bombastic

yeah, the posts like that because they're all "writers"...that's why i read the sun, real journalism!!

(i hope your diminished sense of humour caught that bit of sarcasm)

I read a book for school once called "Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric - the Use of Reason in Everyday Life" (8th Edition - Kahane/Cavender - Wadsworth Publishing) I think you'd really like it; there's a really good chapter about the shortcomings of modern media.

For a long time I just gave up on following the news entirely, but eventually I realized that was the wrong approach! For issues I'm really interested in, I like to follow magazine articles b/c they tend to be better researched and more carefully prepared, and also b/c they tend to give exposure to a broader political voice than newspapers do (the differences between the Globe and Mail and the National Post are sadly narrow compared to, say, Utne and Harpers). I also like to listen to the BBC to 'stay up on things' - less commentary, more facts, more global.

mmm...good point...question everything...but since when do any decisions we make influence anything?
besides, ignorance is bliss, no?

uh, yeah...i'm kidding...isn't that what that little winking man indicates?

Scientology: a new religion founded by L. Ron Hubbard in 1955 and characterized by a belief in the power of a person's spirit to clear itself of past painful experiences through self-knowledge and spiritual fulfillment.

Ain't nothin' spiritual about my definitions. I'm mired in the muck and blood of the real world. I'm as behaviourist as they come. Which would be why I want to be as clear as possible that my beliefs are FAR different than that of scientology.

Ha, unfortunately I doubt that I will be present at Velvet this week, as I am stuck working a corporate function that night. I hope it will end early enough, but only time will tell.

You didn't see me last night either!?

A real shame too, cause I spent a good deal of time with; Lucy, Elana, Lisseth, Red_Vinyl, etc. It was good freakin' times!

I hope to see ya sometime soon there.

Isn't it the same with alcohol? A lot of people when they get drunk just act stupid and talk about ridiculous things that have no intellectual value. I like to get drunk and debate complex philosophical issues or discuss important periods in history, but nearly everyone i know doesn't. I'm not a big fan of pot myself (it turns me into an overly analyitical asshole and gives me a nasty headache) but i can sympathize.

I disagree... naturally... To me any action requires choice which completely negates any situation where one is forced to be unhappy. Even if I were imprisoned tomorrow I am still left with choices on where I will go from there. If I feel I can not serve my time I can try to escape or I can kill myself. I agree that choices are not always easy to make but the difficulty is self made and the choice to submit to circumstance rather then overcome is something I have no pity for. We create life as we wish at whatever level we are comfortable creating it. What I urge is we all accept the ultimate levels of responsibility and realize that every choice is ours and whatever we perceive as good is no farther then a change in perception and actions.

So when you relate your difficulty over the choice between meat and veggies we are in agreement. What you perceive as the better way is being carried out by you right now so you embody what I mean. Now to me neither way is more right then the other, which is my other point regarding perception.

So back to our grenade jumping friend and your friends assertion there are no selfless acts. Yes you may say he was selfless by saving the lives of his friends but only because you are not him, you do not stand in his shoes. If you were you would be driven by your own desire to carry out an action which would be selfish. I know there is a thick negative connotation to that word but really all it means is you are doing something of your own accord. The living god. So you see the action is both selfish and selfless simultaneously, a duality that spreads throughout every concept in existence.

Ah, Velvet...

Where would my sanity lay, if not for you.

And what would be Velvet if not for Osaze's rhythms and scouling vocals.

Thursday never comes fast enough, and the night never lasts long enough.

Of course you were going to say that, this is why you and I often disagree.

I love this question because it points out the nature of perception. The man's action itself was selfish because his motivations were his own. He could not bare the thought of his friends dieing so he killed himself leaving his friends to deal with the loss of him. Also I am of the school of thought that says any action is selfish because it must be motivated by self to be carried out. We could argue this of course... However to the observer of the mans actions he is a hero for selflessly diving on the grenade to spare his friends lives. We can't imagine what was going on in his head, all we see is he saved his friends lives.

What this says to me is the truth of any matter depends on the perception of those who view it and their proximity to it's source. People are uncomfortable with multiple truths but I see no reason to exclude this possibility.