MindRomp and Atheism page 2
Exi5tentialist
10th February 2012, 03:55 PM
I agree.
I don't
I don't
ficus
10th February 2012, 04:56 PM
I used to prefer the term "non-theist" to "atheist", because I didn't identify with New Atheism and on the internet most of the atheists I met were self-identified New Atheists, or were ideologically indistinguishable from them. These days, I answer to "post-atheist".:hug:
Atheism and Theism are both highways to intellectual decrepitude; I prefer being a Radical Skeptic/Idealist, in philosophical terms.
That combo sounds to me like the next door neighbor of Solipsism.not if you understand that the 'others' are equally centers of perception.
Atheism and Theism are both highways to intellectual decrepitude; I prefer being a Radical Skeptic/Idealist, in philosophical terms.
That combo sounds to me like the next door neighbor of Solipsism.not if you understand that the 'others' are equally centers of perception.
Izdaari
10th February 2012, 06:47 PM
Philosophy is dumb
That in itself is a philosophical statement.
Cf. Ayn Rand's book, Philosophy: Who Needs It? :hehe:
That in itself is a philosophical statement.
Cf. Ayn Rand's book, Philosophy: Who Needs It? :hehe:
Izdaari
10th February 2012, 06:52 PM
Atheism and Theism are both highways to intellectual decrepitude; I prefer being a Radical Skeptic/Idealist, in philosophical terms.
That combo sounds to me like the next door neighbor of Solipsism.not if you understand that the 'others' are equally centers of perception.
That would be the difference between solipsism and its next neighbor.
That combo sounds to me like the next door neighbor of Solipsism.not if you understand that the 'others' are equally centers of perception.
That would be the difference between solipsism and its next neighbor.
ficus
10th February 2012, 07:26 PM
Atheism and Theism are both highways to intellectual decrepitude; I prefer being a Radical Skeptic/Idealist, in philosophical terms.
That combo sounds to me like the next door neighbor of Solipsism.not if you understand that the 'others' are equally centers of perception.
That would be the difference between solipsism and its next neighbor.:facepalm: if a solipsist recognizes a neighbor, then he isn't a solipsist...
That combo sounds to me like the next door neighbor of Solipsism.not if you understand that the 'others' are equally centers of perception.
That would be the difference between solipsism and its next neighbor.:facepalm: if a solipsist recognizes a neighbor, then he isn't a solipsist...
charlou
11th February 2012, 12:12 AM
At least Izdaari didn't say nihilism lives next door. :p
Neighbours ... not a great analogy in a multicultural world anyway. ;)
Neighbours ... not a great analogy in a multicultural world anyway. ;)
Izdaari
11th February 2012, 12:24 AM
I made one of my common word omission errors there:
I meant to say: "That would be the difference between solipsism and its next door neighbor."
Ficus' position is not solipsism, and I didn't mean to imply that it was. I did mean to say it had similarities.
I meant to say: "That would be the difference between solipsism and its next door neighbor."
Ficus' position is not solipsism, and I didn't mean to imply that it was. I did mean to say it had similarities.
ficus
11th February 2012, 01:50 AM
That's not an expression I recognize, so I would have interpreted it in a similar way.
You meant to say my position is methodological solipsism, not ontological solipsism.
Which means I hold that my reality is limited to my mental content, but not that my mental content is the limit of reality.
To that must be added that I hold the physical to be a mental phenomena: In other words, physics describes the behaviour of perceptions, experience: Thus no need for 'metaphysics'. A monist immanentist concept.
You meant to say my position is methodological solipsism, not ontological solipsism.
Which means I hold that my reality is limited to my mental content, but not that my mental content is the limit of reality.
To that must be added that I hold the physical to be a mental phenomena: In other words, physics describes the behaviour of perceptions, experience: Thus no need for 'metaphysics'. A monist immanentist concept.
Grumps
11th February 2012, 06:37 AM
At least Izdaari didn't say nihilism lives next door. :p
Neighbours ... not a great analogy in a multicultural world anyway. ;)
In a multicultural world, it is "person who lives right next door, but remains compeltely isolated from everyone around them and refuses to speak to them because his way of living is special and nobody can take it from him."
Or something to that effect.
Neighbours ... not a great analogy in a multicultural world anyway. ;)
In a multicultural world, it is "person who lives right next door, but remains compeltely isolated from everyone around them and refuses to speak to them because his way of living is special and nobody can take it from him."
Or something to that effect.
Izdaari
11th February 2012, 12:28 PM
That's not an expression I recognize, so I would have interpreted it in a similar way.
You meant to say my position is methodological solipsism, not ontological solipsism.
Which means I hold that my reality is limited to my mental content, but not that my mental content is the limit of reality.
To that must be added that I hold the physical to be a mental phenomena: In other words, physics describes the behaviour of perceptions, experience: Thus no need for 'metaphysics'. A monist immanentist concept.
Ok, that does explain where you're coming from a little better. I can relate, but it's a lot different that where I am, since I'm essentially an Eastern Orthodox panentheist. (That is, I am not EO, but I agree with them on panentheism and on the nature of it.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism
You meant to say my position is methodological solipsism, not ontological solipsism.
Which means I hold that my reality is limited to my mental content, but not that my mental content is the limit of reality.
To that must be added that I hold the physical to be a mental phenomena: In other words, physics describes the behaviour of perceptions, experience: Thus no need for 'metaphysics'. A monist immanentist concept.
Ok, that does explain where you're coming from a little better. I can relate, but it's a lot different that where I am, since I'm essentially an Eastern Orthodox panentheist. (That is, I am not EO, but I agree with them on panentheism and on the nature of it.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism
ficus
11th February 2012, 03:55 PM
As long as you put onion domes over your temple all is forgiven....
Panentheism in essence is not very different from Pantheism, since the differences are conceptual, not practical.. it seems.
My position is more specifically Spinonzan-Berkeleyan-Borgesian... an Idealist-existentialist synthesis.
Panentheism in essence is not very different from Pantheism, since the differences are conceptual, not practical.. it seems.
My position is more specifically Spinonzan-Berkeleyan-Borgesian... an Idealist-existentialist synthesis.
Brother Daniel
11th February 2012, 05:39 PM
onion domes
Those pointy domes symbolize flames. Acts 2 and all that.
Those pointy domes symbolize flames. Acts 2 and all that.
borealis
11th February 2012, 05:57 PM
Very pretty flames, though.
http://www.canigotoo.com/specialcruises/specialtyimages/russia-st-basils.jpg
http://www.canigotoo.com/specialcruises/specialtyimages/russia-st-basils.jpg
ficus
11th February 2012, 05:58 PM
Had no idea: I had read there was some meaning attached to them, but knew not which.
Anyhow, I love onion domes...
Anyhow, I love onion domes...
ficus
11th February 2012, 06:17 PM
Very pretty flames, though.
http://www.canigotoo.com/specialcruises/specialtyimages/russia-st-basils.jpg...eatable flames; all art should be kid-in-the-candystore... or lobster-with-side-dish-of-caviar. That's why modernism is bad stuff, it's tofu.
http://www.canigotoo.com/specialcruises/specialtyimages/russia-st-basils.jpg...eatable flames; all art should be kid-in-the-candystore... or lobster-with-side-dish-of-caviar. That's why modernism is bad stuff, it's tofu.
Izdaari
14th February 2012, 04:55 PM
As long as you put onion domes over your temple all is forgiven....
Panentheism in essence is not very different from Pantheism, since the differences are conceptual, not practical.. it seems.
My position is more specifically Spinonzan-Berkeleyan-Borgesian... an Idealist-existentialist synthesis.
:hmmm: But I differ from pantheists in practical ways and from other orthodox Christians in conceptual ways. :hehe:
Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance. Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation. Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice. Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
Panentheism in essence is not very different from Pantheism, since the differences are conceptual, not practical.. it seems.
My position is more specifically Spinonzan-Berkeleyan-Borgesian... an Idealist-existentialist synthesis.
:hmmm: But I differ from pantheists in practical ways and from other orthodox Christians in conceptual ways. :hehe:
Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance. Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation. Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice. Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
Cunt
14th February 2012, 05:58 PM
Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance. Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation. Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice. Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
ficus
14th February 2012, 09:26 PM
Anyhow, I am not a pantheist.. and yes, that was nonsense...
Izdaari
15th February 2012, 01:45 AM
Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance. Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation. Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice. Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
charlou
15th February 2012, 01:53 AM
Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance. Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation. Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice. Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
:)
Do you agree with the sentiment "where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance"?
What does "poverty and joy" mean?
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/sudanese-girl-dying-of-hunger-as-a-vulture-patiently-waits.jpg
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
:)
Do you agree with the sentiment "where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance"?
What does "poverty and joy" mean?
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/sudanese-girl-dying-of-hunger-as-a-vulture-patiently-waits.jpg
FedUpWithFaith
15th February 2012, 02:00 AM
Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance. Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation. Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice. Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
:)
Do you agree with the sentiment "where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance"?
What does "poverty and joy" mean?
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/sudanese-girl-dying-of-hunger-as-a-vulture-patiently-waits.jpg
You must be blind Eloise. It's obvious. The kid's in poverty and the vulture is ecstatic. He joyfully knows he can feed a whole day on that soon-to-be carcass. He might even be able to invite a few friends to dine.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
:)
Do you agree with the sentiment "where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance"?
What does "poverty and joy" mean?
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/sudanese-girl-dying-of-hunger-as-a-vulture-patiently-waits.jpg
You must be blind Eloise. It's obvious. The kid's in poverty and the vulture is ecstatic. He joyfully knows he can feed a whole day on that soon-to-be carcass. He might even be able to invite a few friends to dine.
Amok
15th February 2012, 02:14 AM
I kind of like the story of the Frenchman. Quite a likeable chap, considering the times.
Too bad he screwed up so badly in his interpretation of his hallucination about JC: "Francis, Francis, go and repair My house which, as you can see, is falling into ruins." Silly bugger. Christianity might be quite a harmless and kindly thing today if he'd have thought that through a bit more.
Ah, well. If wishes were fishes.
Too bad he screwed up so badly in his interpretation of his hallucination about JC: "Francis, Francis, go and repair My house which, as you can see, is falling into ruins." Silly bugger. Christianity might be quite a harmless and kindly thing today if he'd have thought that through a bit more.
Ah, well. If wishes were fishes.
Cunt
15th February 2012, 02:18 PM
Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance. Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation. Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice. Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
Do you think this actually makes sense of some kind?
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
Do you think this actually makes sense of some kind?
Fuzzy
15th February 2012, 06:28 PM
Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance. Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation. Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice. Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
Do you think this actually makes sense of some kind?
I would argue that "Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation." makes sense; if you're really patient you're less likely to get angry or annoyed at people.
"Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice." that line is dumb; if people are really poor, they're going to want to be not-poor. I don't know where joy comes into this.
"Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt." Sorta half makes sense? Specifically, meditation is a pretty good way to deal with anxiety. The doubt part seems dumb; I have lots of doubts about lots of things, because I'm not omniscient. I'd be pretty worried about anybody who thought otherwise.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
Do you think this actually makes sense of some kind?
I would argue that "Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation." makes sense; if you're really patient you're less likely to get angry or annoyed at people.
"Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice." that line is dumb; if people are really poor, they're going to want to be not-poor. I don't know where joy comes into this.
"Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt." Sorta half makes sense? Specifically, meditation is a pretty good way to deal with anxiety. The doubt part seems dumb; I have lots of doubts about lots of things, because I'm not omniscient. I'd be pretty worried about anybody who thought otherwise.
Izdaari
15th February 2012, 06:54 PM
Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance. Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation. Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice. Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
Do you think this actually makes sense of some kind?
I don't know yet. I grabbed it off the web as one of the few St. Francis quotes that was actually sourced, and posted it without really processing it first. I mean, I read it and it looked ok at the time, but I didn't analyze it. The poverty and joy line doesn't make sense to me, and I'd really like to ask him to explain what he meant by it. The rest seems surface plausible, but I'd want to ponder it, not so much conscious analysis but just let it percolate in the back of my brain for a while and see if it makes some connections.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
Do you think this actually makes sense of some kind?
I don't know yet. I grabbed it off the web as one of the few St. Francis quotes that was actually sourced, and posted it without really processing it first. I mean, I read it and it looked ok at the time, but I didn't analyze it. The poverty and joy line doesn't make sense to me, and I'd really like to ask him to explain what he meant by it. The rest seems surface plausible, but I'd want to ponder it, not so much conscious analysis but just let it percolate in the back of my brain for a while and see if it makes some connections.
Fuzzy
15th February 2012, 06:57 PM
My guess would be that by poverty he meant it in the monastic sense (i.e. poor by choice and still getting the basic needs for survival), as opposed to the starving to death sense.
I could be wrong, though.
I could be wrong, though.
divagreen
15th February 2012, 07:11 PM
Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance. Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation. Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice. Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
Do you think this actually makes sense of some kind?
I would argue that "Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation." makes sense; if you're really patient you're less likely to get angry or annoyed at people.
"Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice." that line is dumb; if people are really poor, they're going to want to be not-poor. I don't know where joy comes into this.
"Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt." Sorta half makes sense? Specifically, meditation is a pretty good way to deal with anxiety. The doubt part seems dumb; I have lots of doubts about lots of things, because I'm not omniscient. I'd be pretty worried about anybody who thought otherwise.
wrt the italicised: I don't think that it is dumb at all, I think one of the points St. Francis was trying to make with that was to take joy in simple things since the mind can be distracted with luxury; that is why I think a lot of spiritual practices require a time of austerity.
While I think that Osho was mostly nuts and his translations have been thoroughly exploited by new age mental cases, in his book on Taoism he makes a couple of excellent points about "the path of negation" and how that brings them closer to what they perceive as divine which may have nothing to do with a supernatural moral agent.
Maybe some people would consider that dumb but I don't. I think that it is devotion to a higher ideal that brings out the best in some people's efforts when they are exploring activites outside themselves. (Hi Aden! :wave:)
lol, let the deconstructionist games begin.
inb4 Ficus says I need to grow up, lol.
eta: xpost with Fuzzy. yeah.
The Counsels of the Holy Father St. Francis, Admonition 27
wow! What nonsense!
Ok, so y'all aren't St. Francis fans. I can't really say I'm surprised. :rofl:
Do you think this actually makes sense of some kind?
I would argue that "Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation." makes sense; if you're really patient you're less likely to get angry or annoyed at people.
"Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice." that line is dumb; if people are really poor, they're going to want to be not-poor. I don't know where joy comes into this.
"Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt." Sorta half makes sense? Specifically, meditation is a pretty good way to deal with anxiety. The doubt part seems dumb; I have lots of doubts about lots of things, because I'm not omniscient. I'd be pretty worried about anybody who thought otherwise.
wrt the italicised: I don't think that it is dumb at all, I think one of the points St. Francis was trying to make with that was to take joy in simple things since the mind can be distracted with luxury; that is why I think a lot of spiritual practices require a time of austerity.
While I think that Osho was mostly nuts and his translations have been thoroughly exploited by new age mental cases, in his book on Taoism he makes a couple of excellent points about "the path of negation" and how that brings them closer to what they perceive as divine which may have nothing to do with a supernatural moral agent.
Maybe some people would consider that dumb but I don't. I think that it is devotion to a higher ideal that brings out the best in some people's efforts when they are exploring activites outside themselves. (Hi Aden! :wave:)
lol, let the deconstructionist games begin.
inb4 Ficus says I need to grow up, lol.
eta: xpost with Fuzzy. yeah.
ficus
15th February 2012, 09:48 PM
I called it nonsense because of the context in which it was presented. It is an abstract hyperbolism in regards to the human condition, and as such limited, but such thoughts have their uses and wisdoms.
gib
15th February 2012, 10:10 PM
poverty and joy makes sense to me, if people are poor and happy then they're much less likely to crave material wealth than pissed off poor people would
Amok
16th February 2012, 03:42 AM
poverty and joy makes sense to me, if people are poor and happy then they're much less likely to crave material wealth than pissed off poor people would
(Relative) poverty - by choice - and joy makes some sense to me.
But I've read a bit more about the guy, and while I still like his love of the natural world, I'm disappointed.
He appears to have been an Ancient World version of a trust fund baby who over-indulged, crashed, and then morphed into an Ancient World version of a pop culture redemption celeb.
So he gives up his worldly life, puts on hippie garb, and goes begging.
But he's a guy who's still a name, and is in with the bigwigs.
And what does he do with his influence and "alms"? He rebuilds freaking churches.
Oh, man. This guy, who let's face it, was NOT going to starve come what may, begs alongside beggars who MIGHT have starved, and siphons off some of their takings to rebuild churches.
I'm sure he thought it was marvelous and big and important and all that, but what a maroon.
(Relative) poverty - by choice - and joy makes some sense to me.
But I've read a bit more about the guy, and while I still like his love of the natural world, I'm disappointed.
He appears to have been an Ancient World version of a trust fund baby who over-indulged, crashed, and then morphed into an Ancient World version of a pop culture redemption celeb.
So he gives up his worldly life, puts on hippie garb, and goes begging.
But he's a guy who's still a name, and is in with the bigwigs.
And what does he do with his influence and "alms"? He rebuilds freaking churches.
Oh, man. This guy, who let's face it, was NOT going to starve come what may, begs alongside beggars who MIGHT have starved, and siphons off some of their takings to rebuild churches.
I'm sure he thought it was marvelous and big and important and all that, but what a maroon.
Jerome
16th February 2012, 03:46 AM
Curious why the photographer was taking pictures instead of comforting the child.
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/sudanese-girl-dying-of-hunger-as-a-vulture-patiently-waits.jpg
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/sudanese-girl-dying-of-hunger-as-a-vulture-patiently-waits.jpg
Amok
16th February 2012, 03:50 AM
Curious why the photographer was taking pictures instead of comforting the child.
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/sudanese-girl-dying-of-hunger-as-a-vulture-patiently-waits.jpg
To show the world?
The photographer committed suicide, not long afterward.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carter
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/sudanese-girl-dying-of-hunger-as-a-vulture-patiently-waits.jpg
To show the world?
The photographer committed suicide, not long afterward.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carter
Jerome
16th February 2012, 03:51 AM
I can't imagine a human taking that picture.
Jerome
16th February 2012, 03:54 AM
The photographer committed suicide, not long afterward.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carter
Two members won Pulitzer Prizes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulitzer_Prizes) for their photography.
.. and Obama won a Peace Prize for killing niggers for oil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carter
Two members won Pulitzer Prizes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulitzer_Prizes) for their photography.
.. and Obama won a Peace Prize for killing niggers for oil.
Jerome
16th February 2012, 03:55 AM
sick fucks that run this world,
That is a fact.
That is a fact.
Amok
16th February 2012, 03:55 AM
I can't imagine a human taking that picture.
We are scum.
We are scum.
ficus
16th February 2012, 04:01 AM
He appears to have been an Ancient World version of a trust fund baby who over-indulged, crashed, and then morphed into an Ancient World version of a pop culture redemption celeb.
So he gives up his worldly life, puts on hippie garb, and goes begging.
But he's a guy who's still a name, and is in with the bigwigs.
And what does he do with his influence and "alms"? He rebuilds freaking churches.You are strange... it's like you live in some parallel universe with values unrelated to real life.
note: Churches were the 'common room' of that era....
note: that wasn't 'the ancient world....
So he gives up his worldly life, puts on hippie garb, and goes begging.
But he's a guy who's still a name, and is in with the bigwigs.
And what does he do with his influence and "alms"? He rebuilds freaking churches.You are strange... it's like you live in some parallel universe with values unrelated to real life.
note: Churches were the 'common room' of that era....
note: that wasn't 'the ancient world....
ficus
16th February 2012, 04:02 AM
.. and Obama won a Peace Prize for killing niggers for oil.less is more??
charlou
16th February 2012, 10:47 PM
poverty and joy makes sense to me, if people are poor and happy then they're much less likely to crave material wealth than pissed off poor people would
That was the line Mother Teresa took .. while accepting expensive medical treatment for herself and accumulating wealth for the church through the misguided charity of people who don't think too hard about where their money is going.
That was the line Mother Teresa took .. while accepting expensive medical treatment for herself and accumulating wealth for the church through the misguided charity of people who don't think too hard about where their money is going.
PermanentlyEphemeral
16th February 2012, 11:40 PM
Curious why the photographer was taking pictures instead of comforting the child.
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/sudanese-girl-dying-of-hunger-as-a-vulture-patiently-waits.jpg
Or killing the bird to feed to the child.
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/sudanese-girl-dying-of-hunger-as-a-vulture-patiently-waits.jpg
Or killing the bird to feed to the child.
borealis
17th February 2012, 12:00 AM
There are two versions of the circumstances around this photo.
The first is reportedly Carter's, but the second sounds more likely. Not that dieing children are never menaced by vultures, but the circumstances of Carter's being there at all suggest he wasn't the only well fed person on the site, and was likely a ride along with an aid operation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carter#Prize-winning_photograph_in_Sudan
Note also that he was suicidal many years before taking that photo, and it was not the first distressing photo he had taken. He witnessed a lot of horror and took pictures of it happening.
The first is reportedly Carter's, but the second sounds more likely. Not that dieing children are never menaced by vultures, but the circumstances of Carter's being there at all suggest he wasn't the only well fed person on the site, and was likely a ride along with an aid operation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carter#Prize-winning_photograph_in_Sudan
Note also that he was suicidal many years before taking that photo, and it was not the first distressing photo he had taken. He witnessed a lot of horror and took pictures of it happening.
Cunt
17th February 2012, 12:14 AM
I think taking photos of those horrors is a pretty useful thing. For example, does anyone think photos like the famous one of Kim Phuk can change a governments actions in a war?
Hermit
17th February 2012, 12:15 AM
There are two versions of the circumstances around this photo.
The first is reportedly Carter's, but the second sounds more likely. Not that dieing children are never menaced by vultures, but the circumstances of Carter's being there at all suggest he wasn't the only well fed person on the site, and was likely a ride along with an aid operation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carter#Prize-winning_photograph_in_Sudan
Note also that he was suicidal many years before taking that photo, and it was not the first distressing photo he had taken. He witnessed a lot of horror and took pictures of it happening.
Thanks for the link, Borealis. It includes a revealing explanation for why Carter was doing what he did, and why that was not a sign of reprehensible, coldhearted opportunism. Speaking about another picture he took, of a lynching by necklacing, he said: "I was appalled at what they were doing. I was appalled at what I was doing. But then people started talking about those pictures... then I felt that maybe my actions hadn't been at all bad. Being a witness to something this horrible wasn't necessarily such a bad thing to do."
The first is reportedly Carter's, but the second sounds more likely. Not that dieing children are never menaced by vultures, but the circumstances of Carter's being there at all suggest he wasn't the only well fed person on the site, and was likely a ride along with an aid operation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carter#Prize-winning_photograph_in_Sudan
Note also that he was suicidal many years before taking that photo, and it was not the first distressing photo he had taken. He witnessed a lot of horror and took pictures of it happening.
Thanks for the link, Borealis. It includes a revealing explanation for why Carter was doing what he did, and why that was not a sign of reprehensible, coldhearted opportunism. Speaking about another picture he took, of a lynching by necklacing, he said: "I was appalled at what they were doing. I was appalled at what I was doing. But then people started talking about those pictures... then I felt that maybe my actions hadn't been at all bad. Being a witness to something this horrible wasn't necessarily such a bad thing to do."
borealis
17th February 2012, 12:30 AM
Yes, I believe he played a necessary role in letting the world know these kinds of horrors were and are happening, and that he knew it was important.
Hermit
17th February 2012, 12:43 AM
Yes, I believe he played a necessary role in letting the world know these kinds of horrors were and are happening, and that he knew it was important....and more importantly, that the publication of his photographs would be of more use to doing something about the conditions he documented than he could have been if he had, say, tried to nurture the baby back to health or attempted to save the life of the woman who was being lynched.
People who accuse Carter of callousness would probably accuse the makers of films like Bopha or authors of books like Schindler's List of exploitation of others' misery borne of greed as well.
People who accuse Carter of callousness would probably accuse the makers of films like Bopha or authors of books like Schindler's List of exploitation of others' misery borne of greed as well.
Izdaari
17th February 2012, 04:54 AM
Yes, I believe he played a necessary role in letting the world know these kinds of horrors were and are happening, and that he knew it was important....and more importantly, that the publication of his photographs would be of more use to doing something about the conditions he documented than he could have been if he had, say, tried to nurture the baby back to health or attempted to save the life of the woman who was being lynched.
People who accuse Carter of callousness would probably accuse the makers of films like Bopha or authors of books like Schindler's List of exploitation of others' misery borne of greed as well.
Uh huh. These things aren't going to change if nobody knows about them. :sadyes:
People who accuse Carter of callousness would probably accuse the makers of films like Bopha or authors of books like Schindler's List of exploitation of others' misery borne of greed as well.
Uh huh. These things aren't going to change if nobody knows about them. :sadyes:
Jerome
17th February 2012, 04:58 AM
I think taking photos of those horrors is a pretty useful thing. For example, does anyone think photos like the famous one of Kim Phuk can change a governments actions in a war?
How so?
there are still starving nigger babies today, nothing has changed, there are still government wars today,
nothing has changed..
How so?
there are still starving nigger babies today, nothing has changed, there are still government wars today,
nothing has changed..
Jerome
17th February 2012, 05:01 AM
Nothing has changed beyond acceptance of such.
http://www.reenactor.net/forums/tp-images/Image/ww1_images/trench-death.jpg
http://www.reenactor.net/forums/tp-images/Image/ww1_images/trench-death.jpg
Hermit
17th February 2012, 06:32 AM
I think taking photos of those horrors is a pretty useful thing. For example, does anyone think photos like the famous one of Kim Phuk can change a governments actions in a war?
How so?
there are still starving nigger babies today, nothing has changed, there are still government wars today,
nothing has changed..
It's impossible to test this empirically, but I think public sentiment does effect change, and emotionally striking images are a significant factor in doing that.
This is a photograph that in my mind did a lot to turn the public against the police action in Vietnam and accelerated its end.
http://www.siue.edu/~ejoy/Vietnam%201.jpg
Please note what I am not saying. I neither claim that photos initiate trends, nor that they are a critical factor in changing the direction of public sentiment. All I'm saying that the publication of photographs can be of more use to change something about the conditions that they document than if the photographer had attempted to do something on the spot to help an individual afflicted by it.
How so?
there are still starving nigger babies today, nothing has changed, there are still government wars today,
nothing has changed..
It's impossible to test this empirically, but I think public sentiment does effect change, and emotionally striking images are a significant factor in doing that.
This is a photograph that in my mind did a lot to turn the public against the police action in Vietnam and accelerated its end.
http://www.siue.edu/~ejoy/Vietnam%201.jpg
Please note what I am not saying. I neither claim that photos initiate trends, nor that they are a critical factor in changing the direction of public sentiment. All I'm saying that the publication of photographs can be of more use to change something about the conditions that they document than if the photographer had attempted to do something on the spot to help an individual afflicted by it.
Jerome
17th February 2012, 06:56 AM
right, public sentiment sure did turn against undeclared overseas wars
:rolleyes:
how many is the public allowing right this moment?
:rolleyes:
how many is the public allowing right this moment?
Jerome
17th February 2012, 06:57 AM
I argue that photos like these condition the proles to accept such.
Hermit
17th February 2012, 08:44 AM
right, public sentiment sure did turn against undeclared overseas wars
:rolleyes:
how many is the public allowing right this moment?
Jerome, could you please focus your attention on this?
I think taking photos of those horrors is a pretty useful thing. For example, does anyone think photos like the famous one of Kim Phuk can change a governments actions in a war?
How so?
there are still starving nigger babies today, nothing has changed, there are still government wars today,
nothing has changed..
It's impossible to test this empirically, but I think public sentiment does effect change, and emotionally striking images are a significant factor in doing that.
This is a photograph that in my mind did a lot to turn the public against the police action in Vietnam and accelerated its end.
http://www.siue.edu/~ejoy/Vietnam%201.jpg
Please note what I am not saying. I neither claim that photos initiate trends, nor that they are a critical factor in changing the direction of public sentiment. All I'm saying that the publication of photographs can be of more use to change something about the conditions that they document than if the photographer had attempted to do something on the spot to help an individual afflicted by it.
:rolleyes:
how many is the public allowing right this moment?
Jerome, could you please focus your attention on this?
I think taking photos of those horrors is a pretty useful thing. For example, does anyone think photos like the famous one of Kim Phuk can change a governments actions in a war?
How so?
there are still starving nigger babies today, nothing has changed, there are still government wars today,
nothing has changed..
It's impossible to test this empirically, but I think public sentiment does effect change, and emotionally striking images are a significant factor in doing that.
This is a photograph that in my mind did a lot to turn the public against the police action in Vietnam and accelerated its end.
http://www.siue.edu/~ejoy/Vietnam%201.jpg
Please note what I am not saying. I neither claim that photos initiate trends, nor that they are a critical factor in changing the direction of public sentiment. All I'm saying that the publication of photographs can be of more use to change something about the conditions that they document than if the photographer had attempted to do something on the spot to help an individual afflicted by it.
Cunt
17th February 2012, 06:16 PM
I think taking photos of those horrors is a pretty useful thing. For example, does anyone think photos like the famous one of Kim Phuk can change a governments actions in a war?
How so?
there are still starving nigger babies today, nothing has changed, there are still government wars today,
nothing has changed..
It's impossible to test this empirically, but I think public sentiment does effect change, and emotionally striking images are a significant factor in doing that.
This is a photograph that in my mind did a lot to turn the public against the police action in Vietnam and accelerated its end.
http://www.siue.edu/~ejoy/Vietnam%201.jpg
Please note what I am not saying. I neither claim that photos initiate trends, nor that they are a critical factor in changing the direction of public sentiment. All I'm saying that the publication of photographs can be of more use to change something about the conditions that they document than if the photographer had attempted to do something on the spot to help an individual afflicted by it.That was Kim Phuc.
How so?
there are still starving nigger babies today, nothing has changed, there are still government wars today,
nothing has changed..
It's impossible to test this empirically, but I think public sentiment does effect change, and emotionally striking images are a significant factor in doing that.
This is a photograph that in my mind did a lot to turn the public against the police action in Vietnam and accelerated its end.
http://www.siue.edu/~ejoy/Vietnam%201.jpg
Please note what I am not saying. I neither claim that photos initiate trends, nor that they are a critical factor in changing the direction of public sentiment. All I'm saying that the publication of photographs can be of more use to change something about the conditions that they document than if the photographer had attempted to do something on the spot to help an individual afflicted by it.That was Kim Phuc.
Hermit
17th February 2012, 10:58 PM
I think taking photos of those horrors is a pretty useful thing. For example, does anyone think photos like the famous one of Kim Phuk can change a governments actions in a war?
How so?
there are still starving nigger babies today, nothing has changed, there are still government wars today,
nothing has changed..
It's impossible to test this empirically, but I think public sentiment does effect change, and emotionally striking images are a significant factor in doing that.
This is a photograph that in my mind did a lot to turn the public against the police action in Vietnam and accelerated its end.
http://www.siue.edu/~ejoy/Vietnam%201.jpg
Please note what I am not saying. I neither claim that photos initiate trends, nor that they are a critical factor in changing the direction of public sentiment. All I'm saying that the publication of photographs can be of more use to change something about the conditions that they document than if the photographer had attempted to do something on the spot to help an individual afflicted by it.That was Kim Phuc.Yes, and he expressed very similar sentiments to the Carter quote. You will have noticed that my last sentence above was couched in general terms, yes?
How so?
there are still starving nigger babies today, nothing has changed, there are still government wars today,
nothing has changed..
It's impossible to test this empirically, but I think public sentiment does effect change, and emotionally striking images are a significant factor in doing that.
This is a photograph that in my mind did a lot to turn the public against the police action in Vietnam and accelerated its end.
http://www.siue.edu/~ejoy/Vietnam%201.jpg
Please note what I am not saying. I neither claim that photos initiate trends, nor that they are a critical factor in changing the direction of public sentiment. All I'm saying that the publication of photographs can be of more use to change something about the conditions that they document than if the photographer had attempted to do something on the spot to help an individual afflicted by it.That was Kim Phuc.Yes, and he expressed very similar sentiments to the Carter quote. You will have noticed that my last sentence above was couched in general terms, yes?
Nhận xét
Đăng nhận xét