================================================ Subject: Re: NCR: philosophical talk is back From: "creed -7m3 - live" To: Date: Fri 31 Aug 2001 23:42:17 -0400 ================================================ Great points Alexis. All of those words are subjective. And all of them seem to be based upon what your culture and overall views are. I got what you were trying to say. Though, from my own perspective. I enjoyed reading your views. Jim On Fri, 2001-08-31 at 14:46, Alexis M. wrote: > Looks like I missed this topic too. :) > Well, I'll answer (in my own perspective) this question, with a question: > What can we truely say is considered "insane". I mean, the average > person would think "insane" to be something that is different, a little > off, from their own views of a moral mind. (going away from the > definitions, and actually thinking like an "average" person). But here's > another question: What can we actually say is "sane"? What is actually > "normal ways of thinking"? They are just labels for what society as a > whole believes to be ideal. Going back to that whole "eating people > would be insane" thing, some countries (I believe) have actually studied > and performed cannabalism. So to them, it's not considered insane, but a > normal part of everyday life (I don't think it's still practiced, but > Eck!). But in other countries, they'd think it was insane, and just > wrong! > > I hope this was understandable, I know what I'm trying to hit but I feel > like I'm dancing around it. Can't quite get it out. Also, I may have -- Finagle's Second Law: No matter what the anticipated result, there will always be someone eager to (a) misinterpret it, (b) fake it, or (c) believe it happened according to his own pet theory. To unsubscribe or change your preferences for the Creed-Discuss list, visit: http://www.winduplist.com/ls/discuss/form.asp