A blending of biography, philosophy, adventure, and politics, 10 Questions for the Dalai Lama conveys more than history, and more than answers. It opens a window into the heart of a great man and spiritual leader.
I watched this Sunday morning and thought it was definitely worth sharing. I feel as if the Tibet situation [travesty, really] is something that people think is wrong and want to help - yet many don’t fully understand the complexities of what’s going on, or the Dalai Lama’s opinion on how things should be handled.
Back to baseball and philosophy part II. With quite a lot of approaches to competing in the diamond game, from the runner’s game, to the pitching and defense game, mechanics and such, I’ve decided that the team is the formula.
Aligning the stoics with the extremes of baseball seems to be easy for some. And again for others, who speculate on even if there is just philosophy to start off with, with the hardball versus softball debate. Where are the women?
Or that saying "all philosophies are taken" can also be seen as being quite selfish. Sharing is the name of the game, so how come I haven’t revealed any of my personal philosophies? I can’t, I won’t, I will, but not yet.
The rules of the game rule and the "hunches, guesswork, grittiness, gutsiness, the lore of the lunch-pail work ethic" paled against the traditionalists rests where I would start a few fore none philosophy. Next let’s attend the experience and environment conference.
To wonder about the base stealing factor or to focus on those clutch situational players…….?
….Enough of the whoopla, here is John Rawls’ end point philosophy from a letter that was found by the author of the article with the least amount of resistance:
"[Finally], there is the factor of time, the use of which is a central part of any game. Baseball shares with tennis the idea that time never runs out, as it does in basketball and football and soccer. This means that there is always time for the losing side to make a comeback."
words by Phelton Skypes
Don Sutton used to tell me, 'Every time you go out there, you're going to be a different guy. So throughout the course of the year you can be between 30 and 35 people.' via
Just war theory is the attempt to distinguish between justifiable and unjustifiable uses of organized armed forces. Unfamiliar with the basic terms of analysis and debate? Then check out the BBC’s introduction to the ethics of warfare, or read Brian Orend’s excellent introduction from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
The world is upon us.
Bothersome like a whimsical thought of what is apparent of achievement and what needs to get done. To think for a second that what you want is what we want is right. And to think of the later is too late and gone to be done just right. Let us bring flight to those that cannot fly and blind those that can already see.
For in the long run it is us that stand in the way. It is us, the leaders that carry the torch from a land far away to enlighten and then frenzy an irreplaceable interconnectedness. The gates have opened. Signals and co-opted simplicity shed these lights and are only less manly than the comfortable tunnels of Winnipeg, Canadia. Moving on and progressing are the hardest of things, more dense then of the iron, brass, and cult copper that are forged together on a daily commotion.
Let us bring flight to those that cannot fly and blind those that can already see. I’ll see you in station and we will have fun.
thanks for Stanky Plank for sending this in
Posted: July 8th, 2008
at 6:00am by Koookiecrumbles
Categories: hood status,myninjaplease,youtube,life,celebrity,too good to be true,green,web,not ninja-worthy,home,games,clothes,business,robots,film,mnp is for the children,politricks,weaponry,gear,grub,architecture,fo' real?,real life news,9th dan,science,"ninja",10th dan,travel,philosophy
Comments: No comments
Those of us from the Bean know Steven Holl‘s academic work all too well, what with all the coverage his concrete ‘sponge’ [read : Simmon’s Hall] got in both the local and national media - and then ensuing debate over the building’s design.
In a more recent project, which just opened at the start of this school year, Holl investigates porosity yet again - but this time within a renovation/restoration project for NYU‘s Philosophy Department. Long story short? The concept is much iller as an insertion into a pre-existing structure - just look at the photos of this staircase…thing is SIIICK.
As I’ve already said, this time around Holl experimented with the insertion of a ‘porous’ stair into an existing 1890 building at 3-5 Washington Place. Leaving the historic exterior untouched, Holl’s aim was to give the Department of Philosophy a ‘luminous image’ with the new interiors - including faculty and graduate student offices, seminar rooms, a periodicals library & lounge and a ground floor 120-seat cork auditorium.
::All images copyright Andy Ryan::
what the chuck is going down ninjas? the counter says this is post 2000 so officially one could assume that we have now entered version 2.0. as stuart scott once said "that’s redundant from the redundancy department." pure knowledge that can only be digested. what’s in store for the future? haha you must wait and see. just be on the lookout for those shadowy figures that are lurking behind you (sometimes beside you depending on the time of the day). often our angry readers ask why? there are about 500 plus written comments in this thing, which means if you’re like what the hell is the point of that start yapping up a storm on those there keys and make a racket instead of just staring away. there could be many additions to this post, but frankly this one’s not really a milestone as it is a reminder of what has happened in the past.
[W]hile civil rights was deeply influential on white countercultural movements in America [in the late 1960s through mid-1970s], folk music was somewhat less influential, feminism less still, and gay rights hardly at all. . . .
One might move from feminist activism to gay rights activism, or from civil rights activism to Jewish ethnic particularism; but despite the perception that sixties consciousness was Vietnam consciousness, religious people did not seem to move back and forth as much between antiwar activism and other kinds of activism. The war was an issue unto itself. (217, 218)
Counter-culture is thus the active critique or transformation of the existing social, scientific or aesthetic paradigm. It is religious reform. It is the heresy of whoever confers a license upon himself and prefigures another church. It is the only cultural manifestation that a dominant culture is unable to acknowledge and accept. . . . Counter-culture comes about when those who transform the culture in which they live become critically conscious of what they are doing and elaborate a theory of their deviation from the dominant model, offering a model that is capable of sustaining itself. (19)
Peter Birkenhed of Salon.com takes a a few shots at new age philosphies espoused by films such as "The Secret."
"The Secret" espouses a "philosophy" patched together by an Australian talk-show producer named Rhonda Byrne. Though "The Secret" unabashedly appropriates and mishmashes familiar self-help cliches, it was still the subject of two recent episodes of "The Oprah Winfrey Show" featuring a dream team of self-help gurus, all of whom contributed to the project.
The main idea of "The Secret" is that people need only visualize what they want in order to get it — and the book certainly has created instant wealth, at least for Rhonda Byrne and her partners-in-con. And the marketing idea behind it — the enlisting of that dream team, in what is essentially a massive, cross-promotional pyramid scheme — is brilliant.
And who does he see as the figurehead of said scheme? Oprah Winfrey, who has devoted at least two shows to "The Secret." We’re not sure if hes just jumping on the recent (and late) Oprah hate-train… but if he is we salute him. We’re also wondering how many people paid any money to watch that movie… most people I know saw it at free screenings or um… downloaded it.
THE word ‘idealism’ is used by different philosophers in somewhat different senses. We shall understand by it the doctrine that whatever exists, or at any rate whatever can be known to exist, must be in some sense mental. This doctrine, which is very widely held among philosophers, has several forms, and is advocated on several different grounds. The doctrine is so widely held, and so interesting in itself, that even the briefest survey of philosophy must give some account of it.
Those who are unaccustomed to philosophical speculation may be inclined to dismiss such a doctrine as obviously absurd. There is no doubt that common sense regards tables and chairs and the sun and moon and material objects generally as something radically different from minds and the contents of minds, and as having an existence which might continue if minds ceased. We think of matter as having existed long before there were any minds, and it is hard to think of it as a mere product of mental activity. But whether true or false, idealism is not to be dismissed as obviously absurd.