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: Chuzzlewit who wrote (33178)	3/23/1999 4:52:00 PM
From: Rick Julian	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Excellent post Chuzzlewit. Saved me a lot of typing, and presented the argument much better than I could have. The suckling reaction of an infant is not an instinct but a response to stimuli created by a perceived need within an infant. Main Entry: 1in·stinct Pronunciation: 'in-"sti[ng](k)t Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Latin instinctus impulse, from instinguere to incite; akin to Latin instigare to instigate Date: 15th century 1 : a natural or inherent aptitude, impulse, or capacity <had an instinct for the right word> 2 a : a largely inheritable and unalterable tendency of an organism to make a complex and specific response to environmental stimuli without involving reason b : behavior that is mediated by reactions below the conscious level. Pop's contention is the very definition of what he denies it to be.

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (33178)	3/23/1999 5:15:00 PM
From: Father Terrence	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

CTC and Karma-corn: The intellectual claptrap oozing from your instinctual muzzles boggles the thinking mind! Man is above all animals, except perhaps those men who are jackasses (or those who belong to the PETA tribe)! LOL A connection with life is not defined as instinct. What a laugh. And so-called "innate" abilities really depend on the individual. Would you care to tell me what is the most advanced life form on Earth as measured by intelligence, technology, and ability to perceive surroundings cognitively (including the universe and the infinite) if it is not humans? All public schools are supported by federal funds. They also receive textbooks filled with federalist, government propaganda. Money evolves from the creation of wealth; wealth is created by the human mind. You have refuted nothing, except perhaps your own "knowledge" and ability to think clearly. Cheers, FT

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (33178)	3/23/1999 10:33:00 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

...are you aware of the fact that the reason that the US achieved economic dominion over Great Britain was the existence of public education? In part, yes. There were other significant factors. The American colonists were sufficiently vigorous to exterminate the previous inhabitants of their conquered territories before expropriating their resource base. The British relied on conquered populations for the exploitation of the resources they stole, leaving themselves vulnerable to being booted out of the conquered territories once the exploited ones realized that the conquerors were not invincible. This had repercussions far beyond the simple ability to maintain control of the territories in question. The Americans, having no subject population left after their genocidal expansion, had to rely on their own citizens to fill and exploit the occupied territories. This in turn created new opportunities for creation of wealth outside of the traditionally dominant elite, resulting in a broader and more stable economic base. British reliance on forcing subject populations to work in the service of their traditional aristocracy greatly contributed to overconcentration of wealth, as inbreeding and hereditary titles ensured that those managing this wealth were often those least qualified to do it. It is a great pity that the history of colonialism is so poorly studied; it contains some true monuments to human excess, particularly in the dubious art of sanctimony. Have you ever noticed how little mention there is in Victorian literature of the colonial system that sustained the entire economic edifice? For some reason I think of the Indian nabob in Vanity Fair, and of poor Becky Sharp, who thought that chili was chilly. Not Dickens, of course, but its been years since a Victorian novel crossed my palms, and I must make do with what memory sends me. And also, if Edwarda is listening, I think of the white hunter in The Return of Jeeves, who stands near or at the top of my list of flawless literary caricatures. I have seldom laughed so hard reading anything. If I were academically inclined, I could imagine writing on self-perception in colonial powers. In another lifetime, perhaps. Have you ever read Mark Twain's comments on the American occupation of the Philippines?