Philosophy Now Forum

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Corporate-speak uses English words too--they are just assembled in such a way as to make them meaningless, yet sound clever to the unwary.
I suppose it's a skill of sorts.

Unwary of what, pray tell?

Pluto wrote: Yes, Anderson Cooper. Good point. You made me think of this:
http://www.terrybisson.com/page6/page6.html

Great link, humor reviewing what we're made of! As a "meat" vessel, with all its inglorious side-effects, I seriously question our status as Beings consisting of over two-thirds water with a few carbon compounds mixed in. Is this what starting at a grunt level bottom is supposed to be like? I'd like to know what god was responsible for this debasement of having created meatheads who keep on proving what they're made of but as usual all felons strive to remain incognito.

As mentioned once before according to our status in the index of creation, if the Universe had an ass to wipe we'd be among the first to get flushed.

Well there is that, but then there's a whole other lot of stuff that puts MAN as an incredible, multi-talented, noble being. It's never really just one reading. See what this human is creating good or bad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFtsrjlsclQ

Pluto wrote:Well there is that, but then there's a whole other lot of stuff that puts MAN as an incredible, multi-talented, noble being. It's never really just one reading.

There's a little of that mixed in as well.

Whoever wins the NP promotes the SQ

Someone should inform the committee that they are not obliged to award a prize in every category every year, if no-one has done anything noteworthy, they should just skip it for that year.

Dubious wrote:...
It's not unexpected that an article like this would be denigrated by those who stupidly still believe that Churchill saved the Western World ...

No-one believes this but despite his faults Churchill was the right leader for the British in the war as we might well have capitulated without him.

or that it was Hitler's ambition to conquer it.

Er!? And all those tanks, stormtroopers and stukas rolling over Belgium, France, Denmark, Norway, Greece, the Netherlands, etc, were what, tourists?

As for Bob(love his early stuff myself), since when has Music been Literature or Poetry?

Arising_uk wrote: since when has Music been Literature or Poetry?

Lyrics have always been poetry set to music, Just look at them without the music.

thedoc wrote:Lyrics have always been poetry set to music, Just look at them without the music.

Why? They are meant to be with music. Poetry is a different sound.

Arising_uk wrote:

thedoc wrote:Lyrics have always been poetry set to music, Just look at them without the music.

Why? They are meant to be with music. Poetry is a different sound.

Some lyrics are written for the music, some are written without music and are later set to music, there is little difference between the two.

Walker wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Walker wrote: Then you're in a special place. Her birthplace should be enshrined. Joni is the best.

Yes, her songwriting is phenomenal. 'The circle game' could move a hardened heart to tears.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9VoLCO-d6U

Btw, she didn't like Bob Dylan at all--called him a plagiarist (although she did back-track on that).

Editing on the fly before the gossips get out-of-hand. Good philosophy.

With her keen ears Mitchell does a good imitation of Dylan’s voice, but sadly such sounds confound a web search for your listening pleasure. Whether she likes or dislikes, she listens.

She says her conscious attempt as a lyricist is to form word pictures. Obviously this stylistic approach objectively dovetails with folks’ predilections to visualize in snapshots. She has the practical outlook typical of artists and craftsmen. Had she been less creative she certainly has the brain power to have taken the millions-less path of humdrum abstractions.

Forming word pictures might have been more of a relevant artform in popular music lyrics before 'video killed the radio star', so to speak. As MTV's early slogan put it, "You'll never look at music the same way again," and the video/song may have impacted upon pictorial lyricism.

Dubious wrote:...
It's not unexpected that an article like this would be denigrated by those who stupidly still believe that Churchill saved the Western World ...

Arising_uk wrote: No-one believes this but despite his faults Churchill was the right leader for the British in the war as we might well have capitulated without him.

...and if Churchill, who was never happy if there wasn't a war, wouldn't have succeeded in begging the Americans to enter WW I & II the Brits would likely have capitulated with him or more likely Winston seeking asylum in the states.

or that it was Hitler's ambition to conquer it.

Arising_uk wrote: Er!? And all those tanks, stormtroopers and stukas rolling over Belgium, France, Denmark, Norway, Greece, the Netherlands, etc, were what, tourists?

ER!! Are you really so pathetic that you constantaly distort and attack what other's write to enhance your own ego? You never cease doing it with Bob and Bill to score cheap victories.

I said It was never Hitler's ambition to conquer the world which even he would have found ludicrous. As for the invasion of the countries you mention, the causes were much more complicated than "we'll just beat the shit out of them and take over". Here's a little low down since your UK brain regarding the WW2 is still in the middle of the last century. There's a lot more to the story than your verifiably idiotic summary.

Some Background Information:
In the Spring of 1940, the British had been chased out of Europe at Dunkirk (allowed to escape by Hitler) and France soon signed an armistice with Germany. For wartime defensive purposes, Germany continues to occupy Northern France, Holland and Belgium. Bases have also been established in Norway and Denmark (in response to British maneuvers aimed at establishing bases in those nations).
Germany has a peace offer on the table; an offer to end the war and withdraw its troops from all occupied territories (except the Prussian territory reclaimed from Poland). Churchill will hear none of it! Britain continues to bomb Germany while urging the Soviet Union to get involved. The cunning Stalin pretends to want peace with Germany, while his Red Army continue to mass near Germany's borders.
Churchill's grand plan, by his own later admission, is to establish a British presence on the continent, in what he calls "the soft underbelly" (Southern Europe). He hopes to move against Germany from the South, while the Soviets attack Germany from the East. Greece and Yugoslavia are part of this "southern underbelly".

Not least when Hitler occupied the countries you mention he didn't destroy their cities or cause mass causalities in the population. France was left virtually intact. Compare Hitler's occupation of France to this:

Bombing of France during World War II
Between the time of the German victory in the Battle of France and the liberation of the country, the Western Allies bombed many locations in France. In all 1,570 French cities and towns were bombed by Anglo-American forces between June 1940 and May 1945. The total number of civilians killed was 68,778 men, women and children (including the 2,700 civilians killed in Royan).
The total number of injured was more than 100,000.

The German's had a saying that the English will fight to the last Frenchman. You may also want to attempt a guess at who was the first to bomb cities in WW2.

Arising_uk wrote:As for Bob(love his early stuff myself), since when has Music been Literature or Poetry?

Where or when would I have made that claim?

Dubious wrote:...and if Churchill, who was never happy if there wasn't a war, wouldn't have succeeded in begging the Americans to enter WW I & II the Brits would likely have capitulated with him or more likely Winston seeking asylum in the states. ...

He didn't succeed in getting the Yank to join WWII, the Jap did that.

The British may have capitulated as they were sick of fighting in Europe but I seriously doubt they would have welcomed the Reich with open arms.

ER!! Are you really so pathetic that you constantaly distort and attack what other's write to enhance your own ego? You never cease doing it with Bob and Bill to score cheap victories. ...

So the blitzkrieg was what, a peace offering?

I said It was never Hitler's ambition to conquer the world which even he would have found ludicrous. As for the invasion of the countries you mention, the causes were much more complicated than "we'll just beat the shit out of them and take over". Here's a little low down since your UK brain regarding the WW2 is still in the middle of the last century. There's a lot more to the story than your verifiably idiotic summary. ...

I well understand the causes for WWII thanks.

Some Background Information:
In the Spring of 1940, the British had been chased out of Europe at Dunkirk (allowed to escape by Hitler) ...

That and the million dead Frenchman you conveniently ignore.

and France soon signed an armistice with Germany. ...

A million plus dead Frenchman will do that.

For wartime defensive purposes, Germany continues to occupy Northern France, Holland and Belgium. Bases have also been established in Norway and Denmark (in response to British maneuvers aimed at establishing bases in those nations). ...

Get real! The British had bugger all land capability to threaten the German who were also building an invasion force to attack the UK.

Germany has a peace offer on the table; an offer to end the war and withdraw its troops from all occupied territories (except the Prussian territory reclaimed from Poland). Churchill will hear none of it! Britain continues to bomb Germany while urging the Soviet Union to get involved.

We were bombing resource targets at that time. We barely had an air-force or an army to mass bomb cities.

[/b] The cunning Stalin pretends to want peace with Germany, while his Red Army continue to mass near Germany's borders.

This'll be that cunning Stalin that Hitler signed a peace treaty with would it?

Churchill's grand plan, by his own later admission, is to establish a British presence on the continent, in what he calls "the soft underbelly" (Southern Europe). He hopes to move against Germany from the South, while the Soviets attack Germany from the East. Greece and Yugoslavia are part of this "southern underbelly".

That'll be the Greece where they were hanging from telegraph poles would it?

Not least when Hitler occupied the countries you mention he didn't destroy their cities or cause mass causalities in the population. France was left virtually intact. Compare Hitler's occupation of France to this:

Tell that to the Greeks, Poles and Soviets.

Bombing of France during World War II
Between the time of the German victory in the Battle of France and the liberation of the country, the Western Allies bombed many locations in France. In all 1,570 French cities and towns were bombed by Anglo-American forces between June 1940 and May 1945. The total number of civilians killed was 68,778 men, women and children (including the 2,700 civilians killed in Royan).
The total number of injured was more than 100,000.

Er! Occupied mean nothing to you?

The German's had a saying that the English will fight to the last Frenchman. You may also want to attempt a guess at who was the first to bomb cities in WW2.

Tell that to the Poles.

The BEF was a disgrace and Dunkirk a disaster and this latter slur that the French were cowards a total insult.

Arising_uk wrote:

Dubious wrote:...and if Churchill, who was never happy if there wasn't a war, wouldn't have succeeded in begging the Americans to enter WW I & II the Brits would likely have capitulated with him or more likely Winston seeking asylum in the states. ...

He didn't succeed in getting the Yank to join WWII, the Jap did that.

Nah..

Hitler declared war on the US.

Arising_uk wrote: ]Tell that to the Greeks, Poles and Soviets..

It was Churchill that allowed the massacre of the Athenians.