BEOWULF - THE KARMA SUITSYA

cthia wrote: That emotion and that fact is why I used the analogy in the first place, to head off your initial nonsense way back upstream that the SLN, Mandarins and some of the League's citizens wouldn't see Beowulf's actions as treasonous. Look at it as a nanite tailored to do a specific job.

AND IT WORKED for many posters. . .

tlb wrote:I have always admitted that the Mandarins would present Beowulf's actions as being treasonous and I accept that there are those who would believe that false propaganda. I accept that fact as something the leadership of Beowulf needs to consider as they plan their nation's course. So it could be said that I accept your thesis and admit that your prescriptions might ameliorate the response expected from the League. **
So what you are choosing to argue is my continued resistance to the terms that you use to present your ideas. I find them larded with emotional content that distracts from the ideas that you struggle to convey and I think that much of that struggle is due to the slippery nature of those terms. If you do not like my resistance, that is your bad; because I do not see what you could to force me to change my mind.

Karma automatically weighs the good against the bad intentions of an entity's actions and generates the appropriate response.

** The hitch is that Beowulf has been assisting in the rebuilding and rearming of Manticore, starting before the de facto state of war. When the Mandarins and SLN learn this, then none of the things you suggest will prevent an armed response.

cthia wrote:I am going to consider billing you for all of the extra remedial time you require.

tlb wrote:I have always admitted that the Mandarins would present Beowulf's actions as being treasonous and I accept that there are those who would believe that false propaganda.

cthia wrote:NO. This is where you are still having problems.

1. The crux of your problems stem from the fact that you are still suffering from my arguing the stance that Oscar Saint-Just's proponents would consider Theisman's actions as treasonous, which is the subtle reason for your snipe at the end of your very first post of this thread.

because

2. You still cannot fathom that Beowulf actually was treasonous to the sensibilities made between people and to their unspoken and implied responsibilities to their own founding.

tlb wrote:I accept that fact as something the leadership of Beowulf needs to consider as they plan their nation's course. So it could be said that I accept your thesis and admit that your prescriptions might ameliorate the response expected from the League. **
So what you are choosing to argue is my continued resistance to the terms that you use to present your ideas. I find them larded with emotional content that distracts from the ideas that you struggle to convey and I think that much of that struggle is due to the slippery nature of those terms. If you do not like my resistance, that is your bad; because I do not see what you could to force me to change my mind.

cthia wrote:I don't struggle to convey. You struggle to understand. Even a Gorilla can understand the concepts.

tlb wrote:Karma automatically weighs the good against the bad intentions of an entity's actions and generates the appropriate response.

cthia wrote:No No No! Karma doesn't even own a set of scales to weigh good against bad. Karma does not care about the googol of good you did all year. She only cares about the fact that you have her nostrils flaring now. Even a child can grasp it.

tlb wrote:** The hitch is that Beowulf has been assisting in the rebuilding and rearming of Manticore, starting before the de facto state of war. When the Mandarins and SLN learn this, then none of the things you suggest will prevent an armed response.

cthia wrote:Uh oh! Light at the end of the tunnel?
Will there finally be calm in Gilead?

ldwechsler wrote:Please let's play nice. If you want to debate the nature of karma we probably need a few Hindus in. Payback might be a better word but it doesn't quite convey the same meaning.

Treason is a very tricky concept. Are people who oppose going to war traitors? Can you be a traitor if there is no war?

Right now, the US has disassociated itself from several UN bodies. Does that make us a traitor nation or merely one that has kept a sense of decency?

The Mandarins might feel that Beowulf is treasonous but that is merely their opinion.

And remember the great words of another (ironically) Harrington:

Treason never prospers for if does, none dare call it treason.

I have no knowledge about the state of calm in Gilead, because I have not read The Handmaiden's Tale. From Wikipedia:

Balm of Gilead was a rare perfume used medicinally, that was mentioned in the Bible, and named for the region of Gilead, where it was produced. The expression stems from William Tyndale's language in the King James Bible of 1611, and has come to signify a universal cure in figurative speech.

I state what I have said and Cthia says I did not say it right, because I did not parrot the proper words. This reminds me of Professor Fate, who crosses the finish line first at the end of the move The Great Race. He refuses to accept the result, because he did not win his way. Cthia wants me to agree, not just that his idea might be reasonable, but that every word and analogy used to argue his ideas are also reasonable and proper.

cthia wrote:The crux of your problems stem from the fact that you are still suffering from my arguing the stance that Oscar Saint-Just's proponents would consider Theisman's actions as treasonous, which is the subtle reason for your snipe at the end of your very first post of this thread.

NO, No, No. I can admit the his proponents would consider Theisman's actions treasonous (the same as my admitting that the Mandarins will treat Beowulf as treasonous); the problem is that you argued that Theisman's actions WERE treasonous and should have resulted in a trial under the restored constitution - that is something completely different.

I, OTOH, have consumed the Handmaiden's Tale. I highly recommend it. Calm in Gilead can easily be substituted for Balm in Gilead. Balm = calm.

Yet, my first introduction to the phrase came from my very first favorite author, Edgar Allan Poe. The line is found in the Raven. As a snotty nosed little kid, I lived and breathed Poe and Shakespeare. Wore out several volumes of each. My family members would confiscate ratty old pages that had fallen out from excessive reading and buy me new ones.

Yes, I admit to arguing that Theisman's actions were treasonous. And also murderous. But against they who loved Oscar's Haven.

However, I capitulate on this subject for fear of the wrath of a certain Duckk.

Perhaps I spent too much time with Shakespeare which affects my tendency towards analogies to assuage ones difficulty to understand what is obvious.

There is no wrong that can be attributed to an analogy that works, that facilitates understanding. For the art of speaking is to communicate. The art of communication is to draw comparisons. Several posters even picked up the analogy and made it their own.

BECAUSE THE SAME PSYCHOLOGICAL UNDERTONES ARE IN PLAY IN THE HEADS OF THE MANDARINS, SLN OFFICERS AND LEAGUE CITIZENS.

You are much too unhinged on the letter of the comparison, than the spirit of it. Much the same problem I had initially with many in the first several pages of the thread. . .

Throwing the letter of the law in the Mandarins face, as did Beowulf. Instead of the spirit of the law.

.

cthia wrote:I, OTOH, have consumed the Handmaiden's Tale. I highly recommend it. Calm in Gilead can easily be substituted for Balm in Gilead. Balm = calm.

Yet, my first introduction to the phrase came from my very first favorite author, Edgar Allen Poe. The line is found in the Raven. As a snotty nosed little kid, I lived and breathed Poe and Shakespeare. Wore out several volumes of each. My family members would confiscate ratty old pages that had fallen out from excessive reading and buy me new ones.

Yes, I admit to arguing that Theisman's actions were treasonous. And also murderous. But against they who loved Oscar's Haven.

However, I capitulate on this subject for fear of the wrath of a certain Duckk.

Perhaps I spent too much time with Shakespeare which affects my tendency towards analogies to assuage ones difficulty to understand what is obvious.

There is no wrong that can be attributed to an analogy that works, that facilitates understanding. For the art of speaking is to communicate. The art of communication is to draw comparisons. Several posters even picked up the analogy and made it their own.

BECAUSE THE SAME PSYCHOLOGICAL UNDERTONES ARE IN PLAY IN THE HEADS OF THE MANDARINS, SLN OFFICERS AND LEAGUE CITIZENS.

You are much too unhinged on the letter of the comparison, than the spirit of it. Much the same problem I had initially with many in the first several pages of the thread. . .

Throwing the letter of the law in the Mandarins face, as did Beowulf. Instead of the spirit of the law.

So perhaps balm can promote calm.

I can accept that you could consider me unhinged on the letter of the comparison, rather than the spirit of it; that is much better than suggesting that I am sexually aroused by arguing with you (the obnoxious comments about a continued hard-on for all things cthia). The reason this matters to me is that words and phrases which carry heavy emotional weight cause people to respond to that emotion, instead of hearing whatever reasoning is hidden behind them.

tlb wrote:

cthia wrote:I, OTOH, have consumed the Handmaiden's Tale. I highly recommend it. Calm in Gilead can easily be substituted for Balm in Gilead. Balm = calm.

Yet, my first introduction to the phrase came from my very first favorite author, Edgar Allen Poe. The line is found in the Raven. As a snotty nosed little kid, I lived and breathed Poe and Shakespeare. Wore out several volumes of each. My family members would confiscate ratty old pages that had fallen out from excessive reading and buy me new ones.

Yes, I admit to arguing that Theisman's actions were treasonous. And also murderous. But against they who loved Oscar's Haven.

However, I capitulate on this subject for fear of the wrath of a certain Duckk.

Perhaps I spent too much time with Shakespeare which affects my tendency towards analogies to assuage ones difficulty to understand what is obvious.

There is no wrong that can be attributed to an analogy that works, that facilitates understanding. For the art of speaking is to communicate. The art of communication is to draw comparisons. Several posters even picked up the analogy and made it their own.

BECAUSE THE SAME PSYCHOLOGICAL UNDERTONES ARE IN PLAY IN THE HEADS OF THE MANDARINS, SLN OFFICERS AND LEAGUE CITIZENS.

You are much too unhinged on the letter of the comparison, than the spirit of it. Much the same problem I had initially with many in the first several pages of the thread. . .

Throwing the letter of the law in the Mandarins face, as did Beowulf. Instead of the spirit of the law.

So perhaps balm can promote calm.

I can accept that you could consider me unhinged on the letter of the comparison, rather than the spirit of it; that is much better than suggesting that I am sexually aroused by arguing with you (the obnoxious comments about a continued hard-on for all things cthia). The reason this matters to me is that words and phrases which carry heavy emotional weight cause people to respond to that emotion, instead of hearing whatever reasoning is hidden behind them.

That's another analogy you messed up royally. The idiom, unless taken out of this context, hardly means a sexual arousal nor considered obnoxious. Your sensibilities amongst grownups are becoming insane. And that's coming from a guy who admits to crying over a book. A Weber book.

Given your problem with analogies, I can hardly suppose I could have even substituted the fact that you screwed the pooch on this analogy, too?

What else am I supposed to think when you keep digging into me (darn analogies) like a tick over the obvious.

S

P

O

I

L

E

R

S


We'd still be arguing treason if not for. . . S P O I L E R S.

Then lets just take my criticisms as given and permit this dog to scratch himself and go to sleep.

PS. I do not expect that we are particularly street; so the Urban Dictionary might not be normally applicable.

tlb wrote:Then lets just take my criticisms as given and permit this dog to scratch himself and go to sleep.

Sleep tight. Don't let the bedbugs, or fleas, or karma, bite.

tlb wrote:Then lets just take my criticisms as given and permit this dog to scratch himself and go to sleep.

PS. I do not expect that we are particularly street; so the Urban Dictionary might not be normally applicable.

Huh? I simply used the first dictionary I came upon. The idiom is a very common part of American slang.

tlb wrote:Then lets just take my criticisms as given and permit this dog to scratch himself and go to sleep.

PS. I do not expect that we are particularly street; so the Urban Dictionary might not be normally applicable.

cthia wrote:Huh? I simply used the first dictionary I came upon. The idiom is a very common part of American slang.

The problem with analogies and idioms is that they require you and your listener to share a background. That is why it is safer to avoid them when talking to a wider audience. Perhaps this was a common idiom when you grew up; I am only familiar with it from a few movies (usually starring Joe Pesci as a mobster), it was never a part of the slang when I grew up. On this forum, the only guaranteed background is provided by the books.

PS. I expect the definition given, "to want to cause physical harm to someone", is very much a euphemism for "wanting to f**k someone up" which better corresponds to the imagery.

tlb wrote:Then lets just take my criticisms as given and permit this dog to scratch himself and go to sleep.

PS. I do not expect that we are particularly street; so the Urban Dictionary might not be normally applicable.

cthia wrote:Huh? I simply used the first dictionary I came upon. The idiom is a very common part of American slang.

tlb wrote:The problem with analogies and idioms is that they require you and your listener to share a background. That is why it is safer to avoid them when talking to a wider audience. Perhaps this was a common idiom when you grew up; I am only familiar with it from a few movies (usually starring Joe Pesci as a mobster), it was never a part of the slang when I grew up. On this forum, the only guaranteed background is provided by the books.

PS. I expect the definition given, "to want to cause physical harm to someone", is very much a euphemism for "wanting to f**k someone up" which better corresponds to the imagery.

Okay, one of us is going to have to budge or this will continue on and on and on. I admit that certain American idioms aren't going to be well known in this forum of Americans and foreigners. Weber uses idioms and analogies because he's an American author writing American Sci-fi. We can hardly chastise Weber for comparing the SL to a hog that you have to rap on its snout to get its attention. Well? He incorporates lots of foreign stuff as well, that leaves many American people at a loss too. However, I hardly think it's fair that either of us should limit our output in consideration for your lack of input. Though Weber has stated he wishes he could rewrite the Polish names and references in SoF. I don't agree because I love it as it is and had no problem with either, being well traveled and exposed to other languages, accents and cultures. I'd crave the original publishing as I've stated. It supplies an extra feel of authenticity, IMO.

Since this is an American forum of an American author, I hardly agree to the idea of frowning upon the use of American idioms. And any animosity against analogies that fit and work is preposterous. I have foreign friends who are afraid to join the forum, partly because of their own lack of mastery of American idioms but even they hardly came close to wanting to ban them.* They use them too.

Now the crux of their decision forms around their perusal of the forum and what they say is the lack of many people seemingly unable to maturely discuss topics without letting their own jealousies and alliances get involved. I'm embarrassed to have had to agree. And to think I have the nerve and audacity to want to tackle the really gritty - don't touch that with a 10-ft pole! - topics that are controversial, but quite interesting once the discussions and hardliners for the sake of being impossible level off.

*Some forumites have announced disbelief that someone should be afraid of Americans calling them on their use of idioms. But here it is right here.

Some of my Romanian friends' idioms are hilarious. . .

"Let sleeping dogs sleep."

"Put the cart on the horse." LOL

or "Put the cart before you put the horse."

"Stuck between a rock and a hard spot."

Here you are suggesting to an American that he shouldn't even use American idioms to discuss an American work of fiction, in light of youngsters that may have been suckling when the idiom was vogue. It never went into obscurity if you ask me.

I don't know what else to tell ya. But to say no offense was ever intended and that I thought I showed patience in explaining my stance, knowing there are foreigners and people who just didn't get it. I simply like book discussions. Once upon a time I frequented several in the areas I was living at the time. As a male, I was always outnumbered, and in several I was the only male. Though the females loved my input.

I'm all about the discussion w/o favoritism or nepotism though I am human and can be affected by it as well as anyone.

Someone once stated in another thread that my family always agrees with me. . .

I also use lots of hyperlinks and quite often humor and video to facilitate understanding my stance too. Ain't like I don't try to fill in the possible gaps of other posters.

Like my Drivers Ed. instructor taught me, I'm driving for other posters on the road too.