Afraid of being seen as gay, are you?

[Lucifer_Carroll]

I like bikinis.

Huzzah, consensus.

 

[Guest]

As per request...

*drum roll*

Because . . . . . . . . . .

*snare*

Thank you.

Joe - I must add one small correction.

(After the drum roll comes the cymbal crash.)

You two have fun in the Bahamas.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by sweetsubsarahh
Joe - I must add one small correction.

(After the drum roll comes the cymbal crash.)

Maybe in your strange, Bizarro world of drum rolls... but in America, toots, we have snares after drums.

 

[Guest]

Maybe in your strange, Bizarro world of drum rolls... but in America, toots, we have snares after drums.

*grin*

I am ABD for my Ph.D in music, Joe.

After the drum roll comes the crash.

(but you can still call me toots.)

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by sweetsubsarahh
*grin*

I am ABD for my Ph.D in music, Joe.

After the drum roll comes the crash.

(but you can still call me toots.)

Bizarro-world Ph.D, maybe.


: )

 

[Guest]

Bizarro-world Ph.D, maybe.


: )

My tits are much better than Lois Lane's.

 

[minsue]

My tits are much better than Lois Lane's.

 

[gauchecritic]

Bahamas? I thought they were going to have fun with bananas!

I'm just glad I didn't say anything stoopid.

(it's crash cymbal with kick base. Or maybe it's a crass symbol with bitch-face)

Gauche

(with a dead hold on the cymbal almost immediately following)

 

[Liar]

I like bikinis.

And I'll bet you look better in them than me.

My tits are much better than Lois Lane's.

I'm still waiting for a chance to have them compared.

#L

 

[CharleyH]

FINALLY! After 133 posts everyone decides to have an orgy, or at least watch. Thank god this isn't r/l or I'd still be waiting, or moved on . . .

I quite think you'd all look good in bikini's, just remember to shave the bikini line, boys!

 

[RebeccaLeah]

FINALLY! After 133 posts everyone decides to have an orgy, or at least watch. Thank god this isn't r/l or I'd still be waiting, or moved on . . .

I quite think you'd all look good in bikini's, just remember to shave the bikini line, boys!

Hopefully all the girls do already?

 

[CharleyH]

Hopefully all the girls do already?

Look good or shave? You'd be surprised what I see on a beach these days

 

[RebeccaLeah]

Look good or shave? You'd be surprised what I see on a beach these days

Ummm, both....but I doubt there would be much question of the first part. Lit girls are always hot.

*shudder* I don't want to know. I'm surounded by smooth, tanned (sorority) skin, and long legs in short skirts. I think I like it here.

 

[CharleyH]

I'm surounded by smooth, tanned (sorority) skin, and long legs in short skirts. I think I like it here.

So am I

You weren't a perky cheerleader by any chance, were you?

 

[matriarch]

Ummm, both....but I doubt there would be much question of the first part. Lit girls are always hot.

*shudder* I don't want to know. I'm surounded by smooth, tanned (sorority) skin, and long legs in short skirts. I think I like it here.

Oh, and I thought it was the attraction of your studies......

 

[sweetnpetite]

There isn't anything necessarily wrong, psychologically, with people who are hatemongers. It may be that hatemongering is a natural state. Don't know. Can't assert it.

You don't know.

I do. And I assert it.

"Hatemongering is not a natural or healthy state." There. Asserted.

But I don't care to debate it.

That is all.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Huzzah, consensus.

Hey, I'm wearing a bikini right now!

(Went to the pool earlier)

 

[CharleyH]

You don't know.

I do. And I assert it.

"Hatemongering is not a natural or healthy state." There. Asserted.

But I don't care to debate it.

That is all.

Gosh you're feisty

Hate is an unnatural state in the animal kingdom, it is true. Fear, on the other hand is a given, and there is no refuting it, really. Oh I could have debated, but, I prefer butt's . . . but like you, sometimes I think you just need to follow the 'devils' way concession, bikini's and beaches and mai tai's, all of which we ALL seem to enjoy.

Nonetheless, I did like watching the banter, and seeing the opinions, the logic, the 'ill'logic. Thank you, ALL.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by sweetnpetite
You don't know.

I do. And I assert it.

"Hatemongering is not a natural or healthy state." There. Asserted.

But I don't care to debate it.

That is all.

False assertion unless you have direct cognitive access to the laws governing the natural state of man... which, if you do, I'd love to hear the justification for.

But, don't debate it if you don't want.

That is all... as well... also.

Originally posted by CharleyH
Gosh you're feisty

Hate is an unnatural state in the animal kingdom, it is true. Fear, on the other hand is a given, and there is no refuting it, really. Oh I could have debated, but, I prefer butt's . . . but like you, sometimes I think you just need to follow the 'devils' way concession, bikini's and beaches and mai tai's, all of which we ALL seem to enjoy.

Nonetheless, I did like watching the banter, and seeing the opinions, the logic, the 'ill'logic. Thank you, ALL.

Hate may or may not be an unnatural state--we aren't really certain about the emotions of things we don't have cognitive (or communicative) access to. Fear we aren't necessarily certain of either--though we see effects that are fear-like and call them that. Interesting to note, we see effects that are hate-like, too, all the time in nature concerning natural enemies and the like.

 

[CharleyH]

Hate may or may not be an unnatural state--we aren't really certain about the emotions of things we don't have cognitive (or communicative) access to. Fear we aren't necessarily certain of either--though we see effects that are fear-like and call them that. Interesting to note, we see effects that are hate-like, too, all the time in nature concerning natural enemies and the like.

EVERYTHING, my dear Joe, even the seemingly most solid of theories can be questioned, since all theory can change depending on resource, stat, cultural thought, our perspective and time as example.

I learned this from my study of Alice in Wonderland, believe it or not

That animals other than humans hate? Well, territorially, one could assume that the Lion hates other males and drives them away. But hate? True one cannont determine if the Lion actually hates. One needs to define hate to determine it. Does the Lion hate the hyena, or simply find it a nuisance with fearful jaws?

Hate is a strong word.

Yet . . . I know not (in my limited experience) an animal, other than human, that goes out of their way to torture for sexual pleasure longingly for 30 days, shitting on and paining, fucking and taking pleasure upon, or to alienate, perhaps try to eliminate another species, (we call it race). Animals deal with the NOW of a situation, and what might perhaps be positioned as hate in the now, is not evidentiary in context. Does an animal, other than human premeditate, in the spirit of the thread, the illimination of gays, of the mentally reatarded, of blacks, of Jews? Perhaps of hippos, tigers, rats - because of difference? An animal works with what is at hand, and therefore, in laymans terms, yes, we can say that animals do not hate, unless you have a more enlightened perspective.

If so, you just might, MIGHT be the first man I bow to. though I doubt it since no one can come up with a 'straight' answer about the extinction of dinoseurs.

I am as much into quantum possibilities as the next freak. No, we are not certain, we cannot know, we can't even thoroughly prove our own theories about our individuality or the contradiction of our ever changing opinions.

AND yet:

Both hate and fear are certain in humans. Fear is an evidentiary state of animals. One runs from fear, as a lion runs from an elephant. As a shivering mouse, not Doormouse , runs from a playfull cat. Does an animal hate? As a human animal the answer is yes. As what we call a lower hierarchal animal? Nope, not in their mind, and yet can you provide evidence that these other species hate?

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by CharleyH


EVERYTHING, my dear Joe, even the seemingly most solid of theories can be questioned, since all theory can change depending on resource, stat, cultural thought, our perspective and time as example.

Except logical proofs. To question those would be parrot-talk. "1+1 doesn't equal 2" can be questioned... but to question it isn't to actually raise errors in it, but to just say questions.

That animals other than humans hate? Well, territorially, one could assume that the Lion hates other males and drives them away. But hate? True one cannont determine if the Lion actually hates. One needs to define hate to determine it. Does the Lion hate the hyena, or simply find it a nuisance with fearful jaws?

Right. To determine it, it must be defined--that's sensible.

Yet . . . I know not (in my limited experience) an animal, other than human, that goes out of their way to torture for sexual pleasure longingly for 30 days, shitting on and paining, fucking and taking pleasure upon, or to alienate, perhaps try to eliminate another species, (we call it race).

So, is that the bounds of hate? Would things that fall short of that be "not hate"? I don't think you're saying that, by any means. 30 days... 10 days... 1 day... 30 minutes... doesn't matter, does it? So, the time thing isn't a necessary factor for hate.

Sexual pleasure? Is that the hate determinant? I don't think you're saying it is--obviously, hate isn't dependant on a sexual pleasure basis, right? So, we can take that out of the equation.

Which leads us to your point of...

Animals deal with the NOW of a situation, and what might perhaps be positioned as hate in the now, is not evidentiary in context. Does an animal, other than human premeditate, in the spirit of the thread, the illimination of gays, of the mentally reatarded, of blacks, of Jews? Perhaps of hippos, tigers, rats - because of difference? An animal works with what is at hand, and therefore, in laymans terms, yes, we can say that animals do not hate, unless you have a more enlightened perspective.

You're saying that hate is defined by premeditation... I think I have that right. If not defined, then "marked by". Either will do. Its a good idea, to be sure. I even like it. But... it has problems:

1) Hate isn't necessarily marked by a premeditation, is it? Crimes of passion, legally speaking, spark talk of flashes of rage and intense hatred... by that we might say that "hate" can be spur of the moment--allowing animals (whom we assume cannot premeditate things) to hate.

2) Animals may not lack the ability to premeditate things. It is obvious with some species that problem solving occurs and some sort of a pre-thought occurs (monkeys with tools, pigeon dancing, "breakfast in bed" with rats, etc.). Animals obviously think, about what and how is a bit of a mystery to us--but take away our communication abilities and humans would be just as mysterious. If an animal can have aversions and behaviors whose appearance implies hatred (violence, fear, aggressions, defensiveness, etc.), why can we not call that "hatred"...? Most importantly, if we cannot be sure that they don't hate, how can we say they don't? Especially when they /do/ exhibit violent categorical behaviors (dogs growling at strangers is always a good one, or cats getting defensive when particular people sit in their chair).

"Hate" is a very human term, but we use human terms and emotional terms to explain all sorts of natural science. Excluding "hate" from the list to prove another point isn't a good idea. It can be eliminated, possibly, but I do not see how except for linguistic preference at the moment.

Both hate and fear are certain in humans. Fear is an evidentiary state of animals. One runs from fear, as a lion runs from an elephant. As a shivering mouse, not Doormouse , runs from a playfull cat. Does an animal hate? As a human animal the answer is yes. As what we call a lower hierarchal animal? Nope, not in their mind, and yet can you provide evidence that these other species hate?

I can't prove that animals hate... only that they display hate-like behavior. I can't prove that humans hate either... only that they display hate-like behavior (plus, they can communicate "I hate"). As such, I can't speak intelligently about what /is/ in the mind of an animal... only what is possibly in the mind of an animal. And there isn't anything about animals that preclude the possiblity of their hating things.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

False assertion unless you have direct cognitive access to the laws governing the natural state of man... which, if you do, I'd love to hear the justification for.

But, don't debate it if you don't want.

That is all... as well... also.




Hate may or may not be an unnatural state--we aren't really certain about the emotions of things we don't have cognitive (or communicative) access to. Fear we aren't necessarily certain of either--though we see effects that are fear-like and call them that. Interesting to note, we see effects that are hate-like, too, all the time in nature concerning natural enemies and the like.

I will disagree with you. Fear we can be certain of. Operant conditioning is possible with "lower" animals and because of this we can prove fear. Simply put in operant conditiong you use a stimuli to modify behavior, one of the stimuli used is pain. If lower creatures were not capable of fear, then they could not be conditioned using pain. Pain is transitory, especially the minor pain inflicted such as mild electric shock. If the rat can be taught not to enter the green door because he will get shocked, even if there is fod on the other side of the door, then you see proof he knows fear. If he did not fear the electric shock, he could never be induced to not enter the green door and eat.

Hate I am not sure of. I feel you must have significant cognition to hate. The animal brain will react to stress in one of two ways, flight or fight. Assuming flight is an avialable option, those who choose to fight might be percieved to hate. But only if we could somehow deliniate their thought process and be sure they knew another option was avialable in a given situation.

-Colly

 

[Liar]

I'm surounded by smooth, tanned (sorority) skin, and long legs in short skirts. I think I like it here.

You and me both. It's distracting en masse, but you won't see me complaining.

Sorry, just felt the need to bring this thread back to relevant matters.

#L

 

[ABSTRUSE]

I forgot what the subject was.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Colleen Thomas
I will disagree with you. Fear we can be certain of. Operant conditioning is possible with "lower" animals and because of this we can prove fear.

I have had the distinct pleasure of being taught by Behavioral Analysis guru Dr. Kelly Wilson, in my day. Behavioral analysis is an essential clinical psychology tool. Absolutely fanscinating subject that I'd be delighted to talk about any day of the week.

I think he, and I know I, and I suspect the rest of the behavioral psychology world would say... "we can prove that we induce fear-like behavior in the animal, not that we prove fear". There's a huge difference. We can cause behaviors, through conditioning, but we don't get a glimpse inside the animal's head. Behavioral Psychology, at best, gets to say "we can predict and influence X behavior"... it has no business saying "we can predict and influence fear" as it can't meter, register, measure, or quantify "fear".

Hate I am not sure of. I feel you must have significant cognition to hate. The animal brain will react to stress in one of two ways, flight or fight. Assuming flight is an avialable option, those who choose to fight might be percieved to hate. But only if we could somehow deliniate their thought process and be sure they knew another option was avialable in a given situation.

-Colly

See... there's no good reason why significant cognition is needed to hate. That I hate beestings is no great achievement of intellect or reason. I don't need miraculous cognition to really hate that guy over there for everything from stealing my parking space to hitting on my girlfriend to stealing my lunch. Hate seems to be a regression of the intellect, not an achievement of ot--as such, it is possible that its just a natural instinct.

Hate-like behavior is evident in the animal kingdom. Why we choose to call those behaviors "umm, not hate" and yet the same behaviors (with the same justifications) "hate" in humans is beyond me. If I take a dog's food when its hungry enough, it may growl and snarl and jump me. If I take someone's property when they are especially protective of it, they also may growl and snarl and jump me. Hate-like behavior.