Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

MagicBag Grow Bags
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
Cut off your "member"
    #3615153 -

I was reading "The Nature of the Universe" by Lucretius, as translated by R.E. Latham.  I read as far as the introduction when I came across these lines:

"If you woke up one morning to discover that some miracle had transported you to Athens in the early years of the third century B.C., you would find yourself in a social and spiritual atmosphere not altogether unfamiliar. 

"The political ideals of the city-state - liberty, democracy, national self-sufficiency - had lost their appeal in a world dominated by large-scale despotisms and shaken by economic crises and social unrest. 

"The old gods retained their temples and their sacrifices, but had ceased to inspire a living faith.  The master minds of the preceding century, Plato and Aristotle, seemed to have no message for the rising generation - no medicine for the prevailing mood of disillusionment, scepticism, and fatalism.

"In this setting, if you are one of those who believe that civilization wtih all its conventional values has been debunked, you would find congenial company among the followers of Diogenes the Cynic, whoe simple and self-centered life in the tub had demonstrated how many valued assets of mind and body it is possible to do without."

We are now all sitting in the hot-tub with Diogenes in the 3rd Century, B.C.  No medicine, no braille, no guide dogs, no fire alarms, etc.  No modern day helps for the disabled.

This is the way this game is going to work: 

First, assume that for whatever part of the body or mind you lose, science cannot accommodate it.  Whatever you lose, there is no replacement body part.  There is no medication.  There is nothing.  If you lose it, it's gone, and there's no replacement, including for body part and for the brain. 

Let's start with the first body part that you could lose and not care a whit.  Then, we will procede to the next body part.

My proposition is this:  How far can we go before we get down to a torso sans brain and still have a functioning human being?  :grin:

Me first:  Remove the toes.  At first, the human being might have trouble walking, but he could learn to balance without the toes, and eventually he would be fully functioning again.


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Frog]
    #3615237 -

id say take one lung first, the one thats the blackest, and then one kidney, and the toes, and then pinkie fingers, and then ear lobes, and then ( :frown: ) my hair... and thenmy right hand. ill keep going when the others catch up.


--------------------
"yet the more i dig, the more i consume, the more i unfold... the less protected i feel.
i am the spit on the hair of the son of an electron, swimming around the nucleus of a cell inside the sperm of a killer bee, and my purpose is as nebulous as why weve been bestowed with the capacity to give a shit" Brandon Boyd


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Frog]
    #3615251 -

I'd opt for losing my frontal lobe first.

Ancient times sucked.


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Sclorch]
    #3615295 -

No, you guys aren't playing the game right.  ('course, I could have been vague.  :grin: )  Don't immediately say all the successive body parts.  We have to discuss one body part at a time.

So if I say "toes", what's the next body part we can lose? 

Also, I think we need to define "functioning".  What does it mean to be a functioning human being?


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Frog]
    #3615323 -

Frog said:
Also, I think we need to define "functioning". What does it mean to be a functioning human being?


What does it matter?
Cut to the chase and tell me what you want to say...
Or are you NOT beating around the bush?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Sclorch]
    #3615395 -

I am seriously NOT beating around the bush. I have not read this book any further than what I posted. I posted what I read, up to what I read, because I thought it was interesting.

Think back to that days of year 3, B.C. There was none of the modern science that we have now. If you lost a limb, it was gone. There were no replacements.

I'm not trying to say anything. I just thought it interesting, when I first read the introduction, how could you do without a part of either the mind or body? At first I was puzzled. Well OF COURSE we can do without body parts or the mind.

But then I had to realize, this book is about what they were thinking a couple of thousand years ago. We didn't have the "modern" science that we have now.

Imagine sitting around, at that time, discussing losing a body part, and which would be the least or most important to lose, based on not having any alternatives. If you lost a limb, there was no "Limb Shop" at which to buy a replacement.


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Frog]
    #3615438 -

theres limb shops now?? link??

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Frog]
    #3615475 -

Aren't women just men minus the elephant trunk?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Swami]
    #3615501 -

Swami said:
Aren't women just men minus the elephant trunk?


If they were, I would think it would be a lot easier to get laid.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Swami]
    #3615528 -

I think there's some thingy on genes and having different chromosomes? :confused:

There's also that chemical stuff like testosterone and estrogen and such...

And women can do things men can't, like shoot little punks out of their gloryholes.


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Paou]
    #3615536 -

How would it be easier to get laid if women didn't have a "trunk?"

:grin:


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Frog]
    #3615562 -

They don't have a trunk. My point is that women don't think like guys. If they did, they'd be as horny as us, and thus it would be easier to get laid.

Edited by Paou (01/11/05 11:39 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Paou]
    #3615586 -

The don't have a trunk.

What? :whoa:


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Paou]
    #3615600 -

You might be right about that.  I am looking for stastics, but can't find any, because I am not really looking.

:grin:

Time for bed.


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: incubaby_421]
    #3616560 -

incubaby_421 said:
and then pinkie fingers


I think the guitarists would argue with you there... in fact I know at least one would. I would cease to be fully functioning if I couldn't play guitar.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cut off your "member" [Re: Zekebomb]
    #3616651 -

one lung, one kidney, liver, heart, brain, spinal cord

you could go further into losing parts of parts

i guess i cheated and used science... since science told me what parts id need. i dont think id say liver or kidney, if i was back in thier time.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Was Diogenes the original Western troll? naum 2,952 17 03/16/13 11:15 AM
by Icelander
* Being a productive member of society:
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 Grav 7,187 85 02/10/04 10:27 PM
by Grav
* books written by S&P members...who's would you read?
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 kaiowas 7,175 65 06/19/04 09:20 PM
by Strumpling
* The Function of Humans exclusive58 934 9 12/01/05 05:08 PM
by Droz
* Merely a function of our chemical make up.
( 1 2 all )		 chemkid 3,657 27 09/24/02 09:28 AM
by Albino_Jesus
* isn't functionality just a different kind of causality? Malachi 1,019 13 07/21/03 04:18 PM
by Sclorch
* Does lucid dreaming interfere with the function of dreaming? Annom 1,264 10 10/11/05 06:25 PM
by leery11
* You can't judge a religion by its members.
( 1 2 all )		 Swami 1,962 36 08/23/03 12:19 AM
by Jellric

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
824 topic views. 0 members, 2 guests and 16 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.03 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 16 queries.