Messages

QTF

Anyway, the Twilight violence can only end well.

I don't know man, I was just arguing that the point I replied to is logically irrelevant, because we have evolved since then. Saying that we used to be a certain way is not a counterpoint to a statement about how we are now. Not when it comes to biology, anyway. Of course, I'm probably wrong, but that's how I see it.

So I'm still confused. The werewolf cuts her open with his teeth, right? That constitutes biting, right? Werewolf bites turn people into werewolves, right? And she doesn't?

Almost certain it's the second.

I want to see how they deal with the scene where Bella gives birth, in a later book.   Given these books are aimed at the young teen audience, and the described scene involves a werewolf doing a C-section with his teeth....yeah, this should be fun, when turned into a film scene.

I will probably never read these books, so I'm going to go ahead and ask the question that must be on everyone's mind when they read that.

So yeah, does Bella turn into a werewolf or what?

That last one actually makes a lot of sense and is probably true.

The monkey brain is hard wired for authority, leadership, and dom/sub relationships, so it's an uphill battle. I think there may one day be pockets of people who are socialized to get over some parts of their monkey programming. But these will be oasises. Like the hippie communes of the 60s, they can only exist in isolation, and are only a utopia for those that buy in. That being said, it sounds like a nice place to live.

I don't think that model of living will ever gain primacy because there's too much chaos built into humans. I consider myself an upstanding dude, but I can only imagine how I'd act if there were no cops around to regulate my behavior.

Primacy, yeah; see: Huxley's Island
But remember that this wasn't really "wired" into monkey programming until about 10,000 years ago.  Historically speaking, homo sapiens were non-hierarchical by nature for a dramatically larger part of our existence; i.e, hunter-gather societies.

Perhaps, but that doesn't matter now because the people who are alive now are hard-wired that way. Just because our ancestors from way back were non-heirarchal doesn't mean modern man is. Point is irrelevant.

Phew! I thought we had a problem. Three cheers for god, eh? 

He's a good guy. I read it in a book somewhere.

Um, the agricultural revolution IS technology.

Well, yes... this is the generally accepted paradigm... I guess I'm trying to jump out of it for a sec, and picture a technological society which did not rely on sedentary agriculture from the onset. 

Not possible.  No surplus food = no surplus population = no room or time for innovators beyond those which offer immediate benefits for gaining food.

This the obvious answer and probably the correct one... I'm just trying to ask the old anthropological questions from different angles.  I'm aware of the no time argument, but I'm not sure it has proven correct under cultural analysis of modern day hunter-gatherer societies.  They have arguably more free time than we "civilized" prats.  Could you clarify the "no room" part tho?  Thx.

Well, here's the thing: They have more "free time", but that free time happens to be spent looking out for themselves and their community. They aren't employed, no, they don't have a legal or financial obligation to work as we do, but for them it's something much more direct. For them, it's survival. You don't have much time to be innovative if you're busy watching the kids, looking out for predators and rival tribes, gathering enough food and water to get by, etc.
Agriculture is the cause and effect of societal development. It's a necessary part of the mechanism. And sadly, that mechanism happens to be heirarchal for now. I think hippie communes and the like, as Cramulus suggested, are the best we can have right now in terms of non-heirarchies. The thing is, though, societies like that aren't concerned with technological and societal development so much as personal spiritual development. I think perhaps that's a better basic philosophy. Perhaps.

I believe in you.

It was old when you started doing it.

Or do you believe you're the very first person to come along and try to "mindfuck" the Discordians?

Not by any means. I knew that you knew what I was doing. I wasn't trying to mindfuck. I thought everyone knew I was joking. I guess I was wrong. Anyway, I'm done with it. It doesn't matter at this point.

I'm really going to have to work hard to redeem myself now, aren't I?

-SHS,
digging myself to china

I'm starting to think that isn't your intention.

And I'm starting to think maybe it should be. All self-deprecating humour aside, the people here seem worth associating with.

Then why are you doing your level best to alienate everyone?

What I'm trying to say is that I'm putting a stop to all that bullshit right now. It was a bit fun at first, but it's really getting old for all parties involved, I think.

I believe is worth believing in.

This guy is more vampire then anyone from the twilight series

I see your Count and raise you a Munster.

I'm really going to have to work hard to redeem myself now, aren't I?

-SHS,
digging myself to china

I'm starting to think that isn't your intention.

And I'm starting to think maybe it should be. All self-deprecating humour aside, the people here seem worth associating with.

I'm really going to have to work hard to redeem myself now, aren't I?

-SHS,
digging myself to china