:^D Perhaps you are thinking too late in age, Slip. You never popped a
wheel off a car when you were 4? 3? 2? This is common childhood
behaviour, so if it never occurred for you, perhaps you were
exemplary.

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I think that it may be a generalization on your part Chris in the "we"
> reference, as many children, myself included, cherished anything that
> resembled a toy.  I never broke a toy in my life and would become very
> adamant when my brother would waste away his, and sometimes mine.  I
> meticulously cared for every toy I was ever lucky to receive, which
> weren't many.  I had cousins that had everything and would destroy it
> all in the rumpus room.  Toys that I envied were recklessly smashed by
> those insolent little brats.  I still today buy for myself toys,
> simple toys, toys that I could never afford to have.  I love my
> gyroscope, my top and my RC cars.
> I do understand what you are saying in that we don't really realize as
> children the value of what we have received and in "that" we learn the
> makings of it, the mechanism upon which some of us have the ability to
> discover our desire to be one with it, as a career, as a hobby.
> I'm sorry you broke all your toys, Chris, you might be one of my
> distant cousins. LOL
>
>
> On Feb 26, 4:09 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Sagir
>> I don't think this is negativity, as much as learning. When we are
>> children, we don't really mean to break our toy cars...at least not
>> the first time we pull the wheel off. It just happens. The second
>> time, we DO mean to pull the wheel off, but only because we are
>> establishing a causative norm. At that point, however, we have a
>> broken car, and we go crying to our Mom and Dad to fix it...and that
>> then becomes our goal (hopefully), to learn how to fix it ourself.
>>
>> I see nothing negative in this process. It seems to me to be the
>> natural order of growth and learning.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM, saghir anwar
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > hi...sir with due apology ,i will not endorse ur point of view.u started
>> > from human nature that we break the toys in childhood and become engineers
>> > when grow old.its our distructive instinct.we we groom ,we become rational
>> > and utilize our energies to construct something in positive way.but we have
>> > also seen that poorly groomed persons oftenly commit follies and get
>> > irrepareable loss sometime.so we can manage to recover ,if we used our
>> > faculties in a positive way...sorry to be critical but negitivity can not
>> > bring positive results.thanx saghir
>>
>> > --- On Thu, 2/26/09, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > From: Chris Jenkins <[email protected]>
>> > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: It's too late for planet Earth
>> > To: [email protected]
>> > Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009, 6:52 AM
>>
>> > I have a similar thought process. I often liken the macro of the human
>> > race to the micro. When we are young, we break our toys, simply
>> > pulling them apart. Some of us, as we get into our teen years, begin
>> > disassembling small engines, and electronics, curious as to how they
>> > work, attempting to reassemble them. A few of us go on to become
>> > technicians of such things. As a civilization, we have done much the
>> > same, randomly tearing things down as cavemen, becoming more precise
>> > in our disassembly as an industrial nation, and hopefully, as an
>> > advanced civilization of the future, we will become technicians,
>> > reassembling the planet in a way which provides symbiotic sustenance
>> > for all. I really don't see any reason that greenhouse skyscrapers
>> > located in each metropolitan area couldn't provide local food sources
>> > for the populace. This planet could reasonably sustain twice the
>> > population, if we were managed effectively, and didn't piss in our own
>> > bathwater.
>>
>> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 6:13 AM, Ian Pollard <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >> 2009/2/26 archytas <[email protected]>
>>
>> >>> Our current space vehicles
>> >>> remind me someone of primitive spawning in plants - like a group of
>> >>> algae forming a tower to boost one of their number from the surf to
>> >>> the jet stream.
>>
>> >> I think there's little point investing any money on manned space
>> > flight. The
>> >> cost is too high and we -- being a short-lived species -- are not
>> > especially
>> >> suited to travelling the enormous distances of our galaxy.
>>
>> >> Lovelock reckons certain countries (the UK, parts of Canada, New Zealand,
>> >> etc) will effectively become life rafts for the human population. These
>> >> countries would be broken down into super-high density cities and areas of
>> >> intensive GM-farming (forget the current fixation about free-range
>> > chickens,
>> >> my hippy friends). The borders of these countries, sadly, would need to be
>> >> barricaded and policed to stop the unfortunates getting in.
>>
>> >> Ian
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to