The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Profile: Y111
About
User Name: Y111
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Gender: Male
Statistics
Joined: Sunday, June 25, 2017
Last Visit: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 12:01:44 AM
Number of Posts: 368
[0.04% of all post / 0.34 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: “Wrapped in the Flag and Holding a Bible”
Posted: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 12:01:44 AM
Why don't you elect at least someone younger? Biden is even older than Trump. Old people don't like change.
Topic: Neandethals before the Earth was created
Posted: Thursday, April 2, 2020 7:08:55 AM
Since God is omnipotent, he can create the past as easily as the future. Today he can create yesterday and the day before yesterday, and so forth (back?). Moreover, he decides which direction is forth and which is back and how many directions there are. You guys don't seem to realize what 'omnipotence' mean. It means that nothing is impossible to God, no matter how odd it seems to us mere mortals limited in our every action by the laws of nature. God is not limited by anything. He is above nature and its laws, above space and time.
Topic: On Being a Man Today
Posted: Monday, March 30, 2020 9:06:01 AM
If I describe what it means to me to be a man, I thereby give my definition of manhood. Of course you should fit it for me to consider you a man. I don't see how it can be otherwise.
Topic: On Being a Man Today
Posted: Monday, March 30, 2020 7:35:39 AM
Lotje1000 wrote:
I'm personally much more interested in why it's so important to define manhood in the first place. Why can't men just be people, why do they have to be men?

Well, even if there are more than two genders, one of them is still 'man'. I don't see anything wrong in trying to define it and in discussing manhood. Those who don't want to identify with any gender are free to be 'just people'. Why not? Embracing diversity doesn't mean eliminating it, does it?
Topic: Hapless Sick persons.
Posted: Saturday, March 21, 2020 10:18:36 AM
thar wrote:
That is a view from Russian Orthodoxy, I presume.

No, it's my own understanding (I am not a believer). Just a logical conclusion. Maybe too logical. Of course, believers want to be healed here and now rather than dying and waiting for resurrection and a new body. And technincally, since God is omnipotent, he can heal anyone. But then, he could also just make everyone immortal right away, yet he doesn't do it.
Topic: Hapless Sick persons.
Posted: Saturday, March 21, 2020 1:42:04 AM
I don't know much about other religions, but Christianity, as far as I understand, is not about the well-being of the body. Its concern is the spirit, the soul. For the healing of those, you can go to a Christian temple. The Christian God is rather a psychotherapist than a physician.
Topic: A Good Question
Posted: Saturday, March 21, 2020 1:38:51 AM
What is wrong with riding a horse?
Topic: We Never Truly Pay Attention
Posted: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 4:11:18 AM
Well, someone really didn't pay much attention there. :)

Link wrote:
consciousness-studies-show-human-macaque-brains-flicker-every-4-seconds

Article wrote:
Four times every second, explains Princeton Neuroscience Institute Ian Fiebelkorn, Ph.D., to Inverse, the brain stops focusing on the task at hand.
Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Saturday, January 25, 2020 2:53:44 AM
Hope123 wrote:
just against the necessity for you and others to support a movement to change it so that they do get those rights.

Not quite so. I was rather not arguing but making observations and then guessing why I see what I see. I believe the first thing we should do in any situation is figure out where we are and what's going on. Then, hopefully, we'll be able to decide what is worth doing, if anything.

One more reason for my lack of enthusiasm for feminism is likely the fact that I've never heard a Russian woman complain that she is unhappy because she doesn't have some rights. So all this feminist matter is rather abstract to me. I know there are feminists somewhere far away, but that's all.

If I saw our women walking around in black clothes from head to foot and not allowed to go anywhere alone or drive a car, then maybe I'd think there's something I should do about it. I say 'maybe' because in that case my own thinking would be different. We are embodiments of our cultures. Breaking with your culture is like breaking with yourself. It's also like breaking with your tribe and having to survive alone, which has always been dangerous. So it's no wonder if people avoid it like the plague.

Our culture is what puts the world in order, and us in a certain place in that order. It's something we use to orient ourselves in the sea of life. Hinting that someone's culture is wrong, we threaten to leave them in that sea without a map and compass. So if there is a defense reaction, it's natural and expectable, not at all 'weird'. It's weird only if we see people as incorporeal minds that can switch from one belief system to another in the blink of an eye. Since the defense reaction is expectable, we need to be prepared to handle it in a constructive way. Attacking it won't get us anywhere.

Of course, if our objective is simply to play the role of a progressive person and to enjoy watching ourselves in that role, then we won't be interested in being constructive. Then the defense reaction is not only expectable but desireable, and we will express our ideas in a way that is likely to provoke it.

I guess most people just play roles in forum discussions. It's a kind of online game. They may not recognize it fully, though, and believe in their sincerity. Recognizing it would make the game less real and therefore less exciting. Also it may contradict their moral values, which will force them to choose between two pleasures: being good and being thrilled, but they naturally want both. Those pleasures are of different nature and a poor substitute for each other.
Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Thursday, January 23, 2020 12:56:53 AM
Hope123,

I wasn't arguing against equal rights for women. This idea is OK with me. Upon some thinking I seem to see another reason why I am so unenthusiastic about joining the feminist movement. In Russia a boy is actually ruled by women all his childhood and adolescense. Probably in the majority of families, the more influential parent in family matters is the woman, and it has been so for quite a while. In the kindergarten all staff is female. In school almost all staff is female, including the headmaster. So a Russian man is well used to female authorities. Do you think this early training goes without consequences for his gender expectations? I think that due to this experience I see women as strong and powerful and so well able to achieve their goals on their own, especially if they have a whole movement for that purpose. I absolutely don't feel that my participation is necessary.

There are few women in the government, but I think it's a matter of time. A female president would be a really new thing here, but as soon as it happens the first time, I guess it won't be a big deal anymore.

Actually I am not sure women want to be in the government all that much. As much as men want it. So, the principle of equal representation as equal opportunity is OK, but making it into a rule that the government must have as many women as men will just create another religious ritual.

We can all have feminine and masculine traits, but we still identify as either a man or a woman. It's a meaningful difference to me. As well as to feminists, otherwise they wouldn't have chosen this name. Feminism was established and has long existed as a women's movement, and I am not a woman. The idea of equal rights is not specifically women's, but the movement is. I am not saying that it's an obstacle that can't be overcome, just that it's an obstacle.