SilverDNA
-
Posts
391 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by SilverDNA
-
-
It seams I'm addicted, or should I say afflicted with Nexeusmania lately. (I addmit) i can't stand it any more....
***Ripping my shirt of. Shouting out loud***
I LIKE THE NEXUS
-
....may be we should think the other way around not to start with the person and build myth about of an empire, but simply trying to make the system work in the first place and the see witch kind of person would fit in the place.
This was made at the start of this debate and only because I've focused it on a personnel (more general view with children at the head) everybody seeks the best person. I did only point to an alternative way. So I fell sorry about that
:ohmy:
maybe try to start again on the point before I started my argument and resume the discussion there. At the end we see witch model of empire we could bring on and witch head of office should be suited best. (may be a poll worth).
Please think it over.
Take a break eat some chocolate rifles , armies of gummy bears, tanks of marzipan or drink some fluid to your liking, witch ever gets your brain working, so you might find a better solution to the main problem, HOW not WHO could this empire work.
until then I wish all a lot of fun finding new questions. :biggrin:
-
The ranting in my country about that we'll win that cup drives me of soccer. (I'm not that kind of guy)
My only hope is that all in all it will be a peaceful world championship and not like the Olympic summer games of 1972.
So I say that best will win. (regardless of country)
-
It's a theoretical answer to a hypothetical problem how the "hypothetical empire" could work in the here and now. And my hypothetical solution strongly relays on tricking an innocent child to give a simplified answer to the questions politicians argue on and on because in the innocent answer there is more often than not a truthful and simple solution. Look into the Innocent eyes of a child and the truth will hit you like a hammer back. (And the same goes for the answers of a child.) In my thought model there are up to 365 emperors a year (regardless of sex, nationality and social status. Those things that divide us, to be only human.) and a multiplication of up to 365 times the heads of the UN, but economical it is still less than the upkeep of the reality we have. It is a simple base thought model witch I provided for further development.
(A shrewed mind could even say, that we're modding us an an empire up here.) :laugh:
And in thinking out of the usual box I came up with a possible (and I thought acceptable) solution witch I tried to develop further to that what I had in mind.
I want to express that I greatly respect that you have another opinion/solution in your mind. Any critics to my thought model, helping me to improve it. I believe the thought model could be working. Thank you for your opinion.
-
I like to play.... I don't answer this...why. :tongue:
I like good music for the right mood I'm in.
I like to cook and eat. Who doesn't like a good meal after it is cooked by oneself.
I like to read good and interesting things everywhere I find them.
I like a good (sometimes dirty) joke. Why? A smile may win a day but a hearty laughter may win a new friend.
-
If I could have the physical aspects of my late twenties but retain the wisdom of my current age, that would work for me.
I think that is basically a good answer for me too, but I would like to have the physical aspects of my early twenties back. (It seems to me that my body grew faster old, than his. Please apply for me the old 2nd edition AD&D rules of aging for me and subtract seven to eight years of the base value. It would fit for my body sadly)
-
<P>
First I only want to say that only picked up an 'old idea' and and 'old problem' the only thing I deserve for the post above is that I did a little work and posted one good comment at the right spot and as it seems to me with the right words because of the positive reactions.
</P><P>I have bad news in rethinking about the child emperor and senate and good news.
</P><P>Bad news first:
It seem to me that the discussion went into the wrong direction, when reading the following posts of my post about a child as emperor. And the only one to blame is my self, because I did not drive the argument fully in the direction I wanted. In reading carefully the following posts I've found out that the empire it self was more important in this discussion than the life of a single child. And this was not my intention and now I want to repair the damage I have done and apologize to my following posters for that and clarify the original intention to it's full intent. The original Idea is to bring a child to power of an world empire, but without harming the child in any means. There's my failure. If a child is emperor and rules till childhood is ended, then what happens to the former child emperor after his/her reign? Well I thought of that and problems of child stars came up my mind. What about the parents, how should they be treated? Can a child with this responsibility and former power, life on normally after the reign? No I think. It is nearly impossible in that way.
</P><P>Now there is the good news:
In rethinking I came up with a possible solution for that problem and still have a child emperor and a childhood senate. (But this was tricky and so is the solution all in all. No, it is not a completely new solution, it is something that was overlooked by me at first as well I admit.) YES WE CAN have an child emperor and a child senate with out harming the children in any social and psychological way I can imagine. For a Day! And is happening in a lot of countries around the world was well as in the UN once in a year. Everybody should see the drawback now. And I found out another interesting solution for this problem too. Can we make elections every day a year? I think there we would be hard pressed, but a supercomputer could. The system is simple the Supercomputer is watched by more than one programmer (three or more) and officials (at least three), all from different countries. Every day and the whole personnel changes completely. The computer election for tomorrow the next emperor by first determining the country and the then a child at an age of at least 3 or 4 in that country with the whole address where he/she lives. The childhood senate is elected the same way but not by the same supercomputer, but by computers in every country thous the country has an Representative in the senate. The emperor would be responsible to global decisions, the senate for local country related decisions. Now there comes the best part of it. A executive from the same country as the child (well studied in child sociology and he/she should have a staff at his/her proposal) is given the responsibility to go to every child thous elected with a decision list the on tomorrow day. On that day the Parents are Informed that the child has been elected but not the child (no pressure for the child). The child should be questioned in a proper, simple way for a child (playfully I would think best but not forced to make decisions.) The child should work in his speed and liking with the executive still unknowing what is going on. Answered questions/decisions are removed from the list for the next day. A decision from one senate can be only overruled by the decision of the emperor but a fair number of senate members can overrule the emperor. I Know that the names and address of the children must be kept secret from public to protect them. Yes I know that this would be a shadow empire, but I think a fairer one than this (ah... let''s call it) 'dung' we have all around the world now.
this time I hope that I'm failure free and again helpful in that matter.
SilverDNA
</P>
-
...well I've found an acceptable solution for who should be an emperor to that great empire. ( This solution would even more working in on the UN or a democratic government in my opinion, but it has been happed before and if such an empire would exist it would happen sooner or later if the old rules of kingship would be applied.) But as I came to the solution I remembered that someone (in my country) had the same Idea about 24 years ago and made a really good song (still popular) about it. And instead of giving you reasons in the normal formal way, I translated the song text into English as best as I could. In my opinion the reasons in that song are better than I could describe them but see for yourselves.
Original title in German:
Kinder an die Macht - Herbert Grönemeyer
(1986)
Translated into English:
Children to the power - Herbert Grönemeyer
(1986)
(Song text)
The armies of gummy bears
The tanks of marzipan
Wars are eaten
Simple Plan
Childlike genius
There is no good, there are no evil
There is no black, there is no white
There are missing teeth
Instead of suppressing
There's instead strawberry ice cream for lifetime
Always good for a surprise
Give the command to the children
They do not calculate what they do
The world belongs in the hands of children
An end to the melancholy
We will laughed to ground and land
Children to the power
They are the true Anarchists
Love the chaos, clear up
know no rights, know no obligations
Undiffracted force, at plenty
Impetuous pride
Give the command to the children
They do not calculate what they do
The world belongs in the hands of children
An end to the melancholy
We will laughed to ground and land
Children to the power
my solution = a child as emperor and a senate of children for the empire and I think no one has something against children. They are the future so they should rule to live in it.
If you are interested in listening to the song simply copy the original title into the youtube search line.
(and there is a newer version out there from "Christina Stürmer - Kinder an die Macht" if you like acoustic guitars more than electric..)
Hopefully helpful as always
SilverDNA
-
Since the time the end of my back was an open source project for nurses and doctors and thous I know both methods of cleaning holes in my body. I prefer the doctor in front of me, rather than at my back (...and a knife between his/her legs, just in case...). (the dentist is the one I choose)
let me think of one....
You may be know that old Bing Crosby song "Swinging on a Star" (I know Bruce Willis & Danny Aiello did this song too in the movie Hudson Hawk)
Witch animal (a Mule, a Pig, a Fish or the Monkeys) of that song would you specify, if you had to describe your own personality?
-
I want to compare notes on that from the other side of the Atlantic, from my country and differences of democratic systems.
There are three main groups of nonvoters in my country primary.
1. 35% to 40% state that they are displeased with the 5 greatest political parties and the way the elections are used only for nodding those politicians to power. the difference from your country is that the US is having a direct democratic system in my country it is a representative democratic system. The nonvoters primary think it would be a good idea to change to a direct democratic system. (Some would say... well. the grass over the Atlantic always seems greener than it is here.)
2. 25% to 30% State that they don't vote because they're not interested in politics or/and have non idea who's in what political party and even are unable to distinguish a soccer player from a politician. ( I think that the majority of Nonvoters in the US. )
3. 5% to 20% (very Variable) State the don't vote because of the weather (be it either good or bad). (I think G. K. Chesterton wrote something similar in some of his Farther Brown Stories about the collection on Sunday in church.)
This last opinion makes me fell either :sick: or :mad: or :wallbash: or all a the same time.
there also 3 main groups of voters opposing them. Wanna know what they say?
1. 30% to 35% say they vote always the same political party, because they have always supported that political party. But when ask about the current campaign promises of that particular political party only 30% to 40 % could give at least one campaign promises back as an answer. The of the remaining others replied about 20% that they like the looks of a particular prominent politician of that party.
2. 10% to 20% say they go voting because the don't want to see the wrong parity elected by not going to an election. Additional a lot of them they complain they can only chose between the minor evil and the devil. (it's related back to the Buridan's ass paradox.)
3. 20% to 30% say that they vote a particular political party because their parents voted the same. So they say tradition as motive to vote some political party. (Hereditary of political parties from generation to generation? No way I say!)
Again I fell the same as above.
"Policy, which is the sanctuary, where crimes that would otherwise be prison or death, the inevitable result, where betrayals that called otherwise fiery indignation, which lies, drowned but in general derision, to be preserved not only for this otherwise natural consequences , but usually where all these crimes, betrayals and lies as quite natural, if not praiseworthy confirmations of human nature are viewed."
Arthur Schnitzler (used Google translator)
-The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.- (I don't know who said that because too many claimed that sentence for themselves.) In a democratic system the first thing you loose, if you aren't vigilant enough, is the truth, then next the democratic system it self. You lose the overview by to many opinions in a democratic system witch endangers the truth. (in reminisce of reading about Friedrich Nietzsche's "the ugliest man" in "Thus Spoke Zarathustra")
...as all ways the 'trying to be helpful' SilverDNA of your neighborhood.
-
IF my life is on stake on that question then read on, else look a little below that text. IF dangling from a cliff and in danger of falling down I would prefer in that situation a well bearded dwarf to 'hang on' to.... :biggrin: (now your imagine me hanging on a beard of a dwarf above a cliff) :laugh:
Personally I would prefer the goatee to hide away my ugly male face. :ninja:
Now a hard question. Chose carefully.
Justice or Freedom?
-
Im someone who is very cynical of politics, especialy democracy. I grew up in australia and the problem here isnt "lack of liberty" its too much liberty. The real issue is that here democracy has simply become a farce, the two party system no longer have the interests of the people at heart, they never come up with policy that advances the country or even seem to recognise the impending national disasters such as housing superinflation increasingly massive divides between rich and poor, and worst of all, the fact that indigenous australians have about half the life expectancy of whites and live in total squalor. All the government here does is fight with the opposition, its been well over a year since any major policy got put forward or let alone got passed. its pathetic, the whole idea of a government is to govern and administrate, yet all they do is fight eachother while the rest of the country goes to hell, this for me iis why I actualy preffer dictators and hardliners in charge-atleast they'll actualy take action
I agree with you, because I see the same things in my country. I only want to add my experiences, opinions and details to it a little further. In my country I see the weak minorities in the decline of support on various strong lobbyists fractions who work against even smaller minorities. A side result is, as an example, Affirmative actions are abused to oppress these smaller minorities not to be seen by all three arms of government, witch results in a hidden a violation against the most important laws of the constitutional laws in my country. If someone belongs to that smaller minority and and speak out what is wrong then it is very simple to say that this person is simply nuts because those Affirmative actions against smaller minorities are rightful and such abuse in flavor of the mightier lobbing fraction is simply thought of as an Impossible and against the democracy because the political fractions are depending on the lobbyists more strongly than on the small man who votes. A democratic government and society are judged by the way they treat the weakest parts of a society. In this case I think it is infinitely injustice to barre the weakest parts of a society out of the legal system.
I am not in favour of abolishing the Electoral College because like Jefferson I think that would replace the tyranny of the few with the tyranny of the many.
For any system to work it requires a sense of 'civitas' by it's citizens, those that don't vote have only themselves to blame if the outcome is not to their satisfaction. It's not very much of an effort to go to a polling station and cast your ballot, many men have died to preserve that option.
I don't agree fully with your opinions in that, and I want to clarify what I, in my opinion, see in them as right and wrong. (Maybe we could be even both right/wrong as there might be another opinion to this.) I'm simply not fully satisfied with your explanation.
First to the Jefferson quote. I personalty think he was half right but at the same time half wrong with this quote. Hypothetical, if we see the government in a democracy and the people as opposing forces there must be a balance of power. If the balance is in flavor of one side the other side will be oppressed. Now I'm fully aware that it is nearly impossible to archive this, but in my opinion, it is worth our greatest efforts to try as best as we can to get even near that goal as possible. I think that is an important part of doing democracy.
I can do half a circle to express my opinion (based on my experiences and voting lawsuit in my country) on your 'civitas' opinion. As long as it is not seen in a democratic country that it is a way to express that a person is displeased with the lawsuit of the voting procedure and makes use of his 'veto' right, as well with the way the political parties are making promise that can't be kept due to the actual and future situation that can be seen circumstances a state is in. (Playing with hopes and fears in politics to catch votes isn't right ether, I think. Simple statement, basically translated in my country is the following "You voted for that party in the government? So you have no right to criticize it now!" the meaning behind it is simple the voter gave them permission to do that what they're now doing, even if it is against the per-election statements of that government party.) in my opinion every opinion (vote) on an election has to be counted in, not bordered out.)
A solution might be that the percentage of people that have given a vote in an election is the percentage of payment a politician receives, brought thus to an official office by an election. (I would like to see that because it would turn political parties away from lobbing and short sighted client politic decisions that produce financial damage and higher taxes than necessary in the end. Politicians would more be interested in working for the people as for the lobbyists.) ...or very simplified, "Every single vote (even a not given one) is seen or felt by the elected politicians and parties." How else you can make some one who doesn't vote, change his/her opinion on that? (So if someone has a better Idea that includes these people who aren't voting then I'm listening and interested to read them.
And please remember the victims of tyrannic injustice as well...
Personally, it all, on democratic systems, comes down on to that quote from Cicero for me:
"jus civile neque inflecti gratia, neque perfringi potentia, neque adulterari pecunia debet"
"the law ought neither to be warped by favor, nor shattered by power, nor corrupted by money."
and the People in an democratic state have not only the right to fight this but an obligation to force a state to a democracy justice system and to equality of individuals. That's doing democracy! People who not just receive their rights but who fight every day for them in some kind of 'civil war' without a political party at there backs. Gandhi, Galileo, Martin Luther King jr. and Nelson Mandela could be generally good role models of that.
Sorry English is not my primary language, so please, forgive me gently :biggrin: (and plenty, hopefully :blush: ) about mistakes in the use of the language and miss interpretations. (I don't like mistakes, they make me doing things like this -> :wallbash: ...and I don't do this for the personal fun of any one.)
...as always I hope I could help in some way.
-
I would like to have tree wishes:
"I'll take two coke and chips!"
Or I rather would like to have some one who massages my aching back, makes my bed warm, and kisses me softly on my cheek.
And I would need it all tonight, really.
I like a lot of things, but after a hard day I feel like a dead man walking.
So I would like to have a good sleep and some nice dreams and I'm wishing all of you the same.
-
-
We don't need any reason to exist, we exist, that's all, and we have to do with that.
Right you are!
Let me be Dundee!
To debate the individual meaning of existing leads to chaos, because every individual has it's own view of existence. It's like debating the views of life different animals have. Viewing the life of a dog is different from that of a cat or a mouse. Let us please remind our self's that the question is : "Why do WE exist?"
SilverDNA
(to the quote) That is a practical approach, still doesn't prevent philosophers from ever trying to understand the life's purpose.
I don't understand why the debate leads to chaos, should be noted, again, it is not about particular vivence. It's not about particular motivations. The question is broader, actually it should not even be restricted to the human existence although that one is, comprehensibly, our first concern.
The monist approach is the extremist one, it is the reason and cause of so many abuses and bigotry.
Absolutes are not possibles in our universe, there is no place for absolute chaos or absolute order in it.
These two are one the fundamental formant dualities, they form one the main existence's intervals. Chaos is responsible for the dynamics and order for the form. If it would be possible ever, achieving one these two is negating life itself.
There is not such thing as dumb answer or dumb question in the end. These are stages mankind as a whole and individuals in particular passes. Newer answers not always are better than older ones.
All the while man specializes he narrows the vision too. Be him not aware of it and soon he will believe his limited portion as the whole that exist.
No greater example I know of chaos and order sharing than life itself. It's the most marvelous thing in the entire universe. Nothing comes near it in complexity, life is too many times more complex than the universe itself. It may not have a purpose but certainly carries a reason in itself. Will we ever know that reason? I don't know but certainly it'll not prevent us from trying.
PS: "The absolute is relative and the relative is absolute" to understand this statement none the two can be taken alone, they themselves are not possible else together in the form of the interval where things exist. An imaginative reader will notice the similarities in "relative similar to chaos" and "absolute similar to order"; that similarity carries out in math to zero and infinite too.
And whoever does not want to die of thirst among men must learn to drink out of all cups; and whoever would stay clean among men must know how to wash even with dirty water. And thus I often comforted myself, "Well then, old heart! One misfortune failed you; enjoy this as your good fortune."
Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Part II, Chapter 43, On Human Prudence
Friedrich Nietzsche
and another
The animals are much more content with mere existence than we are; the plants are wholly so; and man is so according to how dull and insensitive he is. The animal's life consequently contains less suffering but also less pleasure than the human's, the direct reason being that on the one hand it is free from care and anxiety and the torments that attend them, but on the other is without hope and therefore has no share in that anticipation of a happy future which, together with the enchanting products of the imagination which accompany it, is the source of most of our greatest joys and pleasures. The animal lacks both anxiety and hope because its consciousness is restricted to what is clearly evident and thus to the present moment: the animal is the present incarnate.
Vol. 2 "On the Suffering of the World" / Essays and Aphorisms
Arthur Schopenhauer
You see not much is needed to prove that the course of arguments CAN change but the known facts can not be changed unless you only rely on only philosophic views not on any other sciences. Then you must answer all that can happen between birth and death clearly and exactly. it would blow the frame (The question Why?) from the picture, because you want to view every pixel that 's there and debate and reason every pixel thats there. If you want to do it philosophical there is a very fat chance to come up to religion. I think you are long enough here in the forum to accept the rule that debates about religion are forbidden. So the only reasonable course of debate can be science related philosophy on this question. So I've simplified the facts to the very roots of the problem. (Why make it easy, if you can complicate it?) If you like we can open a new debate about the greatest Philosophers and their achievements, like that one on the military commanders and strategists. (I think it would be fun, if we keep to the rules.)
SilverDNA
And please remember, truth is the not presence of lies, witch would bring you in a paradox argumentation about order and chaos.
-
<BR><BR><BR>Your youth sounds like paradise compared to mine. (Ok, where can I sign to get in?)<BR><BR>I've would like to express more on that but I feel to much anger rising in myself about what's happening here in that monkey fun house of country I live in and I would rather not talk about it for the truth, interdisciplinary sciences and the human rights are on my side of the bill I could write, if writs would be not ignored or viewed as, let's say dangerous, in that fun house of country. Remember what what they did to Galileo Galilei, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr. and Nelson Mandela I think, I would face similar fates as they did. (I would like to join that exclusive club, but alas I see no chance of success for I'm not a hero only if threatened there I see a slight chance to archive something against anything.<BR><BR>The future as I see it can be seen in the G. Orwell quote below. <BR><BR><BR>The world works on a scale. A scale with a tipping point. Here's a really simple example:<BR><BR>When you were in school, there were kids who were fast. There were kids who were mediocre. There were kids who were slow. Finally, there were kids who were crippled. It was fun to mock the two middle groups and admire the first group. But the last group was untouchable. The lines are drawn in different places for everyone. Just like with everything else.<BR><BR>Capitalism-Socialism-Communism:<BR><BR>Capitalism is one end, Communism the other. Socialism is the midpoint. Eastern Europe moved so far to Communism on the scale that it tipped the scales and ended up at the extreme end of the other side do to a total collapse.<BR><BR>The world, at one time, was not exactly "child friendly." I mean in medieval times and such. At some point the filth got so terrible that no one enjoyed it, and there was a reformation of society. It got cleaner. It got dirty again, kept moving that way and then....... Clean again. People can only be moved a few inches at a time, and by the time they've realized they've gone to far something dramatic has to happen.<BR><BR>Modern example: National debt (US). National debt was.... big. Bush comes along. National debt gets bigger. Obama comes along. Debt gets bigger. This past November (election season) everyone was elected on a "fiscally conservative" platform (all at the state level). What do you think will happen this November? We're at the middle of a tipping point right now..... I really wanna see what happens.<BR><BR>Everything shifts in a natural pattern, largely do to a lack of understanding of where this sort of creeping along slowly and blindly leads. That's the problem. No one looks to history and goes, "Yeah, we F'ed up, and that's sorta the road we're going down now. We should stop that." Most people just go, "Way to F it up, people of the past. We're doing the same thing, but guess what? We're smarter than you! I mean, you're practically Neanderthals! Go back to the Ice Age, stupid 20th century american public."<BR><BR>This also has to do with a severe homogenization of our society. Everyone wants to be different, which they're all doing the same way...... So in reality they're all just following each other around pretending that the majority can somehow be made up of rebels. And being a rebel makes them cool, so they'll be like that guy, who's like the other guy. And by the way, I'll blow you back to the stone age, if you won't be like me.<BR> -
We don't need any reason to exist, we exist, that's all, and we have to do with that.
Right you are!
Let me be Dundee!
To debate the individual meaning of existing leads to chaos, because every individual has it's own view of existence. It's like debating the views of life different animals have. Viewing the life of a dog is different from that of a cat or a mouse. Let us please remind our self's that the question is : "Why do WE exist?"
SilverDNA
-
Looks can be deceptively. No matter how much newest designer clothing a person wears and shows off the newest technologies on market are deceptive to the people of what the rally are. It doesn't matter the true soul and heart shine through that, and at least after 5 minutes of talking to such persons you know what they are. Some of them think on wealth and status and regard others that are not in their mind acceptable like a puddle peed on their designer shoes. I like that look on their faces if it comes up what they really are. And sometimes I feel sorry for those persons for the have to learn that money cannot buy true and honest friends. If they are in trouble the true friend will not show them their back and money can't buy that. In compensating the lack of a true own identity they've chosen the path of self deception. Horribili dictu... visu...
SilverDNA
-
I have done a brief census of the candidates for The Greatest Military Commander.
CURRENT STRATEGIC CANDIDATES
Sun Tsu
Leonidas of Sparta
Epaminondas of Thebes
Alexander the Great
Hannibal Barca
Publius Scipio Africanus
Gnaeus Pompey Magnus
Surena of Parthia
Gaius Juluis Caesar
Saladin
Genghis Khan
Napoleon Bonaparte
Adolf Hitler
CURRENT TACTICAL CANDIDATES
Achilles - (Champion)
Lord Cochrane -(Admiral)
Robert E Lee - (General)
Erwin Romel - (Field Marshall)
Von Paulus - (Field Marshal)
Vasiliy Cuikov - (Field Marshal)
Nguyen Giap - (General)
EDIT: If anyone feels that someone has been left out, post or pm and I'll add them to the list. In a about a week I'll set up a poll and we will see if anyone was convinced by an other's dissertation.
Great list,almost leaves no room to add anyone else,and includes many of my personal favorites,great job. :thumbsup:
I will add here a few more names,who fits my taste,maybe they will find their place in the dream-team,though,as I've said,the candidates list is already great.
General Mikhail Ilarionovich Kutuzov of Russian Empire-the guy who made Napoleon to cry(several times)
Tzar(Emperor) Dushan of Serbia-with him,Serbia reached it peak in every way,and he was known as the most powerful leader in his time,in the whole Europe.
Suleiman The Magnificent,Ottoman Sultan-we forgot this guy,where to start and where to finish with his accomplishments..
Vojvoda Zivojin Misic 5 wars in less then 20 years,more then 40 battles,neither one loss,no mistake with him http://en.wikipedia....Mi%C5%A1i%C4%87
Carlos or Charles I of Spain-again,a brilliant man,his biography should be a school text book as a stand alone.
Field Marshal William Slim of the British army-a legend
General Winfield Scott of US Army-perfecto-brillian military record,dedication,discipline,extrenmely long service,mexican campaign,several book publishings on tactics and translations.Grandad rocked.
I look forward to see the pole,friend,good subject and interesting views by various people seen. :thumbsup:
Moranda
I think in the CURRENT STRATEGIC CANDIDATES category there is some one overlooked / missing I want to add because of his first views of military sociology and what can bring down a great commander in person. His views were very popular in in the 30's the the last century.
His name: Yamamoto Tsunetomo (Hagakure, The Book of the Samurai)
SilverDNA
-
There's a simple truth to the question: "Why do we exist?"
Fact:
Everything that is born has do die. Unless someone proves that this simple fact is wrong by science. Death is the end of all life even to a planet, a sun or the universe.
The philosophical conclusion:
So the purpose of life is defined by death. What a person makes between birth and the grave is what defines a person. Especially the experiences and the wisdom and the knowledge made can define what a person wants to be and where the person on his own conquest in life stands. A person can chose a path and change during the experiences of that path, in the middle for the person sees, that the outcome might not be the right way for that person to achieve the desired outcome. So the answer to the purpose in life lies in the decisions we make until death.
I remember that old Monty Python Song "Always look on the bright side of life" aside from the unforgettable tune the text holds some truth to it. :whistling:
:laugh:
SilverDNA
-
Because humans, by nature are selfish, greedy, lustful, and violent. It is only as a requirement of living within society, or absolute devotion to philosophies which are based on pacifism or renunciation that some of these impulses are controlled. And likewise, the degree to which these things are controlled, mediated, or directed is dictated by that society and/or the philosophies that the person is a part of.
To a normal person, cannibalism is an evil, unthinkable act, but to someone who lives in a culture that promotes cannibalism, it's a sacred and important event.
We don't have peace because nobody can agree specifically to what is and is not allowed to occur in the world, and even in the deciding of what is and is not allowed, personal politics or greedy motivations usually get in the way, which leads to laws that just don't work, or aren't acceptable/enforceable.
I agree with you and want to add this as a little summary.
"When all your judgements are based on your own wisdom, you tend towards selfishness and fail by straying from the right path. "
Yamamoto Tsunetomo
SilverDNA
-
I do believe that aliens had a role in human civilization.
How you ask?
:biggrin: just use your imagination! :biggrin:
It was mentioned here before so i'm sorry that i've lost track on the 10 pages of text. So please forgive me that.
From the ages of the caves until now they kept us going. In mythology there all kind of gods, goddesses and supernatural beings. Today there a all kinds of horror, fantasy and science fiction books movies and tv-shows (they have a market)
Humans are primal social. They want to believe that they are not the only sentient beings in the universe. They don't want to be alone. The role of aliens is important to our civilization even if we don't meet aliens till now. Some of us need the time of thinking of alien stories to make a mental vacation because life can be cruel to us and then we come back from our vacations to find a solutions to our problems. Imagine an alien race that is in all kinds human like with the exception that they have no imagination and fantasy and are fixed to reality and then imagine the problems that civilization would have. They have been a vehicle of our imaginations for a long time now. All those stories have an importance as a vehicle to our civilization that would made some science not possible. In some cases there has been a connection to those myths and stories. Some examples i know of.
Isaac Asimov's 3 robot laws are accepted by modern robotics
In the Movie 2001 the discovery made a special maneuver that was copied by the NASA with a probe years later.
Scientists are learning from those stories and Fiction writers relay on science and aliens are the device to make in some cases that acceptable to the broad mass. I think stories of aliens have made some cultural enrichment to us and can transport a wide array of sciences, ideas and theories.
I think that is acceptable to say that aliens have some role in our civilization. :thumbsup:
-
These day there is some question that bugging me that is maybe related to this.
Have we to many diversions that help us to not see people suffering, or do we want to see people suffering as a diversion, or both?
I think that there is some answers to sensibilities in that question.
But I can't answer it fairly (Maybe only for the moment.) and it makes me mad about myself. Not to see clearly a way through the answer.
I don't know if it is really worth a threat her.
What I see is that since the caves people hurt each other and nothing has really changed to a that. We have technology, sports, politics, movies etc. and that all and if a person is hurt we can walk away to that diversions and leave them in their pain. For a lot of people it is that easy and there are other who want to hurt someone who is suffering openly then even more just because the have the might to it and a reason for them to justify it for them selfs. That's how I come down to the question above. But I know and I fear the the next question and that why I'm bugging myself with all of that. I'm a person who makes people suffer like that or I'm a person who walks away from a person who is suffering, or worse both?
-
I was reading something the other day and came upon the question of "Should I like more things than I hate?"
I thought about this for a second, and realized that i could think of more things that irked me, or that I hated a lot more easily as opposed to things i like.
Same go for you or, am I just pessimistic?
Of course im sure i do but things that i hate come to mind first.
About those hateful things that come to mind...
I've read these days that scientists had proven that the limbic system stimulates strong chemical reactions if you experience traumatic situations. The effect is like writing it with a chisel on a stone in the mind and that's why negative emotions/situations/ memories come up to mind more easily than positive ones.
Hopefully that this is helpful.
SilverDNA
This or That?
in Off-Topic
Posted
Philosophical/chemical, I see no empty glass, because the glass itself is always full with air (oops..nearly typed gas) :sick:
...unless you fill it H²O to one half it is half full of water and half full of air. :wink:
@Netwit2008 about the song
"A fish is animal that swims in a brook,
he can't write his name or read a book,
to fool the people is his only thought,
and though he's slippery he still gets caught.
and if that the sort of life you wish
you may grow up to be a fish."
:whistling:
Question or answer?