The Word "mentor" comes from the Greek "Mentor" whom was the son of Alcumus in Homer's Odyssey. When Odysseus left to fight in the Trojan War, he left Mentor in charge to watch over his son, Telemachus. Mentor acted as a guide and confidant to Telemachus, in absence of his father. Upon the return of Odysseus from his ten year journey, (most recently Calypso), Athena took the form of Mentor in protection of Odysseus and Telemachus, because the level of trust and loyalty that both had put into Mentor would aid them in exacting revenge against the tyranny that had overgrown in Ithaca.
As we've recently crossed another "first" threshold since my grandmother's passing, (her July 28th birthday, she would have been 99 this year), memories swelled looking back at those in my life who have acted as a mentor; a teacher; a guide; a liaison, if you will, between known and unknown - such are the trades of a mentor.
Mentors bridge the gap between freely giving their life experience and giving insight to present goings-on, even if perhaps they know nothing of the subject. They know when not to get involved, yet know, also, when to give comforting thought without pressing an issue.
A mentor is not a passerby, although it can be argued that someone that is met only once can give valuable information. Rather, a mentor is someone that has been by your side for an extended period of time. I can think of several people, by reason of polarity, that have acted as such throughout my life. I say polarity, because I am a staunch believer in that one needs balance in life, and polar opposites sharing their experiences and opinions can only form a true basis of the persona that shapes our life.
This mentor is not just someone that we can rely upon. Knowledge lies within acceptance; acceptance of what they have to offer, yes, but accepting that we don't necessarily have to be near this person to feel their presence; we don't need to call this person on the phone all the time; nor Email, text, smoke signal, Morse code, or any other form of communication. This person is there when we need them; for the small pebbles, or the big rocks life throws at us, we needn't be in constant contact to know this to be true.
As you read this passage, I hope you ponder who your mentor is – is this person a friend? A school teacher? A co-worker? Someone that I talk to on-line, but have never met?
Tell that person thanks – before it's too late … mentors make us who we are – a thank-you is the least we can give them in return …
Respect is taken, when respect is given ...
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
Monday, August 4, 2008
Friday, July 25, 2008
English Language - sorta
The following is a response to an on-going debate I have with a friend who seems to think that certain government mandates are contributing to the downfall of every culturally native language except English. He also states that English should not be the main language in America, as other countries make up America, i.e. Canada, Mexico, Brazil, etc. He proceeds to quote PhD holders from UCLA to back-up that English is not the only "living language", and should not be the only one used. So, I quoted the books I had from people that were NOT PhD holders. My argument is the following response:
"I don't know if you're agreeing or disagreeing, so I'll put it another way ... languages have survived without governments, and if someone wants to use "government" as a crutch that "all" languages survive or die, that's poppycock. I'm not going to learn 15 different languages so that I can speak with my neighbors, but if you move here from another country then you better damn well learn English. (Just as I would have to learn a native language if I moved to another country). Or, as an aside, I would learn their language as secondary to my English.
Lingua Franca – Norman French hybrid language (Italian, Spanish, German, Latin, etc.) English is considered to be the first global lingua franca. I have no use for PhD pedantry that can otherwise be proved by the history of formulated usage. "Living language" is used as a metaphor for something still in use and continually changing. Something evolves from nothing but a quick fix for words stemming from a group of certain cultures in order to communicate. English has metamorphed its phonological, morphological, syntactic, semantic, and intonation theories into one that is a rapidly rising global standard. David Crystal (Patron of the International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language) and David Graddol are (knighted British) pioneers in sociolinguistics regarding this global change. (In case the folks over at UCLA forgot where modern English came from - it's from the Brits and Old English). 83% of English vocabulary is Germanic in origin. (Brought by the Romans who swept through NW Germany, which also encompassed Norman French and Spain and also encompassing their native Latin) – (A Grammar of Proto-Germanic - Jonathan Slocum and Winfred P. Lehmann.) That being said, the rest of the percentages are made up of French, Latin, Spanish, Danish, Dutch, Greek, and a small percentage that is of unknown origin (Origins of English Language - Joseph Williams). (Police is a French origin word, yacht is a Danish word, computer (der Komputor) is a German word).
(Native languages of Britain before the Romans arrived, I'll save for another story.)
Pidgin Language – language created under stressful times that evolve over time (Creole, for instance, or your Mussolini anecdote). The unknown percentage of the evolution of modern English can be explained as words created from a pidgin language. Slaves often developed their own language. (Monolingualism of the Other - Jacques Derrida).
Latin, (from Latium along the Tiber River), is considered by many a dead language. However, it is still in use in the Roman Catholic Church, but nowhere else. Either way, it hasn't evolved – (wordsmithing here) – not a living language. Sanskrit is a precursor of Greek and Latin and Avestan (Zoroastrian) is an early relative of Persian (Sir William Jones). Both of these languages gave Greek and Latin words, but not structure, according to modern philology. Neither are used in their original forms, (although studied purely for their linguistic historical importance), and are considered dead languages. (By your PhD arguments, studying a language is keeping it alive, as the people who study it also speak it.) When English evolved from the above statements, the English language gave structure to these words – and the structure has changed since it's humble beginnings. (The Indo-European Dialects - Antoine Meillet). (The Discovery of Language - Holgar Pederson).
So, with all that said, it looks like to me that borrowings are the ONLY way a language changes, and thus, survives. It's BECAUSE the English langauge has borrowed that it survives by changing and adapting unlike any other language.
My great-grandparents, whom came here legally, did not speak a lick of English when they arrived here. But, they did instill in their children that German was not to be spoken at home, only English, in order to communicate and live in this New Country. I'm sick and tired of not being able to communicate with the amalgam of Spanish speakers at my school because they REFUSE to speak English.
No one is stating that native languages be lost, rather, English should be the one everyone speaks IN ADDITION TO their native language, whatever that may be.
Also, last time I checked, our Constitution was written in English, not a little bit of this and a little bit of that from the rest of "America"".
Original Posting
Respect is taken, when respect is given ...
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
"I don't know if you're agreeing or disagreeing, so I'll put it another way ... languages have survived without governments, and if someone wants to use "government" as a crutch that "all" languages survive or die, that's poppycock. I'm not going to learn 15 different languages so that I can speak with my neighbors, but if you move here from another country then you better damn well learn English. (Just as I would have to learn a native language if I moved to another country). Or, as an aside, I would learn their language as secondary to my English.
Lingua Franca – Norman French hybrid language (Italian, Spanish, German, Latin, etc.) English is considered to be the first global lingua franca. I have no use for PhD pedantry that can otherwise be proved by the history of formulated usage. "Living language" is used as a metaphor for something still in use and continually changing. Something evolves from nothing but a quick fix for words stemming from a group of certain cultures in order to communicate. English has metamorphed its phonological, morphological, syntactic, semantic, and intonation theories into one that is a rapidly rising global standard. David Crystal (Patron of the International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language) and David Graddol are (knighted British) pioneers in sociolinguistics regarding this global change. (In case the folks over at UCLA forgot where modern English came from - it's from the Brits and Old English). 83% of English vocabulary is Germanic in origin. (Brought by the Romans who swept through NW Germany, which also encompassed Norman French and Spain and also encompassing their native Latin) – (A Grammar of Proto-Germanic - Jonathan Slocum and Winfred P. Lehmann.) That being said, the rest of the percentages are made up of French, Latin, Spanish, Danish, Dutch, Greek, and a small percentage that is of unknown origin (Origins of English Language - Joseph Williams). (Police is a French origin word, yacht is a Danish word, computer (der Komputor) is a German word).
(Native languages of Britain before the Romans arrived, I'll save for another story.)
Pidgin Language – language created under stressful times that evolve over time (Creole, for instance, or your Mussolini anecdote). The unknown percentage of the evolution of modern English can be explained as words created from a pidgin language. Slaves often developed their own language. (Monolingualism of the Other - Jacques Derrida).
Latin, (from Latium along the Tiber River), is considered by many a dead language. However, it is still in use in the Roman Catholic Church, but nowhere else. Either way, it hasn't evolved – (wordsmithing here) – not a living language. Sanskrit is a precursor of Greek and Latin and Avestan (Zoroastrian) is an early relative of Persian (Sir William Jones). Both of these languages gave Greek and Latin words, but not structure, according to modern philology. Neither are used in their original forms, (although studied purely for their linguistic historical importance), and are considered dead languages. (By your PhD arguments, studying a language is keeping it alive, as the people who study it also speak it.) When English evolved from the above statements, the English language gave structure to these words – and the structure has changed since it's humble beginnings. (The Indo-European Dialects - Antoine Meillet). (The Discovery of Language - Holgar Pederson).
So, with all that said, it looks like to me that borrowings are the ONLY way a language changes, and thus, survives. It's BECAUSE the English langauge has borrowed that it survives by changing and adapting unlike any other language.
My great-grandparents, whom came here legally, did not speak a lick of English when they arrived here. But, they did instill in their children that German was not to be spoken at home, only English, in order to communicate and live in this New Country. I'm sick and tired of not being able to communicate with the amalgam of Spanish speakers at my school because they REFUSE to speak English.
No one is stating that native languages be lost, rather, English should be the one everyone speaks IN ADDITION TO their native language, whatever that may be.
Also, last time I checked, our Constitution was written in English, not a little bit of this and a little bit of that from the rest of "America"".
Original Posting
Respect is taken, when respect is given ...
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Xeno Paradox of Life
""The Tortoise challenged Achilles to a race, claiming that he would win as long as Achilles gave him a small head start. Achilles laughed at this, for of course he was a mighty warrior and swift of foot, whereas the Tortoise was heavy and slow.
"How big a head start do you need?" he asked the Tortoise with a smile.
"Ten meters," the latter replied.
Achilles laughed louder than ever. "You will surely lose, my friend, in that case," he told the Tortoise, "but let us race, if you wish it."
"On the contrary," said the Tortoise, "I will win, and I can prove it to you by a simple argument."
"Go on then," Achilles replied, with less confidence than he felt before. He knew he was the superior athlete, but he also knew the Tortoise had the sharper wits, and he had lost many a bewildering argument with him before this.
"Suppose," began the Tortoise, "that you give me a 10-meter head start. Would you say that you could cover that 10 meters between us very quickly?"
"Very quickly," Achilles affirmed.
"And in that time, how far should I have gone, do you think?"
"Perhaps a meter – no more," said Achilles after a moment's thought.
"Very well," replied the Tortoise, "so now there is a meter between us. And you would catch up that distance very quickly?"
"Very quickly indeed!"
"And yet, in that time I shall have gone a little way farther, so that now you must catch that distance up, yes?"
"Ye-es," said Achilles slowly.
"And while you are doing so, I shall have gone a little way farther, so that you must then catch up the new distance," the Tortoise continued smoothly.
Achilles said nothing.
"And so you see, in each moment you must be catching up the distance between us, and yet I – at the same time – will be adding a new distance, however small, for you to catch up again."
"Indeed, it must be so," said Achilles wearily.
"And so you can never catch up," the Tortoise concluded sympathetically.
"You are right, as always," said Achilles sadly – and conceded the race.""
One could say that life is just like this race. Everytime we feel like we get caught up on something, something else comes along and puts us back a little bit farther. There is no way to catch up to where we need or want to be, thus stays the paradox.
While the calculus method of handling infinite sequences may solve the distance problem, and quantum physics solves the mark between two points, there is the philosophical answer to the paradox: keep going, try something new, and never give up.
I've tried to fill my life with as many eclectic paths as possible. I travel down each one for a short bit of time, until I catch up as much as I can, and turn toward a different direction. This helps keep the mind free and open. My gambit is the possibility of sacrificing certain aspects that some people may find offensive, in that not enough time is spent in one area, and too much in another.
My life "To-Do List: is as follows:
*To write a Letter of Intent to a high-powered political official
*To finish and publish the 9 books I've started
*To continue to write: poetry, blogs, stories, notes, scribbles, ideas
*To re-build a compressed air engine, and build and adapt a Tesla turbine using recycled compressed air, with gyroscopic encasements/compartments
*To re-build an electric engine using Xenon and a friction based power source
*To continue to sit on the board of The Thomas Foundation
*To finish work on my un-named community non-profit endowment
*To continue to be culturally open-minded, and non-biased
*To travel to other countries
*To immerse myself in my educational career
*To make people happy with my small business of jewlery making
*To learn as much as possible about psychology and philosophy
*To continue to enjoy my outdoor activities; hiking and camping
*To reduce my meat intake to 15%, and increase vegetarianism to 85%
*To continue to learn and play percussion, tin whistles, and guitar
*To play the song I wrote for my grandma in public
*To continue to meet and greet new people
*To love my two best friends as the real and genuine people that they are
*To continue to protest things that I feel are wrong, and promote things I feel are right
*To continue to love my family, and all the eccentricities we entail
*To be a life partner with the right woman, and have children together
*To continue to learn things I do not know, but want to
*To never lose sight of who I truly am
All of the above I have started, and will continue to work on until the end - but one never truly stops being ones' self, if one passes on knowledge to another ...
I'm a strong believer that all lists should be long, so that everything can be garnered an achievement if tried. I heard it said once "Do or Do Not, There is No Try" - but, if we don't try, nothing can be done ... to try, is to do - to do nothing, is to not try ...
Respect is taken, when respect is given ...
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
"How big a head start do you need?" he asked the Tortoise with a smile.
"Ten meters," the latter replied.
Achilles laughed louder than ever. "You will surely lose, my friend, in that case," he told the Tortoise, "but let us race, if you wish it."
"On the contrary," said the Tortoise, "I will win, and I can prove it to you by a simple argument."
"Go on then," Achilles replied, with less confidence than he felt before. He knew he was the superior athlete, but he also knew the Tortoise had the sharper wits, and he had lost many a bewildering argument with him before this.
"Suppose," began the Tortoise, "that you give me a 10-meter head start. Would you say that you could cover that 10 meters between us very quickly?"
"Very quickly," Achilles affirmed.
"And in that time, how far should I have gone, do you think?"
"Perhaps a meter – no more," said Achilles after a moment's thought.
"Very well," replied the Tortoise, "so now there is a meter between us. And you would catch up that distance very quickly?"
"Very quickly indeed!"
"And yet, in that time I shall have gone a little way farther, so that now you must catch that distance up, yes?"
"Ye-es," said Achilles slowly.
"And while you are doing so, I shall have gone a little way farther, so that you must then catch up the new distance," the Tortoise continued smoothly.
Achilles said nothing.
"And so you see, in each moment you must be catching up the distance between us, and yet I – at the same time – will be adding a new distance, however small, for you to catch up again."
"Indeed, it must be so," said Achilles wearily.
"And so you can never catch up," the Tortoise concluded sympathetically.
"You are right, as always," said Achilles sadly – and conceded the race.""
One could say that life is just like this race. Everytime we feel like we get caught up on something, something else comes along and puts us back a little bit farther. There is no way to catch up to where we need or want to be, thus stays the paradox.
While the calculus method of handling infinite sequences may solve the distance problem, and quantum physics solves the mark between two points, there is the philosophical answer to the paradox: keep going, try something new, and never give up.
I've tried to fill my life with as many eclectic paths as possible. I travel down each one for a short bit of time, until I catch up as much as I can, and turn toward a different direction. This helps keep the mind free and open. My gambit is the possibility of sacrificing certain aspects that some people may find offensive, in that not enough time is spent in one area, and too much in another.
My life "To-Do List: is as follows:
*To write a Letter of Intent to a high-powered political official
*To finish and publish the 9 books I've started
*To continue to write: poetry, blogs, stories, notes, scribbles, ideas
*To re-build a compressed air engine, and build and adapt a Tesla turbine using recycled compressed air, with gyroscopic encasements/compartments
*To re-build an electric engine using Xenon and a friction based power source
*To continue to sit on the board of The Thomas Foundation
*To finish work on my un-named community non-profit endowment
*To continue to be culturally open-minded, and non-biased
*To travel to other countries
*To immerse myself in my educational career
*To make people happy with my small business of jewlery making
*To learn as much as possible about psychology and philosophy
*To continue to enjoy my outdoor activities; hiking and camping
*To reduce my meat intake to 15%, and increase vegetarianism to 85%
*To continue to learn and play percussion, tin whistles, and guitar
*To play the song I wrote for my grandma in public
*To continue to meet and greet new people
*To love my two best friends as the real and genuine people that they are
*To continue to protest things that I feel are wrong, and promote things I feel are right
*To continue to love my family, and all the eccentricities we entail
*To be a life partner with the right woman, and have children together
*To continue to learn things I do not know, but want to
*To never lose sight of who I truly am
All of the above I have started, and will continue to work on until the end - but one never truly stops being ones' self, if one passes on knowledge to another ...
I'm a strong believer that all lists should be long, so that everything can be garnered an achievement if tried. I heard it said once "Do or Do Not, There is No Try" - but, if we don't try, nothing can be done ... to try, is to do - to do nothing, is to not try ...
Respect is taken, when respect is given ...
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
The John and Margaret Thomas Community Endowment Fund
A few months ago, I began a stint on the board of a community project, that I believe, has potential for many great things.
The John and Margaret Thomas Community Endowment Fund is a foundation that brings community awareness through the differing aspects of worldly cultures.
So far, the Foundation has given grants to several Colorado cultural groups, and has itself, been a part of several gatherings in the Colorado area.
And each year, in addition to grant giving, we have helped to host the Aurora Arts Festival bringing in the likes of world renowned Nigerian drummer and dancer Baba Joda; a poets and writers gathering; a mime troupe; a Samoan musical group, and much more!
We look forward to the international festivals this year, along with bridging the cultural gap by bringing events into public awareness.
However, like most endowments and foundations, we rely on donations, so that we may in turn give back to the community. If you feel like you can donate, or know someone that would, please visit the web site and click on the 'Donations' tab.
The John and Margaret Thomas Community Endowment Fund can be found by clicking the link under the "links" portion of this site.
Celebrate diversity, as much as possible ...
Respect is taken, when respect is given
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
The John and Margaret Thomas Community Endowment Fund is a foundation that brings community awareness through the differing aspects of worldly cultures.
So far, the Foundation has given grants to several Colorado cultural groups, and has itself, been a part of several gatherings in the Colorado area.
And each year, in addition to grant giving, we have helped to host the Aurora Arts Festival bringing in the likes of world renowned Nigerian drummer and dancer Baba Joda; a poets and writers gathering; a mime troupe; a Samoan musical group, and much more!
We look forward to the international festivals this year, along with bridging the cultural gap by bringing events into public awareness.
However, like most endowments and foundations, we rely on donations, so that we may in turn give back to the community. If you feel like you can donate, or know someone that would, please visit the web site and click on the 'Donations' tab.
The John and Margaret Thomas Community Endowment Fund can be found by clicking the link under the "links" portion of this site.
Celebrate diversity, as much as possible ...
Respect is taken, when respect is given
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
2nd Amendment
The 2nd Amendment.
If you believe in the 2nd Amendment as a right for the commonwealth, rather than the sole of the military, you've never been on the receiving end of a gun - if you had, your views would change from the wanton need to kill if a gun was handy via means of "protection", to savoring life when it is about to be shot out from underneath. The Constitution was written under the pretense of war, at a time where wartime measures required guns to fight a gun-toting invading force. In my faith and beliefs, killing is not necessary EVER.
What benefit is there to give everyone a gun? If no one had a gun, what reason would there be for protection? It is ONLY through escalation that guns are needed. If weaponry didn't exist, what would fuel the fervent warrior? The fact that there is EASY access to harmful machines, only fuels those bent on harm. Take away the access, and there will be a decrease in harmful situations penned on an outside source, being guns. There will always be something else to take its place, but shouldn’t there also be a choice of whether or not to take up such a violent act?
If one is given a gun, there is no choice - only one action. If one were to say "I have a gun, but choose not to use it - except only in defence..."; defence of what? Shooting or be shot? The choice becomes kill or be killed? There is death on someone's hands no matter how you view it. Why would anyone choose death, over life? There is always another underlying factor involved, for the use of a weapon. Root out the evil beneath the folds of weaponry, and one will find solace in knowing that there even lies a choice without guns and subsequent killing.
I’ve been mugged because someone wanted my coat. And because I chose to use my mind as a means to fend off the attacker, I was shot because of it. I regret nothing - I have no blood on my hands.
I’ve seen someone shoot themselves, with alcohol and other drugs involved. Had there not been a gun around, he’d still be with us today. Maybe he would have died from a drug overdose, but at least his brains wouldn’t be on the wall of his basement. His nickname was “Brooklyn”.
Thomas Jefferson, one of the greatest minds ever to grace American soil, was pro-gun. He is quoted in his Commonplace Book as saying the following:
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes ... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
Except Jefferson only copied it from an Italian man named Cesare, Marquis of Beccaria-Bonesana, who is considered one of the founding pioneers in the field of criminology, and a philosphical/politician contempory of Jefferson, and author of a treatise of one of the basis of our Constitution, “On Crimes and Punishments”. There is one great difference between the two men: Jefferson used the quote as an end to the means, meaning he was for everyone having a gun so that everyone would be equal in the face of danger. Bonesana actually meant it as a means to and end, as he was fervently opposed to torture and an advocate of criminal reform.
I, much like Bonesana, tend to side with humanism on this subject in that there is now more than ever a sense of urgency at unjust suffering. Utilitarianism works to a point, then the argument begins on which state of moral happiness is best for the greater good – I tend to side with the happiness that is not blowing someone’s brains out, simply because one has access to a gun and is happy about using it at any given point, for any given reason.
I can only say that you will value life to the fullest, knowing that it can be taken in an instant. Diseases can leave a person withering years after diagnosed. Even though I've had my share of medical unfortunates, I cannot speak of that. However, I can speak of being on the receiving end of cowardice ...
Respect is taken, when respect is given ...
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
If you believe in the 2nd Amendment as a right for the commonwealth, rather than the sole of the military, you've never been on the receiving end of a gun - if you had, your views would change from the wanton need to kill if a gun was handy via means of "protection", to savoring life when it is about to be shot out from underneath. The Constitution was written under the pretense of war, at a time where wartime measures required guns to fight a gun-toting invading force. In my faith and beliefs, killing is not necessary EVER.
What benefit is there to give everyone a gun? If no one had a gun, what reason would there be for protection? It is ONLY through escalation that guns are needed. If weaponry didn't exist, what would fuel the fervent warrior? The fact that there is EASY access to harmful machines, only fuels those bent on harm. Take away the access, and there will be a decrease in harmful situations penned on an outside source, being guns. There will always be something else to take its place, but shouldn’t there also be a choice of whether or not to take up such a violent act?
If one is given a gun, there is no choice - only one action. If one were to say "I have a gun, but choose not to use it - except only in defence..."; defence of what? Shooting or be shot? The choice becomes kill or be killed? There is death on someone's hands no matter how you view it. Why would anyone choose death, over life? There is always another underlying factor involved, for the use of a weapon. Root out the evil beneath the folds of weaponry, and one will find solace in knowing that there even lies a choice without guns and subsequent killing.
I’ve been mugged because someone wanted my coat. And because I chose to use my mind as a means to fend off the attacker, I was shot because of it. I regret nothing - I have no blood on my hands.
I’ve seen someone shoot themselves, with alcohol and other drugs involved. Had there not been a gun around, he’d still be with us today. Maybe he would have died from a drug overdose, but at least his brains wouldn’t be on the wall of his basement. His nickname was “Brooklyn”.
Thomas Jefferson, one of the greatest minds ever to grace American soil, was pro-gun. He is quoted in his Commonplace Book as saying the following:
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes ... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
Except Jefferson only copied it from an Italian man named Cesare, Marquis of Beccaria-Bonesana, who is considered one of the founding pioneers in the field of criminology, and a philosphical/politician contempory of Jefferson, and author of a treatise of one of the basis of our Constitution, “On Crimes and Punishments”. There is one great difference between the two men: Jefferson used the quote as an end to the means, meaning he was for everyone having a gun so that everyone would be equal in the face of danger. Bonesana actually meant it as a means to and end, as he was fervently opposed to torture and an advocate of criminal reform.
I, much like Bonesana, tend to side with humanism on this subject in that there is now more than ever a sense of urgency at unjust suffering. Utilitarianism works to a point, then the argument begins on which state of moral happiness is best for the greater good – I tend to side with the happiness that is not blowing someone’s brains out, simply because one has access to a gun and is happy about using it at any given point, for any given reason.
I can only say that you will value life to the fullest, knowing that it can be taken in an instant. Diseases can leave a person withering years after diagnosed. Even though I've had my share of medical unfortunates, I cannot speak of that. However, I can speak of being on the receiving end of cowardice ...
Respect is taken, when respect is given ...
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)