The keyboard is mightier than the machine gun... The political, philosophical and general outpourings of a troubled soul living in Australia and blogging his Vietnam veteran's head off.
Nothing in this blog can be believed. If you think that anything in this blog is true or factual, you'll need to verify it from another source. Do you understand? No? Then read it again, and repeat this process, until you understand that you cannot sue me for anything you read here. Also, having been sucked into taking part in the mass-murder of more than 3 million Vietnamese people on behalf of U.S. Big Business "interests", I'm as mad as a cut snake (and broke) so it might be a bit silly to try to sue me anyway...
posted by The Editor at
4:26 PM
The counter shown below displays the number of Israeli military personnel refusing to serve in the Occupied Territories. I applaud their integrity and their strength of character. To me they are heroes of peace and humanity.
23 Comments:
Similar to being asked the Question,"Answer Yes or No"
"Have you stopped beating your wife yet".
However, I believe I would prefer liking something because it's nice.
Yes. And no. tee hee
Of course, 'nice' is in the eye of the beholder. I like some things that aren't very nice - sarcasm, for example, and grapefruit juice, which lots of people say is not nice at all. And just because I don't like beer doesn't mean it isn't nice, I suppose. Feasting on dead things is probably not nice, but I do like a nice roast chook.
I hope that has cleared things up. :-)
Vest and Sue, What/who determines whether something is nice or not?
Experience.
Define your concept of "nice".
I like it because it speaks to me in myriad ways, Perhaps being nice is one of them.
On the other hand, fine leather couches do not appeal to me at all, though they are nice.
Davoh, if a kangaroo has a pouch with three random abnormally large holes in it, and striations that go almost all the way through, that is not nice.
If, on the other hand, your kangaroo has a solid, durable pouch, level where it should be, and roomy enough to hold everyone, then it is nice.
Nice is easier to demonstrate than to define.
I make the nice, and subsequently I like it.
I also exhibit delusions of grandeur.
Or possibly just delusions.
Also I'm sick of blogger continually making me sign in and then claiming I've done it wrong, and making me do it again.
@phil: couldn't agree more, I have to do the now much harder captcha at least 3 times to get comments up.
@Andrew & Phil. I agree, not nice. Mmm, "nice/not nice" seems to be something (or a concept) that 2 or more people agree with.
@Davo: So, someone else has to agree with you before something is "nice"?
Interesting concept.
Who are these arbiters of "nice", and who appointed them?
So, someone else has to agree with you before something is "nice"?
"Nice" is a vocabulary word. ALL vocabulary words are given meaning through consensus. It must be this way, because the primary value of a word is in its effectiveness for communication.
Vocabulary words with no consensus backing them up, cannot be used to communicate.
Therefore, someone else has to agree what that "nice" is nice for it to really be nice. It is not determined by arbitration, but per function.
Glad to help.
Mr Myste, we're not discussing the dictionary meaning of the word "nice". We're discussing something entirely different. Can you guess what it is?
Well, using the 'pleasing' or 'delightful' meaning of 'nice', which I think is the one you intended: if I'm at a lookout and I say "What a nice view" and someone replies saying "Yup, sure is", my usage is reinforced. So the arbiters of 'nice' are all of us; it's group-think.
According to Dictionary.com, 'nice' comes from Middle English, meaning foolish or stupid. You gotta love that!
What makes something "nice," which is a concept regulated by common consensus, which speaks to Davoh's point, though he may or may not have intended it, and answers the question who is the arbiter. Real-world function is the arbiter and the dictionary, coincidentally happens to agree.
P.S. To indicate a misunderstanding as a means of rebuttal is fallacious by definition, and moreover, unnecessary.
Mr Myste:
[1] If I think something is nice and there is no concensus, then it is not nice?
[2] Please excuse my ignorance, but where did I utter a "rebuttal"?
1. If one person thinks something is nice, but no one else does, then his definition of nice is unique to him, and his concept only makes sense in the sanctity of his own thoughts. Vocabulary is used to communicate. "Nice" is a term that communicates. One man's unique definition of nice, does not communicate, so the test of niceness fails.
2. Mr Myste, we're not discussing the dictionary meaning of the word "nice". We're discussing something entirely different. Can you guess what it is?
That last sentence you uttered was intended to divert attention from the argument I made with a gesture of arrogance. It is a classic fallacious rebuttal.
Mr Myste:
[1] You said "Nice" is a term that communicates. One man's unique definition of nice, does not communicate, so the test of niceness fails.
When I say what I think is nice, I am communicating.
[2] You are presuming to know what my intention was. You label it a gesture of arrogance. You have constructed a nice straw man. But it is on fire. Look, out in the field, it burns brightly. :-)
Puzzle time had a long run for such a short post.
Now take a stab at my Puzzle I am certain a person of your intellect would find it dead easy.
@Vest: What puzzle is that? (Why do I think I've just walked into a trap? :-)
Trying to Wriggle out are you?evend
Go to daily gaggle.
@Vest: Had a look at the quiz. Not my thing. Sorry.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
==========
<<<<< Home
==========