ydoaPs Posted June 5, 2005 Posted June 5, 2005 Brevity' date=' brevity, brevity, wherefore art thou brevity? [/quote'] not too good at Elizabethan English, are you? wherefore=why. in the most famous case of its use, Romeo and Juliet, Juliet is talking to herself, not Romeo.
KaiduOrkhon Posted June 5, 2005 Author Posted June 5, 2005 Dear reverse Molecule: Gotta concede, you continue to show signs of being a good sport, after all. Grateful for your (unfortunately contrasting?) benevolent gesture in the midst of the duly thwarted reign of (invective, impolite, invidious rude?) attempts to divert to 'off topic'; neutralize, simonze and/or demonize this thread and perhaps bait or otherwise prod this record to (how you say?) lose grace? (Oh yeah. We have much more of that - and face - than the manifestly jealous monks would allow, if they controlled it. ('If you don't take control of yer life, sure as hell, somebody else will.' - Solamente Marie D'Angelico) (The tidal surge of unsavory debris is duly noted and archived <each such message an inevitable profile of itself,. There's a heck of a lot of 'co-authors', in ongoing, unpublished notes on the growing recreation of friendly, fashionable facism; much of it free falling in the precipitating skill of literacy - the augmented vocabulary being synonymous with the capacity to reason and think. Everyone is responsible for doing that - everything they think, say and do - so of course anything mindful of that responsibility is at peril of being disreputed, hazed, shunned, ignored, bashed, stompher, smasher killher, basher, chasher, bash-her > We study destructive human aggression here; from the practiced language and intent, to the oppressive physical violence and actions based on germane thoughts and words (think---> say----> do/act-out; influence others to do the same ----> deny and/or wrongly blame and accuse others of what the oppressor is responsible for: squared. In six words (Not having gotten to the ten word challenge yet): THE ABUSE & MISREPRESENTATION OF POWER. The most pressing, global, local and domestic problem in el mundo? No? Meanwhile, this record is routinely faulted for 'dwelling on the negative' - 'giving it more power'. Granting that there are pyromaniacal firepersons and criminal law enforcement officers, andthat aside: those who would study the most ubiquitous serious problem - thought, spoken and acted out, unredeemed, unnecessary physical violence - in the world, are frequently faulted for preoccupying themselves with addressing the problem - that it may be recognized, acknowledged, further understood, and thereby more effectively reduced or minimized. Dwelling on the negative? Fire all the firepersons. Jail all the police? Slash all the surgeons. THE INVISIBLE (What?) WAR: A War of Perception: Want the crime rate to plunge to Zero? Just refuse to take any and all reports and complaints. Ignore violations. A perfect world. An unimprovable <spotless?> record. Shun 'the negative', and all those who 'dwell on it'...)) ) Thanks for passing the pipe of peace. Smoking it causes Truly yours to associate your 'challenge' with your (thoughtful?) icon... (Har har). What I like to do in my spare time expressed in ten words or less...? (We are truly grateful for this thoughtfuil and though provoking question. While we're emulating yer icon.... Thoughfulness often being a palpable, safe and sane balm for the burden of consciousness, sentiency, self awareness relating to mortality... ecteras.) Momentarily alluding to 'We all carry out lives of quiet desperation'. Paraphrased (Ralph W. Emerson? Not sure if he wrote that one, though, thinking of him causes recall of one he did author which you or others may find interesting. Emerson was scolded in the era he authored the forthcoming, mostly because it connotes 'The East', and was written just before, during or after WW II; not to mention theocratical prejudice which mayn't know seasonal boundaries. Anyway R.E. Emerson titled it BRAHMA, and it strongly implies reincarnation and Buddhism: "If the red slayer thinks he slays, and the slain think themselves slain - they know not well the subtle ways I keep and hold and turn again". ) Back to your noble (perhaps genuinely favorable?) challenge. In ten words or less. What do I like to do in my spare time? (Of course this is excluding snuggling or the making of whoopee. Yes. I am a happily married man, betrothed to a happily married woman; we share three adult, former children. The love of my life. Knowing the joy of hearing her say and prove the same toward Truly yours... Excluding all the predictables, if one is lucky... Yer rully making Truly yours think, Mr. reverse Molecule. Sir. Gratzie.) [/b]Seeking and finding liberation in free - especially science related - thought. (Often while otherwise preoccupied with whatever else... Inadvertantly celebrating the miraculous abilities and potential of the human mind. Studying Nature and the goog, bad and oogly human ability to transcend it.) That's about as abbreviated and focused as any of the many other possible ways of correctly and honestly fielding that warm hearted question. Sir. NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED (Continued): You perforce realize, that any semblance of you befriending me will be responded to as heresy by what attentively presiding New Age Inquisition committees that unabashedly prove to lurk in and intrude upon this realm, impotently cathartisizing their personal problems by projecting them on Yours truly. It's a colloquial American ('What?') recreation. Don't be surprised if yer found guilty and punished accordingly, while the - ex tempor, ad hoc, ex parte - rowdy element continues to gavelin and out while working on the charges. (Put downs, gotchaism, brinksmanship, empowering self via disempowerment of others, acquirement of security by what is no less than an artform of generating insecurity in someone else - who needs a reason beyond artificial establishment of feeling secure; secuity being that which all persons spend more time and money thinking, acting and reacting upon, than any other preoccupation - 81/2 hrs of household daily TV input is primarily an 'escape'... (from a faintly ticking timepiece in a quiet room with no other sounds, people or any other type of living company or companionship... The large, comfortable room can contain a well stocked library and an abundant source of food and air. The time when this setting was paradise to many people has - for the most part - disappeared like a wet dream in a mid '70's vintaged Brooke Shield's 'body stocking in the sex scenes.' Truly yours has been calling public access TV the 'electronicoliseum' for decades. Major portions of that - otherwise potentially world liberating - media are methodologically designed to mesmerize viewers with extreme, unredeemed violence, or direct implications of violence - even, and perhaps especially - in the 'commercials', where none of it is to be taken seriously. Until the early '90's, the entertainment industry was still flatly stonewalling that 2-D sound tracked violence (artificial experience) on TV increases violent behavior in 3 and more dimensions of reality. That denial was over-run on the floor of congress, when the incumbent FCC and other farcical public airways 'watchdogs' were avalanched in academic, scientific evidence of every description, from major universities and educational representatives, all over the world. Consequently, the 'rating' standard was introduced (General Audience. Parental Guidance. Restricted, and X. The programming did not change, and in measurable fact - there's people who audit these broadcasting events and contents - is continuously pejorative. 'Solution': 'Parents and teachers are responsible for whatever (formerly and frenetically denied) destructive influence may be imparted on their children or students, regarding the now - finally - undeniable, overwhelmingly - proven fact that such input does indeed cause and increase unredeemed ('recreational'/'educational') violence (re: 'tolerance threshold expansion', 'normalization of the anomalous') via the ('What?') electroniColiseum. As this record has previously pointed out. What do corporate state ('sponsors' - controllers of TV programming at large, certainly including the 'commercials' - in the presentation of a three hour TV production. 1/3rd, one full hour of that production is commercial messages.) have to gain by driving everyone bonkers? A higher gross national product. People in a state of confusion, fear, insecurity, angst, - big time DENIAL and looped, continuously recurring, unresolved contention: consume much more of everything that's 'on sale', 'out there'... Yes. There is a military industrial complex, corporate state 'double government' (the difference between what you hear and see, and what you get. The difference between what an institution, person or people hold up as their code of behavior and law, and what is actually happening in contradiction to those, consequently betrayed standards, dedicated to making several different types of INVISIBLE ('What?') WAR: A War of Perception, on its citizens. (Any questions?) No magic potion for a solution here, whereas: no real problem can be resolved when accompanied by a policy of denial or diminishment of import. That is, if we really wish to 'stop the - unnecessary, 'recreational', 'thrill killing' - violence... Is not some knowledge and understanding of where it starts and what causes it, a good place to start. Presently, along with the whopper that 'the crime rate is actually going down', there is also the much circulated psuedo-mystery of 'No one knows what causes violence'. Meanwhile, among other things, denial of the problem ('The violent crime rate is actually going down'), along with the flat footed shoulder shrugging ('No one knows what causes violence') are major contributors to the increasing violence and it's causes... The fact that the negative impact is usually incalculable, per incident, is a stimulating tonic for the next re-run, or audiovisual 5 second 'tease' of Janet Leigh being butchered in the shower. Ostenibly, those who are raised, 24/7, 365 with this are not negatively influenced, and if they are, nobody can do anything about it (for President?). (20/20 vision, an' walkin' round blind. Combine with Orwell's: 'The people of Big Brother's Oceania will not see, hear, know or understand, what they understand, know, hear and see' - paraphrased. Re: DoubleThink, Ingsoc, Duck, Quack and Death Speak. Skull and bones designed diapers and military camouflage tampons are still (representatively) peaking as the height of fashion - seen and/or worn everywhere. Doan mean a thing.) Refer: A MOVEABLE VIETNAM: A Continental Misunderstanding (Any questions?) .................................... The exemplary intruders and topic tumblers on this exemplary thread are carrying out a lesser - very importantly and conspicuously 'unaccountable; (anonymous) - counterpart for what the two young men brought down upon their fellow students and teachers - Columbine H.S. in Colorado. Bundy. Gacey. Richard Allen Davis. Jeff Dahmer. Jack the Ripper. The murderer of the Black Dahlia. Charles Whitman (Texas tower, '65). Why do - especially young men in groups - invade and methodologically destroy a perfectly well structured, tastefully appointed, temporarily vacant dwelling? Answer: 'It's a rush'. 'Breaks up the daily hum drum'. When the remarkably suave, unremorseful, debonaire, nattily attired, smooth talking Ted Bundy was asked in court, why he abducted, torture raped and murdered over three dozen young women, he sardonically replied (on videotaped testimony): "It gets my rocks off". IGNORE THE ENVIRONMENT, and MAYBE IT WILL GO AWAY, (- bumpersticker) continued: The lesser Ted Bundy's and Columbine High School kommandos are coming out of the insanity factory's woodwork, certainly including the craven spate of anonymous, blind-hatred-as cheap-thrill-stimulation, intruding on bbs posts, forums, threads, and websites, etceteras. (No one has the foggiest idea what causes it, and the problem is diminishing.) ......................... Okay, reverse Molecule, it was a sorta windy response, but your challenge was reciprocated as per your specifications (somewhere in this meaningless, colloidally jellyfish brained know nothing). Regarding your contract to tell me who the Spanish speaking Roman Emperor was, my first thought was 'Gibral Taric', when he conquered Spain in 711 AD, but then, he was a Carthaginean left over from the - at that time - nearly 300 year aged fall of the Roman empire (Wrong, but kinda impressive? We like to impress people in a good way and it's one of the things we think about a lot in our spare time...). So. I'm guessing Constantine, who established the second Capital of the Roman Empire in what was then named Constantinople (changed to Istanbul, about 75 years ago?) Constantine was the ruler who required all - formerly pantheistic - Roman citizens (that amounts to just about everyone in what is presently called 'Europe') to become Christians. No cigar? Alpha. Beta. Chi. Delta. Epsilon. etceteras (I forgot the remainder. All Greek to me.) Oke. Mr. Smarty pants. Who spoke Spanish and ruled the Roman Empire, sir? Thank you for reading this missile, I mean missive. Sincerely, K. B. Robertson World's #1 Albert - The Axe - Einstein Groupie Etceteras. P.S. Just checked the update on this thread, from Ophiolite to Coral? Anyway, the guy is actually thanking Coral for her message, while lamenting that the message was too brief? (Is this the same Ophilolite, or is the guy smoking catterpillars?)
atinymonkey Posted June 5, 2005 Posted June 5, 2005 not too good at Elizabethan English, are you? It's Middle English, not 'Elizabethan English'. We don't name the periods of language after the monarch, if we did you would be speaking Elizabethan right now. in the most famous case of its use, Romeo and Juliet, Juliet is talking to herself, not Romeo. Juliet is phrasing a question to Romeo in her musings, this is eminently clear. The scene has had comedic elements added, for the sake of the audience, by having Juliet cast about her as if looking for Romeo. It's a longstanding theatrical joke. Pointing out the discrepancy just removes your ability to appreciate the evolution of the Bards work. Double meaning was common in the works anyway. For instance: - Hamlet gives advice to Ophelia on the subject of celibacy (act iii s1) "Get thee to a nunnery". In the period a nunnery was both a house of God and sometimes a whore house, but he did not specify which one, so Hamlet was insulting Ophelia in a way she could not rebuke. A double meaning for comic effect.
Coral Rhedd Posted June 5, 2005 Posted June 5, 2005 Nevertheless, I believe yourdadonapogos is correct about the meaning of wherefore. My dictionary has 1 for what reason 2 for which reason (The Oxford American Desk Dictionary and Thesaurus, second edition, 2001).
reverse Posted June 5, 2005 Posted June 5, 2005 And you too show continuing good humour in the face of hostility. The scientist places quest for knowledge, above the quest for power. (Though F.B. would have it that they are one in the same). Thank you for your answer, so you have your hands as full as your page. And even though you paly free and fancy with the quantity know as (10), I give you your prize. T R A J A N ( 98 – 117 ) and one more prize to boot. Jabberwocky Twas brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe; All mimsy were the borogoves, And the mome raths outgrabe.
Coral Rhedd Posted June 5, 2005 Posted June 5, 2005 In six words (Not having gotten to the ten word challenge yet): THE ABUSE & MISREPRESENTATION OF POWER. The most pressing' date=' global, local and domestic problem in el mundo? No? [/quote'] To wit: Agree. Meanwhile, this record is routinely faulted for 'dwelling on the negative' - 'giving it more power'. Granting that there are pyromaniacal firepersons and criminal law enforcement officers, andthat aside: those who would study the most ubiquitous serious problem - thought, spoken and acted out, unredeemed, unnecessary physical violence - in the world, are frequently faulted for preoccupying themselves with addressing the problem - that it may be recognized, acknowledged, further understood, and thereby more effectively reduced or minimized. Sure. It is seen as dwelling on victimization or "having a victim mentality." God forbid that victims should say, "Ouch!" Want the crime rate to plunge to Zero? Just refuse to take any and all reports and complaints. Ignore violations. A perfect world. An unimprovable <spotless?> record. Shun 'the negative', and all those who 'dwell on it'...)) ) This is interesting. I shall add a true story along these lines presently if the thread stays on topic. (Ralph W. Emerson? Not sure if he wrote that one, though, thinking of him causes recall of one he did author which you or others may find interesting. Emerson was scolded in the era he authored the forthcoming, mostly because it connotes 'The East', and was written just before, during or after WW II; not to mention theocratical prejudice which mayn't know seasonal boundaries. Anyway R.E. Emerson titled it BRAHMA, and it strongly implies reincarnation and Buddhism: "If the red slayer thinks he slays, and the slain think themselves slain - they know not well the subtle ways I keep and hold and turn again". ) Tis karma. The exemplary intruders and topic tumblers on this exemplary thread are carrying out a lesser - very importantly and conspicuously 'unaccountable; (anonymous) - counterpart for what the two young men brought down upon their fellow students and teachers - Columbine H.S. in Colorado. Bundy. Gacey. Richard Allen Davis. Jeff Dahmer. Jack the Ripper. The murderer of the Black Dahlia. Charles Whitman (Texas tower, '65). The fact that you know all these names reveals something about your reading material. Refresh my memory on Richard Allen Davis. I can see his face clear as day but I cannot remember who he killed.
KaiduOrkhon Posted June 6, 2005 Author Posted June 6, 2005 Dear Coral Rhedd (and ALL - You know who You are): May the Buddha smile upon You & Yours for your generous contributions. Richard Allan Davis was the thing that abducted, raped and murdered Polly Klaus, who was taken from a pajama slumber party with her girlfriends, with a knife to her throat.Though the abduction was immediately reported, it wasn't in time to stop Davis from successfully escaping with his hostage. With all respect, Coral, most every well read, well intended person known to me, often interchanges the word 'kill' with 'murder', whereas, the law and morality finds them on opposite ends of the life perishing spectrum. Murdering being generally optional, killing being generally obligatory. After the thing's apprehension, he showed no remorse in court, and taunted her father with: 'She told me, 'Just don't do me like my daddy did'. Don't know if Mr. Klaus required bailiff's to restrain him or not. Your posts - and some others - on this thread are breaths of fresh air, Coral Rhedd (Loren b'goren 'g'brigh? - Sp?) Entries # 22 & 23 by reverse and Ophiolite are riotous parodys not only of Truly yours, but of themselves also. AvatarTinymonkey is a formidable Bard groupie to grapple with, also. **************** Hey reverse Molecule: Trajan. 98 - 117 it is then. Thanks. Hey. 117 is said to be the peak of the Roman Empire, which faded in starting about 500 BC as a relatively small village, town and urbania, further said to be founded by Romulus and Remus, since much celebrated barbarian orphans adopted & nurse by a SheWolf. Most everyone is familiar with the various statues and friezes if not the story that accompanies it, including the barbarian roots of what later became (with the exception of Greece and Southern China) the most advanced of civilizations, right along with the fratracidal intrigue of Romulus slaying Remus (something about who was in charge? Anyway, it became a maintained tradition of in-fighting throughout the approximately 1,000 year reign, though it wasn't all that big a the beginning, and it sorta anticlimatically fizzled out at 'the end', the chronology of which is still being argued by upper historians...) One good door prize 'to boot', deserves another? Though this 'boot' includes a question... Lewis Carroll is said to have been an adroit mathematician, and that any number of passages, if not entire episodic structures in ALICE IN WONDERLAND, were determined or otherwise metronomically influenced (?) by various mathematical equations and formulae. Might you - or anyone in these parts - know anything more about that...? Hey, Ophiolite, if yer gonna protest Michener in such illustrious company, you may as well know this low brow almost included John Jakes (So there?). Presume you know of H.G. Well's OUTLINE OF HISTORY - among the finest accounts of planetary, flora and fauna, town & country history ever written, m'thinks. It's out of print, I think (Anything real good goes off the air or out of print and stays tht way, ever notice that?) Anyway, if you see OUTLINE OF HISTORY, or any of the three sequential presentations of THE PEOPLE'S ALMANAC (in a 2nd hand store, or possibly ordered via 'out of print books'), pounce on either or both of them. The rogue government is reliably alleged to burn every copy of THE PEOPLE'S ALMANAC it can get it's paws on. If and when read, Dear Reader may understand why. A few knots aft, reverse Molecule asked 'What else?' (besides what Truly yours had already posted on physical science, emphasizing Einstein's works, especially in Field Physics. Reminds me to soon include some more -specific details - on 'what else', in those regards. It has to do with the specific issues for which there is no previous explanation, which are explained by 'my work' (pirouettes on the shoulders of mastadons?) Choral Rhedd's voluntary appointment to tell us more about how the plunging crime rate can be reduced to Zero. (Didn't that use to be the 4th dimension?) Certainly looking forward to that, been mesmerized ever since Coral's first post on 'hypergraphia'. Regarding Coral's evoked interrogative about what the flock this thread is about (paraphrased?)... Well. With a title like THE (dang near) EVERYTHING ('cept final) THEORY, it looks like we've hewn out quite a compass of swath here. And why not? It could be categorized under, over, around, through and alongside of many categories, no? Hey anybody (Especially the sang froid, out of the closet impolite one?): Of course Truly yours is an egocentric aphid lounging (and turfing divots?) in the lush Summer greenery of the Great Continental EuroAsian Green Grass River Dragon's domain. (Yer gonna have to be awful impolite to out surley that, Ophiolite. 'Reed' may be spelled 'Reid', and I'll have to replay the eight hours of Philosophy tape albums to fish out his place in the bibliographical mix. (A thousand pardons. Signor.) (Are we allowed to be having this much fun, here?) ((Surely another ill willed bus - if not VW - full of thrill & security seeking passengers will be along in fifteen minutes, or less?)) (((I ain't sayin' nothin' t' cut to the cache, or whatever it was, bein' argoo'd about b'4, that h'ain't now.))) Hoping the presiding constructive elements mayn't be too fractious of the fact that this many people aren't s'poseta (more or less?) get along, much, for very long... - Equus (Etceteras) P.S. yourdadonapogos might get more well deserved ink in this realm, if he or she's handle wasn't so polysyllabically challenging? Hey Code: Your dad on a pogos. You'll (consequently?) be hearing more from us later?
YT2095 Posted June 6, 2005 Posted June 6, 2005 this is a Science Forum, Not a BLOG! I reccomend you take this elsewhere (your ISP should provide you with plenty of free webspace by default, Use That!). Thread Closed...
Recommended Posts