|
|
| Author |
Message |
remmers
|
|
The Lesson of the Master
| 
Aug 2 06:16 UTC 1994 |
It is important to have all the prior forms in order before proceeding to
the next step. In this way, our efforts are assured a firm foundation
which they would not otherwise possess. Many a noble venture has failed
from inattention to this precept. A house with all the windows and doors
locked but one is not a secure house.
Ah, you say, but what about indeterminism? A locus of proper and complete
prior forms may well admit more than one consequent. And if this is the
case, what is our next step? The answer is simple: It is what you choose
it to be. A hungry man may have his appetite assuaged either by roast
beef or mutton.
But wait a moment. Perhaps we have tripped upon a fallacy. Surely by
their very nature a truly complete set of prior forms admits but one
consequent, you say. My friend, the fallacy is yours. An image may
in its passage through a lens be focused at one point, but it emerges
on the other side with all the rich variegation of the original, and
we may choose on which aspect of it we wish to concentrate.
|
| 21 responses total. |
arwen
|
|
response 1 of 21:
|
Aug 2 22:07 UTC 1994 |
Have you ever looked at life through a clear glass marble?
I keep one handy to remind myself that all is
not as it seems.
|
md
|
|
response 2 of 21:
|
Aug 3 13:27 UTC 1994 |
In fact, for several years when I was in my teens,
I looked at the world *only* through a clear glass
marble. Carried it around with me everywhere.
After a while, my brain had adjusted to the view
and I was able to do everything normally, except
when I wasn't looking through the marble. Then,
everything looked wonderfully stretched and expanded.
Whenever I wanted a weird and different view of
the world, I would put down the marble and just
look at it. "Geez," I would say to my friends
and family, "I don't know how you can function
with everything looking like... like *this*."
Younger children understood me, but none of the
adults did.
|
arwen
|
|
response 3 of 21:
|
Aug 3 16:20 UTC 1994 |
I think everyone should have to take a class on clear glass
marbles......then when you lose your marble(s) you
will have a clear distorted memory of an expanded
stretched (before drying in a hot dryer which will
cause it to shrink) reality.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 4 of 21:
|
Aug 3 17:12 UTC 1994 |
Some experiments were done once on fitting people with glasses that
turned their view upside-down. But I don't recall what happened.
|
remmers
|
|
response 5 of 21:
|
Aug 3 21:09 UTC 1994 |
They took off the glasses, that's what happened.
|
arwen
|
|
response 6 of 21:
|
Aug 3 22:29 UTC 1994 |
NO,no,remmers...they stood on their heads!!
|
remmers
|
|
response 7 of 21:
|
Aug 8 16:28 UTC 1994 |
I deeply appreciated the attention and analysis that my third
paragraph has received. However, no one has yet commented upon
the first two paragraphs. This deficit should be remedied, as
a discussion in which not all points have been analyzed is
perforce incomplete.
|
remmers
|
|
response 8 of 21:
|
Aug 12 21:35 UTC 1994 |
The master grows impatient at the silence of his flock. Are
your tongues packed in ice?
|
gerund
|
|
response 9 of 21:
|
Aug 12 22:54 UTC 1994 |
Well, sir... I think it's a bunch of cow chips.
Perhaps an open house is not unsecure... it's just open.
On The other hand...perhaps it doesn't matter.
On the foot... if it does matter, who cares realy?
On the other foot.. why don't we just chose and live with it?
Btw... ignore all this I've said... it's meaningless. :)
|
fuz
|
|
response 10 of 21:
|
Aug 13 03:35 UTC 1994 |
good.
|
arwen
|
|
response 11 of 21:
|
Aug 16 14:03 UTC 1994 |
mah tub ith fothen hep hep. wom wawa peas
|
remmers
|
|
response 12 of 21:
|
Aug 17 03:53 UTC 1994 |
I quite agree, but to which point in particular is that applicable?
|
arwen
|
|
response 13 of 21:
|
Aug 17 19:09 UTC 1994 |
frozen tongue points
|
remmers
|
|
response 14 of 21:
|
Aug 18 01:44 UTC 1994 |
Ah, just so. Guess you must've gotten the warm water. All right,
now respond to my points.
|
arwen
|
|
response 15 of 21:
|
Aug 20 21:25 UTC 1994 |
Don't point...it is rude
|
vishnu
|
|
response 16 of 21:
|
Aug 22 03:28 UTC 1994 |
Good point.
|
arwen
|
|
response 17 of 21:
|
Aug 22 22:15 UTC 1994 |
We had better say something legitimate or he is going to think
this is pointless.
|
kami
|
|
response 18 of 21:
|
Aug 22 22:26 UTC 1994 |
not by the hair on its pointy little head.
|
remmers
|
|
response 19 of 21:
|
Aug 23 01:35 UTC 1994 |
Well, perhaps We can focus the discussion a bit by raising a question
regarding personal styles: What is your threshold for action? 90%
certainty of outcome? 75% certainty? What?
|
orinoco
|
|
response 20 of 21:
|
Sep 18 16:55 UTC 1994 |
I'm getting me a clear glass marble...
|
alfee
|
|
response 21 of 21:
|
Sep 29 00:35 UTC 1994 |
My threshhold for action depends primarily on the importance of the task at
hand, not necessarily the certainty of outcome. Or, to rephrase: the
positive, or desired, certainty of outcome. For example: action=attempting
to save the life of a heart attack victim using CPR. Desired outcome:
return to consciousness, heartbeat, independent respiration. I know that
statistically less than 50% of all CPR attempts result in desired outcome,
yet the VALUE of the life that can potentially be spared through the action
of CPR is enough of an incentive to use this course of action.
In working with my Alzheimer's patients, I get desired outcomes in our
therapy sessions less than 10% of the time, because much of my work is hit-
or-miss and experimental. Once again, my desire to connect with these
people is enough of an incentive to keep trying many different actions in
the therapy group setting to hit in that 10%. I VALUE the connection.
And that is a brief synopsis of one facet of my personal style.
|