|
|
|
|
Timmy, you missed my point. You're still digging the hole.
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So many trees. I wonder where the wood can be.
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A reply does not necessarily have to concede an argument or respond directly to the parent, if a valid point is nonetheless made. You might see NW's post as tangential, but I found it interesting.
Perhaps if you think that other people cannot see the wood for the trees it is because you cannot yourself see the world from their point of view?
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As anyone that writes and posts stories can attest, there are always those persons who want to correspond with you to point out your grammatical, spelling and sentence structure errors. These are the truly pedantic. And they have a terrible time visualizing the forest because all those damn trees are in the way. This gave me a desire to do a little research into the psyche of such folks. The following is from the Wikipedia and I wonder if it could describe some of what I see in this particular thread?
************************
Pedantry can also be an indication of certain developmental disorders. In particular those with Asperger Syndrome, or Higher Functioning Autism, often have behavior characterized by pedantic speech.[1] Those with Asperger's tend to obsess over the minutiae of subjects, and are prone to giving long detailed expositions, and the related corrections, and may gravitate to careers in academia or science where such obsessive attention to detail is often rewarded.
Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder is also in part characterized by a form of pedantry that is overly concerned with the correct following of rules, procedures and practices.[2] Sometimes the rules that OCPD sufferers obsessively follow are of their own devising, or are corruptions or re-interpretations of the letter of actual rules.
:-/
Youth crisis hot-line 866-488-7386, 24 hr (U.S.A.)
There are people who want to help you cope with being you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jedediah
|
 |
Likes it here |
Location: Made in NZ
Registered: March 2006
Messages: 170
|
|
|
Umm. . .Shouldn’t that be – “Anyone WHO writes and posts”.. ? ;-D
(sorry)
E Te Atua tukuna mai ki au te Mauri tauki te tango i nga mea
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think there is anything the matter with pedantry if done in a tongue-in-cheek way. There are several of us here for whom a misplaced apostrophe is a little like a fingernail scraping a blackboard. It would, however, be impolite to point it out except to people that one knows will not be offended, so one does not. This is standard politeness.
There is nothing wrong with either Asperger's Syndrome or obsessive-compulsive traits. They are simply a certain way of thinking, and do not invalidate the requirement for ordinary social protocol, only potentially make it more difficult. Neither excuses socially unacceptable behaviour.
I guess I was wondering, Paul, what difference it would make if indeed some people here could be diagnosed with Asperger's or OCPD?
David
[Updated on: Mon, 07 May 2007 18:31] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As you've already stated, Timmy, you didn't actually see the boy stealing the can of drink. You did notice him having the can of drink when he went out, but are you absolutely sure that he didn't have it the first time you saw him? Do you remember what sort of drink it was? Coke? Pepsi?
If you had reported this incident, you would only be able to report what you assumed had taken place, but you couldn't be absolutely sure, could you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would simply demonstrate, Deeej, that there is a potential for some threads to be unending - as those folks would not be prone to giving in to another's viewpoint. Eventually you are arguing for the sake of arguing. Obsessive compulsive behaviours can be overcome by tenacious application of self control. It is simply a matter of knowing when enough is enough and controlling that impulse to obsess.
~Hugs
Youth crisis hot-line 866-488-7386, 24 hr (U.S.A.)
There are people who want to help you cope with being you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nigel wrote:
> So many trees. I wonder where the wood can be.
It's hardly the first time here that I've that observation made about me - and, actually, the time has come to give that particularly meaningless cliche a decent funeral. I'll start a new thread for the purpose ...
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In fairness, many of those who have Aspergers-like traits can often be more concerned about getting to a truth than defending a position.
There may be those who feel that this does not apply to me - self-honesty compels me to admit that it does in some cases and not in others!
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13800
|
|
|
Just the aluminium base of a drinks can. That was all I saw.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, this relies on several things:
i. that you are correct in your interpretation of the possible effects of a syndrome such as Asperger's
ii. that those people you see as potentially having these traits actually do have them, diagnosed as such or otherwise
iii. that they would be exhibited in such a way as to lead to endless, circular arguments
I have a genuine, psychiatric tentative diagnosis of Asperger's, and have also had OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder) in the past -- although that is not quite the same as OCPD. I do tend to discard this diagnosis as it isn't useful to me most of the time, but I bear it in mind from time to time.
My personal desire is, as NW says, to establish the truth, or if that is not an option, at least to understand the other person's justification in taking an opposing position. I find it very hard to do the second if it is based on false logic. On the other hand, if the position makes sense to me but I do not happen to agree with it then I have no problem. (A person who believes in the absolute veracity of the Bible I simply cannot comprehend, but a person who has a personal belief that does not interfere with science I do not mind at all.)
According to this, if two intelligent people with Asperger's and opposing positions were to have a conversation, at first it might seem very polarised, but (provided that each was in the right state of mind to engage in debate), after a bit of discourse it is likely that each would concede a few points of fact, hopefully eventually leading to a compromise or at least a detailed examination of where the opinions differ. This is totally different from an unending circular argument, which, in fact, drives me to distraction.
I have no way of knowing if I am representative of people with Asperger's syndrome (and I am sure that, even if I am, I am only very very mildly autistic) but, even to enhance my particular traits a hundredfold, I do not see them leading to the behaviour you seem to be suggesting some of us (all of us? or only one of us?) are exhibiting.
Unless you're doing a clinical study, or are a particular patient's doctor, ascribing diagnoses where none is requested or required is at best irrelevant, at worst offensive.
Also, you say:
>Obsessive compulsive behaviours can be overcome by tenacious application of self control. It is simply a matter of knowing when enough is enough and controlling that impulse to obsess.
What is your authority for this statement? Are you a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist? People are driven to mental breakdown by obsessive compulsive disorders (as was I, almost). You think that those people can "simply" say to themselves, "enough is enough" and it all goes away? In my case, it did a great deal more harm than good. Very rarely is there a "one size fits all" solution in psychology: the human brain is a lot more complicated than you seem to think it is.
David
[Updated on: Tue, 08 May 2007 00:09] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NW wrote:
>It's hardly the first time here that I've that observation made about me<
It's interesting that others have independently made this observation. It is not a valid argument to dismiss a well known saying as a meaningless cliché **period** That is misuse of self-assumed authoritary.
Hugs
Nigel
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deeej wrote:
>What is your authority for this statement? Are you a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist?<
If this argument were taken to its logical conclusion, people would not be permitted to give an opinion on anything unless they had an officially recognised qualification in the subject of their opinion.
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timmy, I have not taken a position on the responsibility of reporting a (perceived) crime. Point one is that stealing remains stealing under whatever guise and point two is that the argument in this thread has been reduced the the level of the ridiculous in order to justify a position.
Whether a crime is reported or not is at the discretion and conscience of the individual.
Btw, I believe that in English law 'shoplifting' has not been committed until the goods are taken off the premises, but I'm ready to be corrected on that point.
Hugs
N
[Updated on: Tue, 08 May 2007 07:47]
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For a person who claims that other people habitually miss his point, that's a remarkably dense statement.
I said nothing about being "permitted" to do anything. It is rarely a good idea, without medical or specialist knowledge, to start diagnosing other people with medical or psychological conditions. That is personal, and impolite. It is even more impolite to start dispensing what appears to be advice without it having been asked for, especially if it is naive advice.
More generally, I certainly do think that people are well-advised to avoid making provocative statements, where they are not backed up by reliable sources, in case they offend other people. This does not prevent us from discussing anything here, only requires the use of tact.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nigel wrote:
> It's interesting that others have independently made this observation. It is not a valid argument to dismiss a well known saying as a meaningless cliché **period** That is misuse of self-assumed authoritary.
>
Nigel, I really think that you must be trying very hard indeed to miss the point of my posts!
Firstly, I made it rather clear that I was NOT dismissing a "well known saying as a meaningless cliché **period**", but that I felt it more appropriate to start a new thread for the discussion of why I was dismissing the well-known saying. (Indeed, I took the trouble to write the "Standing up for the trees ... " post in draft, before I posted to this thread, so that I could post it almost immediately after saying that I was intending to do so).
Secondly, The thrust of my posts on this and other topics has repeatedly been the need for all of us to be aware of the limitations of generalisations and approximations, and assuming that a view of the collective interest is of any use in dealing with the individual.That is why I find the "wood, trees" thing so meaningless! And, of course, it's contradicted by several other cliches ... "take care of the pence and the pounds will take care of themselves", and "all generalizations are meaningless, even this one", for example.
Thirdly - and importantly - I find your comment "It is not a valid argument to dismiss a well known saying as a meaningless cliché **period** That is misuse of self-assumed authoritary." to be patronising and inappropriate.
Do you have reasons for these assertions that you would care to share, or are they just "ex cathedra" pronouncements - on "self-assumed authority"?
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deeej, I think you put it very well.
It's an unfortunate fact that certain groups have often been treated in very well-meaning but inappropriate ways. I think it means that there is a particular need to consider rather carefully the admonition to "use care and charity when you discuss here" when such topics crop up - many of us may have mental, emotional, physical, or perceptual "conditions" which we have not so far felt able to (or the need to) share on in this place.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13800
|
|
|
There are times when things need to be reduced to the absurd in order to allow people to see that positions need to be movable and proportionate.
With regard to shoplifting, the crime is really theft. In a large department store this can be judged to have taken place when leaving an area of the store. It's wise to pay "locally"
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the U.S. they have to walk outside the store. They have to leave the store befor they can be charged with shoplifting. In a way I can see the point.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I realised that NW had started a new thread and I had read it. However, my comments were germane to what was being discussed in this thread. I still stand by those comments as applied to this context.
Sentences consist of either a command, a statement or a question. If every time a statement is made it has to be backed up by a valid argument, even though it may be self-evident, conversation or discussion becomes impossible. "It is not a valid argument…etc" - those of a philsophical bent will know it practically impossible to prove a negative. If NW finds that statement patronising and inappropriate, so be it and here's a real cliché as opposed to a proverb: well, there you go.
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David, I didn't provide you with "my" interpretation of Asperger's or OCPD. I plainly stated that the definition came from the Wikipedia. That it could lead to endless, circular arguments was derived from Wikipedia's explanation as - "are prone to giving long, detailed expositions, and the related corrections". That seemed to be what I was seeing in that thread.
I do have first-hand knowledge about obsessive compulsivity. As a youngster I had a very annoying and pronounced facial tic that I used as a form of self comforting. I also had a habit of counting things. I would tap my finger against something and count the number of taps, etc. In the 50's they would be considered quirky behaviour but today are recognized at OCPD. My parents were evidently of the mind that the tic was something I would grow out of (and I never informed them about my compulsion to count things). So I basically had to put up with it as I was growing up. I exchanged my facial tic for a toe wiggling behaviour that wasn't apparent inside my shoe. A cure? - hardly, but at least an exchange for something that didn't socially stigmatize me.
I don't believe I ascribed a diagnosis. But what you did receive was my own method of dealing with my behaviour. I had to finally tell myself that enough was enough. I discovered that most of my impulses to obsess were stress related and I learned how to deal with and limit stress. I learned to self sooth in socially acceptable ways. In your own case you said enough was enough and you sought therapy. That is the "tenacious application of self control" to which I referred.
Youth crisis hot-line 866-488-7386, 24 hr (U.S.A.)
There are people who want to help you cope with being you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
 |
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Wikipedia is not an authority on many subjects.
Any as far as I'm concerned.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Self soothing in socially acceptable ways....
Well I didn't quite call it THAT.... But it sure as hell soothed the "self" and I accepted as many ways as were offered....
[Updated on: Tue, 08 May 2007 19:16]
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13800
|
|
|
It's a good first port of call, but should never be referenced in any formal discussion
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deeej wrote:
>This does not prevent us from discussing anything here, only requires the use of tact.<
lol
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
 |
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
Two or three days ago, feeling somewhat better and in need of a little stimulation (MENTAL stimulation, you fools; disinfect your minds immediately!) I decided to go on line and visit A Place of Safety. This was the lead thread when I did so; but for the familiar names of the participants I might be forgiven for thinking I had mis-typed the URL. Hey guys, what’s with all the bitching? Whilst APOS was never exactly a bitch-free zone, it came closer than any other well-patronised gay-orientated forum.
I retired to meditate over a couple of bottles of Speyside malt whisky. Then I had a third bottle, just to be sure. Thus fortified, I came to the conclusion that you all deserve an hour’s detention, during which time you will have the opportunity to meditate on the ten-point Cossie Report on the issue. If you are good, you can go home in an hour. If you are still feeling argumentative, you must set out your argument clearly and lucidly, and I’ll give you marks out of ten. Score less than 8 and my local agents will call upon you to administer physical encouragement!
First point. Can a thief be beautiful? Can a blond guy sing? The two questions are equally valid or, more succinctly, equally silly. Physical beauty, honesty, hair colour and vocal ability are all measurable human characteristics, but none of them are interdependent. It may be that few thieves are physically beautiful, but in the scheme of things some certainly will be, and will no doubt make that good fortune work to their advantage. And Timmy did make it perfectly clear from the outset that he was talking about simple physical beauty, not some philosophical concept of inner beauty.
Second point. Timmy reported that the child had breezed through the checkout with a can of drink he hadn’t had before, and drew the inference that he was a shoplifter. There are three distinct facts here. Timmy could give evidence that the child passed through the checkout. He could give evidence that the child made no payment when so doing. Finally, he could give evidence that the child was carrying a can of drink. Collectively, those facts don’t amount to the proverbial hill of beans. Timmy might also give evidence that he had previously seen the child several times elsewhere in the store, that at no time did he see him in the company of another person and that at that time he did not see him holding a can of drink, but no sane prosecutor would rely on these negative assertions. Timmy himself offered the possible scenario that the child was with his mother, who was paying for the can. That’s a perfectly feasible assumption; many an eleven-year-old would prefer to amble round the store on his own rather than follow his mother through the aisles, and to wait for her outside the store rather than join her in the checkout queue.
Third point. There isn’t, in fact, a shred of evidence that the child stole the can; it’s merely one of several possible interpretations of Timmy’s observations. Timmy was not merely justified in taking no action – he had no moral justification for doing otherwise. It would be wholly wrong (and in some circumstances actionable) to accuse someone of criminal activity on a basis of pure supposition. In the circumstances described, such an accusation would be about as justified as accusing a man of vaguely Arabic appearance of being a terrorist just because he is seen running towards a tube station.
Fourth point. Good law is in any event rarely black and white; it allows for evaluation of the circumstances of a particular case. If I were in a store with a ‘no tolerance’ shoplifting policy, and I actually saw a child steal a can of fizzy drink, I would elect not to tell the store. Why? Because a policy to prosecute in every case without taking account of the circumstances of the case is, in my view, morally unjustifiable. And anyway, the cost of a can as a proportion of the profits of J Sainsbury Plc brings the offence closer to the concept of a victimless crime than the devious machinations of allegedly upright citizens who flagrantly avoid their tax liabilities – a topic about which (in a professional capacity!) I know a great deal. We need a sense of proportion before presuming to be moral arbiters.
Fifth point. It’s never wise to speculate too much without a little empirical research. I admit that I am not a Sainsbury shopper; their nearest large store is around twelve miles away, with even larger branches of ASDA and Tesco within half that distance. But, fortified with my knowledge of those other stores, I selflessly sacrificed an hour or so to travel twelve miles on a voyage of investigation. (I’m wonderful that way; have I never mentioned this before? Got my own Meerschaum pipe and deerstalker, but I’ve given up the opium.) And, my dear Watson, it was just as I suspected. All standard 330ml (just over half-pint) cans of drink are sold in 6-packs or 12-packs; if you’ve ever bought one, you’ll be well aware how hard it is to fight your way through the packaging – it certainly couldn’t be done surreptitiously. The only loose cans are tiny 125ml ‘lunchbox’ cans, which are sufficiently unusual to provoke comment, and Timmy made no such comment. All soft drinks in the sandwich area are sold in plastic bottles. The only way of buying a loose 330ml can is to obtain it over the counter in the store cafe. So I respectfully (well, not all that respectfully!) suggest that a significant probability is that our boy either did exactly that, or else an accompanying adult bought a multipack and gave him a can from it.
Now where was I? Ah, yes. Point six. I tend to admit that there was a potential for ambiguity in Nigel’s first post, but that was soon dissipated. I certainly accept the validity of his point that if progress requires energetic use of a spade it’s probably wisest to walk away! Incidentally, The Black Prince will no doubt clarify – it’s well outside my sphere – but I suspect that ‘shoplifting’ is simply a generic term for theft from shops; the criminal offence is honest-to-goodness theft (the oxymoron is especially for Nigel; the rest of you can find your own stupid cows!) I gather from those who know such things that, in practice, supermarkets don’t pounce until shoplifters leave the store – not because concealment of an item beyond the checkouts is not an offence, but because the later challenge avoids defences such as ‘I just wanted to see what the colour looked like in daylight’.
Point seven. In essence, I can’t find fault with the essence of NW’s post of 11.19 on 7 May, though I think he’s being a little naughty in resorting to inverted logic – the technique of responding to a point by invoking irrelevant extremes, much favoured by the propagandist. I’ll return to chastise him later!
Point eight. In response to Nigel, post of 13.29 on 7 May: “I wonder where the wood can be?”. Silly boy. Obviously, it’s between your legs when you see the beautiful boy go through the checkout.
Point nine. I find myself disagreeing with my bruv Roger. Can this be a first? I think our Dr. Benjamin S gets an unfairly critical press. All he really said was that parents should talk to their kids instead of ordering them around. I did that, and I’ve had no reason to regret it; it’s just a matter of being consistent and making it clear that ‘No’ doesn’t mean ‘I don’t love you’. I’d even go a step further; the answer to a question beginning with ‘Can I ...’ should always be yes unless you have solid, logical grounds for saying no.
Point ten. Everything else goes in here; I’m getting tired! OK, I haven’t criticised Deeej yet. I guess it’s your turn, David! I can fully see why your hackles rose when OCD and allied subjects cropped up, but – be fair – thee and me (OK, I know it should be thou and I, but I wanna be provocative!) have pontificated many a time and oft about subjects in which we can claim no academic qualification. In fact, I once hurt Jamie (he of ‘Just Hit Send’ et al) by something I said about child abuse; those who know me well know that I constantly tease but would never intentionally hurt. All I can say in my defence is that I think he misunderstood the point I was trying to make – but the fault was clearly mine for not being unambiguous. I guess Nigel gets another gold star for perception, but a ‘Could do better’ for tact. Finally, I realise that ‘Whip Wikipedia’ is the fashion statement of the month, but aside from politics and history it’s usually a pretty useful guide. OK, it shouldn’t be referenced in isolation, but if it quotes accessible base references it’s probably fairly reliable.
Yup. I know. I’ve challenged a few posters here. If you don’t agree, I’ll be happy to take things further. But, please, in a good-humoured way, without the confrontational attitudes shown earlier in this thread. We are – and, I hope, will continue to be – friends here, and if friendship doesn’t merit compromise, what else can possibly do so?
Oh, and btw NW, you haven’t escaped! I’m replying to you on your own thread!
Sherlock McCossie.
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please, sir, I didn't take part in this thread. Can I go home now, Sir? Please, sir.
The paradox has often been noted that the United States, founded in secularism, is now the most religiose country in Christendom, while England, with an established church headed by its constitutional monarch, is among the least. (Richard Dawkins, 2006)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13800
|
|
|
There is one place where single cans may be bought of this size. The "Reduced" section, where oddities are sold off at slightly lower prices. This may 0or may not be available in all stores, but is in ours.
My use of "Shoplifter" was a feeling. It would have been "enough" for the security people to investigate if they gad felt the same, but absolutely not enough for me to have made a report.
Sainsbury's has a zero tolerance, always prosecute policy.
Thus I agree with the points you refined
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cossie, welcome back and a special hug as you made me Laugh Out Loud.
Gold star for perception - hmm maybe. Tact - could do better. No, sorry, cossie (and Deeej) that's the problem. I can't do better. I just have to make a virtue out of a vice.
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JimB
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: December 2006
Messages: 349
|
|
|
The negativity, antagonism and absurdity (indeed, can a boy be both cute and a thief?) of this topic has been waiting for someone of eloquence to bring it to an end.
JimB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie wrote:
> Point seven. In essence, I can’t find fault with the essence of NW’s post of 11.19 on 7 May, though I think he’s being a little naughty in resorting to inverted logic – the technique of responding to a point by invoking irrelevant extremes, much favoured by the propagandist. I’ll return to chastise him later!
Other stuff on the other thread! But in response to this, I'd plead that I really don't think that it's irrelevant. A "principle of morality" had been asserted which is no such thing.
More to the point, it is increasingly not accepted as such. My own contact with teenagers suggests that there's a growing feeling that it is morally justifiable to screw up supermarkets and multinationals, because they have screwed up and continue to screw up the environment (effectively stealing the common good of clean air, unpolluted water etc.) and to exploit workers in developing countries. I do not share this view ... if only because I don't think that nicking a can of soft drink is an appropriate reaction (though I might consider a theatrical gesture which destroyed supermarket property, in the right circumstances ...)
But I think the challenge can be made, and is frequently made, and not only by juvenile shoplifters.
[Updated on: Fri, 11 May 2007 16:10]
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13800
|
|
|
It's very odd. I said specifically he was not cute. 
He was just extraordinary facially beautiful. Additionally he walked and stood to emphasise his beauty.
It seems odd to me to take two unrelated items and make them mutually exclusive. They are neither mutually exclusive, nor are they part of the same set. If we drew a simple Venn Diagram, we would see two circles, one representing beauty and the other representing thieves. There would be an intersection because of the nature of humankind. By pure probability there must be some beautiful people who are thieves.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have seen from time to time boys that are exceptionally beautiful, not cute (all kids are cute). The thing is they know it and will use it in their favor.
About this reporting him to the store. Is it not Hebrew law that if you didnt actually see him steal it, you cant accuse him. Its like if you see a man run out of a house and later there is a dead man in the house, you cant accuse the man who ran out because you didnt actually see him murder the man. Its called bearing faulse witness. I know we have a good friend in Isreal who can let us know if Im right or wrong.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Who ever said this conversation is or has been brought to a conclusion.
Certainly not I.
I did however become bored with it.
But it would take not alot of impetus to revive it within me.
See, I believe that no child either deserves or is entitled to a free ride when it comes to the construct of a good value system. This applies to not only petty crime but also to the quality of schoolwork, manners (both social and table), deportment and so on.
Do I believe that Tim should have cried at the top of his lungs "STOP THEIF" in the store..... no..... I do however believe that calling the attention of someone who works there would have been a step in curtailing the possibility of further socialy-unacceptable behavior for this particular child.
But this is just my opinion and as far as I know I am at least entitled to that.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ah my friend, you are definately intitled to an opinion. You are right that children should be coached in the proper way to exist in society. The point I was making was that Timmy did not see the boy pick the can up and hide it going out the store. The child could have paid for it, his mom or dad could have been in a line and paying for it.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
True enough....
But is there a responsibility to say that there was a man running from the house?
Note i said a man running..... not a murderer running.....
[Updated on: Fri, 11 May 2007 18:41]
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The one time I heard this brought up it was forbiden to even say he saw the man running from the house. I believe it was because it would lead to the man being accused.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Roger wrote:
> The one time I heard this brought up it was forbiden to even say he saw the man running from the house. I believe it was because it would lead to the man being accused.
Actually, it would lead to the running man to explain why he was running. If that and whatever other evidence the authorities gathered warrented then accusations would be in order.
In what jurisdiction did this running happen?
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is Hebrew law and IM not sure if it is even observed in this day and age. It was a point that Hebrew law prevented anything from being said lest it caused and innocent man to be charged with a crime.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Re: Yesterday in Sainsbury's 
Well done Cossie! 
