Seasons
This is a forum or general chit-chat, small talk, a "hey, how ya doing?" and such. Or hell, get crazy deep on something. Whatever you like.
Posts 5,518 - 5,529 of 6,170
Posts 5,518 - 5,529 of 6,170
Vashka
16 years ago
16 years ago
"If men weren't "pigs" at heart, we could all walk around naked."
"Maybe men can't help they way they think, but I was happier before I knew how they think."
I do believe that you have come to these conclusions through experience. I still think you are wrong! As you say, my experience is different. Not that I've never met any "pigs", but that I've also met men who are not pigs. In fact, I know quite a few decent men. I'm even married to one.
As a scientifically-minded person, I'm wary of unwarranted generalisations. I'm also aware of confirmation bias: we pay more attention to evidence that fits our preconceived beliefs. I think that's what you're doing in this case. I probably am too - but you admit your view of men is making you unhappy. I believe that you gave "men in general" a chance before dismissing them all, but I submit that giving individual men a chance is fairer and may be more profitable for you. It seems to me that you should watch out for signs of sleaziness, but not assume they're there. (And in fact that may be what you do!)
I dunno. It makes me sad to think about how many horrible people there are around. But it almost makes me sadder to think of decent people not being given a chance, or being written off at the first slip that is reminiscent of a previous bad experience. And I hope this doesn't sound patronising, but it makes me sad for you, Bev, because you seem like a lovely intelligent person and you deserve better!
PS Again, I don't trust literature, films, or even magazines as representing the actual attitudes of a time. I can see for myself that the media now doesn't often portray my attitudes towards and experiences of the world. I don't really trust it for the past, or only in a limited way.
PPS Bev, I don't mind if we don't continue this discussion. I'm not sure we're going to change each other's minds, and I suspect we agree on a lot more than we disagree on, in actual fact! We obviously both feel strongly about this - because we see similar things as important.
"Maybe men can't help they way they think, but I was happier before I knew how they think."
I do believe that you have come to these conclusions through experience. I still think you are wrong! As you say, my experience is different. Not that I've never met any "pigs", but that I've also met men who are not pigs. In fact, I know quite a few decent men. I'm even married to one.
As a scientifically-minded person, I'm wary of unwarranted generalisations. I'm also aware of confirmation bias: we pay more attention to evidence that fits our preconceived beliefs. I think that's what you're doing in this case. I probably am too - but you admit your view of men is making you unhappy. I believe that you gave "men in general" a chance before dismissing them all, but I submit that giving individual men a chance is fairer and may be more profitable for you. It seems to me that you should watch out for signs of sleaziness, but not assume they're there. (And in fact that may be what you do!)
I dunno. It makes me sad to think about how many horrible people there are around. But it almost makes me sadder to think of decent people not being given a chance, or being written off at the first slip that is reminiscent of a previous bad experience. And I hope this doesn't sound patronising, but it makes me sad for you, Bev, because you seem like a lovely intelligent person and you deserve better!
PS Again, I don't trust literature, films, or even magazines as representing the actual attitudes of a time. I can see for myself that the media now doesn't often portray my attitudes towards and experiences of the world. I don't really trust it for the past, or only in a limited way.
PPS Bev, I don't mind if we don't continue this discussion. I'm not sure we're going to change each other's minds, and I suspect we agree on a lot more than we disagree on, in actual fact! We obviously both feel strongly about this - because we see similar things as important.
Bev
16 years ago
16 years ago
Vashka, I will agree to disagree.:-) This is nothing compared to some debates we have had on the board here (believe it or not there have been intense arguments over quantum physics that make this look short.--Irina instigated that one too
).
I do want to clear up one thing about my own personal view though. I am aware that I am talking in generalizations here, and I never meant to imply that all men are pigs (I put it in quotes for a reason--maybe Irina knows what I meant). My comments were really directed against the commercialization of sexuality (i.e. porn, strippers, prostitutes) that take something that was a fun and natural sharing of affections and intimacy and make it a cold, mechanical nasty experience. I was also talking about how cultural attitudes change (though sex always sells, and I get that too). To reduce my opinion about sexuality and romance to "men suck" is missing the point.
I think the reason you believe I do not give men a chance is because you do not know me in real life. Three times you have mentioned the belief that I do not give men a chance. Dear me, quite the opposite--which is probably why I sound bitter to you now. You will have to take my word on the fact that I very much want to believe in love and romance, and each time I tell myself "this one is different" though I do try to avoid making past mistakes and therefore avoid the big obvious red flags. I am glad you found someone who is right for you. It is possible that the things I want make me difficult to match. That isn't to say I don't like individual men, and that I have not tried many, many times to build a lasting relationship. I am the queen of chances and chancers but the crown can get heavy at times.
I shouldn't have personalized the discussion so much with examples from my experience or my personal outlook on romance. Still, I doubt we will change each others minds about commercialization of sex nor the changing cultural expectations for romantic encounters. If you are happy and have a good relationship, great for you.
Maybe that makes the other things matter less to you though, because you aren't out there dating. I may be wrong, it just seems like I shouldn't tell you about marriage as mine failed, and you shouldn't tell me about how many great men are out there, since you married one and don't have to look anymore.

I do want to clear up one thing about my own personal view though. I am aware that I am talking in generalizations here, and I never meant to imply that all men are pigs (I put it in quotes for a reason--maybe Irina knows what I meant). My comments were really directed against the commercialization of sexuality (i.e. porn, strippers, prostitutes) that take something that was a fun and natural sharing of affections and intimacy and make it a cold, mechanical nasty experience. I was also talking about how cultural attitudes change (though sex always sells, and I get that too). To reduce my opinion about sexuality and romance to "men suck" is missing the point.
I think the reason you believe I do not give men a chance is because you do not know me in real life. Three times you have mentioned the belief that I do not give men a chance. Dear me, quite the opposite--which is probably why I sound bitter to you now. You will have to take my word on the fact that I very much want to believe in love and romance, and each time I tell myself "this one is different" though I do try to avoid making past mistakes and therefore avoid the big obvious red flags. I am glad you found someone who is right for you. It is possible that the things I want make me difficult to match. That isn't to say I don't like individual men, and that I have not tried many, many times to build a lasting relationship. I am the queen of chances and chancers but the crown can get heavy at times.
I shouldn't have personalized the discussion so much with examples from my experience or my personal outlook on romance. Still, I doubt we will change each others minds about commercialization of sex nor the changing cultural expectations for romantic encounters. If you are happy and have a good relationship, great for you.


Irina
16 years ago
16 years ago
Bev wrote:
Irina instigated that one too
Oh, oh! My true nature is coming to light!
Bev
16 years ago
16 years ago
Yeah, you gotta watch Irina--she likes to stir up trouble.
Irina--see how mature I was about letting "You admit your attitude about men is making you unhappy" slide even though that's not even close to what I said? Damn all that personal growth lost in a snotty side comment. You bring out the worst in me. Thanks. :-)
(Just kidding Vashka-I know that's what you think I said and that's OK).
Irina--see how mature I was about letting "You admit your attitude about men is making you unhappy" slide even though that's not even close to what I said? Damn all that personal growth lost in a snotty side comment. You bring out the worst in me. Thanks. :-)
(Just kidding Vashka-I know that's what you think I said and that's OK).
prob123
16 years ago
16 years ago
I remember the quantum discussion and the one on moral situations. I still say absolute evil lurks in the world...but I like quantum physics
Irina
16 years ago
16 years ago
Bev wrote:
Irina--see how mature I was about letting "You admit your attitude about men is making you unhappy" slide even though that's not even close to what I said? Damn all that personal growth lost in a snotty side comment. You bring out the worst in me. Thanks. :-)
Er, you're welcome, Bev!
Er, you're welcome, Bev!
Irina
16 years ago
16 years ago
Prob123 wrote:
I still say absolute evil lurks in the world...
I agree... and it also swaggers.
I agree... and it also swaggers.
Irina
16 years ago
16 years ago
Prob123 wrote:
but I like quantum physics
So do I! It has all the beauty of a mathematical theory, but the plurality of interpretations means that we can argue about it forever.
So do I! It has all the beauty of a mathematical theory, but the plurality of interpretations means that we can argue about it forever.
Interzone
16 years ago
16 years ago
i would say, evil is manifest in the world, very much so, no doubt about that. but, i think it's transient in nature, rather than absolute. this makes me a cultural pessimist, and an ontological optimist, i guess...
the best thing about quantum physics is, it proved conclusively that the reductionist materialist worldview is fundamentally flawed, and does not hold water as an ontological theory. the bad thing is, nobody noticed it, which is a good news for me
the best thing about quantum physics is, it proved conclusively that the reductionist materialist worldview is fundamentally flawed, and does not hold water as an ontological theory. the bad thing is, nobody noticed it, which is a good news for me

Bev
16 years ago
16 years ago
Absolute evil? Prob123 just says she believes in that so she has an excuse to go back in time and kill baby Hitler. Prob, why do you hate babies?
So, was I just evil?
/swaggers
So, was I just evil?
/swaggers
The Clerk
16 years ago
16 years ago
Well, there's good in the world, and Arlo Guthrie says that "for every light, you have to have a dark to stick it into" (I think I got that verbatim). So there's evil according to the Church of Arlo.
Speaking of evil, our much-beloved (insert eye-roll here) Senator, Jesse Helms died, and the mayor here in Raleigh (or some big shot) wanted every public building's flag lowered to half-staff. Turns out we have one sensible person who knew Jesse was a mean so-and-so and wouldn't lower his flag. He was given an ultimatum to raise that flag or resign. After decades as a state employee, he resigned and THEN, of course, the flag got lowered. What I'm thinking is, was it worth it? But it sure would've been fun.
Speaking of evil, our much-beloved (insert eye-roll here) Senator, Jesse Helms died, and the mayor here in Raleigh (or some big shot) wanted every public building's flag lowered to half-staff. Turns out we have one sensible person who knew Jesse was a mean so-and-so and wouldn't lower his flag. He was given an ultimatum to raise that flag or resign. After decades as a state employee, he resigned and THEN, of course, the flag got lowered. What I'm thinking is, was it worth it? But it sure would've been fun.
Bev
16 years ago
16 years ago
Interzone, please explain more how quantum physics proved the reductionist material world view was flawed? I understand quantum theory was a shift from Newtonian physics, but I am wary of the idea that a change in our understanding of physics proves or disproves a philosophical position (unless you are taking the view that math and science are the most basic of philosophies and any shift the the set of rules used in physics is a philosophical one). The spooky effect, uncertainty principal and the like do not conclusively prove or disprove anything mystical or metaphysical, they just confirm the fact there are some phenomenon we do not completely understand at this time and that more research is needed. All good science does that. The fact that observation effects the subject being observe just tells us we aren't as good at identifying and controlling extraneous factors as we thought, and that this factor must also be studied. What proof do you mean?
It's not that I am a materialistic reductionist, mind you. I think philosophy can make use of the scientific method (or not, depending of the framework of that philosophy) but that no experiment or set of studies conclusively proves anything. We merely accept reasonable conclusions drawn from sounds scientific theories as true until such time as new evidence is found that may change the analysis. I'll grant you I am pretty certain about theories such as gravity, but the point is to keep the research and inquiry going, not to conclusively prove anything.
Before Psimagus accuses me of being pro "creationist" or whatever they call it now (as he did last time we discussed the assumptions and implications of the scientific method) I want to state I think there are several characteristic that make a scientific theory scientific and not mere conjecture. Off the top of my head, a good theory such as gravity or evolution should be testable, rely on experimentation and solid method, should be based on data that is replicable and fits other establish data and theory, and it should generate new hypothesis to be tested. That doesn't mean the data or theory can be said to conclusively prove anything though. It just means we accept the most reasonable logical implications of the known information until such time as our knowledge or information changes. If the information doesn't change, however, and the theory works (and Netwon's still works pretty good for many things) we can keep using it and think of it as "true".
It's not that I am a materialistic reductionist, mind you. I think philosophy can make use of the scientific method (or not, depending of the framework of that philosophy) but that no experiment or set of studies conclusively proves anything. We merely accept reasonable conclusions drawn from sounds scientific theories as true until such time as new evidence is found that may change the analysis. I'll grant you I am pretty certain about theories such as gravity, but the point is to keep the research and inquiry going, not to conclusively prove anything.
Before Psimagus accuses me of being pro "creationist" or whatever they call it now (as he did last time we discussed the assumptions and implications of the scientific method) I want to state I think there are several characteristic that make a scientific theory scientific and not mere conjecture. Off the top of my head, a good theory such as gravity or evolution should be testable, rely on experimentation and solid method, should be based on data that is replicable and fits other establish data and theory, and it should generate new hypothesis to be tested. That doesn't mean the data or theory can be said to conclusively prove anything though. It just means we accept the most reasonable logical implications of the known information until such time as our knowledge or information changes. If the information doesn't change, however, and the theory works (and Netwon's still works pretty good for many things) we can keep using it and think of it as "true".
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar