Help This Guy Answer the Questions of Life, the Universe and Everything!

reply to post by YouAreLiedTo


At least we know we are not alone!

reply to post by SuperiorEd


Thank you.....numerology is fascinating...though I don't have the mathematical mind for it, I love seeing all the connections. The computer thingy in Hitchhiker's Guide didn't give any explanation for 42 just said it is the answer to everything.

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Originally posted by vogon42
Actually...pardon me.....the book was originally published in England in 1979.

Sorry Ed, you have to wait a few more years before you can plagiarize it, and have people believe you.

BTW: if you do a web search, you can find an interview with the author where he states the number 42 means NOTHING.....just had to decide on a number for his book, something not too elaborate....so....well....uh ....42.

And that is how he came up with the answer.

Unfortunately... your ignorance of this matter has made you a false prophet.

When an idea is a patently obvious and self-evident, it is seen under the heading of Well-Known Fact with copyright. I can say Coke if I want. I can say Disney. Legally, I am not in danger. Are you sure you are concerned with plagiarizing or are you after another intention?

I am confused...so 42, is it the answer to everything in the universe..or not? The odds of improbability are what?

*pulls the string of yarn from my mouth as I watch a whale float downward*

I believe Vogon42 to be in Junior High. Either way, he is referring to the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Book. This is where he takes his name of Vogon42. As irony, he is accusing me of plagerism for using the title of one of the books in the series, "Life, the Universe and Everything" as the hook in the title of this thread. 42 is the answer to the question, "What's the answer to life, the universe and everything?" The movie ends with 42 as the answer. Of course, I'm sure you already know this.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


delete for reasons of manners and decorum.

How creepy and superior and arrogant do you actually allow yourself to get?

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

delete for reasons of manners and decorum.

How creepy and superior and arrogant do you actually allow yourself to get?

edit on 7-1-2012 by wildtimes because: WOW

edit on 7-1-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

After teaching junior high for 20 years, there are signs that show age by character. Using nener-nener and similar tactics to make a point is typically replaced with context and reason as a person gets older. The object of growing up is to treat others with the respect they demand from others. Age comes across loud and clear on ATS when childish behavior rises to the surface. I don't mind pointing it out to help the person grow into their role as a member of society. Contributing requires rules of common behavior in any context. You'll learn this the heard way as you grow older if you stick to always playing the role of the one that is hurt. Buddha had something to say on the subject:

We are what we think.
All that we are arises with our thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the world.

Speak or act with an impure mind
And trouble will follow you
As the wheel follows the ox that draws the cart.
We are what we think.

All that we are arises with our thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the world.
Speak or act with a pure mind
And happiness will follow you
As your shadow, unshakable.

"Look how he abused me and hurt me,
How he threw me down and robbed me."
Live with such thoughts and you live in hate.
"Look how he abused me and hurt me,
How he threw me down and robbed me."
Abandon such thoughts, and live in love.

In this world
Hate never yet dispelled hate.
Only love dispels hate.
This is the law,
Ancient and inexhaustible.

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Originally posted by vogon42
.........

Have you heard of an author called Douglas Adams? (of course you have, thats why you are copying his statement)

.................

It's the only non-fiction book I have ever read in my life.......

Wow ed, you really think this book is NON-FICTION? (and they let you teach children??)

BTW: Freudian slip or not.....at least you have admitted the bible is fiction (or that you have not read it?)

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
.... The object of growing up is to treat others with the respect they demand from others. .....

Actually ed, with 11 years military experience, I can say from experience.

Respect can NOT be demanded, it has to be earned.

reply to post by SuperiorEd

The object of growing up is to treat others with the respect they demand from others. Age comes across loud and clear on ATS when childish behavior rises to the surface. I don't mind pointing it out to help the person grow into their role as a member of society. Contributing requires rules of common behavior in any context. You'll learn this the heard way as you grow older if you stick to always playing the role of the one that is hurt. Buddha had something to say on the subject:

Whoa, there, friend. Back the truck up.
Let's have a look at these remarks, their premises, and your choice of wording.

The object of growing up is to treat others with the respect they demand from others.

The object of growing up is to learn to CEASE demanding that others give you what you want! Respect is EARNED. Demanding it from someone is bullying and childish.

Age comes across loud and clear on ATS when childish behavior rises to the surface.

Arrogance comes across loud and clear when dismissive, long-winded answers that do not directly answer the asked questions, nor clearly make one's point accessible to the entire audience, rises to the surface.

I don't mind pointing it out to help the person grow into their role as a member of society.

That's not why you did it. You said it ABOUT another member to a third party in a snide and superior-sounding tone. If you wanted to "help" vogon42, you'd have sent a u2u and a gentle suggestion. You would not have called him out in front of the entire class and insulted him. Fail, Ed.

I certainly hope you don't do that with your students, either. You are supposed to be leading by example, not showing off your vocabulary and speaking in riddles.

Contributing requires rules of common behavior in any context.

Such as speaking in a manner that the intended listener can understand. And answering questions with clear, direct answers. Sadly, it has become apparent to me by reading yours, that you aren't a particularly good "listener", though no one could fault you for being an unenthusiastic "speaker."

You'll learn this the heard way as you grow older if you stick to always playing the role of the one that is hurt.

Are you addressiing "me" directly with this? Or using the generic form of "you?"
As for playing the role of one that is hurt, I am the one in charge of monitoring how I interpret the behaviors and statements of others, not you. And I decide to whom I give respect, and it is not to people who "demand" it or use big words and Bible verses rather than answering questions. If you dont' approve of who I respect or don't like it that I do not respect your manner of addressing others, that is your problem, not mine.

I don't mind pointing out when someone is rude, snide, back-handed, and petty. I say "That remark seems [rude, or snide, or back-handed, or petty, or uncalled for, or a cheap shot]. Would you care to rephrase it? Did I understand you correctly?"

Works better if my objective is to COMMUNICATE. If one is trying to get an idea across, it is incumbent upon THEM to ascertain the INTENDED RECEIVER of the message is able to interpret it correctly.

Saying, "What are you, twelve?" is not serviceable. Saying "I believe SuperiorEd to be 12" to someone else would not indicate that I was "helping" SuperiorEd.

Buddha had something to say on the subject:

And there is evidence that Jesus studied Buddhsm, and that is what he taught.

So, Ed, accept this rebuttal and communication from me as an effort to help you see how you come across, from the perspective of an educated person over the age of 50, who tried to sit through your lectures and ask a couple of questions, but eventually dropped the class due to not being taught anything and instead being ordered to give respect where none was due.
Useless. I'd rather go outside and watch the ants in my yard. They have more to offer.

Originally posted by vogon42

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Originally posted by vogon42
.........

Have you heard of an author called Douglas Adams? (of course you have, thats why you are copying his statement)

.................

It's the only non-fiction book I have ever read in my life.......

Wow ed, you really think this book is NON-FICTION? (and they let you teach children??)

BTW: Freudian slip or not.....at least you have admitted the bible is fiction (or that you have not read it?)

Right. Meant to say fiction. I only read non-fiction. I never had an interest in it, but for some reason I was drawn to Hitchhiker's guide in high school.

I don't need to admit that the Bible is fiction. It's the history of mankind in parable. The parable teaches from the stories that actually happened. The very words are written into the soil we dig for evidence. If you want fiction, pick up a high school history book and read about the founding of America. The Bible doesn't hide facts because they are uncomfortable or cause us moral stress. It hangs it all out there in raw form. God doesn't do a rewrite to make Himself look better. If He did, the Bible would be an easily read book, full of glowing recounts of our past. Instead, we find the good, bad and ugly. Through it all, we find a loving God clinging to truth above all else. If the Bible were written by men, we would find something closer to our glorious recounting of how we were friends to the American Indians.

Originally posted by vogon42

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
.... The object of growing up is to treat others with the respect they demand from others. .....

Actually ed, with 11 years military experience, I can say from experience.

Respect can NOT be demanded, it has to be earned.

Our character demands it for sure. Character can also harm the chances. Grace is something different. God didn't try to earn our respect. He demonstrated truth to us from love. Grace is unmerited. This means there is nothing we can do to earn it. While respect might be earned with men who cannot demonstrate a hither ideal, grace is there as a gift. We can't earn God's respect. God doesn't need to earn ours by default. He is all truth and all love. When respect isn't afforded to God in reverence and faith, what happens with this gift of grace?

We both demonstrate the need for grace. While we might get hurt by the tongue or lash out trying to stand on some perceived higher ground, God is there offering us what we don't deserve. God is amazing. All I have to say on the matter.

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
... ..... If the Bible were written by men, ......

Ok, I thought mathew , mark, luke, john.......etc Were human.

If they were human...then Who wrote the bible?

reply to post by wildtimes

So, Ed, accept this rebuttal and communication from me as an effort to help you see how you come across, from the perspective of an educated person over the age of 50, who tried to sit through your lectures and ask a couple of questions, but eventually dropped the class due to not being taught anything and instead being ordered to give respect where none was due.
Useless. I'd rather go outside and watch the ants in my yard. They have more to offer.

We're both sinners. No doubt about it. We demonstrate this daily. Grace covers this and I'm thankful for that.

Romans 3 shows this clearly:

22 There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

Grace is unmerited. It's a gift. You and I both need it to get over our pride. Would you agree with this?

Originally posted by vogon42

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
... ..... If the Bible were written by men, ......

Ok, I though mathew , mark, luke, john.......etc Were human.

If they were human...then Who wrote the bible?

As the Bible demonstrates and states, scripture is inspired by God. The word inspired is Theopneustos. It is derived from two Greek words (1). theos = "God" (2). pneo = "to blow, to breathe"

2 Timothy 3

16 All Scripture is (Inspired) God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

My words are not god-breathed. I can only rightly divide scripture. This will be prone to mistake here and there. If you don't take it on faith, what can I do for you? The answer is not much. Faith is required to see from spiritual eyes. We all see dimly, even to brightest theologian.

1 Corinthians 13

11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

This is the essence of the entire Bible. This whole chapter gives us all what we need to see God. Love comes from our hope in God. This originates from faith, which is God's work in and through us. The thing that blocks this work is pride. We all have some of that and will demonstrate it here and there from our character. Some more and some less. To say we have no pride is false since we are all sinners and sin is caused by pride. Humility is a measure of grace, moving us away from our own pride toward love. Our works can never get us there alone. Christ died for us to pay this debt to sin and death, therefore moving us to a new master of faith in God. When we depart this world in a state of grace, we will move beyond our status of fallen sinners. Meanwhile, we are here demonstrating our pride or measure of humility.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


OOPS......ed, you missed the queston.

Let me ask it again.

If they were human...then Who wrote the bible?

reply to post by SuperiorEd

You and I both need it to get over our pride. Would you agree with this?

Yep.

And I have been thinking about your approach, vs my approach, and where it is that we differ. I have told you I believe you have the best of intentions.

I have also expressed to you that I am befuddled by many of your messages and responses to others, and to me. I have followed your posts for awhile, and it seems to me that your way of expressing yourself and your ideas goes over the heads of folks who might otherwise benefit from your offerings.

I apologize if my frustration has taken on a tone of "lecturing" on how to communicate. Also, I know that my "challenges" are less than gracious from time to time. I hope you can take on good faith that I am in agreement on your basic philosophy, while I feel the style you have is not easily accessible and can be taken as dismissive, evasive, and cryptic. I don't think that's your intention, though, I honestly don't.

I do object to you "deciding" the age of members without coming to know them better and finding out more before concluding such things. Nevertheless, I wish you no harm.

Namaste
--wt

reply to post by SuperiorEd

God doesn't do a rewrite to make Himself look better.

Why does he not do a rewrite, then, to make himself more easily understood?
Writers of instructional documents rewrite to make certain their points will be taken as intended. Writers rewrite and rewrite until they are absolutely sure they have used the best words, phrasing, vernacular, vocabulary, and symbolism or analogies to get their point across CLEARLY to the intended audience. They don't just "jot it down" and then say "well, if they don't get it, that's their problem, and boy will they pay for their failure!"

Do you undestand what I mean? I think the problem you and I are mutually sharing is one not of premise, but style in delivery and attention to the reader's or listener's capacity to perceive the intended message; style of expression, and style of communication. The bottom line is I think we have both missed the mark in understanding one another.

Maybe I'm wrong. But that's as far as I've gotten in understanding you.
--wt

Originally posted by vogon42
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

OOPS......ed, you missed the queston.

Let me ask it again.

If they were human...then Who wrote the bible?

Hello?
Is anybody out there?

Originally posted by vogon42
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

OOPS......ed, you missed the queston.

Let me ask it again.

If they were human...then Who wrote the bible?

There are kids in my school that walk behind someone and trip them, then point to the guy beside them as they fall on the ground? All the while, they laugh and point at the person they are abusing. We typically call these actions bullying. Most teachers simply take kids like this to the office and forget it. This amounts to nearly the same thing. I take a different approach. I like to meet with the student and their parents. If circumstances allow, I also include the student who was bullied. When we discuss the problem and answer the question of why bullying is a poor choice, the student develops some empathy. They realize that I am in it for their good and not there to judge them to punishment. If possible, I always choose to have the parents give the consequence. From there, I take the relationship I develop and build rapport from that time on.

At times, there are students that continue to hold to the position that they were just having innocent fun. They continue the behavior in coming weeks. Nothing was learned because they couldn't see themselves clearly. Eventually, they get picked on themselves or beaten up by picking on the wrong person. Either way, they eventually learn to value others.

In this case, who was earning respect and who had to learn it the hard way?

The Bible was written by the guys that were inspired by their circumstances. This can be comparable to the kid that got tripped. For the people of Israel, they were the ones being continually tripped by other nations. This continues to this day. Many lessons were learned by their own mistakes. The lessons learned from this were then presented in context in the Bible as the light for everyone by example. Although men wrote the words, the inspiration came form the events. This was provided by God. The bully may never learn to love. God isn't necessarily teaching the bully a lesson. It is more likely that the witnesses learn a deeper value of truth from observation and trails of their own.

I stand on the answer I previously gave. If you have insight, feel free to present it.

I'm not quite an outsider, having made a post on page 1 of this thread, but I was away from it long enough so that I was very surprised when I came back to it and started on page 3 to see how the discussion was going.

What happened?!? It's become personal, and even rereading the posts at the bottom of page 2 doesn't explain it.

I was enjoying the thread, allowing the power of the human mind expressed through its creations, to mingle with the power of God expressed through His creations. For me, it was like a cosmic light show and symphony, with different posters introducing different themes and lighing schemes.

But there was only so much I could take at one sitting. I'm not sure that SuperiorEd writes "above" us as much as his writing is "dense," full of substance. When he adds to that an abundance of Bible verses, which are as full of substance as anything can be, I understand that reading slows down. I wouldn't want to read a lot of SuperiorEd at one sitting, but there's always something valuable there.

But, I should add a little to this thread. My understanding was that for perhaps a millennium or more, monks, clergy, and those they trained were the scientists of the western world. Here, it seems is an even closer connection between science and God. As examples, look at the Christian thinkers in science from this list: Another wiki link.

Originally posted by vogon42

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Originally posted by vogon42
.........

Have you heard of an author called Douglas Adams? (of course you have, thats why you are copying his statement)

.................

It's the only non-fiction book I have ever read in my life.......

Wow ed, you really think this book is NON-FICTION? (and they let you teach children??)

BTW: Freudian slip or not.....at least you have admitted the bible is fiction (or that you have not read it?)

Had these people known copyright laws, they would have known that titles cannot be copyrighted. It does not matter what anyone makes as a title in a thread, or a book, a movie, or a song, titles cannot be copyrighted. The only thing that can be is the substantive material and intellectual work.

Geesh, it's as if people have never done a creative work in their life. I have made short films, and have had to follow all the laws so I do not violate any copyright. Titles are not copyrighted, only the intellectual work contained in it. If the OP wishes, he could call the title simply The Declaration of Independence, and it is legal.

So he borrowed a title, that means nothing.

BTW, the other things that you can do is post pictures of any American landmark, if you are American, because the landmark belongs to you. The same goes for images taken at State parks and county parks. All those belong to the American public. Even if you are in another country, and take a picture of an American embassy, you are free to do so, because it belongs to you, if you are American.

So did he borrow a title, or plagiarize the work contained within the book? If he merely borrowed the title, it does not matter at all.