Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	14-Aug-04/12:20 PM
"That's what consciousness is for." Consciousness is consciousness. Our reactions to the environment are behaviour. Establishing that consciousness is a prerequisite for particular patterns of reaction to the environment is equivalent to a refutation of epiphenomenalism, which frankly I don't think you're up to, old boy.
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	14-Aug-04/10:17 AM
You're a very silly person, indeed.
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	14-Aug-04/10:09 AM
You have taken a totally wrong-headed approach to this conversation. If someone says "In my opinion, X" then they think X is a fact. If someone says "In fact, X" then they think X is a fact. They are both opinions, and they are both asserted to be facts. You want everyone to prefix all their assertions with "In my opinion,...". But that is obviously both impractical, and redundant. Have a look at your original dig at the unpc community: "The thing I find most fascinating about people who hate PC is that they feel like somehow the dreaded “PC” has some how shackled them..." Did you say "In my opinion the thing I find most fascinating about people who hate PC..."? No. You just stated your opinion. Have you spoken to every politically incorrect person? No. Does that matter? Well if you had it would add weight to your argument, but it doesn't mean you're wrong, or that your assertion is completely unfounded. Noone came back at you with jibes about having never done a thorough survey. Richa just gave you his opinion on the matter, which was that political correctness hadn't changed our attitudes. I said I thought political correctness was symptomatic of a change in attitudes. And then you blurted in with the "most" argument. For pity's sake, you should have shared your opinion with the rest of the group when you had the chance. What do you really think most people feel about political correctness?
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	14-Aug-04/9:05 AM
I didn't necessarily call you a dunce. What I said was: "You're a dunce if you think people can't use the word 'most' just because they haven't spoken to more than 50% of the population." > Why don't you put on you deductive logic wings and figure out what I think genius? You probably think: "I have no idea what other people think about politcal correctness." But consider this: If I jabbed a group of people with a red hot poker, what would they think about it? Can you honestly say you have no idea at all? > apparently you are in agreement with Richa that you can predict most people's human behavior. I obviously can't flawlessly predict human behaviour. I have an opinion on what I think most people feel about political correctness. It is based on the people I meet, conversations I overhear, things I see on TV and read about in the News. P.S As regards the 'semantics' thing, I have spent the last three years studying formal semantics in theoretical computer science. Formal semantics in this context is mathematically formalising the meaning of computer programs. I know what the word actually means, which is probably why I didn't understand you. For your information, I think the phrase "it's just semantics" is more popular in America than in Britain. I haven't met anyone who has used it in conversation. That is why I asked.
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	14-Aug-04/8:49 AM
Being polite is one thing, but is it polite, for instance, to let an ethnic into University because they are an ethnic, even though that ethnic has performed worse in his examinations than ten other non-ethnics? I'm not saying that sort of thing happens all the time, but there are definitely situations in which political correctness comes at the expense of the majority. I probably agree with positive discrimination up to a point, but does my good heartedness and tolerant nature extend to letting coloureds into Higher Education? Good Christ I hope not. Thanks for listening.
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	14-Aug-04/8:41 AM
P.S His use of 'most' isn't 'just semantics'. If he had said 'some' that might be 'just semantics'. It's obvious he doesn't think all people agree with racial slurs.
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	14-Aug-04/8:35 AM
Look nobody here has done a survey to see what most people think. But richa can at least make a sort of judgment based on what he reads in the news, on the people he meets, or the conversations he overhears. You're a dunce if you think people can't use the word 'most' just because they haven't spoken to more than 50% of the population. You must have some sort of idea as to what most people where you live think about political correctness. I suggest you share your views with the rest of the group.
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	14-Aug-04/8:18 AM
I think political correctness is symptomatic of changing attitudes towards ethnics and gays and other minorities. It only came about because it became increasingly unpopular to be thought a bigot. In this country, any prominant person who is heard uttering racial slurs is instantly slated in a News. By God Sir, it wasn't always like that. I don't think most people these days would agree with a homophobic lewd, or an anti-semitic lewd, or a sexist lewd. When the phrase "political correctness" was coined, it became popular to be politically incorrect for comedy value. But people only find political incorrectness funny because they think it's so outrageous. It's an obvious tautology, but political correctness is only stupid when it conflicts with actual correctness. Thanks for listening.
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	13-Aug-04/4:05 PM
P.S I only mention the soul and brain as separate because anyone who believes personality has nothing to do with the brain, and everything to do with the soul, obviously does think the soul and the brain are separate. My point is that even if you think they are separate, it is still the case that making physical changes to the brain will change a person's observable behaviour. Since all you know about someone's personality is from what you observe of their behaviour, I'd say their personality had changed. What would you say? where do u think your personality is stored? oh wait I forgot u don't have any personality hahahahaha no but seriously?
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	13-Aug-04/3:49 PM
I dont blow anybody with a henna tattoo of father christmas on there cock
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	13-Aug-04/3:48 PM
Yeah, well how about most people haven't been "deprived of consciousness", so your "point" is irrelevant? And how about you're making the bunko assumption that having a personality depends on being conscious?
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	13-Aug-04/3:43 PM
"Anyway there is an argument to say that differences in intelligence are only as relevant as differences in hair curliness. That is to say the purpose of evolution is to create a fit with the evolutionary environment." Yes well that might be relevant if the coloureds had stayed in their own country, mightn't it? But, they made the choice to enter the fast-paced world of Civilised-society. Nobody forced them to come over here. And now look where we are: Coloured songs all over the radio like a sort of rash that you can't show the doctor because you're too embarrassed.
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	13-Aug-04/10:22 AM
What do people mean when they say that something "is simply semantics"?
Re: a comment on Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	13-Aug-04/9:16 AM
It is a fact that white people are more likely to get skin cancer than black people. It is also a fact that black people are more likely to suffer from sickle cell anaemia than white people. It is also a fact that that white people tend to have straighter hair than black people. In fact it is obvious that there are a large number of physical characteristics associated with a person's race. The brain is a part of the body, just as the skin, or the blood, or the hair is. Why should it be any different? The fact is that there is no reason to think characteristics such as personality and intelligence aren't also influenced by race. Of course such characteristics are partly a product of an individual's environment, but there is no doubt that different brains would deal with the same environment in different ways. If you attempt to argue that personality is a product of the soul, and not of the brain, then consider this: if you jab a pencil into someone's frontal lobes, their personality changes. When it comes to racism, most people think it's wrong to generalise on the basis of race. They say things like "What you think has nothing to do with the colour of your skin". But that is the King of Generalisations. Is there any justification for it? It is perfectly conceivable that there could exist a race of people that were all evil and stupid. In conclusion, discriminating on the basis of race is only a stupid thing to do if your grounds for discrimination are unjustified. Thanks for listening.
Re: The Grand Adjustment by horus8	12-Aug-04/4:30 PM
It was a grey morning, but all I could see anywhere was green. Some sap called Rogers was paying me twice my actual rate to track down his ex-wife, name of Blimpo Toots. Rogers said she'd accidentally grown a beard one morning, checked the mailbox at the wrong time, and then just vanished into the seedy world of backstreet tuba shows. Not as uncommon as you might think, especially not for a girl like Toots, who according to Rogers could blow a Negro through a thirty-foot chimney and still have enough breath to ask for seconds. I took her photo out of the file and scraped off some of the crust. Yeah, she was a nice-looking broad, but nothing special. I tried to imagine her with a thick black beard bulging out of her cheeks. Well, ho-ly shit. If the Puff-up in my chaps meant anything, Toots'd be halfway to Humpsville by now, riding the cackrails on a rickety asswagon named 'Uncle Sam' with no brakes and a four liter negro injection.
Re: Waiting In The Shadows by TearsOnRoses	12-Aug-04/10:17 AM
Four metric tons of guff, and a pinch of forlorn hope. Beautiful. Simply beautiful. -10-
Re: My Dumb Choice...YOU by sonawrote	12-Aug-04/9:55 AM
Bulgingly stupid.
Re: a comment on Niggers Don't Write Poetry by pain killer	12-Aug-04/9:50 AM
Oh, "frowned upon" is it? Yes. Frowned. Thanks ever so much for pointing that out.
Re: Mississippi Burnin. by SupremeDreamer	12-Aug-04/9:41 AM
You turd. It's obvious you think poetry is about being raw and controversial. You put offensive words like "nigger" and "mellifluous" in your poemes to make your writing seem more dangerous. And when - shock horror! - someone thinks you're being racist, you blunder around in a massive self-righteous rant about how your work is always being misunderstood by the PC establishment. Well I've got news for you buddy: "Your subversion is a perpetual disease" Besides, the preferred nomenclature is "Negro".
Re: a comment on Punk Rock Christmas by unknown^user	12-Aug-04/4:10 AM
Don't even know what a clarkie is!? Obviously you're a total n00b when is comes to drugs. And yes, of course you can smoke an E n00b.