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 : Links 'n Things -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer Flugum who wrote (278)	1/7/2005 4:03:30 PM
From: HG	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 536

I've been reflecting on how language not only limits, but inhibits our communication and expression. The more I think about it, the more I realize that language is a curse. Lately I've had moments that no words can define. I grope to explain the feeling, but I feel I am a universe unto myself - completely insulated from other human beings and their innate experiences - and no language can explain, can even come close to describing the experience. A pity. Kudos to Victor Frankland Rollo May for figuring it out. Nigel too shouts from the rooftops: members.aol.com Perhaps one day an exchange of a silicon chip between people can accomplish that. Language may become as marginalized, superfluous as a typewriter is today. In this case, we don't even have a single definition of the word 'good.' When referring to the abstract quality, we vaguely point in the general direction. Hence the confusions and double standards. So tell me, is 'good' s'posed to be promoting happiness or should it promote success? Happiness and success could be two different routes - very contradictory. And what the heck is moral excellence and how would you define piety? Does good have to be pious? Does it have to be religious? I'm not pious/religious, so does that mean I am no good? <I personally know I am no good, but try proving that to me!> And what about polite - if I yell and shout, like I usually do, does that make me 'not good'? And of course, if I can be used/useful or serviceable, then I must be good, else not! In other words all the diseased, disabled - deviances - are 'not good.' We haven't even gone thru the entire list and I'm already tired. I give up. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Good: Possessing desirable qualities; adapted to answer the end designed; promoting success, welfare, or happiness; serviceable; useful; fit; excellent; admirable; commendable; not bad, corrupt, evil, noxious, offensive, or troublesome, etc. Possessing moral excellence or virtue; virtuous; pious; religious; -- said of persons or actions. Kind; benevolent; humane; merciful; gracious; polite; propitious; friendly; well-disposed; -- often followed by to or toward, also formerly by unto. Serviceable; suited; adapted; suitable; of use; to be relied upon; -- followed especially by for. Clever; skillful; dexterous; ready; handy; -- followed especially by at. Adequate; sufficient; competent; sound; not fallacious; valid; in a commercial sense, to be depended on for the discharge of obligations incurred; having pecuniary ability; of unimpaired credit. Real; actual; serious; as in the phrases in good earnest; in good sooth. Not small, insignificant, or of no account; considerable; esp., in the phrases a good deal, a good way, a good degree, a good share or part, etc. Not lacking or deficient; full; complete. Not blemished or impeached; fair; honorable; unsullied; as in the phrases a good name, a good report, good repute, etc. That which possesses desirable qualities, promotes success, welfare, or happiness, is serviceable, fit, excellent, kind, benevolent, etc.; -- opposed to evil.