"Rick Scott" <rick@shadowspar.dyndns.org> wrote in message
news:52c7.4131a2a0.d1d68@shadowspar...
> Hmmm. Funny, I just finished my morning perusal of the CBC news page,
> and, lo! a study on how humans are hard-wired for revenge.
> No point in contesting your argument, I see. =)

Well, it makes sense, when you think about it. People work on motivations,
right? They are motivated mainly to satisfy internal senses of
gratification. What is more gratifying than when a person gets what they
deserve? Sure, there are a lot of people out there who fight this sense of
"revenge" as being something that is a more basic instinct that should be
suppressed by "enlightened" folks, but even the most enlightened person
reacts to revenge situations with a "well, yeah, I suppose he deserved it,
but..." kind of thing.

> > Of particular disdain in that list is my personal choice favorite of
> > the bunch: Psychology. To me, psychology is nothing more than
> > extortion of the weak minded.
>
> One minor gripe: I think that you're directing arguments at the
> entire field of Psychology that are better aimed at its sub-fields of
> psychotherapy and clinical psych.

Well, while those particular gripes were aimed at the fields you describe,
the field as a whole is little more than putting common sense down on paper
and supporting it with statistics, which is something so mindnumbingly
simple as to be almost laughable. The thing that shocks me is the lengths
to which pscyhologists, sociologists and criminologists will go to make
CURRENT psychological trends fit the societal norms of the time. For
instance, spanking is out of vogue, and it's relatively easy to find data to
support this. Where is the data collected from the 50's? It speaks an
ALARMINGLY different story, but we don't get to hear about that, now do we?
Stuff taken as gospel not a decade ago is now simply dismissed as "wrong"
and now this is the new thing to do. It's annoying. Human nature does not
change in that period of time, only society does, which leads to only one
conclusion: psychology is a reflection of society, not of human nature,
which is what it should be about. THAT is what pisses me off.

> people'd be able to air out their problems with their friends and
> families instead of hiring a stranger to listen to them.

The sad thing is, the stranger isn't even helping, more often than not.
Advice is rarely given from a therapist, except on a very broad, vague and
general level. Specific advice is avoided, so what good is the stranger,
really? Essentially, you're buying a shoulder to cry on. **** THAT!

> > Want a fun experiment. Videotape yourself drinking yourself silly.
>
> Wow. Sounds interesting. Frightening, perhaps. =)

Frightening is a bit overdramatic... try "illuminating".

> > The sentiment "In Vino Veritas" definitely holds true. What you see
>
> I'd heard that saying in passing before, but it's not something I'd
> ever contemplated at length. Iiiinteresting.

Pretty much anything written and spoken in latin in modern times is
something that should be contemplated at length.

"Veni, vidi, vici" - i came, i saw, i conquered
"E pluribus unum" - out of many, one
"Caveat emptor" - let the buyer beware

> Hmm. Perhaps I should get prospective friends all liquored up as a
> sort of job interview. If they get belligerent, kick'em to the curb
> and deny ever meeting them. =)

Sounds like a plan. I'm going to do that as well!

> I notice people of all ages being drunken idiots, but perhaps more so
> amongst youth. To think that the older folks who persist in this
> behaviour simply never matured past it seems like a reasonable
> theory to me.

I think the reason you don't see more "older" drunken idiots is because the
older ones have (mostly) learned that their drunken idiocy has gotten them
thrown out of so many bars and whatnot, that they now just stay home and get
plastered without fear of being thrown out of their own homes. Young
ones don't much give a damn yet(there's still plenty of bars to soil).

> Indeed. Even had I the money to waste on getting smashed every weekend,
> I wouldn't -- it's been done before and wasn't particularly fun in and
> of itself. Like you say, I'd far rather hang out with some friends,
> and have some pleasant conversation, possibly accompanied by a few
> drinks.

From the sounds of it, you're one of those guys who does not enjoy getting
drunk. I suppose that's your choice, but I have to be honest with you,
there are two generalities I've learned about drinking and people over the
years. First, drunkenness usually serves to separate the (inherently) good
from the (inherently) bad. Second, drunkenness almost ALWAYS serves to
separate the fun from the dull.

That is not to say that a person must be drunk to have fun or anything of
the sort, but like we've discussed before, drinking tends to remove social
restrictions the people place upon themselves, that is to say, it lowers
inhibitions. People are more of whatever they were when they drink. If a
person is going to be a fun person to be around, they are going to be that
much MORE fun when they are drunk, in the same general way. People who are
dour, dull, sullen people tend to get much more that way when they drink.
You want to find out who the fun ones are, get em hammered. Even the most
introverted shy person shows their true colors, something that can easily be
brought out when sober by the right set of people and circumstances.

You want to know who *REALLY* piss me off? People who instantly judge other
people for drinking. The most common phrase is "You know, you don't *HAVE*
to drink to have a good time!" Yes, we know, Polly Prissy Pants, but
drinking is a fun social thing to do, and as long as I'm not puking in your
car, I'd appreciate it if you would shut the hell up and have some fun. I'm
not forcing you to DRINK, I would appreciate it if you didn't work to force
me *NOT* to drink. The thing that really irks me is that people who don't
drink and are judgemental of those that do seem to actively work to prevent
drinking, which is silly. No harm, no foul, what's the problem?

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right

(Jeff Goslin <autockr@comcast.net> uttered

> The thing that shocks me is the lengths to which pscyhologists,
> sociologists and criminologists will go to make CURRENT
> psychological trends fit the societal norms of the time. For
> instance, spanking is out of vogue, and it's relatively easy to find
> data to support this. Where is the data collected from the 50's?
> It speaks an ALARMINGLY different story, but we don't get to hear
> about that, now do we?

I strongly believe that a person who looks for something hard
enough will probably find it, whether it's actually there or not.
Descartes started out wanting to show that God existed, and,
amazingly enough, managed to rationalize his way into `proving'
God's existence. In a related vein, the Bible has been quoted to
condemn or support slavery, interracial marriage, prostitution,
polygyny, and sundry other things, depending on the views of its
wielder. Is this trend more prevalent in psych, sociology, and
criminology than other fields? Perhaps.

Everyone praises what he believes; his god is his own creature,
and in praising it he praises himself. Consequently he blames
the beliefs of others, which he would not do if he were just,
but his dislike is based on ignorance.
:Muid ad-Din ibn al-Arabi (1165-1240 CE)



> Pretty much anything written and spoken in latin in modern times is
> something that should be contemplated at length.
>
> "Veni, vidi, vici" - i came, i saw, i conquered
> "E pluribus unum" - out of many, one
> "Caveat emptor" - let the buyer beware

"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur."
(Whatever is said in Latin, sounds profound.) =)

In all seriousness, when it comes to my favourite latin quotes,
Juvenal comes a close second...

"Difficile est saturnam non scribere."
(It is difficult not to write satire.)

.....and Cicero has my favourite:

"Nihil tam absurde dici potest,
quod non dicatur ab aliquo pilosophorum."
(There is nothing so absurd,
that some philosopher has not said it.)



> I think the reason you don't see more "older" drunken idiots is
> because the older ones have (mostly) learned that their drunken
> idiocy has gotten them thrown out of so many bars and whatnot, that
> they now just stay home and get plastered without fear of being
> thrown out of their own homes.

Either that, or they just get more pragmatic. They realize that they
can get right and truly pissed for fifteen bucks at home, as contrasted
with fifty or more at a bar. =)



> From the sounds of it, you're one of those guys who does not enjoy
> getting drunk.

Depends on how you define `drunk'. I enjoy getting pleasantly pissed
every now and again, but I've definitely passed the point where I
consider getting rip-roaring-falling-down-puke-on-your-shoes drunk
to be even remotely entertaining.



Rick
--
key CF8F8A75 / print C5C1 F87D 5056 D2C0 D5CE D58F 970F 04D1 CF8F 8A75
It's your life, and you don't owe a soul the least explanation or
justification. If someone has a problem with what you choose for
yourself, just be real clear in your mind that it's *their* problem,
not yours. :Jess Anderson