I would say hand brake Slip: the wind in your hair the sun (or rain) on your face and the occasional bug in the teeth... :)

On 9/7/2010 5:15 PM, Slip Disc wrote:
...........and can indeed brake down those barriers.

Would that be the foot brake or the hand brake?

Chuckle, just getting in on the humorous side of the thread.  ;-)

On Sep 7, 4:05 pm, Molly<[email protected]>  wrote:
I agree with your view on humor, DWB, especially a good pun.  But
there is a wide variety of humor, and the cynical variety is meant to
demean or establish superior/inferior ranking.  The humor that can
hold up the mirror and show us how we are all connected in our
humanness is not a barrier to communication and can indeed brake down
those barriers.

On Sep 7, 12:46 pm, DarkwaterBlight<[email protected]>  wrote:

I tend to look at humor as a doorway rather than a barrier. Regardless
of intent, if one cannot laugh in spite of one's self then the
question of 'why?' must be asked. This may be obvious to the offended
individual or not but a well meaning comedian can easily waste a good
and meaningful pun on a jadded and humorless individual. Perhaps it's
on account of the 'thick skin' (and sometimes thick skull) I have
developed, that I veiw it this way. It's just really hard for me to
take offense to just about anything, especially when humor is added.
On Sep 7, 10:21 am, Molly<[email protected]>  wrote:
Wonderful quote, Francis.  Alice's bigger viewpoint of the Logos of
the words we use may be lost on Humpty Dumpty in his need to express
authority through "mastery", of words, identity of view, and
reluctance to consider another meaning.  This may indeed be the crux
of the barriers to communication on the topic of capitalism or any
other, as " people began ' arriving ' at their fixed and
hardened perspectives, views or values. Which makes an open
conversation impossible, for there is mere reiteration of known
positions"
By Logos, I mean the traditional sense of the word, the "meaning that
passes between you and me," which takes into account connotation,
denotation, linguistics and semantics.  These are the processes
fleshed out in honest and open dialogue.  Groups often get stuck in
defining terms. Anyone entering the dialogue with an ax to grind, a
need to be right or feel injured, stops dialogue and keeps the group
stuck in argument (or outright abuse), and there are thousands if not
millions of places in cyberspace ready to engage on this level.
Violent language, fallacious arguments, cynical humor and personal
attacks are all barriers to communication, often by design if a person
in the group is more interested in talking only about themselves or
what they make the words mean as masters of them.  But we all know the
story of Humpty Dumpty.
Dialogue takes a knowledge of other group members and respect for
differences in language and culture before semantic differences can be
flushed out, and common understanding of terms agreed upon.  Then,
different viewpoints can be expressed and appreciated. There are then
those wonderful moments when we can experience our own viewpoints
expanding, as the meaning that passes between you and I gains
dimensionality.
I think this is an important thread, Vam.  Thanks for starting it.
On Sep 5, 5:37 am, frantheman<[email protected]>  wrote:
Like many terms used in public discourse, Ashok/Vam, sometimes the
only answer is that given by Humpty Dumpty :-):
"`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
`it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'
`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so
many different things.'
`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master --
that's all.'"
http://www.sabian.org/Alice/lgchap06.htm
Francis
On Sep 4, 5:17 pm, ashok tewari<[email protected]>  wrote:
little time ? !  ... indeed.
But that's not the issue I'd highlighted, Fran. It was about " what *people
mean when they use the term* ' capitalism.' "  Not how it means in Das
Kapital.
On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 7:25 PM, frantheman<[email protected]>wrote:
Well, if anyone's got a little time on their hands, here's an
introduction to the subject of capitalism :-)
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Das_Kapital
Francis
On Sep 3, 7:56 pm, Vam<[email protected]>  wrote:
I do sense an aspect of timelessness in the platform, on which people
with fundamental questions or doubts met and discoursed to clarify.
What happened was people began ' arriving ' at their fixed and
hardened perspectives, views or values. Which makes an open
conversation impossible, for there is mere reiteration of known
positions. Like, it would be disappointing if we came to clear the
ground and found it littered with buildings of all sorts, including
those one may disagree with or dislike.
I believe the developments take nothing away from the timelessness of
ME. But we need to go back to discussing fundamental issues, aspects
or terms. For instances, I am till date intrigued by what people mean
when they use the term ' capitalism.' Ideally, the user should be able
to enlighten us with all ideate dimensions to the term -  practice,
structure, economic values system, moral values, ethical values, and
way - of - life beliefs and philosophy.
The discussion would of course veer to alternate systems and
philosophies ... and so on. The participants definitely make their own
informed or cultural choices along the way. Life itself clarifies the
rest of the way. And perhaps the discourse gets upgraded ...
sometime ... if there are enough interested members to infuse life !!
--
ASHOK TEWARI- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Reply via email to