Originally posted by TheColdDragon
reply to post by RogerT
You're getting closer, but not quite there yet.
You have asserted the following,
1) Those who would spank are unconcious beings, that people are delusional and in denial.
Here are my assertions clarified:
One must become unconscious in order to inflict violence on a child in the form of spanking.
Most people are, for the most part, delusional and in denial, (including me btw)
2) Those that spank are deficient in the will(motivation) to learn other means.
Those that spank and feel bad about it are simply deficient in alternative, non-violent options, and maybe also the motivation or desire to learn.
Why do you continue to insist upon replacing my 'maybe's' and 'possibly's' with 'is' and 'are'?
You even quoted my actual statement and still managed to misrepresent it one line above.
3. Those that spank are unreasoned, ignorant and belligerant.
Reason over reaction, compassion over belligerence.
No, this is a case of you taking a comment out of context in order to strengthen your position.
My reference is to the exchange between 2 ATS members. One is pro spanking, the other pro non-violence.
My perception of their discussion is expressed in my statement. If I need to spell it out for you, the pro-spanker IMO posted reactively and
belligerently, whilst the non-violence advocate displayed a reasonable nature and compassion. Of course that's just my perception.
4. Logical deduction based upon Science is inferior to "Awareness"
Bingo, you nailed one.
... an ambiguous terminology often self-defined.
like 'logical deduction', or 'science'?
Every term can be ambiguous if the individuals in the conversation don't share an identical perspective and the same dictionary
Also that thinking is antithetical to awareness,
Bingo, that's 2 for you.
equating people that don't think to a superior status over thinkers.
I don't think there are many people on the planet who don't think, but there are plenty that have managed to experience the suspension of thought,
if only for a moment or two.
In fact, I'll bet you've spontaneously had this experience also, maybe during an intense moment of sport or some extremely scary life threatening
moment.
Satori, enlightenment, inner peace, being in the now, awareness, fully conscious, a state of presence, there are many terms for it. None of the terms
'are' it, they are just pointers. As the Tao Teh Ching states, 'that which can be named is not it!' (loose translation)
Of course, the assertion that it is superior is a sign that awareness has already been lost, so even though my mind says it is so, that's only my
ego's evaluation.
Some may feel it is not better to be awake than asleep, to feel fully alive and one with everything rather than numb and sedated, to have access to
right action in any moment rather than simply reacting according to mental programming at the push of a button.
Is it superior, well yes, I definitely believe so, but that's just my own limitations talking.
5. Inferred that evolving world views and the ability to change ones mind on a subject is a negative quality while also inferring such as again
something outside of what you define as "Awareness"
No, you'll have to work harder at this one. I don't mean to infer a negative quality, I was attempting to paint a completely different paradigm for
you.
Inside the egoic mind structure, you can change your mind as often as you like, but you are still stuck in an illusion. You may think you have dropped
an inferior belief for a superior one, but all you've done is traded your baggage from samsonite to gucci - it's still baggage.
Your beliefs are irrelevant and will continue to flip flop around for the rest of your life as different information comes into your focus.
If you manage to gain a moment of awareness, all your current beliefs will dissolve anyway. The insanity of violence towards children will then not be
a belief but just plain obvious.
6. Failed to understand what the word "CAPACITY" means, and how Knowledge and Awareness ARE each a "Capacity".
Already replied to this one ... deficient only in knowlege and awareness, not capacity.
Bro' sometimes I think your intellectual self importance really gets the better of you. Who's definition of the word am I failing to understand?
"Innate potential for growth, development, or accomplishment; faculty"
"The power to learn or retain knowledge; mental ability"
"A measure of this ability; volume"
I can't find a single source that supports your idea that knowlege and awareness 'are' a capacity. Everything seems to point in my favor, that we
actually have a capacity for them.
A jug has a capacity to hold water. If it is only half full it still has the same capacity compared to when it is empty or even full.
I'm puzzled that you're trying this one on, to be honest. Are you retaliating for my comment about your misuse of the word parody?
7. That spanking children is some form of "Insanity".
Ding ding, another one correct.
and in response to...
How could you possibly know that? Are you claiming omni-knowlege?
No. I only claim that the Universe is chaotic and unpredictable, and all emergent lifeforms display the same... including humans. No two humans are
identical in behavior, psychology, mannerisms, personality and what does and doesn't work for them as both persuasive learning mechanisms and
dissuasive ones.
Yet if you cut any human, they will bleed. Perhaps we are not as different as you think
Anyway, it's good to see you finally admit that something you said was just a guess and nothing more than your imaginary version of reality.
There is no absolute in declaring something neither right or wrong, stating something "IS" is not declaring a value about something. Stating
something is at times necessary is also not a statement of absolutes, it is a consideration of conditional variables and the fine limitations of
existence as a whole in allowing ALL possible solutions to be explored at any given moment in time.
I read this paragraph 3 times and still couldn't understand it.
Sorry, but if you say something is 'necessary' then that is an absolute in my book. If not, then where is the option?
Lacking perfection and omniscience, it is necessary to resort to violence at times. Is there a way at all times? Yes. Is it a feasible way? Probably
not the case in all circumstances.
Again, this is a confusing paragraph. Did you leave out a key word or two? Are you saying it is necessary to sometimes use violence on children to get
them to do what you want or it isn't?
[edit on 2/8/09 by RogerT]
[edit on 2/8/09 by RogerT]
