|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 94 responses total. |
brenner
|
|
response 25 of 94:
| 
Mar 27 03:58 UTC 1995 |
Wonderful rehersal.
|
juls
|
|
response 26 of 94:
|
Mar 27 21:23 UTC 1995 |
Okay, that's twice, gotta say it: R E H E A R S A L (as in hearing all
over again).
|
sdober
|
|
response 27 of 94:
|
Mar 28 01:09 UTC 1995 |
Wonderful taxes.
|
brenner
|
|
response 28 of 94:
|
Mar 28 02:09 UTC 1995 |
No, no, no, gota say it: S E X (as in texas all over again)
|
mdw
|
|
response 29 of 94:
|
Mar 28 04:10 UTC 1995 |
If you do taxes wrong, they result in a lifetime of trouble.
If you do sex right, it results in a lifetime of trouble.
If you do texas wrong, it results in the trouble of a lifetime.
Uh, what was the question?
|
vsclyne
|
|
response 30 of 94:
|
Mar 28 05:57 UTC 1995 |
With answers like that, who needs questions?
|
brenner
|
|
response 31 of 94:
|
Mar 28 14:31 UTC 1995 |
Why?
|
sdober
|
|
response 32 of 94:
|
Mar 28 17:00 UTC 1995 |
Wow. Marcus kicks ass too. There's some real po-mo promise(tm) here.
|
vsclyne
|
|
response 33 of 94:
|
Mar 28 23:44 UTC 1995 |
So I'm finished reading this conference for now, and it's
time to sit here and sift some more sand. Today's subject
is ethics.
1) In evolutionary terms, there is survival value in
grouping behavior of complex organisms; hence societies;
2) In evolutionary terms, there is societal survival
value in individual behaviors that promote the welfare
of the society as a whole;
3) Individuals, and the society as a whole, reward
these behaviors. They mediate the Jungian duality of
individuality versus the need to belong to the group;
4) otherwise self-seeking individual survivalists
"feel good" being altruistic;
5) Ethics formalizes, and attempts to rationalize,
these behaviors. While they are rationalizable, they
are, in fact, pre-rational archetypes.
I think this is all quite convincing, except I don't
know how to account for accordions in this analysis.
|
thanne
|
|
response 34 of 94:
|
Mar 29 01:35 UTC 1995 |
I'm still mulling over my new term for the post-pico
conferencing system (when such a thing exists, if ever):
po-pi. Like it?
Heh.
|
brenner
|
|
response 35 of 94:
|
Mar 29 03:47 UTC 1995 |
Vsclyne, accordions are not bound by time, space or
linear argument. They meet together at will.
They discuss the flutes. They dream of reincarnation
as fiddles. They arise from their stupor.
|
mdw
|
|
response 36 of 94:
|
Mar 29 03:48 UTC 1995 |
One the one hand, you have the rabbit school of evolutionary ethics,
which says you reproduce as fast as possible, but try to keep the
investment in any individual unit as low as possible to minimize the
inevitable loss of investment as many of your individual units rejoin
the food chain. With the appropriately inconvenient population curve,
the rabbit principle can be a very sound long-term strategy.
On the other hand, you have the top-dog school of evolutionary ethics.
In this school, you seek to produce invulnerable individual units, so
that the relatively high risk invested in each individual unit has the
best chance possible of survival. Given sufficient intelligence to deal
with the vagueries of life, these units can also be highly successful.
Accordions are members of neither group; having no sex, no nutritional
value, and no brains. Indeed, evolutionarily, accordions seem to be a
complete waste of time. Perhaps it's just as well that only a few odd
varieties of primates, primarily of african descent, take any interest
in accordions.
|
nephi
|
|
response 37 of 94:
|
Mar 29 04:26 UTC 1995 |
Aren't all primates of African descent?
|
brenner
|
|
response 38 of 94:
|
Mar 29 08:05 UTC 1995 |
THE IRISH PRIMATE
|
vsclyne
|
|
response 39 of 94:
|
Mar 29 13:54 UTC 1995 |
Marcus makes a valid point. The existence of accordions
proves that evolution is not a grand design but rather
a haphazard, random process of accumulated accidents.
Brenner, I am Irish and I am *definitely* primal.
|
brenner
|
|
response 40 of 94:
|
Mar 29 14:13 UTC 1995 |
The phrase (The Irish....etc) is redundant.
|
juls
|
|
response 41 of 94:
|
Mar 29 16:40 UTC 1995 |
Be this a foitin' pub, boyoes?
|
mdw
|
|
response 42 of 94:
|
Mar 30 00:14 UTC 1995 |
New world primates aren't african. New world primates also feature
prehensile tails, unlike their old world cousins.
|
juls
|
|
response 43 of 94:
|
Mar 30 00:17 UTC 1995 |
And just what do you do with yours, Shannon, since the canopy is pretty
sparse in LA?
|
vsclyne
|
|
response 44 of 94:
|
Mar 30 03:00 UTC 1995 |
What do I do with my what? Whose canopy? What
*are* you talking about? I have a prehensile
tale. That has nothing whatsoever to do with
canopies.
Juls, we need to talk.
|
humdog
|
|
response 45 of 94:
|
Mar 30 10:39 UTC 1995 |
now tell me, which of my Irish Primates would you like
to hear about?
the black haired, blue eyed one who belonged to the IRA i think?
the grey eyed one (although i think we did him at great length
in the cave, not that his length was great or anything)
the unmentionable one?
the lovely one?
the regal one?
the poetical one?
|
nephi
|
|
response 46 of 94:
|
Mar 30 11:21 UTC 1995 |
Oh please go on about the unmentionable one that you mentioned!
|
vsclyne
|
|
response 47 of 94:
|
Mar 30 13:33 UTC 1995 |
Yes, by all means, the unmentionable one. Sounds
quintessentially Irish to me.
(Marry an Irishman and you can have Spirish children, humdog.
Little cocker spirish humpuppies. What a prospect. Or
don't marry him, whatever, just pump out them humpuppies.
The world is waiting.)
|
juls
|
|
response 48 of 94:
|
Mar 30 16:31 UTC 1995 |
(Stunned at the concept.)
Prehensile tail/tale, Shannon you silly, and rain forest canopy. It was
a JOKE.
<muttermuttergrumble. . .>
|
humdog
|
|
response 49 of 94:
|
Mar 30 16:48 UTC 1995 |
marry an irishman, and all my children shalt be
black irish.
if i married an irishman of the temperament i prefer,
the authorities will find out,
and they will arrest my fine babies at birth.
|
