|
| Author | Topic: SPOUT |
| Doug |
posted 4/13/03 8:15 PM
This is the place to spout off about anything and everything that turns your crank or pisses you off. The opinions expressed are not necessarily those held by the creators of this message board even if the creators of this message board have expressed an opinion. [This message has been edited on 05/09/2003] |
| DOUG |
posted 4/17/03 6:22 PM
I woke up this morning with the thought that ... humans learn from experience and then I remembered the old saying ...History repeats itself. The contradiction is telling but i need someone to tell me so give it a go if you can. |
| GRANT |
posted 4/17/03 6:24 PM
Hmmm... Difficult question. I'll try to define 'history' for myself so I can answer your question. In the meantime, contemplate this little nugget of wisdom. Hardly a pure science, history is closer to animal husbandry than it is to mathematics, in that it involves selective breeding. The principal difference between the husbandryman and the historian is that the former breeds sheep or cows or such, and the latter breeds (assumed) facts. The husbandryman uses his skills to enrich the future; the historian uses his to enrich the past. Both are usually up to their ankles in bulls[~]t." - Tom Robbins Make your way eastward sometime in the next year. We really would love to see you guys. Keep up the momentum on these musings. I enjoy reading, and thinking, about them. 'Til the next LochDu, Grant |
| Doug |
posted 5/2/03 7:49 PM
A ramble more than a spout I'm confused and worse I have no "normal" social perspective. I feel what I am doing is not normal but cannot connect the consequences to my own life. Are people really all fucked up? It must be about survival. And survival must rely on diversity. Why become a teacher or a uni-bomber or a priest? Why is the world changing so? Conflicting beliefs. "I can't live with the idea that you have different ideas." Canadians have the reputation of being wishy washy but refer to it as being tolerant.... an ugly word if you ask me, but at least it indicates flexability. The world is compacted and ideas haven't quite adjusted to it yet. Good luck world. sincerely, Doug |
| Doug |
posted 5/8/03 11:58 PM
War Eh! “A knife in the hand is worth two in George Bush.” anonymous If you want an argument against the action (war) that has taken place in the Middle East, just read any reputable newspaper in the last 6 months. If you haven’t got it by now there’s no hope and I won’t supply you with another. Instead, I will offer my sympathies to the American folks (George likes the word “folks”). They are the ones who have been horns-waggled (I believe GW would use the word horns-waggled too). Don’t get me wrong folks. I know Saddam is a bad dude and if he were sitting next to me, as I write in this coffee shop, I would bonk him on the head. My sympathies go out to the public, not merely because their president is a twerp but because they have been forced into a situation by a twerp. Without anyone’s say-so, he has put, into opposition, a person’s natural feeling of what is right and that person’s loyalty to his brother and country. Although a person might object to the operations (war), he, at the same time, feels the need to support the troops. Whenever a human receives contradictory messages from the brain the usual response is no response. Way to be human guys. But that’s just the way I see it. None-the-less, I have decided to also offer a surprise argument in favor of the war: War is natural. Here goes. Darwin, even though his last poop (I think a lot about coffee, poop and evolution) was over a 100 years ago, had some ideas about what is "natural"... ideas that still ring true today. His theory of natural selection 'relies' on the characteristic differences of a species and the choices made based on those differences (example: man sees blond woman with big boobs and instinctively wants to f@#$. Note: I apologize for the previous example for it was in poor taste… the woman does not have to be blond or have big boobs). It is this behavior of a species that enables it to strengthen its own gene pool. Survival of the fittest and all. The point is, as a species on this planet, we depend on characteristic differences. For every 10 plane Janes we need to have 10 dumb Dicks (proportions may vary). It is not only interesting but beneficial to be different, and imperative for survival. Blond, black, red, tall, short, stupid, smart, bumpy, smooth, round, shy, gay, straight, crooked, loud, wise, crazy, thoughtful, clumsy, smelly, sleepy, strong, weak, happy, evil, etc. etc… its all good… all natural. You might say that Darwin was talking about animals and not us humans (if you could re-read the last sentence, drawing out the words “animals” and “humans” in a condescending manner, you would better appreciate the sentiment the sentence was attempting to relay). Not so. In Isaac Asimov’s book, The Naked Ape, he argues that it is only the ever growing human brain that sets us apart from those wooly little creatures we like to skin and wear to keep us warm (a unique feature of our species alone. Note: luckily, if there were a “superior” species than human on the planet, humans would, likely, still be safe from the threat of being skinned to make coats, gloves and hats and all). Isaac believes the brains development was crucial for human survival given the environment. Natural. To sum up so far, it is natural to be different and it is natural to have a big brain. It is exactly this big brain and the diversity of human nature that allows us to control, manipulate, and destroy our natural environment. Here is the important part. It is also our nature to explore all of that big brain potential and all of its possibilities. All of its potential and possibilities. I’ll get back to that. Isaac Asimov also believed that “the greatest problem humans face in this day is over population”, which is an assertion I subscribed to as well until Bush and Saddam helped me to modify the hypothesis to, “the greatest problem humans face in this day is over population of idiots”. I have since done a flip flop. We can’t have it all. Remember diversity and big brain potential. We have to accept the good and the bad and the grand ideas that come with them. We have to welcome them. Hurrah for Dick and Jane. Bring on the idiots. Plastic is natural; the Village People are natural; coffee is natural and so is smog, french kisses, breast implants,… and war. ... oh ya, so is extinction. |
| Grant |
posted 5/12/03 1:44 PM
Ok then, I read a book this year by Howard Bloom called The Lucifer Principle. In this book, Bloom sets out to explain human conflict as the result of genetic evolution. Each person, he argues, is not so much an autonomous actor as a small cell in one or more super-organisms - the societies of which that person is a part. Bloom explores what we all observe about life and the world in a superficial way. One idea being that one group's freedom is another's slavery or that one group's God is another's devil. In such a situation good and evil become blurred and sometimes what opposing groups fight over is two competing goods. Another observation is that we are not as good as we think we are as a group and our enemies are not as evil as we paint them to be. There are alot of the observations the book dealing with the corrupt politics of leaders from the left and right of the political spectrum who pretend to be for righteous causes but actually use such lines of thought, or "memes" as he calls them, to cull personal power to themselves. Bloom waxes cynical further by suggesting that "memes" such as peace, justice, and freedom are often terms use to hide a group's desire to move up in the pecking order of individuals, groups, or nations. He postulates that we evolve as part of a group as rather than as individuals by showing that organisms which are isolated from the group end up suicidal or tend to die quicker since they are of no value to the 'superorganism' anymore. Hmmmm...guess that explains war, eh? Well, here's Frank Zappa's take again: "Some Scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Keep the ball rolling, Cheers, Grant |
| Randy |
posted 6/4/03 3:27 PM
Dear Mr. Pratt I am incensed by the current ad in British Columbia stating that "visible minorities" will only be considered in the opportunity to be employed by our national government. Whereas I understand the desire for expansion of opportunities for the minorities, I feel, as I am sure most people do (including minorities), that opportunity should be advance on ability and merit and not skin tone. Should there be a need to "level" the playing field, it cannot be achieved by reverse discrimination against 80% of the population of Canada. The process of equalization needs to focus on the development of the minority to a level by which they achieve their position as equals, not as favorites. In that situation, the deciding measure between two similar applicants may very well be skin tone, gendre, or language, and that would be considered, by most, fair. It would also allow the receipient of the job posting the confidence that his/her ability was paramount in the acquistion of their job allowing integrity for the individual to be established and reinforced. In today's environment, a new "minority" employee has no idea if he/she was the best for the job because the government has filtered out 80% of the population. Having a very close contact in government, who is female bilingual, I understand the feelings of doubt and confusion generated by this hiring practice. She refuses to "identify" simply because she demands the satisfaction of achieving a level based on her ability. In short, her confidence, and her self esteem, demands her to know that she has attained an achievement because of her, and not because of an equalization program. Presenting yet another arguement, I, as a tax paying Canadian citizen, should always have the right to apply for work for my government, regardless of the wants of politicians and special interest groups. As I understand the ad to read in British Columbia, hiring of a visible minority from outside of Canada would be considered in advance of hiring a "white" canadian. This sir is absolutely wrong. I, and all other hard working Canadians, pay large sums of taxes which your government finds ways to squander without regard. Now we are being told that a person, who has paid nothing into this country, would be considered for a $100,000 a year job because his/her skin was the correct colour and "us" hard working Canadians "need not apply". I fear that our government has, once again, buried it's head in the peverbial "socialist" sand. Sincerely, Randy Ellison Stittsville, Ontario |
|
|