Poverty measure ... doesn't make sense to me

[Swoop]

What's the difference between faith and enlightenment?

Simple.
"Faith" = going to a building on Sunday morning to hand over cash that you can't afford, to a white collar criminal who does not pay any tax, for a lie that you will be allowed to live forever with all those nice relatives who lived boring lives and whom you avoided throughout your own life.
"Enlightenment" = Knowing that doing good and not being a cunt to others, is a "good thing".

[Graystone]

Once you call his Beloved RBE for the Communism it really is (fun Fact - Fresco, whom Mashie already brought up earlier in the Thread and the creator of the RBE concept attended Communist League - although he was ejected for critiquing Marx...) the insults, refusals to engage and general grandstanding happens.

I actually think Mashie deep down knows that it's in the same philosophical tree as Marxism, Communism etc. I also think that deep down he knows it's doomed to the same failure - and that's why when you touch that exposed nerve he goes from the rational Mashman that used to be up for Debate to the pious asshat that we currently have.

So why did this Fresco call it an RBE? what's his resource?

I'm not so sure, there's clearly a retreat from reality, and passing on the blame to others (ie, calling someone an arsehole then blaming them for seeing it as a combative tone) so he can sit in a nice little box of his own reality where his RBE dream can be a sure thing. It's self-delusional behavior so I don't think we can rationalise exactly what he knows deep down.

[Woodman]

@trying to gain followers. You're funny. You read posts how you read them. I've told you there was no combative intent my post, yet you choose to believe otherwise. See the problem there? If you do, then yeah, we might actually be able to have a discussion should you genuinely wish more information. If you don't, then why the fuck would I bother with you?

Thanks. I appreciate your ill-founded sentiment.



Nature v's Nurture... The Dunedin Experiment had some interesting things to say about that. As do many psychologists, anthropologists etc... i.e. there is no such thing as human nature, because everything is learned and behaviour is triggered by the environment under which a human being is nurtured. It's not my opinion, it's documented fact. We have no nature. We live, we die, every country in the world has different cultures/religions/rules that make us different to someone in another country. That's not nature, that's monkey see monkey do.

As such, I'm more than open minded about such things, but when one comes across someone such as yourself that is so deeply entrenched (dramatic phrase, don't spill your coffee) in an opposing view, things get icky. Icky to the point where I'll be told that I'm meaning this or saying that when I mean something different, or indeed that I'm being closed minded or combative and living in a fantasy land that has no bearing on reality whatsoever despite the mounting evidence to the contrary. It ain't my fault that you guys choose not to explore the things I state and would rather simply state that I'm being this or that and ignoring this and that because you guys think so, as that is what your preferred position at that given point in time is. Calling me closed does you no favours. However, I actually enjoy many of your posts as you seem to be able to ask a question and accept the answer given as an actual answer. That you deny that answer as invalid is entirely up to you. I cannot and will never try to convince you otherwise. I shall put forwards logical, reasonable and common sense points and then guess what? You get to make your own mind up. If a post sounds angry, then go, make a cup or tea, and come back and read it again once you've calmed down... coz you someone may be trolling you using language specifically posted to highlight just how stupid readers who don't actually want to learn anything coz the person might seem angry etc... The last person who apologised to me for their emotive rant was met with the response "It's ok, I listened to what you said not how you said it.". Some people need to do some serious growing up if they think that they're open minded and fold when confronted with what looks like conflict or a combative post... but no, they'd rather spin in the spin because that's what they came here to do. All entirely your choice and absolutely nothing to do with me other than the environment my words create. Le sigh.

Cool, but your rbe is just an unproven theory.

[Graystone]

Simple.
"Faith" = going to a building on Sunday morning to hand over cash that you can't afford, to a white collar criminal who does not pay any tax, for a lie that you will be allowed to live forever with all those nice relatives who lived boring lives and whom you avoided throughout your own life.
"Enlightenment" = Knowing that doing good and not being a cunt to others, is a "good thing".

Nah I don't agree with that at all. Edge cases, and only in a religious sense for both of those examples.

[Akzle]

No, I really don't.

I suspect you are taking umbrage with the last one - However - some of the rules that on the surface would seem to directly contradict that - generally have conformity to other things that are pretty much universal (namely to do sexual fidelity which itself seems to stem from concerns around parentage and inheritance).

I did say that it sometimes goes a bit wonky

there's no umbrage motherfucker.

you presented that list as definitive of "human nature"
i'm telling ya, that people i'd identify as azn or injun, don't fit your definition. so by your 2ft stick, they're either "not human" or...

[mashman]

Cool, but your rbe is just an unproven theory.

Correct. It is... although plenty of cultures have lived that "way" (i.e. sustainably). Damned shame they used colonisation as a tool.

[TheDemonLord]

there's no umbrage motherfucker.

you presented that list as definitive of "human nature"
i'm telling ya, that people i'd identify as azn or injun, don't fit your definition. so by your 2ft stick, they're either "not human" or...

I'm glad you say I've got a 2ft stick

However - none of those Cultures made their Women folk do dangerous work (apart from Child Birth) - All of them considered Women as incapable of looking after themselves - so developed very strict rules as to how they should act - these rules, although made under the intent of protection, ended up as oppressive.

Concepts such as Dowries (the original idea being it was a portion of the Bride's family wealth, transferred to her, so that in the event of her Husbands death, she could look after herself) had a rooting in an idea of protection of Women - but as I'm sure you are aware, have become rigid tools that do the opposite.

Hence why I said they went a bit Wonky.

[Akzle]

I'm glad you say I've got a 2ft stick

However - none of those Cultures made their Women folk do dangerous work (apart from Child Birth) - All of them considered Women as incapable of looking after themselves - so developed very strict rules as to how they should act - these rules, although made under the intent of protection, ended up as oppressive.

Concepts such as Dowries (the original idea being it was a portion of the Bride's family wealth, transferred to her, so that in the event of her Husbands death, she could look after herself) had a rooting in an idea of protection of Women - but as I'm sure you are aware, have become rigid tools that do the opposite.

Hence why I said they went a bit Wonky.

that's a foot short of a yard. if you're happy with that measure then power to you. i guess.
just don't lick my windows cos i've had them cleaned.

whoopdeedoo basil. intent's pretty meaningless when the outcomes known but doesn't change anything. one could almost say there were ulterior motives in play. are they part of human nature?

and (off topic) dowry was pretty much fathers with cunt daughters paying some poor sod to take the whore. and also usualy reciprocal with the groom swapping farm animals with the bride's parents, presumably because he was sick of shagging them and wanting to upgrade.

and that was but one of 4 traits.

[TheDemonLord]

that's a foot short of a yard. if you're happy with that measure then power to you. i guess.
just don't lick my windows cos i've had them cleaned.

I was making a Penis joke...

whoopdeedoo basil. intent's pretty meaningless when the outcomes known but doesn't change anything. one could almost say there were ulterior motives in play. are they part of human nature?

Well - Intent is pretty key - if you look at a lot of tribal/ancient cultures - they have some pretty bizarre rules, often with steep/brutal punishments and are enforced with tyrannical enthusiasm - It's easy to look at it and critique it on the outcome, without any appreciation for the intent.

Perhaps my favourite example is the Biblical prohibition against eating shellfish, and it being a crime punishable by Death - on the Surface it seems very arbitrary and an unnecessarily steep punishment...

Until you remember that the people who created the rule lived in the desert some 3000 odd years ago - and that Shellfish can have some very nasty bacteria, especially if they are carted across the Desert and aren't fresh.

Then you remember that the people of the time lived in very close proximity, often in extended familial groups, with limited access to Fresh Water.

Almost everyone here will have some memory of a gathering of people where someone had a tummy bug and a couple days later, almost everyone is squirting at both ends. For us, it's not that bad - sit on the Toilet, with a bucket, drink lots of fluid, eat only bread etc. But if you remove that ready access to clean water and you remove modern sanitation and you add in desert heat - it suddenly becomes much more serious - potentially killing the youngest members of the tribe (infants) and the eldest members of the tribe (the Elders) and leaving the tribe undefended.

At that point, you realise that a supposedly silly rule - when given the correct context and intend - isn't as silly as it first sounds.

Now in regards to Ulterior Motives and are they Part of Human Nature? I'm not 100% sure, certainly across cultures there has been prohibitions of kinds in place to ensure that Parentage of children is beyond dispute - there are also similar behaviours observable in the Animal kingdom.

I suspect that there is a strong human nature component (Mainly from the Male side) but with time it has moved to a much more cultural behaviour.

and (off topic) dowry was pretty much fathers with cunt daughters paying some poor sod to take the whore. and also usualy reciprocal with the groom swapping farm animals with the bride's parents, presumably because he was sick of shagging them and wanting to upgrade.

and that was but one of 4 traits.

As I said - it goes a bit Wonky...

[TheDemonLord]

Correct. It is... although plenty of cultures have lived that "way" (i.e. sustainably). Damned shame they used colonisation as a tool.

Yes....

That's because the complexity of living in mudhuts and grass skirts means that everyone is capable of doing every job in the tribe - once society gets a bit more complex, it doesn't work.

[Katman]

I was making a Penis joke...

You are a penis joke.

[TheDemonLord]

You are a penis joke.

Hows that Closet working out for you?

[Akzle]

I was making a Penis joke...
...

your penis is a joke.

and also probably still 2/3ds the average measure

[ellipsis]

...having a small penis does not preclude you from being a sizeable cunt...

[TheDemonLord]

your penis is a joke.

and also probably still 2/3ds the average measure

I see you're getting comfy with Katman in his Closet.

But by all means - continue thinking about what swings majestically between my legs - I'm secure enough to be flattered.