Zoe: Jayne. This is something the Captain has to do for himself. Mal: No! No, it's not!

'War Stories'


Natter .38 Special  

Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.


Trudy Booth - Aug 24, 2005 3:34:20 pm PDT #1001 of 10002
Greece's financial crisis threatens to take down all of Western civilization - a civilization they themselves founded. A rather tragic irony - which is something they also invented. - Jon Stewart

S:UT


Steph L. - Aug 24, 2005 3:36:24 pm PDT #1002 of 10002
Unusually and exceedingly peculiar and altogether quite impossible to describe

Huh. I have NO idea why, but there were just fireworks outside my window.

(If there were more Cincinnatians on this board, I'd make a joke about Bob Huggins getting fired....)


-t - Aug 24, 2005 3:42:28 pm PDT #1003 of 10002
I am a woman of various inclinations and only some of the time are they to burn everything down in frustration

Kenya! Exciting!

I want to start hanging out at the track and talking about esquivarience.


Kat - Aug 24, 2005 3:46:08 pm PDT #1004 of 10002
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo

I have NO idea why, but there were just fireworks outside my window.

Celebrating humpday?

Oh man, first day back at work and I'm already feeling tired. Bad sign?


dcp - Aug 24, 2005 3:47:42 pm PDT #1005 of 10002
The more I learn, the more I realize how little I know.

Inoculations for Kenya.

What's the list now? I'm guessing typhoid and typhus, but what else? What's recommended as an anti-malarial?


§ ita § - Aug 24, 2005 3:50:37 pm PDT #1006 of 10002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Shots: yellow fever, hep a, polio booster

Prescriptions: Cipro (traveller's diarrhea), malarone (anti-malarial) and a typhoid oral vaccination

I haven't filled any of the prescriptions yet. The first two are guaranteed -- not sure if I'll go with the typhoid or not -- she wasn't pressing it.


Emily - Aug 24, 2005 3:52:30 pm PDT #1007 of 10002
"In the equation E = mc⬧, c⬧ is a pretty big honking number." - Scola

You know that kind of half-ashamed schadenfreude that you get when you see people you're no longer friends with, and they no longer look as good as they used to? Like, "Ha, well she's looking older and fatter and has dorky glasses! Of course, I'm older and fatter too, and always have had dorky glasses, and I started out less good-looking than her, so I'm probably still less attractive, but still-- ha! Dude, that's so not a cool thing to think. How petty are you?"

Yeah, I'm getting that.


Dana - Aug 24, 2005 4:03:15 pm PDT #1008 of 10002
I'm terrifically busy with my ennui.

Ah, the next episode of Network Battle of the Reality Stars has Simon Says.


Kathy A - Aug 24, 2005 4:07:37 pm PDT #1009 of 10002
We're very stretchy. - Connie Neil

Yay!! I love watching famous people make total idiots of themselves on national tv.


billytea - Aug 24, 2005 4:24:59 pm PDT #1010 of 10002
You were a wrong baby who grew up wrong. The wrong kind of wrong. It's better you hear it from a friend.

I guess we're at an impasse. And that I shouldn't have used the word navel, since it's sending you in a direction of assuming self indulgence on the part of my deity.

Possibly not, but I find it telling that you did so. What else is there for such a deity to regard?

The difference between loving and giving love is -- well, giving. That's been my whole point. The whole being suffused with warmth and affection for anything that might or might not ever exist? I'm good with.

Right. So, what meaning are we supposed to attach to such a being being all-loving? What difference is there between it and an all-selfish being? Indeed, if all there is is self, "the whole being suffused with warmth and affection" is a pretty picture, but your 'for' (and it's telling that the language here is predicated on a non-solipsistic existence) has nothing to relate to but itself.

See, all I've got from your picture is that such a being might turn out to be all-loving, were it ever in a situation where such a term gains meaning, but for the moment I can't say it's loving, selfish, or fnargle. There's nothing to explain what distinguishes these terms compared to anything else.

I don't know, and I guess I won't because you won't explain.

Um. Already did. You said you disagree, but without a reason that's coherent, I don't know what to say to it. Say we were discussing geometry, and I made a point, but you said that square circles were a counterexample. Do I have anything to say before I know what you mean by that?

In summation: I do not feel you need an object to be loving, and I don't believe that there's anything inherently loving in creating an object.

Why do you think it needs to be inherent? I would have thought that you have to argue that it can't be loving to make your point here. If it is conceivable for creation to loving, then an ALAPG would create in that fashion instead of any non-loving alternative.

But you don't seem to understand I can separate loving from giving, and I have no idea how you expect me to convince you, if you refuse to believe me.

It's not a question of belief, it's a question of coherence. I believe you believe it. But I also think the concepts you're using to conceive of it are themselves given meaning by a non-solipsistic existence, and thus there's a contradiction in using them to argue for a love in a solipsistic state of affairs.