Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (78653)	4/22/2000 2:04:00 AM
From: epicure	Respond to of 108807

I think we are at an impasse in this argument- as Neo stated (and I have to agree with him that one time) the discussion with him- is over. I realized today, while driving about in my van- I SWEAR driving is as good as yoga- that what you and I are doing, is describing what we see. We are ordering our thoughts based on our perceptions. I didn't start out thinking the way I think, I came to it after making connections about all the things I have read and learned. And all I am doing is describing. Not calling things better or worse, or higher or lower- merely describing, and theorizing about what it all might mean- for fun, not for the good of an immortal soul, or to be my highest self, or whatever. While Neo attempts to show us what he has read, to justify the his "belief" (something which I really think is impossible to justify- but MAYBE it is, and I've just never seen it done- so far I prefer the "This is what I believe, and I believe it because I believe it" approach- at least it is honest, and unassailable)- I think he is coming at the whole discussion a bit differently. He believes then seeks to prove. We (or at least I) don't believe- I merely give my best shot at a theory that fits the facts for now. I'm not making a grand pronouncement about THE TRUTH. Someone who has THE TRUTH is always going to be defensive unless you agree with them about the truth- and they certainly aren't going to admit they don't know what the truth is, or there might be multiple truths, yada yada yada.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (78653)	4/22/2000 10:26:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Well, that is not the nature of induction, which is generalization from experience. If I were going to show why I claim that an elephant has a tusk, I would show you miscellaneous pictures of elephants........

To: Dayuhan who wrote (78653)	4/22/2000 11:09:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Although I do suppose that we have reached a point of exhaustion, I will raise a few issues that you may or may not care to address, just in case we find a second wind: Although social cohesion is important, most animals have it without art, literature, and science. Why would the herd instinct be bred out, and need to be supplanted by cultural forms? If there is no perception of "high" and "low" common to humanity, whatever its origin, why did the conquerors of more civilized empires admire and adopt the ways of the conquered, not merely in Europe, where the Goths emulated Romans, but in China, after the Mongols; in Asia Minor, where the Muslim elite took up Hellenism, and produced texts on Plato and Aristotle; among the Vikings, where the Normans became French; and elsewhere? Why are our social relations so status driven? More importantly, why do only close competitors vie, why are most prepared to admire those they perceive as "high status"? And why do qualities like a gorgeous voice or comical facility produce keen admiration, when they are superfluous to biological imperatives? Well, that should do for now. I will understand if you do not feel like continuing......