Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
|
why is it....?
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
  
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
 RE: why is it....? (in reply to pink)
|
|
|
And yet it could be worse.
In our common ground are included many of the insights made over the philosophical course of past ~ 2500 years.
Things that had yet to be explored by Sokrates and his followers, like subjectivity versus objectivity or the opportunity of observing oneself, are inlcuded in our associative and semantical standards. - Even if only few are aware and value the achievement.
There are other cultures that have not been there. Histories which in place of systematics of evaluation developed behavioural escape from dispute ( formal shock absorbers if you want). Deeming avoidance of discussion as high goal, not clearance.
With no routine of approaching objectivity. Equalling emotion with ratio, or opinion / belief with knowledge / entity.
Hence hardly prepared to clear yet the simplest / most obvious circumstances.
Consequently, hindered with making out bone of contention and from there focussing instead on the opponent´s personality ( lost relevance of "who" instead of "what").
Considering how much worse it can be, I embrace the size of objective measure in western discussion, even though having been discretely dissatisfied with it ever since.
Sure, there could be more education on the merits of controversy and about the misconception of passive harmony, but all in all there is progress with pragmatism.
-
What I see more cirtical than the objective measure is the desease of envy.
A primitive rudiment that is strongly re-appearing from unwashed shore and infesting the people.
Destructive envy everywhere. Even among close friends and siblings.
The generosity of granting where due, having become an edelweiss.
A status of embarrassing emotional low-brow.
Ruphus
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Jan. 13 2014 9:25:22
 |
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: why is it....? (in reply to pink)
|
|
|
In the moment I can´t find a headline to show you, but just yesterday there was in the German news how prejustice against the virtual world has been proven as just such.
People not becoming isolated / unsocial computer nerds; some games even turning out supportive for skills. Etc.
Before spreading of PCs I belonged to those who would not expect much from computers. I thought more or less like "calculators, so what!?"
Even when the internet became accessible for everyone, I did not understand its actual potential and possible relevance to us, as after all an informative species.
My todays take about internet communication is that it is priceless and probably the best means for information and support to democracy ever. Even with its weak point of opinion as apparent facts / a requirement to learn how to use it.
And what etiquette is concerned, my impression is that we are progressively getting better at it, with many understanding the challenge of virtually behaving like in life. Understanding the gift of being network across the globe and of instantly or even real-time exchanging ideas and knowledge.
If used constructively the computer represents a lovely complex tool for text, audio, graphics and meanwhile even 3D production that by far exceeds what I once would had even dreamed of. And the means of research and communication (, meanwhile even including video conference or remote home guarding for almost free) are just fantastic.
Who be left biased against this technology in good use, must realize that it likely is about ordinary resentment based on matter of inflexibility with age.
Man, how I remember my international communication of many years ago. Typing letters, bringing them to the post office and having them delivered within 3 to 4 weeks.
Getting your reply in two months or so.
Calling another continent at 5 expensive dollars or more per minute.
Or standing in the dark room and waisting budgets for often not so great photographic works.
Or the headaches with getting something multi tracked ... and so on.
And I recall my first encounter with a digital pocket calculator, in a stores display on Paris airport.
Love on first sight.
But merely four fundamental operations of arithmetics at a price of nearly 400 francs.
These days you get them thrown after you when you miss out on closing the door while leaving the room. 
Ruphus
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Jan. 14 2014 9:35:34
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.0625 secs.
|
Printable Version
