OT: How much baggage will you accept?

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=FlyerInHi]scaredyclassic, I like your writing. Is discrete sex outside of marriage ok?[/quote]

Thnx for compliment. I’m better at oral argument than writing.

[NotCranky]

[quote=CA renter][quote=Blogstar]O.k. Good argument on the family staying together. Well put together.

I agree about the appearance of dog piling but CaRentter is debating pretty badly too. Has yet to admit where she has been wrong anywhere. And she has been plenty, maybe you could call it hyperbole but she is completely sincere in her claims that sociology proves men are worse than women and that other crap. Two wrongs don’t make a right. I know.[/quote]

Please clearly point out where I am wrong. Please explain — very clearly, and without utter nonsense like “you’re being whiny,” which proves nothing — which points I am missing. And please do not do what UCGal did, where she claimed that I said something that was neither stated nor implied.

As for the notion that “men are worse than women,” I’ve never said that; what I have said is that men have oppressed women throughout history…which is why, IMHO, “women’s work” doesn’t carry the same status as “men’s work,” and why people insist (even to this day!) that it has little/no value, either monetary value, or value to their families or society. If you have some evidence to share with us that shows otherwise, I’d love to see it.[/quote]

I have showed you how male privilege and power isn’t, I have shown you how what you call abandonment is expulsion. All your errors of perception and wrong conclusions are where your “oppression” comes from. Men and women built culture together with the animal differences we have. We either grow together or we don’t grow together, but holistically speaking there is no catching up to do.

You lie about what you want to see. That gets old.

[NotCranky]

[quote=scaredyclassic][quote=FlyerInHi]scaredyclassic, I like your writing. Is discrete sex outside of marriage ok?[/quote]

Thnx for compliment. I’m better at oral argument than writing.[/quote]
Maybe that is where you are like a woman too, scaredy, the verbal stuff. Maybe being like a woman in some way is good for lawyering?

[CDMA ENG]

Right now…

I am listening to some beautiful Gaberial Era Genesis… Feeling the nice ocean breeze through my home…

And laughing at you guys for wasting such precious time on incredibly long and unwinnable debates…

I suggest you laugh at yourselves… Drink some nice wine and listen to something beautiful of you own choice…

We will all be dead soon enough and to waste time trying to convince one another of each other view point is worthless…

CE

As the human torch says “Flame on!”

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=Blogstar][quote=scaredyclassic][quote=FlyerInHi]scaredyclassic, I like your writing. Is discrete sex outside of marriage ok?[/quote]

Thnx for compliment. I’m better at oral argument than writing.[/quote]
Maybe that is where you are like a woman too, scaredy, the verbal stuff. Maybe being like a woman in some way is good for lawyering?[/quote]

Jews and words go way back.

huh. here’s a book called jews and words that just came out!

i was hanging out at pegasus books in berkeley ca just lasy week reading this.

jews and words, words and jews.

but yeah, i am the gentle persuader, the feminine conflict resolver…im way more liek a girl than my wife, who is very blunt and masculine in her approach. i only approach obliquely, tentatively, always seeking eprmission and consent and consensus.

she just tells it like it is. she can be brutal.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=CDMA ENG]Right now…

I am listening to some beautiful Gaberial Era Genesis… Feeling the nice ocean breeze through my home…

And laughing at you guys for wasting such precious time on incredibly long and unwinnable debates…

I suggest you laugh at yourselves… Drink some nice wine and listen to something beautiful of you own choice…

We will all be dead soon enough and to waste time trying to convince one another of each other view point is worthless…

CE

As the human torch says “Flame on!”[/quote]

wasting time? this is the whole point of living!

Dialectic (also dialectics and the dialectical method) is a method of argument for resolving disagreement that has been central to European and Indian philosophy since antiquity. The word dialectic originated in ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato in the Socratic dialogues. The dialectical method is discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject, who wish to establish the truth of the matter guided by reasoned arguments.[1]

The term dialectics is not synonymous with the term debate. While in theory debaters are not necessarily emotionally invested in their point of view, in practice debaters frequently display an emotional commitment that may cloud rational judgement. Debates are won through a combination of persuading the opponent; proving one’s argument correct; or proving the opponent’s argument incorrect. Debates do not necessarily require promptly identifying a clear winner or loser; however clear winners are frequently determined by either a judge, jury, or by group consensus. The term dialectics is also not synonymous with the term rhetoric, a method or art of discourse that seeks to persuade, inform, or motivate an audience.[2] Concepts, like “logos” or rational appeal, “pathos” or emotional appeal, and “ethos” or ethical appeal, are intentionally used by rhetoricians to persuade an audience.[3]

The Sophists taught aretē (Greek: ἀρετή, quality, excellence) as the highest value, and the determinant of one’s actions in life. The Sophists taught artistic quality in oratory (motivation via speech) as a manner of demonstrating one’s aretē. Oratory was taught as an art form, used to please and to influence other people via excellent speech; nonetheless, the Sophists taught the pupil to seek aretē in all endeavours, not solely in oratory.[citation needed]

Socrates favoured truth as the highest value, proposing that it could be discovered through reason and logic in discussion: ergo, dialectic. Socrates valued rationality (appealing to logic, not emotion) as the proper means for persuasion, the discovery of truth, and the determinant for one’s actions. To Socrates, truth, not aretē, was the greater good, and each person should, above all else, seek truth to guide one’s life. Therefore, Socrates opposed the Sophists and their teaching of rhetoric as art and as emotional oratory requiring neither logic nor proof.[4] Different forms of dialectical reasoning have emerged throughout history from the Indosphere (Greater India) and the West (Europe). These forms include the Socratic method, Hindu, Buddhist, Medieval, Hegelian dialectics,

[scaredyclassic]

also…not incpmpatible with getting really drunk…

i think socrates got wasted..

[NotCranky]

I wrote a post about divorce …splitting the family that got lost in the upload.

Want to get it out a little.

While I said good job on your post scaredy, Sometimes I think what you said is only true because or our stupidity.

Doing something different that standard family dynamics is so loaded with self fulfilling doom proficy because we get so entrenched in the current cultural norms. Kind of like people get entrenched in religion and there is no way they will see any other way. We put this in our kids because kids are basically made by the time they are 7.

I think the logistics of sharing kids from separate houses is painful enough to want to avoid it but I am not sure they can’t get used to having two houses pretty easily if we weren’t brainwashed and hadn’t done it to them.

Humans have had many social patterns for raising children over the year and I am pretty sure there will be vastly different ones from what we have in the future. Culture is G-d.

Plus we can blind ourselves that our marriage is better than a separation easier to do once we have culturally made it so the kids will suffer from a split.

This just stuff my enemy mind thinks of from time to time…not an argument.

By Kenny Loggins about divorce I think:
“I did for you and the boys and because love should teach you joy and not the imitation that your mommy and daddy tried to show you” I see a lot of imitation, loneliness, and as Brian likes to point out , mutual dependency built on confidence in the current system. Carenters argument is really an adaptation to mutual dependency established by marriage vows(promises), which she feels is scary. I am right there on the scary part. We wouldn’t have the argument without the dependency.

Maybe there are ways that there is less imitation and no big problems moving on if we change the predispostion to negativity about anything but a nuclear monogamous household and don’t teach our kids it.

Like you said we are wired differently than we think does what we are doing really respect that or are we respecting current family dynamic religion and happier if we do because we are stupid. I know I am can’t handle anything different either but admit it could be stupidity at play too.

[NotCranky]

I think you mentioned white privilege , CaRenter.
That’s a good one because your whole paradigm is built on it. Of course you and all women were forced into white privilege and never would have allowed for it yourselves otherwise.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=Blogstar]I wrote a post about divorce …splitting the family that got lost in the upload.

Want to get it out a little.

While I said good job on your post scaredy, Sometimes I think what you said is only true because or our stupidity.

Doing something different that standard family dynamics is so loaded with self fulfilling doom proficy because we get so entrenched in the current cultural norms. Kind of like people get entrenched in religion and there is no way they will see any other way. We put this in our kids because kids are basically made by the time they are 7.

I think the logistics of sharing kids from separate houses is painful enough to want to avoid it but I am not sure they can’t get used to having two houses pretty easily if we weren’t brainwashed and hadn’t done it to them.

Humans have had many social patterns for raising children over the year and I am pretty sure there will be vastly different ones from what we have in the future. Culture is G-d.

Plus we can blind ourselves that our marriage is better than a separation easier to do once we have culturally made it so the kids will suffer from a split.

This just stuff my enemy mind thinks of from time to time…not an argument.

By Kenny Loggins about divorce I think:
“I did for you and the boys and because love should teach you joy and not the imitation that your mommy and daddy tried to show you” I see a lot of imitation, loneliness, and as Brian likes to point out , mutual dependency built on confidence in the current system. Carenters argument is really an adaptation to mutual dependency established by marriage vows(promises), which she feels is scary. I am right there on the scary part. We wouldn’t have the argument without the dependency.

Maybe there are ways that there is less imitation and no big problems moving on if we change the predispostion to negativity about anything but a nuclear monogamous household and don’t teach our kids it.

Like you said we are wired differently than we think does what we are doing really respect that or are we respecting current family dynamic religion and happier if we do because we are stupid. I know I am can’t handle anything different either but admit it could be stupidity at play too.[/quote]
wel, yeah…

but im talking more about just living in the world the way it is…not the way it could be…

[scaredyclassic]

without this tyepe of dialectic civilization itself ceases to exist…

[NotCranky]

[quote=scaredyclassic][quote=Blogstar]I wrote a post about divorce …splitting the family that got lost in the upload.

Want to get it out a little.

While I said good job on your post scaredy, Sometimes I think what you said is only true because or our stupidity.

Doing something different that standard family dynamics is so loaded with self fulfilling doom proficy because we get so entrenched in the current cultural norms. Kind of like people get entrenched in religion and there is no way they will see any other way. We put this in our kids because kids are basically made by the time they are 7.

I think the logistics of sharing kids from separate houses is painful enough to want to avoid it but I am not sure they can’t get used to having two houses pretty easily if we weren’t brainwashed and hadn’t done it to them.

Humans have had many social patterns for raising children over the year and I am pretty sure there will be vastly different ones from what we have in the future. Culture is G-d.

Plus we can blind ourselves that our marriage is better than a separation easier to do once we have culturally made it so the kids will suffer from a split.

This just stuff my enemy mind thinks of from time to time…not an argument.

By Kenny Loggins about divorce I think:
“I did for you and the boys and because love should teach you joy and not the imitation that your mommy and daddy tried to show you” I see a lot of imitation, loneliness, and as Brian likes to point out , mutual dependency built on confidence in the current system. Carenters argument is really an adaptation to mutual dependency established by marriage vows(promises), which she feels is scary. I am right there on the scary part. We wouldn’t have the argument without the dependency.

Maybe there are ways that there is less imitation and no big problems moving on if we change the predispostion to negativity about anything but a nuclear monogamous household and don’t teach our kids it.

Like you said we are wired differently than we think does what we are doing really respect that or are we respecting current family dynamic religion and happier if we do because we are stupid. I know I am can’t handle anything different either but admit it could be stupidity at play too.[/quote]
wel, yeah…

but im talking more about just living in the world the way it is…not the way it could be…[/quote]

We probably can’t make the leap in a month or two maybe really smart people could like savants at this kind of stuff if there are any…kids maybe could with the right leadership.

Yikes , sorry about the missing commas, it’s ok to spell terribly but not miss so many commas.

[scaredyclassic]

i appreciate the lack of commas, i dont like to be told when to pause

[scaredyclassic]

im just a cnservative, in sickness and in health, death till we part kind of guy. although i kinda picture my wife kinda keeping my corpse around for a few days after to just kind of yell at…

[NotCranky]

[quote=scaredyclassic]without this tyepe of dialectic civilization itself ceases to exist…[/quote]
We are kind of posers at dialectics, though I can’t see that there is no value to civilization, Warren Farrell is the real deal.

[Author]

Posts