Enigmatic can mean any of mysterious, puzzling, hard to understand, mystifying, inexplicable, baffling, perplexing, bewildering, confusing, impenetrable, inscrutable, incomprehensible, unexplainable, unfathomable, indecipherable, Delphic, oracular; ambiguous, equivocal, paradoxical, sibylline, unaccountable, insoluble, obscure, elliptical, oblique; arcane, abstruse, recondite, secret, esoteric, occult, cryptic; informal - as clear as mud
The enigmatic is seen by some as rude, None of this is how I think of Gabby, though she can touch a few bases. Mutual understanding is not a bad context - though a long way from nodding donkey consensus. On Tuesday, 4 November 2014 14:24:59 UTC, archytas wrote: > > Context is difficult with you Gabby, partly on enigmatic grounds (I mean > the term nicely) on your expression. I'm broadly probing the > legitimation crisis. We have reached a point when politicians promising > change need to be greeted with shouts of 'apple juice'. We lack public > context on economic matters even though technology could give us an > economics we could use as we use washing machines or drive cars. Instead > of this we have perverse resource allocation and devolved budgets to ration > services that revictimise victims through the false promise of help, which > is really going to be the denial of the complaint and exposure of > complainants to more harm. Meanwhile the problems grow under the pretence > we are dealing with them. We might learn about data and evidence in an > examination of this. We don't seem prepared to do so. > > On Tuesday, 4 November 2014 06:07:33 UTC, Gabby wrote: >> >> Ah ja? I'm not so sure. >> Am 04.11.2014 01:49 schrieb "archytas" <[email protected]>: >> >>> Needless to say. >>> >>> On Monday, November 3, 2014 9:18:32 PM UTC, Gabby wrote: >>>> >>>> Again your interpretation. I meant to have politely replied: What is >>>> your context? >>>> >>>> 2014-11-03 20:41 GMT+01:00 archytas <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> Gabby makes some important points - seem to remember the 81 paper but >>>>> there were many, Dictionaries don't really help here - nor the >>>>> hermeneutics of 'finding the original copy' - German sin is exemplified >>>>> in >>>>> the Jewish Numbers 31 and so on across genocides and the concentration >>>>> camp >>>>> as a business tactic in such as 'red rubber'. Primitive societies tell >>>>> us >>>>> their wars are based on revenge - though they always involve resource >>>>> grabs >>>>> (land, hunting, women, children). We seem to have merely managerialised >>>>> this. >>>>> >>>>> The demand for social services and welfare is much greater than we >>>>> admit, extending into such issues as why we have been so stupid to expand >>>>> the human population in tripling it in my lifetime, global warming, >>>>> pollution and the crass failures of "education". One might think one >>>>> could >>>>> at least focus on 'the abuse next door' - but I have to say when this >>>>> came >>>>> along in my life Sue and I failed and found the agencies and politicians >>>>> much worse than useless. The ultimate standard of morality would have >>>>> been >>>>> to shoot the parents and do the time - had one been able to rely on the >>>>> agencies looking after the kids rather than doing a worse job. >>>>> >>>>> The resource issues are not insurmountable though they are within our >>>>> stupid economic system. Even to talk of this is more or less heresy - >>>>> and >>>>> look what we prefer to do - speak of young kids preferring a 'prostitute >>>>> lifestyle' and hear politicians talking about the few cases in which >>>>> abused >>>>> children hit the care jackpot. The ages of consent across the West were >>>>> often created in response to child prostitution. The first law of >>>>> innocents I know of comes from Dark Age Scotland and I am by no means >>>>> sure >>>>> what the improvements since have been. >>>>> >>>>> The specific social services resource issue was discussed in the >>>>> 1950's in terms of concentric circles - one could only focus on a small >>>>> number of the worst cases in a much wider circle of need. Only 10% of >>>>> kids >>>>> killed by parents in the UK are actually known to social services in the >>>>> sense of being subject to a care order. The costs of admitting a problem >>>>> soon spiral and following the money one soon realises little actually >>>>> gets >>>>> spent on the kids. Gabby raises the issue that it is cruel to promise >>>>> solution when we have no intent of funding what's needed. In terms of >>>>> sufficient numbers of people to do most of what is needed there is no >>>>> problem - we just create a system which prevents money-resourcing. >>>>> >>>>> We have, of course, pumped trillions into subsidy of manufacturing and >>>>> banks over the years - these areas supposedly thrusting self-reliant >>>>> genius >>>>> competitors - and very little into what we call welfare - we 'police' >>>>> Afghanistan and Iraq making things much worse but do almost nothing for >>>>> our >>>>> own victims. There are answers. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sunday, November 2, 2014 8:46:36 PM UTC, Molly wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I befriended one of the LaCasa employees that worked with children in >>>>>> groups and took disclosures. She eventually became a police officer, >>>>>> hoping it would be less stressful. I think it probably was.If the >>>>>> network >>>>>> is large enough, no one burns out. Trouble is, it is rarely large >>>>>> enough. >>>>>> I think people have the need to look away from this problem more than >>>>>> any >>>>>> other. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sunday, November 2, 2014 2:59:57 PM UTC-5, Allan Heretic wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ah, pedophiles they have been in the news including one for >>>>>>> soliciting an underage computer image. Personally I am glad to see the >>>>>>> aggressive prosecution, I am very proud of the enforcement effort. >>>>>>> I wish I could say it would an honor to be part of the team thing on >>>>>>> pedophile but truth is I think it would destroy me. I do give them my >>>>>>> full >>>>>>> support, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Molly <[email protected]> >>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>> Sent: Sun, 02 Nov 2014 8:26 PM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Who can we tell? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *It is important to agree on terms when conversing. This from the >>>>>>> Free Dictionary:* >>>>>>> *em·power·ment** n.* >>>>>>> *Usage Note: *Although it is a contemporary buzzword, the word >>>>>>> *empower* is not new, having arisen in the mid-17th century with the >>>>>>> legalistic meaning "to invest with authority, authorize." Shortly >>>>>>> thereafter it began to be used with an infinitive in a more general >>>>>>> waymeaning "to enable or permit." Both of these uses survive today >>>>>>> but have been overpowered by the word's use in politics and pop >>>>>>> psychology. Its modern use originated in the civil rights movement, >>>>>>> which sought political *empowerment* for its followers. The wordwas >>>>>>> then taken up by the women's movement, and its appeal has not >>>>>>> flagged. Since people of all political persuasions have a need fora >>>>>>> word that makes their constituents feel that they are or are about >>>>>>> to become more in control of their destinies, *empower* has been >>>>>>> adopted by conservatives as well as social reformers. It has even >>>>>>> migrated out of the political arena into other fields. · The Usage >>>>>>> Panel has some misgivings about this recent broadening of usage. For >>>>>>> the Panelists, the acceptability of the verb *empower* depends on >>>>>>> the context. Eighty percent approve of the example >>>>>>> *We want to empower ordinary citizens.* But in contexts that are not >>>>>>> political the Panel is markedly less enthusiastic. The sentence >>>>>>> *Hunger and greed and then sexual zeal are felt by some to be stages of >>>>>>> experiencethat empower the individual* >>>>>>> garners approval from only 33 percent of the Panelists. The Panel >>>>>>> may frown on this kind of psychological empowering because it r >>>>>>> esonates of the self-help movement, which is notorious for trendy >>>>>>> coinages. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've never been interested in talking politics, and although I've >>>>>>> had occasion to work with some, never really affiliated with any party. >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> will leave any tendency to interpret what I say as an affiliation with >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> political party up to you. I really don't have one. I will be excited >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> see Dave Bing next week when he comes to my place of employment. for a >>>>>>> photo shoot, the Democrat who restored integrity to the office of Mayor >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> Detroit. He took a lot of heat and it took guts to devout the years of >>>>>>> his >>>>>>> life that he did to turning the city around like a freighter on the >>>>>>> river. >>>>>>> Like skin color, religion or citizenship, I don't don't hold many >>>>>>> preconceived notions to a persons political persuasion when relating to >>>>>>> them, so really can't speak to your comment about republicans and >>>>>>> democrats. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nice to know pedophiles are prosecuted somewhere. Congratulations! >>>>>>> A system working! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sunday, November 2, 2014 1:28:13 PM UTC-5, Gabby wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The big picture, that you draw, is very much a U.S. American >>>>>>>> Republican's view. I know quite a number of people whose aggressivenes >>>>>>>> gets >>>>>>>> triggerd by this deliberate choice of imagery. (I'm sure the relief >>>>>>>> barking >>>>>>>> will set in later) >>>>>>>> Let's see if we can find a common ground for the word >>>>>>>> "empowerment". The root is English, that's correct, but the modern >>>>>>>> popularity and usage goes back to the American Julian Rappaport: In >>>>>>>> praise >>>>>>>> of paradox. A social policy of empowerment over prevention, in: >>>>>>>> American >>>>>>>> Journal of Community Psychology, 9/1981, 1-25 (13), saying: „Having >>>>>>>> rights >>>>>>>> but no resources and no services available is a cruel joke.“ I think >>>>>>>> we can >>>>>>>> all agree if we don't take a closer look at our rights, but assume we >>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>> them. >>>>>>>> As for moving, if you cannot protect innocent children - this would >>>>>>>> still be a taboo in our German context, even if we wanted to do the >>>>>>>> same. >>>>>>>> We have left innocent Jews to the apparatus, we have no excuse left. >>>>>>>> It is >>>>>>>> the alledged pedophiles who have to be protected in our communities, >>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>> they have to move elsewhere, no laws and law enforcement could do >>>>>>>> something >>>>>>>> about that. >>>>>>>> But you know what, I believe your call for a kid's survival >>>>>>>> training is more of an anti-Democrat, Republican demagogy than a real >>>>>>>> call! >>>>>>>> :) Am I right? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>>>> Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ >>>>> topic/minds-eye/QYatNwqDgp8/unsubscribe. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>>> [email protected]. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>> >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>> Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/minds-eye/QYatNwqDgp8/unsubscribe. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>> [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
