Author Topic: Park Your Amusements Here  (Read 98687 times)

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #45 on: December 04, 2009, 04:07:42 pm »
That was a line from the movie; the "mixed metaphors" do, in fact, relate to your sayings and maxims in such a context. Take it up with Troy Duffy if you have questions or concerns.


As far as amusements go, I am terribly amused that tea is made from eyelids.

... mythologically speaking, of course. Legend goes that back in the day a monk was meditating for a full year without stopping. As he neared the end of this period, however, he fell asleep. When he woke up he was so enraged at himself for falling asleep that he cut off his own eyelids so that he couldn't accidently shut them ever again. His eyelids became the seeds from which tea plants grew (which became a boon to monks like him who wanted to stay awake).

Also, I am amused that broth is essentially tea made with animal- instead of plant-matter.

GenesisOne

  • Bounty Seeker
  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1215
  • "Time Travel? Possible? Don't make me laugh!"
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #46 on: December 04, 2009, 05:29:44 pm »

"A rose by any other name flocks together."

These things never get old.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MixedMetaphors

How amusing to mix and match these things and mess with people's minds.

You get bonus points if they express a look of confusion.

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #47 on: December 06, 2009, 01:59:21 am »
Lord J, Esquire Productions Presents:
A Lord J, Esquire Production


Lord J, Esquire Stars in:

The Tale of the Unexpected Plot Twist

Once upon a time, a mysterious new source of power was discovered (probably by Lord J, Esquire). Once tapped it met and even exceeded all expectations, and caused no trouble of any kind whatsoever. And everyone lived happily ever after. Except for the conservatives; they got pricked by a prickly holly bush. The holly bush received the Medal of Honor. The End.

GenesisOne

  • Bounty Seeker
  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1215
  • "Time Travel? Possible? Don't make me laugh!"
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #48 on: December 06, 2009, 05:56:10 pm »

Hmm, as your editor...

Naw, just kidding.  It's great the way it is.

Although in an alternate ending, the conservatives would be shippedd off to an island where they get hit by the Nom Bomb I dropped earlier.

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #49 on: December 06, 2009, 06:40:48 pm »
Careful, J. With great power comes absolutely no onerous responsibilities what-so-ever.

Romana

  • Springtime of Youth
  • Zurvan Surfer (+2500)
  • *
  • Posts: 2749
  • Fight the Future
    • View Profile
    • Tumblr
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #50 on: December 06, 2009, 07:18:51 pm »
J can web swing wherever he damn well likes.

Boo the Gentleman Caller

  • Guru of Life Emeritus
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5262
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #51 on: December 07, 2009, 03:56:17 pm »
Lord J would be a great politician for one reason: he sits on one extreme side of the political debate.

GenesisOne

  • Bounty Seeker
  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1215
  • "Time Travel? Possible? Don't make me laugh!"
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #52 on: December 07, 2009, 06:22:36 pm »

Well, since we're drifting into the field of political potenail, here's a good joke:

A Congressman was once asked about his attitude toward whiskey.

"If you mean the demon drink that poisons the mind, pollutes the body, desecrates family life, and inflames sinners, then I'm against it."

"But if you mean the elixir of Christmas cheer, the conglomerate of mass media sponsorship, the taxable potion that puts needed funds into public coffers to comfort little crippled children, then I'm for it."

"This is my position, and I will not compromise!"

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #53 on: December 07, 2009, 09:12:50 pm »
Thats not a joke, thats a fallacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If-by-whiskey

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #54 on: December 07, 2009, 09:43:18 pm »
Lord J would be a great politician for one reason: he sits on one extreme side of the political debate.

You mean that I'm out of the mainstream. I'm not sure whether this is an amusement of mine or more appropriately a frustration, but here it is: Popularity does not make a thing true, and people don't seem to want to acknowledge that, especially when they're on the popular side of the equation. From where I sit, it's most of you who are the extremists--often reflexively so and with no awareness of it whatsoever. But when I talk about political extremeness I'm talking about ideologies themselves; what you're talking about is the numbers game and that is almost worthless as a measure of ideological integrity.

I identify as "very liberal"--almost as liberal as a person can be--because I see lots of problems in the world that require progressive change as opposed to keeping things as they are or backtracking to the customs of an earlier era. But "very liberal" implies that I'm out on the frontier of the classic left-right political spectrum, which is misleading. Not only are there are all kinds of people to the left of me, even in this country, but that spectrum is of limited use outside predefined argument. Actually, to be perfectly honest with you, I hate that spectrum. Left, center, and right: They're all bogus. The imagery came out of France centuries ago and the relevancy hinges upon there being a legitimate politico-economic debate with viable choices in the party system to represent all plausible interests. Neither exists today. American politics today is a battle between nebbishes, lunatics, and lobbyists. The spectrum is obsolete. I have no loyalty whatsoever to any political party or platform. I only care about results.

The problem, if I may, is that your definition of "extreme" compares my positions to those of the mainstream. I mentioned that already, but I just want to reiterate what a terrible way that is to judge the merit of an idea. One need only look back as far as 2004 to see that, when we reelected Bush and bolstered the Republican majorities in Congress. The majority is never wiser than the wisest individuals, and often far short of it.

But perhaps it would be even more useful to describe in brief how exactly I might not be extreme by my own grasp of the concept. Admittedly I lied a wee bit. There are a handful of positions where I might consider myself extreme. But in general I consider my positions well-placed. How could I not? On abortion, for instance, my view is that controlling one's body is the second most important right there is, while unborn babies are not even persons yet. If you accept those premises--and both are supportable in the courts of evidence and logic--then my position of "abortion on demand" is not extreme in the least: It's judicious, humane, and almost inevitable. It never comes up in this country, but there is a whole other dimension to the abortion debate: forced abortions. I'm not in favor of those any more than I am in favor of criminalizing abortion. In my view, deviation in either direction is what's extreme, because it avoids or worsens the problem.

Most people who judge ideas by their integrity rather than their popularity (or context) would say the same thing of themselves: Their positions are the opposite of extreme, where the axis is not left to right, nor popularity to unpopularity, but reasonableness to unreasonableness. People rarely choose, out of context, to be extreme (i.e., unreasonable), and when they do it is often an expression of frustration stemming from perceived powerlessness or an intractable quandary.

I don't know if I would make a "great politician" or not. I'm not very charismatic, my positions are too esoteric for lay audiences to comprehend through a few flimsy soundbites, and my interest in political power as a vehicle for the advancement of humanity is not nearly as high as you might think. I detest the thought of having mooks for colleagues, or for bosses. I don't know how electable I would be, nor how effective I would be if I were actually able to gain office.

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #55 on: December 07, 2009, 10:04:32 pm »
Subjectivity, not truth, determines a spectrum. Let us consider a realm that should have few to no emotional connections: the spectrum of visible light. You're violet, J, at the extreme end of the spectrum, on the blue side. To say that you are moderate could be true, if humans could perceive electromagnetic radiation of lower wavelengths. Blue is a very fine color, maybe it is really where the spectrum should be centered if humans weren't so limited by the cones in our eyes. But alas, there is no objective truth to the spectrum; it is (almost) entirely defined by what people perceive. Maybe someone is violet-color blind and can't even see that spectrum of color, making your position not just extreme but effectively invisible. Or maybe they’re red-color blind, and so your extremeness isn’t so extreme. Or maybe they’re really a mutant and are tetrachromatic, so you are legitimately more moderate.

It’s all open to interpretation. Trying to redefine words is usually more trouble than it is worth.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2009, 10:14:23 pm by Thought »

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #56 on: December 07, 2009, 10:14:10 pm »
Ah, but I never said I was moderate. In fact I explicitly conveyed my distaste for moderateness by including "center" in my denunciation of the left-right spectrum.

As for your main comment, that "subjectivity, not truth, determines a spectrum," I think you may want to reexamine that stance. The example you gave disproves rather than supports your claim, and there are many more instances where spectra are objective. Do not mistake the parameters of a spectrum, or the act of placing on one, with the subjectivity of interpreting those placements.

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #57 on: December 07, 2009, 10:19:45 pm »
Reexamination commencing... … … … reticulating splines… … … Reexamination complete.

Results: Previous analysis is confirmed pending input of additional data.

Perhaps since the light spectrum is a product of our biological functions, you are assuming that it is objective?

Or maybe my own perspectives on objectivity are a bit different. I tend to find math a rather subjective and arbitrary topics, for example.

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #58 on: December 07, 2009, 10:26:24 pm »
Or maybe my own perspectives on objectivity are a bit different. I tend to find math a rather subjective and arbitrary topics, for example.

I suppose that could be it. At any rate, I don't want to get too sidetracked. Your objection seems to be that "extremeness" is necessarily defined subjectively. Since I laid out three different spectra of extremeness, and you saw fit to make the objection you did, I conclude that you were either being contrary for the sake of illuminating a minor point outside the continuum of the argument, and were not actually disagreeing with anything, or that you actually endorse the idea that popularity is the only credible spectrum of extremeness, which would sound uncharacteristic coming from you.

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Park Your Amusements Here
« Reply #59 on: December 07, 2009, 11:33:32 pm »
Oh not at all; one of the first debates I had here at the compendium, outside of the analysis forum, was with Daniel regarding what constituted significant contributions to human expression. My stance was essentially that one could find instances of popular culture being worthy of being included among the great works of humanity.

Likewise, you will often find me commenting in a similar fashion; popular opinion is an important factor in establishing social "truths." Just recently I made a similar comment regarding the Twilight saga, if you recall. Its popularity, to me, is an indicator that it has the potential to be more than what it has thus far seemed to be (though not a guarantee).

I do agree with you that popular opinion is not well suited for establishing "ideological integrity," and indeed I agree with much of what you said, but it appears that you were rejecting a classification system on grounds that exist mostly in your perception of that system and not in the system itself. To say that you are extreme is to (usually) say nothing about the validity or quality of your positions, but rather the rarity of that position. Admittedly, some people do use the word in a derogatory manner, but it still means a degree of rarity, rather than a degree of worth.

Now you maintain that your positions are logical, well thought out, and sound, yes? If true, then by definition, regardless of what your positions actually are, they are extreme by merit of such positions being rare, as you noted.

To offer an alternate view; you would say that you are an intelligent fellow, correct? Would you say that you are extremely intelligent? Or if perhaps a sense of modesty is creeping into you, perhaps you might say that you are at least in the direction of the extremely intelligent? While it would be terribly lovely if everyone were as intelligent as one might hope fore, the fact is that it is non-extremely intelligent who get to determine what extreme intelligence is. Likewise, it is the non-your-political-stance people who get to determine if your stance is extreme or not.

But as for why I objected: among other reasons, it was because objecting in general is amusing to me. Given Boo’s brief comment and your reaction to it, this seemed like an interesting topic to object to in hopes of getting you to expand on it.