Quote of the Day
-
it is now tuesday, so i have decided to assume the mantle of quote of the day, mainly bacause i heard a blinding one on monday but it was too late.
"A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing."
i know it isn't quite the same vein as the previous posts, but i'm drunk and i don't like arguments.
pav
-
@johnsenior1973 said:
But the whole issue of not publishing PMs goes back months. It was made clear then that you don't do it. Toxic has clearly done it again, he's been pulled up on it, and he's started this thread to cry about it.
In normal circumstances one would not make private conversations public without the other parties permission. It's not respectful.
In some cases, however, making pm content public can be legit. For instance to adress bad practice or to defend public intrest.I don't know if it is the case here. Not enough info.
-
@unknownuser said:
In the last few years, the very idea of telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth is dredged up only as a final resort when the alternative options of deception, threat and bribery have all been exhausted.
Michael Musto -
"Many discussions of free speech, especially by those whom I would call free speech ideologues, begin by assuming as normative the situation in which speech is offered for its own sake, just for the sake of expression. The idea is that free expression, the ability to open up your mouth and deliver an opinion in a seminar-like atmosphere, is the typical situation and any constraint on free expression is therefore a deviation from that typical or normative situation. I begin by saying that this is empirically false, that the prototypical academic situation in which you utter sentences only to solicit sentences in return with no thought of actions being taken, is in fact anomalous. It is something that occurs only in the academy and for a very small number of people.
Therefore, a theory of free speech which takes such weightless situations as being the centre of the subject seems to me to go wrong from the first. I begin from the opposite direction. I believe the situation of constraint is the normative one and that the distinctions which are to be made are between differing situations of constraint; rather than a distinction between constraint on the one hand and a condition of no constraint on the other. Another way to put this is to say that, except in a seminar-like situation, when one speaks to another person, it is usually for an instrumental purpose: you are trying to get someone to do something, you are trying to urge an idea and, down the road, a course of action. These are the reasons for which speech exists and it is in that sense that I say that there is no such thing as "free speech", that is, speech that has as its rationale nothing more than its own production."
Quoting Stanley Fish interviewed by Peter Lowe & Annemarie Jonson on his book "There's no such thing as free speech ...and it's a good thing, too (OUP, 1994)"
-
“Never ruin an apology with an excuse.” ~Kimberly Johnson
-
@unknownuser said:
I believe the right question to ask, respecting all ornament, is simply this; was it done with enjoyment, was the carver happy while he was about it?
John Ruskin -
"I would have understood it all, if it hadn't been explained to me" -Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
-
"In every man sleeps a prophet, and when he wakes there is a little more evil in the world."
- Emil Cioran
-
-
shoudnt it be attributed to Agrajag? -
"Whenever you're in a tight spot, try to imagine yourself marooned on a beautiful desert island."
- The Little Book of Calm
-
Remember: An Amateur built the Ark, Professionals the Titanic
-
@unknownuser said:
@unknownuser said:
Therefore, a theory of free speech which takes such weightless situations as being the centre of the subject seems to me to go wrong from the first. I begin from the opposite direction. I believe the situation of constraint is the normative one and that the distinctions which are to be made are between differing situations of constraint; rather than a distinction between constraint on the one hand and a condition of no constraint on the other. Another way to put this is to say that, except in a seminar-like situation, when one speaks to another person, it is usually for an instrumental purpose: you are trying to get someone to do something, you are trying to urge an idea and, down the road, a course of action. These are the reasons for which speech exists and it is in that sense that I say that there is no such thing as "free speech", that is, speech that has as its rationale nothing more than its own production."
I posted the whole quote because it is very impressive....What a great way to express the difficulties therein. Bravo...I'm going to save that piece and use it a few times with your name on it if you don't mind.
I'll give you a bowl of petunias if you manage to memorise it... - It's a speech not a quote.
-
'Eat pressure, sh!t results'
Anon
-
I no longer have sex with my wife. I have too much respect for her...
Local at the Prince Albert Pub - Bowness. -
@toxicvoxel said:
I no longer have sex with my wife. I have too much respect for her...
Local at the Prince Albert Pub - Bowness.
good one. -
The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen. ~Tommy Smothers
-
'if you don't like whats on the channel, turn over or off' - PapaKhai to Khai.
-
@khai said:
'if you don't like whats on the channel, turn over or off' - PapaKhai to Khai.
Thanks for staying tuned in to my thread.
-
"You cannot make a man by standing a sheep on its hind legs. But by standing a flock of sheep in that position you can make a crowd of men."
Max Beerbohm
Advertisement