41

Physiology & Medicine / Raising Successful Students.

« on: 30/03/2023 03:47:53 »

You know, I still remember going to St. Al's HS 1982-6. And it was a very concentrated learning environment.

It seemed all the teachers and staff had doctorates. And you know, St. Al's was third on a list of students who went onto college (I forget if it was statewide, or nationally).

Because you know, if you failed, it wasn't your fault. It was theirs.

42

Just Chat! / Performing Gounod's Ave Maria A Capella...

« on: 29/03/2023 15:39:27 »

Ever since we got the Firestone's Christmas album when I was a kid, with James Mccracken's version, I have loved the Ave Maria (Gounod). I learned it early on, and often sang it a Capella.

And I was thinking, the Gounod version really sounds very good a Capella. And you know who should record it this way? Boyz to Men. ♫⋆｡♪ ₊˚♬ ﾟ. ⤹˚˖♬

43

Just Chat! / Could A Purely Logical Person Be Moral?

« on: 28/03/2023 13:33:40 »

“Your actions are highly unethical!”

—Mr. Spock, The Empath, Star Trek: The Original Series,
 Season 3, Episode 12, Original air date December 6, 1968.

As the above quote shows, the fictional Mr. Spock at least was very moral.

But could a purely logical person actually be so? How would he probably behave? Or could we even know?

This is psychological question. But I suppose it could be a larger philosophical one too.

44

Just Chat! / If Religion Wants To Survive...

« on: 26/03/2023 13:27:02 »

I hope this is the right section of the boards for this.

Not that I really care either, but you know Christians going to lose all their support just over gays. They think homosexuality if a choice, it isn't. Rev. Fred Phelps (1929-2014) thought God hates f-gs, if he exists, he probably doesn't. Actually, the concept of homosexuality didn't even exist in ancient times.

If Christians accept gays and gay marriage, they may still be around in a couple hundred years. I agree with you, religion is probably nonsense. But you know you, it does give some people meaning in their life. It makes them moral, which isn't bad. And it gives them a firm moral compass, which I've always admired. And I have to tell you, some Christians I've noticed, do seem to be genuinely happy. Anyways, what people choose to believe personally is really up to them. So in that way, it's not anymore or less valid than atheism.

And if a Christian wants to argue for what I'm saying. The Sermon on the Mount says we should love even our enemies and even those who do evil. And you know, Jesus never really said anything about homosexuality. Of course the Biblical Jesus is probably much different than who the real Jesus was.

And there were a thousand Messiahs crucified a year in Palestine by the Romans (which is frightening, because there are 365 days in the year). Jesus just had a good press agent, Paul. Also, you realize, Messiah ("anointed one") referred to a Jew who would free the Jews from bondage.

Anyways, I don't know if religion will even be necessary in a couple hundred years. But who knows what the future holds. And plus you know, religion does fill such an important psychological need. And how could that be bad?

45

Just Chat! / Ignoring Emails, etc.

« on: 26/03/2023 11:52:37 »

As I often tell people, ordinary people have the luxury of ignoring your emails, phone calls, etc. People who work with the public, simply don't.

It's rude. It's wrong. No matter what your reasons might be.

46

Plant Sciences, Zoology & Evolution / How Do You Repel A Very Persistent Cat?

« on: 12/03/2023 17:17:45 »

I just got cat repellent, and it is only working slightly. Amazon just delivered it (see below).

A couple of days ago a cat came to my house. First with a bunch of his buddies. Now he just comes alone. I wonder if there is not something wrong with this kitten. He follows me day and night, he cries all night outside my door. I'd love to help him, but I've got two kitties of my own. The other day, I walked a couple of blocks down Strathmoor Street where I live. He followed me all the way, weaving in and out of my feet. Several blocks! Why is he obsessed with me.

Detroit Animal Control and local rescues and shelters can't help, because he's not aggressive, he's just obsessed with me for some reason. I don't want to hurt him, and I won't. But he's not my responsibility.

Any suggestions?

47

Just Chat! / I Just Made My Own 'Memes'...

« on: 11/03/2023 02:58:30 »

I guess I'm sort of old school when it comes to using a computer. I use a Wordpad document, because it is amazing how you can manipulate it. And it does have a feature where you can save it as a jpeg image. IAE, I made a whole bunch of memes just now (that's what you call quotes with a little imagery, isn't it?). You know I am proud that they look so professional. My friends on Facebook and Twitter probably don't even realize I was the one who made them.


Anyways, many were on a Star Trek theme. You know, some of the statements made there are so profound, don't you think. Tell me if you agree. And many were on Shakespeare and Adous Huxley's "Brave New World", also so profound and universal I think. Anyhow, I am not going to attach all my memes here. I will simply past all the text I used:

“But I don't want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin.”
― Aldous Huxley, Brave New World

“...reality, however utopian, is something from which people feel the need of taking pretty frequent holidays....”
― Aldous Huxley, Brave New World

"One world's butcher is another world's hero. Perhaps I am neither one."

- Jarok, to Picard, The Defector (Star Trek: The Next Generation), Season 3, Episode 10

"Data, you're here to learn about the human condition and there is no better way of doing that than by embracing Shakespeare."
—PICARD, The Defector (Star Trek: The Next Generation), Season 3, Episode 10.

"We must not make a scarecrow of the law,
Setting it up to fear the birds of prey,
And let it keep one shape, till custom make it
Their perch and not their terror."

— Shakespeare "Measure for Measure", Act II. Scene i (ANGELO).

"Thieves for their robbery have authority
When judges steal themselves."

— Shakespeare "Measure for Measure", Act II. Scene ii (ANGELO)

"Through tattered clothes great vices do appear,—
Robes and furred gowns hide all."

—William Shakespeare, King Lear, Act IV, Scene 6, 180-1.


"Anticipation is fun."

—ST: TNG (Counselor Deanna Troi).

"You may find that having is not so pleasing a thing as wanting. This is not logical, but it is often true." Mr. Spock, "Amok Time"

"Computers make excellent and efficient servants, but I have no wish to serve under them." Mr. Spock, "The Ultimate Computer"

"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." Jean-Luc Picard, "The Drumhead"

"It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." Q, "Q Who?"

"If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are." Jean-Luc Picard, "Encounter At Farpoint"

"When dreams become more important than reality, you give up travel, building, creating; you even forget how to repair the machines left behind by your ancestors. You just sit living and reliving other lives left behind in the thought records." Vina, "The Menagerie" ("The Cage")

"They used to say that if Man was meant to fly, he'd have wings. But he did fly. He discovered he had to." James T. Kirk, "Return to Tomorrow"

"To be human is to be complex. You can't avoid a little ugliness — from within — and from without." James T. Kirk, "Requiem for Methuselah"

"Data, from your own experience of performing Ebenezer Scrooge, you're aware how fear can be a very powerful motivator."

Jean-Luc Picard, "Devil's Due"

48

Just Chat! / On Gender Reassignment...

« on: 10/03/2023 17:43:33 »

You can easily change your gender. Gender is a fluid concept. But you sadly can't change you sex yet.

But I hope someday science will be able to do that.

And transitioned men being able to bear children. Wouldn't that be a wonderful thing?

49

Just Chat! / How Human Morality 'Evolves'...

« on: 08/03/2023 13:40:39 »

Okay, these boards do not have a philosophy section like most boards. So someone may have to tell me if I am putting this in the right place.

Anyways, I have been making memes and sharing them on the internet. I made this one a while back:

Sometimes right and wrong aren't so clear. Is it wrong for a man to steal bread to feed his starving children? Was Robin Hood wrong? Were the American colonies traitors? Or heroes. Sometimes it's clear. Sometimes not so much.


Yeah, sometimes morality can be a relative thing. Now I am not saying it usually should be, don't misquote me. Because that can be a controversial statement, especially for people trying to rationalize their harmful actions. And just to be clear, I think really the only law (that I can think of so far) that you'd be justified in breaking, would be like a silly assisted suicide law (like now have in MI).

Apparently, I am not alone in this, which is ironic. 20-30 years ago, Michiganders all remember Dr. Jack Kevorkian ("Dr. Death"). He was always my hero, but to some he was a villain. Anyways, Oakland Co. Prosecutor Richard Thompson felt he was on a crusade, send by God. But he lost his reëlection due to that nonsense. The more sensible prosecutor Gorcyca took his place. Here is the rest of the story from Wikipedia: 

As Kevorkian's notoriety increases, he provokes polarizing public opinion. His supporters believe he is performing a public service and that the government has no right to interfere with the decisions of competent individuals who want to die. He insists that he gives his patients a means to end their suffering; they alone made the decision and initiated the process. He also claims to have turned down 97 or 98 percent of the people asking for his help. His critics, however, believe he is playing God. Conservative Oakland County prosecutor Richard Thompson believes Kevorkian is a murderer, but can't gain a conviction; he attributes his failures to Michigan's weak laws regarding assisted suicide and advocates stronger laws. In 1998, Thompson loses an election to a more liberal assistant prosecutor, David Gorcyca, who has no interest in wasting money (a major criticism of Thompson) prosecuting Jack Kevorkian as long as he only assists in suicides.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_Don%27t_Know_Jack_(film) (You have to scroll down.)

Anyways, Americans are in some ways traditional, but they are always fair-minded. I disagree with the statement Gorcyca was that liberal. I know in the infamous Jenny Jones case Thompson said or implied he normally wouldn't prosecute a case if the victim was gay. Gorcyca always would. Also one time the police raided a homeless shelter. Gorcyca demanded. He wanted to know what all that nonsense was about, before he got involved in the case. Gorcyca was kind of jerk too (if I can use that word). He believed in vigorously enforcing certain vice laws. I don't know what that was all about. But they say, when it went to the jury, they promptly dismissed them usually. Gorcyca was just a decent man. But in the US that's a liberal trait for some reason.

Also the view of certain moral issues can change over time, and that's just human nature. Masturbation used to be thought of as a horrible moral wrong. Even Margaret Sanger called it people's dirty little secret. But my very conservative doctor friend once told me before he retired, it's largely evolved into a nonissue. Witches were illegal at one time. "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live". Yet even the most conservative fundamentalist Christian in my country doesn't think Wiccans should go to jail. They try to disrupt their gatherings with bullhorns. But it's only homosexuality that they think should still be illegal, for some reason.

I also have always been drawn to the Aldous Huxley novel "Brave New World". It's a dystopian drama. But is it really? Crime is an illness and corpses are fertilizer. But is that really the worst thing that could happen in the future. The people there are all happy. Isn't that what would really matter?

And the irony of it all, is the "savage" is really just one of us. It's only in the future that he would be considered a disruptive influence. Consider that.

Anyways, in conclusion, morality is sometimes relative, and sometimes it isn't. Maybe some people were just always wrong in the past. Maybe people will be shocked by some of the things we do now. But morality is always changing, because it is always evolving. And that I think is important.

50

Just Chat! / An Open Statement To Atheists...

« on: 07/03/2023 12:28:40 »

I feel compelled to say this at least once. Don't worry though, I think this is probably the last time I will post something like this.

But I like to think I believe in God now. But I am very skeptical, and I seem to become more agnostic the older I get. So atheists, I know where you're coming from, and tend to agree with you even. But no, you're not perfect either. Because no one is.
 
No, it's not your fault. It's just human nature really. But I do have to say one thing, has anyone ever noticed how obnoxious some atheists are getting? No not all, and I hope not most. But Christian's are at least still courteous and polite. Has anyone else ever noticed this?

As I said, I'm sorry I had to say that. But it's true.

51

Technology / My Views On First Contact...

« on: 07/03/2023 12:13:06 »

Well, I'd call this something related to technology. Decide for yourselves.

Anyways, I might as well tell you all, I believe that humans are now just basically waiting for first contact. Perhaps an advanced alien entity is just waiting for us to cross certain ethical and technological thresholds. And this topic is often best explored in the fictional sci-fi series Star Trek. You know, I like that sci-fi series. It's fictional, yes. But a lot of what they predict may come true. Some writers are just more perceptive to things like that. Think of Jules Verne. Plus it really doesn't sometimes take a genius to predict the future. We can make some educated guesses now. Can't we?

But, as in Star Trek, some believe that this advanced entity will share its technology with us, but when they think we're ready for it. Perhaps now, they are simply observing.

I am reminded of that ST: TNG episode First Contact (original air date, February 18, 1991). In it Malcor III is preparing to develop warp drive technology, and the Federation is beginning to observe them, in anticipation of this. But unlike other races, the Malcorians are more suspicious of the idea of being observed, and this creates unanticipated problems.

This story is interesting. Because in the end, they decide to delay first contact instead. But what I like about the episode, is Science Minister Mirasta Yale decides to stay behind on the episode, she essentially does experience first contact you could say. You know that idea does sound tantalizing, doesn't it? What if only one human could see how an advanced alien race lives, and stay on their home world? Because think of it. Then he or she to continue on as a kind of ambassador or liaison between and two races. I'd sign up for something like that. Wouldn't you?

Also, I wanted to tell you, last year I finally was able to get one of those 10-north glasses from ST: TNG on Ebay. I searched high and low, but I finally got it. (They were really just candle holders, in case you didn't know.) And of course I immediately made an Absinthe Martini, my second favorite drink (a Manhattan is my first BTW). And I immediately took a picture.

You know, if I ever was in the above situation, the first thing I would have to have is a synthehol Manhattan. Wouldn't that be nice? But the holodeck or simulated reality would be the first thing I would have to try (of course once you got a matter replicator first, you'd be all set—think about it). I'll attach the picture, along with a couple of links describing the episode (as a citation—as I said, I for one think they are accurate, in some of their predictions of the future).

And I've got to ask you all. If you were taken to the advanced alien home world like Science Minister Mirasta Yale, what's the first thing you'd have to try? Because it just fires the imagination, doesn't it?

Here are the links (read them, please ):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Contact_(Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation)

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/First_Contact_(episode)

52

New Theories / Are We Becoming Dumber?

« on: 06/03/2023 05:32:35 »

I don't know, there's a theory in the United States, that humans are becoming dumber. Supposedly it has something to do with how we are becoming more dependent on technology. I won't bore you with that, because I am not a scientist. You've heard it all before actually. What I will tell you are my own observations.

You know it has troubled me, most of life actually, how much the U.S. education system is dumbed down (is dumbed down a word? Oh well). I think our educational system is clearly in shambles. It's assebly line, they say. Teachers feel obligated to pass you, even if you would receive a failing grade in the past.

Actually, though, there are signs of this trend in our popular culture. It's not related to this, or at least I hope it isn't.

I guess I'll give you a couple of examples. Please tell me that I am overreacting. People call food items, like cream soda "creme soda". Because we will think they use actual cream in it. We know. (Creme is simply a French word, if you didn't already know.) I don't know what you'll think about this next one. I am probably overreacting. The Latin phrase Sic Semper Tyrannis is usually translated today as "Thus always to tyrants". It used to be translated as "ever", not always. Anyways "Thus ever to tyrants" just sounds better to me, is what I am trying to say.

This next one proves my point much better I think. In Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" Scrooge tells Bob Cratchit that if he doesn't watch his mouth, he may spend the holidays losing his situation. In the 1999 version with Patrick Stewart, "situation" is replaced with "occupation". We all know what it means, the way he uses makes it obvious. Duh.

I don't know though, because some people are just perceived as being much more talented, and yes smarter, than they are, because their famous, and we just expect it of them. It could relate to what I said above, decide for yourself. I once heard on a talk show, when I was a kid, that Richard Burton was once performing Hamlet. When he got to "to be or not to be" he paused, and a look of confusion came over his face. Burton loved drinking, and he was, yes, drunk during the performance. That's the real reason why he forgot his line. But the next day, the critics said "Brilliant!", Hamlet was pondering the question. It had never been done before, of course. But Burton was brilliant for being the first to do it that way. So je ne sais pas.

53

Plant Sciences, Zoology & Evolution / Are Dogs Evolved to Hate Cats (and Vice Versa)?

« on: 05/03/2023 19:00:11 »

Are dogs and cats evolved to hate one another? Because I have always wondered.

Take our cat Fluffy (1988-1999). We got him, more or less as a kitten. And his first experiences with dogs weren't really that bad, it seemed. He was mostly fascinated, as a kitten, by what they could be. "Look at that big kitty there" we'd joke, he seemed to be saying (maybe you had to be there).

So is there evolution involved? Or something else perhaps?

54

Just Chat! / Origin Of Words Like 'Bedlam".

« on: 03/03/2023 13:45:34 »

People often use terms today which may sound harmless, without knowing their true origins. Take the words Bedlam and Tomfoolery. Bedlam of course indicates a state of great confusion. And people who act silly, are often said to be engaging in tomfoolery. Bedlam of course anyone will tell you is short for St. Mary of Bethlehem, a notorious old insane asylum in London. It later became a hospital for the mentally ill, and still is in operation today.
 
Tomfoolery is a more obscure term. Tomfoolery is derived from the archaic term Tom-Fool. Tom o'Bedlam and Poor Tom are names formerly applied to the demented and developmentally disabled, because they often ended up in Bedlam. (Also interestingly insubordinate wives were sometimes placed in Bedlam. Couldn't they just get a divorce?)
Bedlam was the first attempt at humane care for the mentally ill. People there lived under appalling conditions by today's standards. People paid a penny to observe the patients like specimens in a zoo.
 
But you have consider how life would've been for these people otherwise. Mentally ill and developmentally disabled people were often beggars. And beggars had a very low status back then. Queen Elizabeth I famously said she'd rather be a beggar woman than a queen married. Because people apparently never even helped beggars back then (how'd they eat?). I at least am inclined to give them credit for at trying to care humanely for these people. (Also I recently read the patients there were given unlimited amounts of beer for lunch, which is interesting. You know, drinking water was often contaminated back then.)

IAE care for the mentally ill has of course greatly improved since the old days of Bedlam. But we must always remember the past. And it is perhaps ironic then that when we use terms Bedlam and tomfoolery, we are.

55

Physiology & Medicine / The Pitfalls of Changing the Civil Commitment Laws (in the USA)...

« on: 20/02/2023 00:26:23 »

I really don't know what percentage of boardmembers here are from the US. Because this is really more of a US issue. Also, I don't know what your policy about posting matters related to medical law, even in the medical section. Because you know, law and medicine really sometimes can't be separated. IAE, I think this is the last legal thing I will post here for a while. At least unless I think of something else really important.

But people, in the US at least, complain it's not easy enough to civilly commit mentally ill people. But that doesn't seem to be the case with old age homes. People seem to complain it's too easy to put Grandma or Grandpa there. He or she was functioning so well independently, and the kids had them put them there. Probably because they were after their money too, I don't know.

Changing the commitment laws wouldn't change anything, I'm sure they're more than adequate. It's just free and easy to do, i.e., change the law. They used to call that closing the barn door after the horses escaped, because it really accomplishes nothing.

And it might make things worse too. There seem to be a lot of mentally ill people in downtown Dearborn now (a suburb of Detroit, MI where I live), I don't know why. People acting weird, sometimes yelling for no apparent reason, if you know what I mean. Anyway, this one lady was apparently accused of shoplifting at a store. Maybe she did, maybe she didn't. But no one really cared at that point. But she was visibly upset, talking loudly to herself, possibly mentally ill. But the Dearborn Police just called her a taxi to take her home. That's really all she needed.

Now if it was easier to commit her, they'd have to put her in a jail cell possibly. And people fearing that would be less likely to get help, which could potentially make matters worse. Just like if you let a sliver go, it can lead to infection, the same is true about mental illness. Making matters in fact much worse instead.

Thoughts? Comments?

56

Physiology & Medicine / Akathisia and the Rights of the Mentally Ill...

« on: 17/02/2023 16:46:12 »

I don't know if any of you are aware of the medication side effect of akathisia. It sounds so harmless, a simple side effect. And it certainly isn't deadly. But it can be quite painful.

My father had a nervous breakdown in 1996 and 1997 after my mother's death. But he was obviously already bipolar, and had been hospitalized as a young adult too. And that is when we found out quite a bit about the mental health system (esp. in Michigan, where we live).

Akathisia is a very common side effect associated with antipsychotic neuroleptics. It is often not associated with the the new class of atypical antipsychotics. And it can be quite painful.

Now no one is saying we should do away with psychiatric drugs or treatment. No one should take them who doesn't need them. But for those who need them, they can be a lifesaver.

And even doctors who work in the better mental health settings tend to be impatient with patients who complain about akathisia. We had good insurance, so we were always in the best places. But I can only imagine what it must be like for a mental patient dealing with akathisia in jail, or even worse prison, where I would imagine they'd be much less sympathetic.

As I said, no one is saying to do away with antipsychotic or antidepressant drugs. But dealing with akathisia can actually be quite simple. There are many drugs to eliminate or at least lessen this side effect, Cogentin is often used. Or something as simple as taking the medication at bedtime might be enough, because you can apparently sleep the side effect off.

My father was initially put on Haldol, the first drug of choice back then. But it is notorious for the side effect of akathisia. And he really didn't need, because as it turned out another medicine was more effective anyways.

I don't know how much people who advocate for prisoner or mental health rights are aware of akathisia. But if they aren't aware of it, they definitely should be.

57

Just Chat! / My Personal Views (Political and Moral)...

« on: 14/02/2023 11:30:10 »

Well, I don't know if people usually post their political views on the Naked Science forum. But I thought, just in case anyone was wondering about mine, I would.

Yeah, I don't know if I've made my political and personal views clear by now. But I'll try to summarize them here.

I am a lifelong Democrat, and I have been liberal to varying degrees all my life. Though I think that I was more moderate when younger. I don't know how radical I really am. I used to think that supporting gay marriage put me out of the mainstream. Actually it's quite common now. In fact a majority of Americans that describe themselves as practicing Catholics support gay marriage. I do, e.g., support a strong military defense. So I may have some different views. But mainly I am a pragmatist I think.

Since at least 1996, perhaps even earlier,  I have been rethinking concepts like justice and retribution—and even mercy. I think so-called "evil" is really a disease, and problem. And although I've never been in trouble with the law, and don't plan on being, I really sympathize with people who are considered criminals, for example, and other outcasts. They need the most support, because they are the least likely to get any support. People should be held accountable for their actions, and some people should be segregated from society, sometimes for life. But always humanely. And other options should always be explored. Societal problems are always complicated, and have more than one cause.

As I often tell people, I often admire attorneys and physicians, because they always treat you as a human being, in need of help. I find that commendable. And I am very rational, and always have been. But I think that has always helped me.

I always respect people's beliefs, and their right to hold, and hold onto, their political and moral beliefs. I am also gay. But fortunately that is no big deal either.

I'd like to help people, but often find there's little I can do. But I am beginning to realize that any positive change you can make in the world is good.

58

Just Chat! / Four Letter Words As 'Vulgar' But Not 'Obscene'...

« on: 13/02/2023 11:09:41 »

Funny thing, and I didn't even know this at first. But words like **** and sh1t, and a few more, are vulgar, but not slang. As it turns out, they in fact were perfectly acceptable at one time, although **** has always tending to be at least a little taboo.

So what is there official status? I mean, could you use them, with out being accused of using nonstandard English? For example, if you hand in an essay, to your college professor, and used one of those words, could he dock you? Because the only hard and fast rule in that situation, is don't use anything, as I said, "nonstandard". But they're not nonstandard, just rather old, if you know what I mean.

And please don't try to turn this into some kind of moral debate. That often happens when I ask this question. This is a place of scientific facts alone. Yes, they're inappropriate to some, and I realize that. But that wasn't my question.

Also interesting story, about the evolution of words, and this can tie into my question. As I said, they only have become vulgar. They were indeed, at one time, an acceptable part of the English language. And that may still be happening.

For example, sh1t, was still an acceptable word, around the time of Benjamin Franklin (January 17, 1706 [January 6, 1705 O.S.] – April 17, 1790). In fact, he famously said, "Force shites upon Reason's Back." which is interesting, because it shows that sh1t once had an "e" on the end. How did it lose the "e"? Does anyone know? I know sh1t somehow sounds more dirty than shite not that I care. At least to me. I don't know if that has anything to do with it.

And the evolution still going on. Fart only recently became inappropriate, so they say. I still use it though, because what other word is there that means that? And am I using a nonstandard word then? See what I mean.

I read in my dictionary, that some say that snot is only now becoming inappropriate. Now, in my house we used it all the time. So I don't even know what they are talking about.

Thank you in advance for you replies .

59

Just Chat! / But Maybe Things Were Dirtier In The Past...

« on: 12/02/2023 14:20:25 »

People say anything goes these days, but did you ever notice how dirty films were anyways, even in the 1950's? I'm in favor of anything that involves consenting adults, so it doesn't bother me anyways. But still. I'm thinking especially of some of those Marilyn Monroe movies.

Did you ever see Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend from "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes" (1953). She talks about employers having extramarital affairs with their female employees. And at one point, she seems to advise the other girls, it's then that those louses go back to their spouses. And an older man having an affair with a young female secretary or employee. When is that ever appropriate?

And "The Seven Year Itch" (1955). A man's wife and kids are in upstate New York. So all the men start chasing the young women (look at the airport scene). And Tom Ewell starts chasing the blonde bimbo, who just moved into the apartment. Again doesn't bother me, but still seems somehow more raunchy than anything you'd see today. And that piano scene? Really.

Movies were much more dirty in the past by far. Today the plots are much more clean. They show much more nudity. But who cares? 

60

Just Chat! / An Open Question To A Moral Nihilist...

« on: 10/02/2023 13:57:35 »

Just one question I always wanted to ask a moral nihilist.

Why wouldn't science apply to human ethics too. Science can help us build a better mouse trap, bake a better cake, fight a better war, etc. Shouldn't it help us find the best moral system.

Plus I'm guessing even moral nihilists think there's a moral system better than the rest. Mercy instead of cruelty? Love instead of hate? Happiness and well-being instead of hardship? And when is inflicting pain ever right? Because isn't pain always a horrible thing to go thru? Who ever says it's nice? Some people think it's sometimes necessary or unavoidable. But I've never heard anyone say it's nice or they enjoyed it.

See what I mean?