Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 11, 2008 - 07:52pm PT
|
Skip, I know it's hard to wade through Doug's writing, but you should read the last post completely. He did address your concerns
Comes down to this, We don't recognize or take responsibility for our own senseless killing, but we just other's angry rhetoric as an excuse to demonize them in a situation where there are wrongdoers on all sides.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 11, 2008 - 09:38pm PT
|
Hi Skip
yeah, I agree that Doug sound unnecessarily condescending in his posts. I thing that arrogance might not be his real problem but that doesn't mean he doesn't have a point about "the log in our own eye"
Peace
Karl
|
|
dirtineye
Trad climber
the south
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2008 - 10:53pm PT
|
Doug B's bg problem is that after he learned to write by reading the Dr Bronner's bottle and copying the style he found there, he drank the contents.
And Skip, HOW could you pick one of the rare sentences of Doug's that actually can be forced to make sense as your example of crappy writing? Now I didn't say it made good sense, or that it was correct, only that it is not total garbage, like much of what he writes.
It's kind of like a Baba Rum Raisin sentence. OR, a sentence off a DR Bronner's bottle.
|
|
Doug Buchanan
Mountain climber
Fairbanks Alaska
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2008 - 05:28am PT
|
Yoooo my good friends of rhetorical bivies on precarious ledges......
Because I have never seen or read a Doctor Bronner's bottle, and have no idea what is in one, might it be that the good Doctor has bottled some rhetorical adventures that IF QUESTIONED rather than attacked, might produce some medicinal knowledge from one's answers to one's questions?
The human mind learns new knowledge from forming questions, not statements. The wisdom of answering every question one encounters, is derived from the process of asking and answering questions, that might cause one to wisely ask questions of one's always wrong first several answers.
Be cautious with that which you accuse the other guy. If questions of your accusation reveal that it holds no substance, it often identifies the nature of the accuser.
I hold no superior thinking skills, and have claimed none. I have never claimed to be a great thinker. I simply ask questions of recognized contradictions, the same simple ability of Skip, Karl, Dirt and every other human. Therefore the accusation revealed more of the accuser than the accused.
I routinely suggest the wisdom of asking more questions. Thinking is the process of asking and answering questions. It produces new knowledge useful to society and thus myself. Some people suggest that others consider climbing, or voting for idiot politicians. Some people suggest that others ask more questions. Good thing they do not all suggest the same thing.
If there is arrogance in asking questions, and verifiably describing people who make mistakes because they act before they adequately question their actions, then you and I are indeed an arrogant lot.
Is it not obvious that George Bush and every other war monger in human history acted before he adequately questioned his actions?
War is merely a dramatic example of all the other examples we manifest. Would we not make fewer embarrassing mistakes if we first asked ourselves a few more questions?
Those actions which harm others, such as charging climbers $200 for their RIGHT to walk on their public land, are worth first asking more questions, or otherwise expect thinking climbers to accurately describe mental midget National Park Service slugs and their unthinking Access Fund minions. Is it not obvious that, like George Bush, those dolts did not ask themselves the legal definitions of a RIGHT, and public land? Well?
Upon their inherent failure, when the total costs of the Iraq war and the National Park Service taxation for rights are tallied, even children will marvel at the unmitigated stupidity of those people of these days who denigrated those who suggested the wisdom of asking more questions before creating damaging contradictions.
Ask those questions.
Skipt, consider reading again what you have written. I read what I write many times before I upload it (and still find errors in what I upload).
You wrote the following of about my comment.....
(Skipt) "Look at this sentence:
(Doug)"Ask questions, and synthesize the knowledge YOUR answers therefore create in your mind."
(Skipt) This doesn't even make sense."
It does make sense, that is, convey useful knowledge.
Instead of asking a question to derive knowledge you did not yet recognize, you made a statement that revealed that you asked no question of a contradiction you perceived, to therefore remain ignorant. I did the same thing for many years, including those during which I maliciously damaged Vietnamese. I was an idiot.
An airplane flies because several concepts were discovered by curious humans asking questions, and synthesizing or combining the correct answers in a mechanical device.
A military enemy can be abjectly defeated without using any force, permanently, by asking questions about human minds functioning under the perception that force can achieve a sustainable goal.
SKIPT, Can I force you to think and act as I decree, with no subsequent cost to me? Did you answer that question and combine your answer with the answers to questions about what George Bush and his idiot National Park Service dolts do?
Now, does my earlier statement make sense?
Each new item of knowledge your mind learns results from arrangements of words (or actions) that your mind mostly recognizes from previously learned data, with the one new item better supported by that data, than any prior learned contradiction or lack of knowledge. Therefore, any of several different arrangements of words can effect a transfer of knowledge not recognized from prior arrangements.
Some people simply do not agree with others. Other people instead keep asking themselves questions to identify WHY they do not agree, to thus advance their related knowledge to and beyond the other guy. Your choice. Because you simply do not agree, do not expect the other guy to be so simple.
(An aside... All humans ultimately agree on everything, by design of the human mind, but the proof requires one to ask and answer a few more questions than are common.)
Bullshit is male bovine feces. Bullsh#t, as a rhetorical term, was invented to hastily avoid accurately identifying and resolving a contradiction, to thus remain ignorant. (Now what? I did not type that # in bullsh#t. Some bullshit censor did it.) The term has served its purpose well. Bush considers much to be bullsh#t. More carefully consider bullsh#t. It holds much knowledge.
There is nothing herein that is a lecture. You train your mind by the words you use. Use them accurately, and you will discover much useful knowledge not recognized by those who trained their mind to never really understand what is being referenced by bullsh#t, lectures and countless other rhetorical excuses to denigrate offered knowledge. If a word recognition zipping along a prior trained neuron must slow its process to identify unrelated meanings, such as bullshit that is not bullsh#t, or matters of the heart that are really matters of the mind, the brain will miss the accurate neuron assignment for the next three words which may hold the knowledge you seek.
If you do not have time for these concepts, you are not reading this sentence.
And why do I not do what I often say can be so easily done, such as manifest peace in Iraq, Palestine, Israel, Afghanistan, or make an honest US government, etceteras? As often stated, there is no incentive. It is part of the knowledge puzzle. There are other parts, all learnable by anyone.
But let me know if any significant entity would like to resolve any complex human-caused contradiction. The worthless-to-climbers AmerAC and Access Fund members might by some chance event sack their entirely corrupted, self-serving leadership and staff, select some actual climbers, and want to regain climber rights, an inconsequential example. They can learn how to do so on their own by STARTING to ask questions where they prior stopped to start acting with a verifiably doomed process. They stopped for a reason they did not question. I can offer them the questions, if they ask. Those particular self-serving idiots just lack the knowledge resultant from more questions.
A rather well designed show, these humans. Do you not agree?
DougBuchanan.com
|
|
UncleDoug
Social climber
N. lake Tahoe
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2008 - 12:19pm PT
|
Skip,
Do you realize how arrogant and condescending you come off in your last post?
I hope you do so this is planned and not your true self.
|
|
dirtineye
Trad climber
the south
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2008 - 12:43pm PT
|
HEHE, gotcha on the Dr Bronners, huh Doug?
But seriously, let's examine one small bit your stuff.
Doug, probably after taking a big swig of Dr. Bronners, wrote:
"Is it not obvious that George Bush and every other war monger in human history acted before he adequately questioned his actions?"
Well no Doug, it's not. In fact, war mongers are pretty much well known for not giving a damn about questioning their actions, or caring at all for that matter, so why do you think that self examination of any duration or level would make any difference to someone hell bent on waging war for their own gain?
You seem to think that questioning would provide enlightenment to these guys, and change their path. I bet not.
I can just see Hitler thinking, in 1940, right before one of his invasions: "Oh wait, the unexamined life is not worth living. I really should not be doing this. God what have I done??? wow, Herman, do you think if we stop now the rest of the world will let us keep Poland and still kill the jews? Do ya?? huh?
I feel soooo bad about this, really I do. Don't know what came over me. I'm REALLY sorry. If only I had asked myself more questions, I might not have become a megalomaniac war monger hell bent on conquering the world. Oh well, too late now.
|
|
Doug Buchanan
Mountain climber
Fairbanks Alaska
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2008 - 03:16pm PT
|
Skipt and colleagues of the mountains.......
The primary reason government lied to "forge" or start and continue the Iraq war, and maintain idiot climbing regulations, can be found in this thread and other comments on any war or government action.
Person A makes Statement B.
Person C changes the words to Statement D and says that the (new) statement is therefore wrong and/or Person A is therefore wrong.
A contradiction is therefore created by the changing of the words. Wars are started and maintained with created contradictions. They are ended with resolving contradictions.
Doug, who often states and describes all human minds as of the same design, with none inferior or superior, is described by Skipt as Doug telling others of their inferiority. Notice the significant change in words.
When one fails to use or recognize words that hold their meanings, they usually create contradictions.
Further, one person's perception of "bad style" and "lack of respect" is another person's perception of good style and respect. They just learned different things with their same brain design.
(As an aside, the power-damaged mind of the idiot who sought power above reasoning, is not inferior. Its perceptions were altered to create rather than resolve identified contradictions, by a specific process. That is a separate part of the knowledge puzzle.)
Because it is NOT POSSIBLE for the speaker or writer to conform his words to those unknowable words desired by the other mind, the other mind, if it wishes to learn more knowledge or entertain itself, must make the effort to derive knowledge from the writer's words. Your choice.
Therein if one does not understand something, they wisely ask questions, not change the words and claim that the changed words are in error.
If the 6th grade school teacher only said what the 5th grade student learned, so said teacher would be understood all the time, social knowledge would not be advanced.
If the 6th grade student accused the teacher of being wrong, rather than ask the questions to clarify the new knowledge or demonstrate its error, said student would remain with 5th grade knowledge on average.
If the climber spoke only of walking on the sidewalk, the sidewalk walker would not learn climbing. What did you want to learn from a climber's forum and a war thread?
THEREFORE Skipt..... A simple point demonstrates a simple point, not intelligence or an ability to focus. The latter are demonstrated by themselves.
To parse away what others consider to be unnecessary, might be, by analogy, to leave the rope behind since the climbers are not going to pull each other up the mountain. What? The rope is used for a different purpose? The simple point of climbing is to climb, not fiddle-fart with ropes. Should that not be adequate knowledge for climbing?
The careful reader will notice how often I state or indicate that I have no desire to want others to understand what I am writing. These words are for the advancement of my knowledge, by insuring that I create no contradiction in them (not always with success before uploading).
YOU AND SKIPT ARE ON YOUR OWN, as is the case with all people and knowledge. Your mind is isolated in a cranium. YOU must do the work to learn new knowledge. It cannot otherwise be put in your cranium. If you easily understand somebody's words, you have already learned the related concept. Only the difficult to understand offers you new knowledge.
You will never successfully get or give something for nothing, or more for less. Work your mind, if you wish.
MICRO ROCKS IN EYE..... Consider that the war mongers do not really desire to start wars, but to gain more power, by design of power in the human mind. Now therefore with those words, if they discovered an easier, less costly process to rule a larger area, perhaps the world, without war, would they start a war or use the easier process?
Practical sorts looking for the simple point, they would verifiably use the easier process.
And therefore the amusement is illuminated. That process is readily available, theirs for the asking. It has always been available. With his basic desire, Hitler or Bush could have ruled the world, or any part of his interest, and been the most respected leader in human history, but only by using words that hold their meanings, and other parts of the knowledge puzzle they do not access with their current knowledge because they are looking for the simple point, not new knowledge.
Hitler lost his chance. Bush, McCain, Obama, Osama or any of their desire could still do that, but they must learn the related knowledge. If they wanted to climb mountains, would they learn the related knowledge, or attempt to achieve more power with more lies?
The balance is perfect in all things. The humans are predicated on the design of their mind. That stated, WHO would use the process of their mind (reasoning), and who would use the process of their muscles (force)?
Notice that the use of institutional force always ultimately fails the humans.
NOW THEREFORE, WHAT WAS THE GOOD DOCTOR SUGGESTING OF HIS BOTTLE OF MEDICINE?
DougBuchanan.com
|
|
Doug Buchanan
Mountain climber
Fairbanks Alaska
|
|
|
Aug 13, 2008 - 05:05am PT
|
The current Presidential Ego Gratification Wars may offer a better example of what I attempted to explain above.
The writers of the US Constitution were well educated in the Common Law, the most brilliant process of social governance created by humans. Therein words hold their meanings, and no law may create a contradiction.
Knowing the countless excuses and rhetorical illusions that European monarchs used to hastily start destructive ego gratification wars, the US Constitution writers required Congress to "declare" war, if US military personnel were to use force of arms.
A Congressional "declaration of war" creates an open and accountable process of responsibility for the results, by each congressman voting for the "declaration of war". There is no equivocation, approximation, maybe, sort of, or a little bit. Everybody knows precisely what is being done, and the votes are recorded by name.
The "simple point" is the "simple point", and nothing else. The "Congressional Declaration of War" is the "Congressional Declaration of War", and nothing else.
Now notice that the ten wars the US has started, since WWII, involved no "declarations of war".
The US Constitution gives the DemocanRepublicrat Regime no authority to use US military force of arms with an "authorization" for war, "police action", "national interest", "response to terrorism", "search for weapons of mass destruction", or "insult to King George Bush's father".
The power-damaged minds of the DemocanRepublicrat congressmen rightfully feared the words, "Declaration of War", so they merely CHANGED THE WORDS to "authorization for war", not accountable in the common law, and more easily juggled again to rhetorically dilute the guilt by the same shift used to change "declaration" to "authorization".
They reverted to the nebulous ego gratification war excuses of in-bred, mental midget European monarchs.
The controlling concept was the government's "public" schools having already successfully taught society, especially the useless news journalists, that words hold no accountable meanings, and that word meanings can be changed, shifted or slithered slaunchwise at the whims of illiterate dolts with government titles equivalent to European titles of nobility and their effect on their minds.
You train your mind by the words you use. Start using accurate words. Stop shifting and approximating meanings of words. Practice precise words.
Your concern is not the other guy. Your concern is your own mind's ability to recognize that US military personnel fighting a war based on an "authorization" identifies those military personnel, the congressmen and their supporters as illiterate, criminally acting (add a few derogatory adjectives) simpletons who have sunk to the nadir of intellectual inability so magnificently illuminated by George Bush.
Learn that sooner than I did, since I did the same thing in Vietnam, much to my current embarrassment and amusement. The other guy must learn on his own. You cannot help him, especially if he easily understands you because you have sunk to his level.
As your questions advance your ability to recognize controlling contradictions, including those illuminated by the National Park Service climbing regulations supported by the idiot American Alpine Club leaders supported by obviously unquestioning American climbers (if any support the AmerAC), you will be amused by those who ask fewer questions, and learn much from those whose comments add valuable parts of the knowledge puzzle to your mind.
You will have vastly more fun, and laugh more often.
And send your old climbing gear for the new Alaskan Alpine Club museum and display area. Spread the word. Today I found one of those little "not for climbing" miniature biners in a dumpster. Used it to hang Andrew Embick's rock shoes on the rope around the main room ceiling edge. More old biners would be good.
NO SALT AND PEPPER SHAKERS. I saw several of them in the dumpster, also. As smart as I think I should have already been by now, I have no idea of what to do with salt and pepper shakers. Maybe put all of them in a durable container, with a picuture of the galaxy, and bury it where it will erode out in 1,000 years, to mystify archeologists.
Or something like that.
Doug
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!