Peace - Page 7

henry quirk · 09-30-2009, 03:15 PM

Classic, we're talking about two vastly different kinds of creatures here.

My expectations of one are not translatable to the other.

On one hand: we have the human individual for who it is natural to speak.

On the other: we have the dog for which it is natural not to speak.

As to the damaged human individual who cannot speak, whether or not such a person is capable of love depends entirely on the nature of the damage.

If I am stricken with throat cancer and lose my voice: I can still love.

If I were born with a damaged brain that limited my ability to speak as one aspect of the damage, then, it's entirely possible I would be unable to love.

Your question is awfully broad. Care to narrow it a bit?

Again: what makes human love unique is that it is 'done' within an 'I'. There is deliberation and reflection. That we communicate ourselves, transmit ourselves, through speech is the tool of the 'I', but not the definer of 'I'.

classicman · 09-30-2009, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk

we have the dog for which it is natural not to speak.

False - Just because YOU do not understand the communication, doesn't mean it isn't speaking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk

If I am stricken with throat cancer and lose my voice: I can still love.

If I were born with a damaged brain that limited my ability to speak as one aspect of the damage, then, it's entirely possible I would be unable to love.

What? Love requires the ability to speak? WTH are you talking about now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Your question is awfully broad. Care to narrow it a bit?

HA HA HA - Especially coming from the guy who wouldn't define "peace" in his own thread and continues to discuss the every increasingly redundant "I" without any concrete definition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Again: what makes human love unique is that it is 'done' within an 'I'. There is deliberation and reflection. That we communicate ourselves, transmit ourselves, through speech is the tool of the 'I', but not the definer of 'I'.

The first sentence is still opinion and has been challenged repeatedly. The latter is pure conjecture - we still have no definition of "I" but we now have a "tool" of this ever elusive "I". Ahhh progress.

Pico and ME · 09-30-2009, 10:20 AM

I dont totally buy it. They have evolved a highly sensitive ability to detect our emotions because our emotions have a huge impact on their well-being, not because they recognize the emotions in themselves.

skysidhe · 09-30-2009, 11:01 AM

Thanks for the thoughtful response Henry.

I do get where your coming from. There is much scientific controversy over this.

There is no way I could prove love by my animals.

My belief that animals have emotions like love is more than a case of 'believing something is true makes it so'.

We can sit across from one another, have coffee, and talk and argue and debate and there is no question, for either of us, that our coffee companion is another 'I'.

Well I would look funny talking to a dog in a coffee shop :P

Seriously, I think anyone sitting with with you debating and having coffee would be very happy to do so.. You seem to be a very interesting person even without a wagging tail.

henry quirk · 09-30-2009, 11:12 AM

HA!

I wouldn't have thought to put it that way, but, yeah, exactly.

#

"Thanks for the thoughtful response Henry."

You're welcome!

#

"I can see you would be in your element to meet and debate and I think anyone sitting with with you debating and having coffee would be very happy to do so.. You seem to be a very interesting person even without a wagging tail."

Gosh...I think I'll just toe the ground and be shy and embarrassed for a bit...

xoxoxoBruce · 09-30-2009, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skysidhe

You seem to be a very interesting person even without a wagging tail.

Assumption.

henry quirk · 09-30-2009, 11:17 AM

classicman · 09-30-2009, 04:13 PM

It is becoming increasingly apparent that "I", as you put it, "ought to retire from the conversation." This moving target crap is getting real old real quick. Perhaps I'll let another "dog" chase your elusive bone for a bit.

FWIW - I have been reading AND participating in this thread since the first post. Enjoy!

henry quirk · 09-30-2009, 04:19 PM

"It is becoming increasingly apparent that "I", as you put it, "ought to retire from the conversation.""

Fine by me.

#

"This moving target crap is getting real old real quick."

And still no evidence offered in support of your position.

Not surprising in the least.

#

"Perhaps I'll let another "dog" chase your elusive bone for a bit."

I'd prefer another person.

#

"FWIW - I have been reading AND participating in this thread since the first post."

Indeed. Pity your participation was picayune; your comprehension poor.

classicman · 09-30-2009, 04:22 PM

Perhaps you hadn't noticed that everyone else already stopped participating with you. I WAS trying to be nice. Perhaps you should consider that next time. mmmkay?

Shawnee123 · 09-30-2009, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman

Perhaps you hadn't noticed that everyone else already stopped participating with you. I WAS trying to be nice. Perhaps you should consider that next time. mmmkay?

ORLY? I'm counting 5 other people who have participated today.

And I haven't even added my .0000002 cents.

Spexxvet · 09-30-2009, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

ORLY? I'm counting 5 other people who have participated today.

And I haven't even added my .0000002 cents.

Does it count as participation if you posted, but couldn't bring yourself to read any of Henry's posts?

Griff · 09-30-2009, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Does it count as participation if you posted, but couldn't bring yourself to read any of Henry's posts?

You're having trouble with the non-standard format as well? Unreadable. Does anyone know what this thread is about?

dar512 · 09-30-2009, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Griff

You're having trouble with the non-standard format as well? Unreadable. Does anyone know what this thread is about?

Not even henry. But it's all quite intentional. Just ask him.

Spexxvet · 10-01-2009, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Griff

You're having trouble with the non-standard format as well? Unreadable. Does anyone know what this thread is about?

It's about 118 posts, as of now.

09-30-2009, 03:15 PM	#1
henry quirk maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 2,162	Classic, we're talking about two vastly different kinds of creatures here. My expectations of one are not translatable to the other. On one hand: we have the human individual for who it is natural to speak. On the other: we have the dog for which it is natural not to speak. As to the damaged human individual who cannot speak, whether or not such a person is capable of love depends entirely on the nature of the damage. If I am stricken with throat cancer and lose my voice: I can still love. If I were born with a damaged brain that limited my ability to speak as one aspect of the damage, then, it's entirely possible I would be unable to love. Your question is awfully broad. Care to narrow it a bit? Again: what makes human love unique is that it is 'done' within an 'I'. There is deliberation and reflection. That we communicate ourselves, transmit ourselves, through speech is the tool of the 'I', but not the definer of 'I'. __________________ like the other guy sez: 'not really back, blah-blah-blah...'

09-30-2009, 11:01 AM	#4
skysidhe ~~Life is either a daring adventure or nothing.~~ Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 6,828	Thanks for the thoughtful response Henry. I do get where your coming from. There is much scientific controversy over this. There is no way I could prove love by my animals. My belief that animals have emotions like love is more than a case of 'believing something is true makes it so'. We can sit across from one another, have coffee, and talk and argue and debate and there is no question, for either of us, that our coffee companion is another 'I'. Well I would look funny talking to a dog in a coffee shop :P Seriously, I think anyone sitting with with you debating and having coffee would be very happy to do so.. You seem to be a very interesting person even without a wagging tail. Last edited by skysidhe; 09-30-2009 at 11:13 AM. Reason: need more coffee lol

09-30-2009, 11:12 AM	#5
henry quirk maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 2,162	"adept social parasites" HA! I wouldn't have thought to put it that way, but, yeah, exactly. # "Thanks for the thoughtful response Henry." You're welcome! # "I can see you would be in your element to meet and debate and I think anyone sitting with with you debating and having coffee would be very happy to do so.. You seem to be a very interesting person even without a wagging tail." Gosh...I think I'll just toe the ground and be shy and embarrassed for a bit... __________________ like the other guy sez: 'not really back, blah-blah-blah...'

09-30-2009, 11:17 AM	#7
henry quirk maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 2,162	HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! __________________ like the other guy sez: 'not really back, blah-blah-blah...'

09-30-2009, 04:13 PM	#8
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	It is becoming increasingly apparent that "I", as you put it, "ought to retire from the conversation." This moving target crap is getting real old real quick. Perhaps I'll let another "dog" chase your elusive bone for a bit. FWIW - I have been reading AND participating in this thread since the first post. Enjoy! __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

09-30-2009, 10:20 AM	#3
Pico and ME Are you knock-kneed? Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Middle Hoosierland Posts: 3,549	I dont totally buy it. They have evolved a highly sensitive ability to detect our emotions because our emotions have a huge impact on their well-being, not because they recognize the emotions in themselves.

09-30-2009, 04:19 PM	#9
henry quirk maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 2,162	get bent "It is becoming increasingly apparent that "I", as you put it, "ought to retire from the conversation."" Fine by me. # "This moving target crap is getting real old real quick." And still no evidence offered in support of your position. Not surprising in the least. # "Perhaps I'll let another "dog" chase your elusive bone for a bit." I'd prefer another person. # "FWIW - I have been reading AND participating in this thread since the first post." Indeed. Pity your participation was picayune; your comprehension poor. __________________ like the other guy sez: 'not really back, blah-blah-blah...'

09-30-2009, 04:22 PM	#10
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	Perhaps you hadn't noticed that everyone else already stopped participating with you. I WAS trying to be nice. Perhaps you should consider that next time. mmmkay? __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)