, is irrelevent in any meaningful way.
amicus has earned a stiff drink, settles back with an aged brandy of good quality and a big fat cigar, raises his feet for the mistress to massage and puffs away....
(I be bad)
shereads
Sloganless
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2003
- Posts
- 19,242
The main one being that there was a trial, which left a paper trail of evidence a mile long and never turned up anything of the sort. Despite the fact that women's rights and worker rights weren't exactly the Flavor of the Month at the time.amicus said:
That last bit they definitely didn't foresee. Fortunately for the greedy ones, as is so often the case, so much wealth was acquired while labor issues were being debated and government piddled along in bureaucratic fashion, that the continuing worker abuses were entirely worthwhile financially, despite the eventual lawsuits and regulatory steps. White-collar crime pays pretty well. Ask the gentleman from Tyco...
As for the chase for profits and knowing risk of lives? The historic record "asks us" to believe it, not me.
Higher wages? They were being arrested for demanding the right to pee twice a day. Higher wages were a distant dream at the time of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, amicus. These were just people who didn't want every moment of their work day to be spent in misery. If someone had been willing to accommodate them, maybe the history of labor unions in America would have been cut short.
At every opportunity, amicus. Greed is a powerful force. It trumps compassion every time.
No one would want that; the mystery is why you are so opposed to throwing out the soiled water, with or without the baby.
I buy the historic record over your wishful thinking, yes. And since you've implied that the Triangle Shirtwaist Tragedy - and the hundreds of newspaper articles, legal briefs, documents submitted into evidence by police and fire departments, etc., are the product of one website host with an agenda, here's what a Google search of the words "triangle shirtwaist fire" turns up:
Results 1 - 10 of about 9,590 for triangle shirtwaist fire. (0.19 seconds)
No, we used rivers as sewers until government was pushed and pushed and pushed to defy its own wish to please its campaign contributors, and regulated toxic dumping. You still haven't said how you would solve the problem of a neighbor upstream who poisoned your water and told you to go f**k yourself when you complained. You'd be on the phone with your congressman so fast your neighbor's head would spin, but to say that would be to negate your entire argument. Which, for reasons you haven't made clear, insists on taking a view no less extreme than the pinkest commie in Moscow: no regulation, ever; trust the good sense of Misters Mellon and Carnegie to make that dam safe, they'll get around to it after a few fishing seasons at the camp. They're busy right now, but don't worry, Johnstown.
I'm trying to advocate a middle ground. Not even advocating it, but simply stating that I can't see any proven alternative to having as much freedom as human nature will allow without there being abuses of power and rampant greed that cause terrible suffering. Every year, my local electric utility bitches and moans about some regulatory action or other, meanwhile its CEO is the single highest paid executive of a publicly held company in the state, making $11 million a year in salary and bonuses, plus stock options and other variables. Life is tough for a capitalist in a socialist state like Florida...
<sigh>
Exhausted from the futility of it.
Last edited:
amicus
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 14,812
shereads....I was all done for the night...an hour ago...but read your last...
"
I'm trying to advocate a middle ground. Not even advocating it, but simply stating that I can't see any proven alternative to having as much freedom as human nature will allow without there being abuses of power and rampant greed that cause terrible suffering. Every year, my local electric utility bitches and moans about some regulatory action or other, meanwhile its CEO is the single highest paid executive of a publicly held company in the state, making $11 million a year in salary and bonuses, plus stock options and other variables. Life is tough for a capitalist in a socialist state like Florida...
<sigh>
Exhausted from the futility of it.
__________________
I never said life was fair, my dear...I cringe when I see the salary figures of someone like Shaquille O'Neil and Kobe Bryant, neither of whom performed well in college. But, I guess they sell entertainment and people willingly pay for it.
I too am chagrinned at CEO salaries and perks and not sure I can defend that sort of compensation, especially in an area like energy that is essential and basically a public monopoly.
As I have tried to say many times before, I do not have an agenda that includes a mindless advocacy of an 'ism' capitalism included.
What I do have and hope I never lose, is an undying respect for the achievements of the individual man, from the first who discovered fire to those who walked on the moon.
All thoughts, all actions come from the free unfettered mind of a human being...and I have somewhat dedicated my intellectual pursuits in defending that freedom of thought and action while at the same time respecting each life as the ultimate value.
Not that that is a 'middle ground' either but it is the best I can do.
regards...amicus...
"
I'm trying to advocate a middle ground. Not even advocating it, but simply stating that I can't see any proven alternative to having as much freedom as human nature will allow without there being abuses of power and rampant greed that cause terrible suffering. Every year, my local electric utility bitches and moans about some regulatory action or other, meanwhile its CEO is the single highest paid executive of a publicly held company in the state, making $11 million a year in salary and bonuses, plus stock options and other variables. Life is tough for a capitalist in a socialist state like Florida...
<sigh>
Exhausted from the futility of it.
__________________
I never said life was fair, my dear...I cringe when I see the salary figures of someone like Shaquille O'Neil and Kobe Bryant, neither of whom performed well in college. But, I guess they sell entertainment and people willingly pay for it.
I too am chagrinned at CEO salaries and perks and not sure I can defend that sort of compensation, especially in an area like energy that is essential and basically a public monopoly.
As I have tried to say many times before, I do not have an agenda that includes a mindless advocacy of an 'ism' capitalism included.
What I do have and hope I never lose, is an undying respect for the achievements of the individual man, from the first who discovered fire to those who walked on the moon.
All thoughts, all actions come from the free unfettered mind of a human being...and I have somewhat dedicated my intellectual pursuits in defending that freedom of thought and action while at the same time respecting each life as the ultimate value.
Not that that is a 'middle ground' either but it is the best I can do.
regards...amicus...
shereads
Sloganless
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2003
- Posts
- 19,242
amicus said:
So Walmart takes all? That's your dream of a better world?
No protected widerness, no scenic vistas minus a Trump casino tower? Wow. You don't like the scenery, or you can afford to own all of the scenery within your line of vision. Those of us who like to leave the cities and see some trees now and again already have to go pretty far to do it. You want to leave those few remaining opportunities in the hands of industry.
You must not be involved in a lot of environmental work (
) or you'd be aware that even a clear VICTORY in court against someone who's doing irreparable damage to the coral reef and fishing grounds that others depend upon for their livelihood, is nearly impossible to enforce. There are court cases that are attempts to enforce the results of prior court cases.Adding to the burden wouldn't be all that rational, would it.
The entire world, under your guidance, becomes the New Jersey turnpike. Unless some beneficent billionaire decides to preserve Yellowstone for his grandkids, and lets the rest of us visit once in a while. That would be nice.
Last edited:
cantdog
Waybac machine
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2004
- Posts
- 10,791
Objective thinking as a universal
There is more than one realm of experience. The physical is the realm of the objective, but the other two are unquantifiable, there is no meter to measure them with. These two are the spiritual and the interpersonal. Without meters, these subjective realms are a blank to science. Aristotle even laughs at them. The absence of evidence that the spiritual even causes a measurable effect on anything (Kirlian photography?) helps the science-bound express its contempt for them.
But you live in a human mind; you feel human emotions and watch humans interact. You know that the feelings a person has, meterable or not, affect what she does, make her take different actions than under other influences. Actions are measurable, feelings are undeniable. Philosophies purporting to attack problems of esthetics or ethics which cannot address quality because they can't graph it;, or which purport to tackle societal issues without, in their "greatest good," the happiness and the scope for the social and spiritual vouchsafed to the men and women living in those social arrangements, are crippled.
You really do need, I think, a chance to discuss spirtuality and religion in an open, easy way. You want do talk about it with people who are advanced enough to know what they're speaking of. It is an extremely important area of the human experience which our culture neglects and marginalizes.
The problem is even more profound than that, for we practice the politics of hate for lack of wisdom. There is wisdom in America, but it needs to be shared to become a part of the heritage of the culture, and the culture is materialist in the extreme and wisdom isn't quantifiable.
Mechanisms to share technical things abound, but the distinctions between good tech and bad is often the impact it has on the spirit and the interpersonal milieu of the practitioners of the tech. Irrational objections, you say, but not everything is amenable to objectivity. If by calling them irrational you mean to dismiss them as of no importance, then you espouse a soulless and ulimately a useless philosophy with no hope of pointing the way to a quality life for real human beings.
There is more than one realm of experience. The physical is the realm of the objective, but the other two are unquantifiable, there is no meter to measure them with. These two are the spiritual and the interpersonal. Without meters, these subjective realms are a blank to science. Aristotle even laughs at them. The absence of evidence that the spiritual even causes a measurable effect on anything (Kirlian photography?) helps the science-bound express its contempt for them.
But you live in a human mind; you feel human emotions and watch humans interact. You know that the feelings a person has, meterable or not, affect what she does, make her take different actions than under other influences. Actions are measurable, feelings are undeniable. Philosophies purporting to attack problems of esthetics or ethics which cannot address quality because they can't graph it;, or which purport to tackle societal issues without, in their "greatest good," the happiness and the scope for the social and spiritual vouchsafed to the men and women living in those social arrangements, are crippled.
You really do need, I think, a chance to discuss spirtuality and religion in an open, easy way. You want do talk about it with people who are advanced enough to know what they're speaking of. It is an extremely important area of the human experience which our culture neglects and marginalizes.
The problem is even more profound than that, for we practice the politics of hate for lack of wisdom. There is wisdom in America, but it needs to be shared to become a part of the heritage of the culture, and the culture is materialist in the extreme and wisdom isn't quantifiable.
Mechanisms to share technical things abound, but the distinctions between good tech and bad is often the impact it has on the spirit and the interpersonal milieu of the practitioners of the tech. Irrational objections, you say, but not everything is amenable to objectivity. If by calling them irrational you mean to dismiss them as of no importance, then you espouse a soulless and ulimately a useless philosophy with no hope of pointing the way to a quality life for real human beings.
amicus
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 14,812
Quite a mouthful, Cant...
The tone of your post implies you are not seeking any refutation of your 'Messianistic' statements that 'emotion' and 'spirituality' are beyond reason and logic.
In reality, it is quite the opposite.
It is categorically essential that man understand and 'quantify' the nature of emotion and spirit.
For most of the history of mankind, we have had to settle for a religion out of Africa to answer the questions about the nature of man, the nature of the mind and the reason and purpose for our existence.
One can sense the difficulty of the struggle through the biblical allegories.
One should admire Homer and the Greeks who created a whole family of Gods to deal with the emotions and spiritual requirements of mankind.
Skip ahead to Shakespeare and the Renaissance, the rebirth of Aristotelian thought and the long tortuous journey that man understook to understand why we are what we are, outside the god concept.
"Psychology" "The Science(not art) of the mind or mental states and processes: the Science of human nature..."
The study of the mind, of emotions is a rational, scientific pursuit, as it should be.
All the emotions and the whole range of 'spiritual experiences' of man have come under the knife of science, reason and rationality.
Who would have the audacity to think that the 'mind' the brain, was real, but its functions are not?
Every human emotion has a 'real' basis within the nature of man and the reality we live in. It is our task as rational beings, to pursue an understanding of those emotions and spiritual needs with all the tools at hand..
To do otherwise is to end up in the Jim Jones category, mindless allegiance to any witchdoctor that waves a flag.
amicus
The tone of your post implies you are not seeking any refutation of your 'Messianistic' statements that 'emotion' and 'spirituality' are beyond reason and logic.
In reality, it is quite the opposite.
It is categorically essential that man understand and 'quantify' the nature of emotion and spirit.
For most of the history of mankind, we have had to settle for a religion out of Africa to answer the questions about the nature of man, the nature of the mind and the reason and purpose for our existence.
One can sense the difficulty of the struggle through the biblical allegories.
One should admire Homer and the Greeks who created a whole family of Gods to deal with the emotions and spiritual requirements of mankind.
Skip ahead to Shakespeare and the Renaissance, the rebirth of Aristotelian thought and the long tortuous journey that man understook to understand why we are what we are, outside the god concept.
"Psychology" "The Science(not art) of the mind or mental states and processes: the Science of human nature..."
The study of the mind, of emotions is a rational, scientific pursuit, as it should be.
All the emotions and the whole range of 'spiritual experiences' of man have come under the knife of science, reason and rationality.
Who would have the audacity to think that the 'mind' the brain, was real, but its functions are not?
Every human emotion has a 'real' basis within the nature of man and the reality we live in. It is our task as rational beings, to pursue an understanding of those emotions and spiritual needs with all the tools at hand..
To do otherwise is to end up in the Jim Jones category, mindless allegiance to any witchdoctor that waves a flag.
amicus
shereads
Sloganless
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2003
- Posts
- 19,242
Missed the response to his semi-response. Accidental, I'm sure.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by amicus
I chose not to copy an article which implied the fire was set by those attempting to Unionize the Ladies Garment Industry, for obvious reasons.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
The main one being that there was a trial, which left a paper trail of evidence a mile long and never turned up anything of the sort. Despite the fact that women's rights and worker rights weren't exactly the Flavor of the Month at the time.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
Now, you believe, and you are asking us to believe, that the 'Robber Barons' the factory owners and the investment bankers behind them were so immersed in a chase for profits that they knowingly risked the lives of many people, destroyed a building and a business, brought the wrath of government and the labor movement down upon them, on purpose?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
That last bit they definitely didn't foresee. Fortunately for the greedy ones, as is so often the case, so much wealth was acquired while labor issues were being debated and government piddled along in bureaucratic fashion, that the continuing worker abuses were entirely worthwhile financially, despite the eventual lawsuits and regulatory steps. White-collar crime pays pretty well. Ask the gentleman from Tyco...
As for the chase for profits and knowing risk of lives? The historic record "asks us" to believe it, not me.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
Take into consideration that most of the workers were jewish immigrants from all over Europe who were being coerced to join Unions for higher wages...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
Higher wages? They were being arrested for demanding the right to pee twice a day. Higher wages were a distant dream at the time of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, amicus. These were just people who didn't want every moment of their work day to be spent in misery. If someone had been willing to accommodate them, maybe the history of labor unions in America would have been cut short.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
On a wider scale, even in current times, there are cases of nightclub and high rise fires that needlessly take lives because someone did not install a sprinkler system, a back up elevator, another exit...
Do people make mistakes? Are there criminals in the business community" Do they cut corners?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
At every opportunity, amicus. Greed is a powerful force. It trumps compassion every time.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
Of course, all that happens...but let us not throw the baby out with the soiled bathwater....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
No one would want that; the mystery is why you are so opposed to throwing out the soiled water, with or without the baby.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
As you can determine, both of these examples have been highly publicized in college classes to illustrate just what you have been led to believe: namely, that it is 'capitalism' the free market system, the 'robber barons' who are to blame for the tragic events you listed.
Do you really buy that?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
I buy the historic record over your wishful thinking, yes. And since you've implied that the Triangle Shirtwaist Tragedy - and the hundreds of newspaper articles, legal briefs, documents submitted into evidence by police and fire departments, etc., are the product of one website host with an agenda, here's what a Google search of the words "triangle shirtwaist fire" turns up:
Results 1 - 10 of about 9,590 for triangle shirtwaist fire. (0.19 seconds)
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
Mankind makes mistakes, we used rivers as sewers until we learned better....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
No, we used rivers as sewers until government was pushed and pushed and pushed to defy its own wish to please its campaign contributors, and regulated toxic dumping. You still haven't said how you would solve the problem of a neighbor upstream who poisoned your water and told you to go f**k yourself when you complained. You'd be on the phone with your congressman so fast your neighbor's head would spin, but to say that would be to negate your entire argument. Which, for reasons you haven't made clear, insists on taking a view no less extreme than the pinkest commie in Moscow: no regulation, ever; trust the good sense of Misters Mellon and Carnegie to make that dam safe, they'll get around to it after a few fishing seasons at the camp. They're busy right now, but don't worry, Johnstown.
I'm trying to advocate a middle ground. Not even advocating it, but simply stating that I can't see any proven alternative to having as much freedom as human nature will allow without there being abuses of power and rampant greed that cause terrible suffering. Every year, my local electric utility bitches and moans about some regulatory action or other, meanwhile its CEO is the single highest paid executive of a publicly held company in the state, making $11 million a year in salary and bonuses, plus stock options and other variables. Life is tough for a capitalist in a socialist state like Florida...
<sigh>
Exhausted from the futility of it.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by amicus
I chose not to copy an article which implied the fire was set by those attempting to Unionize the Ladies Garment Industry, for obvious reasons.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
The main one being that there was a trial, which left a paper trail of evidence a mile long and never turned up anything of the sort. Despite the fact that women's rights and worker rights weren't exactly the Flavor of the Month at the time.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
Now, you believe, and you are asking us to believe, that the 'Robber Barons' the factory owners and the investment bankers behind them were so immersed in a chase for profits that they knowingly risked the lives of many people, destroyed a building and a business, brought the wrath of government and the labor movement down upon them, on purpose?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
That last bit they definitely didn't foresee. Fortunately for the greedy ones, as is so often the case, so much wealth was acquired while labor issues were being debated and government piddled along in bureaucratic fashion, that the continuing worker abuses were entirely worthwhile financially, despite the eventual lawsuits and regulatory steps. White-collar crime pays pretty well. Ask the gentleman from Tyco...
As for the chase for profits and knowing risk of lives? The historic record "asks us" to believe it, not me.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
Take into consideration that most of the workers were jewish immigrants from all over Europe who were being coerced to join Unions for higher wages...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
Higher wages? They were being arrested for demanding the right to pee twice a day. Higher wages were a distant dream at the time of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, amicus. These were just people who didn't want every moment of their work day to be spent in misery. If someone had been willing to accommodate them, maybe the history of labor unions in America would have been cut short.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
On a wider scale, even in current times, there are cases of nightclub and high rise fires that needlessly take lives because someone did not install a sprinkler system, a back up elevator, another exit...
Do people make mistakes? Are there criminals in the business community" Do they cut corners?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
At every opportunity, amicus. Greed is a powerful force. It trumps compassion every time.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
Of course, all that happens...but let us not throw the baby out with the soiled bathwater....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
No one would want that; the mystery is why you are so opposed to throwing out the soiled water, with or without the baby.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
As you can determine, both of these examples have been highly publicized in college classes to illustrate just what you have been led to believe: namely, that it is 'capitalism' the free market system, the 'robber barons' who are to blame for the tragic events you listed.
Do you really buy that?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
I buy the historic record over your wishful thinking, yes. And since you've implied that the Triangle Shirtwaist Tragedy - and the hundreds of newspaper articles, legal briefs, documents submitted into evidence by police and fire departments, etc., are the product of one website host with an agenda, here's what a Google search of the words "triangle shirtwaist fire" turns up:
Results 1 - 10 of about 9,590 for triangle shirtwaist fire. (0.19 seconds)
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amicus:
Mankind makes mistakes, we used rivers as sewers until we learned better....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SR:
No, we used rivers as sewers until government was pushed and pushed and pushed to defy its own wish to please its campaign contributors, and regulated toxic dumping. You still haven't said how you would solve the problem of a neighbor upstream who poisoned your water and told you to go f**k yourself when you complained. You'd be on the phone with your congressman so fast your neighbor's head would spin, but to say that would be to negate your entire argument. Which, for reasons you haven't made clear, insists on taking a view no less extreme than the pinkest commie in Moscow: no regulation, ever; trust the good sense of Misters Mellon and Carnegie to make that dam safe, they'll get around to it after a few fishing seasons at the camp. They're busy right now, but don't worry, Johnstown.
I'm trying to advocate a middle ground. Not even advocating it, but simply stating that I can't see any proven alternative to having as much freedom as human nature will allow without there being abuses of power and rampant greed that cause terrible suffering. Every year, my local electric utility bitches and moans about some regulatory action or other, meanwhile its CEO is the single highest paid executive of a publicly held company in the state, making $11 million a year in salary and bonuses, plus stock options and other variables. Life is tough for a capitalist in a socialist state like Florida...
<sigh>
Exhausted from the futility of it.
Last edited:
rgraham666
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2004
- Posts
- 43,724
Property Rights
Sigh. How often do we have do go down this road.
The biggest problem with property rights is defining what can constitute property. Historically, people have come up with some pretty weird ideas of what constitutes property.
The weirdest one of course, is the idea that other people can be property, either through outright slavery or through cultural norms such as marriage and parenthood.
If you look at the historical record, people being property has made for more misery in the world than happiness.
The biggest problem with the whole idea of property is that people forget that while property is under your authourity, it is also your responsibility.
Which makes sense, most people love authourity, but hate responsibility. More correctly, they will take the credit when decisions they make have a positive effect, but won't take the blame when things go wrong.
Sigh. How often do we have do go down this road.
The biggest problem with property rights is defining what can constitute property. Historically, people have come up with some pretty weird ideas of what constitutes property.
The weirdest one of course, is the idea that other people can be property, either through outright slavery or through cultural norms such as marriage and parenthood.
If you look at the historical record, people being property has made for more misery in the world than happiness.
The biggest problem with the whole idea of property is that people forget that while property is under your authourity, it is also your responsibility.
Which makes sense, most people love authourity, but hate responsibility. More correctly, they will take the credit when decisions they make have a positive effect, but won't take the blame when things go wrong.
rgraham666
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2004
- Posts
- 43,724
Unions
There is a question that always pops into my mind when people run down unions.
Why is it bad for a group pf workers to band together to create enough power to affect things to their advantage, but good for a group of business people to band together for the same purpose?
There is a question that always pops into my mind when people run down unions.
Why is it bad for a group pf workers to band together to create enough power to affect things to their advantage, but good for a group of business people to band together for the same purpose?
rgraham666
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2004
- Posts
- 43,724
Tools
Getting back to our original thread here and doing a bit of philosiphising.
One of my central beliefs is that everything that human beings create is a tool of one description or another.
Government, business, language, money, computers, ad naseum are just tools. Although tools are useful, there are a couple of problems attached to them.
The first problem is summed up in the old aphorism, "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."
Our tools shape our perceptions. We are going to tend to look at the world through the perceptions created by our tools. This may not be a good thing.
A classic example in my opinion, is money. A wonderful idea as far as I'm concerned. It made commerce so much easier than when trading in pigs and goats. Or even gold.
However, we have now mistaken money for actual value, and apply that value to things that it was never meant to be used for. We now use it to evaluate the worth of other human beings. I don't think that's such a good idea.
The second problem is best stated by, "It's a poor workman who blames his tools."
And we do blame our tools. "It's the government's fault." "It's business' fault." "It's the unions fault."
Ferchrissakes people! It's our fault.
Tools can't do anything except what we ask them to do. They have no will of their own. If the results aren't what we expect or want, it's because we made bad decisions or used the wrong tool.
You can't use a hammer to pour cement. And a cement mixer is a poor tool for pounding nails.
And above all, tools have no ethical component. We tend to think of our tools as 'good' or 'bad'. They're neither. The people using the tools are the ones doing good or bad.
I can use a shovel to dig a vegetable garden or the foundation of a house. Or I can use it to brain or gut a man. Whatever, it's not the shovel's fault. It's mine.
That's my $0.02 on this subject.
Getting back to our original thread here and doing a bit of philosiphising.
One of my central beliefs is that everything that human beings create is a tool of one description or another.
Government, business, language, money, computers, ad naseum are just tools. Although tools are useful, there are a couple of problems attached to them.
The first problem is summed up in the old aphorism, "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."
Our tools shape our perceptions. We are going to tend to look at the world through the perceptions created by our tools. This may not be a good thing.
A classic example in my opinion, is money. A wonderful idea as far as I'm concerned. It made commerce so much easier than when trading in pigs and goats. Or even gold.
However, we have now mistaken money for actual value, and apply that value to things that it was never meant to be used for. We now use it to evaluate the worth of other human beings. I don't think that's such a good idea.
The second problem is best stated by, "It's a poor workman who blames his tools."
And we do blame our tools. "It's the government's fault." "It's business' fault." "It's the unions fault."
Ferchrissakes people! It's our fault.
Tools can't do anything except what we ask them to do. They have no will of their own. If the results aren't what we expect or want, it's because we made bad decisions or used the wrong tool.
You can't use a hammer to pour cement. And a cement mixer is a poor tool for pounding nails.
And above all, tools have no ethical component. We tend to think of our tools as 'good' or 'bad'. They're neither. The people using the tools are the ones doing good or bad.
I can use a shovel to dig a vegetable garden or the foundation of a house. Or I can use it to brain or gut a man. Whatever, it's not the shovel's fault. It's mine.
That's my $0.02 on this subject.
Last edited:
shereads
Sloganless
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2003
- Posts
- 19,242
Re: Tools
Respectfully offers $0.05. Begs you to keep the 3 cents change; dashboard change cup is full.
As usual, RG, I agree with you 99.995 percent. Two points, the most useless one first: If the tool you brain or gut someone with is not a garden shovel, but the new Acme Gut-O-Matic¨ Brain Basher, the tool has some culpability.
Mostly, I'm curious whether you believe art, music and literature to be tools, and in what sense? In one of these philosophical threads, we debated the essential differences between human beings and animals. In the space of a few decades, we've seen the uniqueness of the human race defined by progressively more complex factors, as one after another were debunked by the observed behavior of apes in the wild, and then at primate research centers: the use of tools; the creation of tools; the ability to communicate with words/symbols; the ability to string words/symbols together into new and original "sentences." Edited to add: murder, both within the community group and during tribal warfare.
We were left, if I remember, with only one differentiator of human beings, that can't be disproven: the way we celebrate ourselves and the world around us through the creation of art, music and literature.
Is art a tool? A tool of expression, to communicate what can't be communicated in any other way?
---------
Edited to add: It's only just occurred to me that there are two other essential difference between us and the higher primates: our hyper-consciousness regarding our, um, private parts, which we either flaunt or struggle to keep covered; and our flair for fashion. There's no recorded evidence of a chimpanzee voluntarily wearing stiletto heels.
rgraham666 said:
Respectfully offers $0.05. Begs you to keep the 3 cents change; dashboard change cup is full.
As usual, RG, I agree with you 99.995 percent. Two points, the most useless one first: If the tool you brain or gut someone with is not a garden shovel, but the new Acme Gut-O-Matic¨ Brain Basher, the tool has some culpability.
Mostly, I'm curious whether you believe art, music and literature to be tools, and in what sense? In one of these philosophical threads, we debated the essential differences between human beings and animals. In the space of a few decades, we've seen the uniqueness of the human race defined by progressively more complex factors, as one after another were debunked by the observed behavior of apes in the wild, and then at primate research centers: the use of tools; the creation of tools; the ability to communicate with words/symbols; the ability to string words/symbols together into new and original "sentences." Edited to add: murder, both within the community group and during tribal warfare.
We were left, if I remember, with only one differentiator of human beings, that can't be disproven: the way we celebrate ourselves and the world around us through the creation of art, music and literature.
Is art a tool? A tool of expression, to communicate what can't be communicated in any other way?
---------
Edited to add: It's only just occurred to me that there are two other essential difference between us and the higher primates: our hyper-consciousness regarding our, um, private parts, which we either flaunt or struggle to keep covered; and our flair for fashion. There's no recorded evidence of a chimpanzee voluntarily wearing stiletto heels.
Last edited:
rgraham666
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2004
- Posts
- 43,724
I'll get back to you shereads, gotta think about that for a bit.
rgraham666
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2004
- Posts
- 43,724
I will disagree with you on the Acme Gut-o-Matic Brain Basher™ though.
I can still dig a vegetable garden with it.
Should it be used for what it's advertised as, most of the culpability still goes to the person using it. Without someone to wield it, the Brain Basher™ would just sit there and rust.
And a small amount goes to the marketing exec who came up with the name. They must have known the name would have inspired people to use it in the way advertised.
I can still dig a vegetable garden with it.
Should it be used for what it's advertised as, most of the culpability still goes to the person using it. Without someone to wield it, the Brain Basher™ would just sit there and rust.
And a small amount goes to the marketing exec who came up with the name. They must have known the name would have inspired people to use it in the way advertised.
gauchecritic
When there are grey skies
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2002
- Posts
- 7,076
amicus said:
Psychology is at best a signpost of possibilities. A scientific method of proof is that circumstance a will always result in b. In psychology this is not true and also unprovable. Otherwise identical twins would behave identically.
This too is patently untrue and unprovable (see above)
Dualists? Or are they not worthy of consideration as your kind of scientists?
Emotion, real, nature, reality? All qualitative, there are no quantities there for your scientists to measure.
Exercise is a much better description of your pursuit, task implies an end result which never has and probably never will be found when you have so many schools of thought in direct opposition to each other and non being able to produce irrefutable proof of their belief.
As to the tools, the point about psychology, philosophy and all the metaphysics is that the tools available are the component parts of the thing being analysed. You can't take an engine apart using a spark plug.
The 'purpose' of mind (that greater and intangible thing than the sum of its parts) is as an evolutionary tool which enables man to forecast his future. The parts of the tool are words, with which we tell ourselves stories. Stories which can predict occurences and outcomes. Stories which can categorise risk. Stories which can be transmitted from one person to another complete and completely useable.
You follow a very simple and oft found fallacy, mistaking the word for the thing and then using itself to describe itself.
Example: I have a realtime computer which can give the answer to any question however complex.
What will the weather be like on April the first 2217? (the Department of Defence can pretty accurately predict weather for 4 days in advance before chaos obscures prediction)
My computer is so complicated and refined that it takes into account every conceivable condition and action which may or may not affect the weather on that day 2000 years in the future from the butterfly flapping to El nino. The one drawback is that because of the complexity, its result won't be given until the first of April 2217.
Why? Because to all intents and purposes my computer is the model itself.
Put more simply: the best and only complete way to describe an apple to you is to give you an apple.
The thing is the thing, not the words however unique, obscure or specialised they are.
Now that's deep.
Gauche
dr_mabeuse
seduce the mind
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2002
- Posts
- 11,528
gauchecritic said:
That's what happened in chemistry. It's possible to set up a mathematical model of what will happen in a certain reaction, but it takes longer to set up the model than it does to go into the lab and do the experiment.
The mathematical description has become more complex than the system being described.
---dr.M.
