Men are men, women are women. East is east, west is west, and never the twain shall meet. (Kipling. Not a serious quote) — Bitter Crank

The ballad reveals its fuller meaning in subsequent lines.

Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,
Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God's great Judgment Seat;
But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth,
When two strong men stand face to face, though they come from the ends of the earth!

In the end distinctions of geography, breed, birth, or sex, do not matter at all when those with integrity meet. If you met Caitlyn Jenner would you refuse to use her preferred pronouns? It would seem rude to do otherwise.

Transsexualism and transvestitism is an elaborate sexual masquerade--and certainly not the only sexual and non-sexual masquerade which humans perform. But let's stay honest: A man wearing a dress (even if an artificial vagina has been created) is still a masquerading man. A woman wearing a beard and a suit (even if an artificial penis has been created) is still a masquerading woman. — Bitter Crank

Actually, all fetal genitalia are the same and are phenotypically female, so all men are not men but masquerading women. We've both got frick'n nipples for Christ's sake! We can even lactate.

The question for 'gay liberation' is more a matter of what gay people have given up to gain acceptance and the 'normality' of heterosexual-type family life. — Bitter Crank

What have they given up?

Assuming there's a 'superstition' that black women are low status and being low status in America is disadvantageous, lobbying in favor of someone on the basis of gender/race could be seen as moral, specifically in the moral sense of fairness.

Keep in mind that this would be an effort to counteract superstition (and its associated disadvantages) and if there's a superstition that women of color are low status, this false belief would be counteracted by them occupying high-status positions in society, such as a Supreme Court justice.

Then wouldn’t it be fair to try rectifying the situation?

Do you believe that the false beliefs and biases that we’re talking about are advantageous to some and disadvantageous to others?

Would a revival of Bushido and Stoicism teach the youth of today how to keep a stiff upper lip? — Dermot Griffin

A curious pairing. If a stiff upper lip is the goal then Bushido may be the better choice. I don’t think the world is in need of more stiff lips though. Human kind is definitely in need of greater well-being.

I’ve misinterpreted what you mean by superstition? What exactly do you mean with that term in this context if not false beliefs and biases?

A murderer has killed someone. How can others of the same taxonomy be perpetrators of murder if they did not kill anyone? A victim of murder is deceased. How can others of the same taxonomy be victims of murder if they are still alive? To confer guilt or victimhood to others beyond perpetrator and victim is a false conclusion and leads to unjust actions, in any case, but to confer them to one race or another is an absurdity. — NOS4A2

In a nutshell, the word you used to describe this is superstition. False beliefs and biases that are advantageous to some and disadvantageous to others.

Do you want to claim that superstitions don't exist? Go ahead, I won't object.

None of this distracts from the principle of fairness though. I know that you know what fairness is. I know that you have a sense of fairness. You seem to have the superstition that you don't value fairness.

The superstition as it has been used leads one to false conclusions and unjust actions, ... — NOS4A2

Yes, as you say, "I speak of race as pseudoscience and superstition. The history of how this superstition was used to malign, exclude, and murder human beings is well documented."

... such as the assumption that any member of such taxonomies are either victim or perpetrator in some all-purveying race struggle. — NOS4A2

This appears to contradict your statement that the history of how this superstition was used to malign, exclude, and murder human beings is well documented. Murder, for instance, requires a perpetrator and a victim. Are you saying that your own belief in history causes you to have false conclusions and unjust actions?

The history of how this superstition was used to malign, exclude, and murder human beings is well documented. The assumption that any member of such taxonomies are either victim or perpetrator in some all-purveying race struggle are the direct result of the same thinking, and immediately falsified upon evidence to the contrary. — NOS4A2

These two sentences seem to contradict each other. Can you rephrase?

religion/spirituality is evolutionarily advantageous. — baker

You might assume it is, in a common-sense sort of way, but it's far from a given. All other species on Earth seem to have survived this far without it. What's behind it may even prove to eventually end us.

wherever it is unethical to lobby against someone on the grounds of race, it is unethical to lobby in favor of someone on the grounds of race, and for the same reason. It seems to me that violating this principle is the problem to begin with. — NOS4A2

The primary fault with your reasoning here is that you speak as though 'race' exists in a vacuum. It is clear to everyone who takes this case seriously that race represents more than mere skin pigmentation. Generally speaking, it represents a marginalized segment of society. So you seem to be saying that you feel it is unethical to lobby for or against those in a disadvantaged position.

I also feel it is unethical to take advantage of those with a disadvantage, but I don't see how it's unethical to give advantage to those with a disadvantage. I can only assume that you do not value the principle of fairness, even though you fully understand the concept.

Trying to follow what you’re saying, I will point out that the media doesn’t report what its audience doesn’t want to hear, and that approval polls reflect public approval.

It's hard to disagree with that, when they literally published it as their intention for the world to see: https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

It simply cannot be interpreted any other way. — Garrett Travers

I don’t follow what you’re saying.

he still garnered more votes than any president in the history of all nations of the world, with the unbelievable exception of Biden, who has in his first year garnered the worst approval rating of any president in history in that same time, or very close to more than any other. — Garrett Travers

Second only to Trump for worst first year approval rating. The media and the public are responsible for that, of course, and not Trump. :smirk:

The last thing Trump needs to be worried about is environmentalists and social justice warriors, and the only thing that he's lost is the election. He's untouchable.

Ah, I didn’t see the ponytail until now. That’s even more mystifying though, because it seems highly unlikely that Greta would warn Trump about losing the election.

The other two human characters are children — universeness

No. The body proportions clearly show that the man with the “I warned you Trump” t-shirt is an adult.

There is no shame in putting yourself in a composition. It is to be admired, actually, because it demonstrates the courage to truly own the message that is being expressed. An after-the-fact warning is alway 20/20, as the old saying goes, because there is no possibility of making a false prediction. You give yourself all the credit and take no risk whatsoever. It is truly courageous to blatantly demonstrate, and to personally own, such shameless positioning.

I think you misunderstand my comment. — Apollodorus

How so?

Anyway, I guess my point is that because religion is based on faith rather than reason, an uneducated but charismatic person could do just as well if not better than an educated person in establishing the "correct" view.

In religion, the only "correct" view is the one coming from religious authority and the view that most people believe is true. It's not known to be true of course but believed to be true. It's a matter of faith.

If you had only one educated and one uneducated view, the options would be reduced to just two, making it much easier to choose. — Apollodorus

Does God exist? An educated person could probably make a better argument one way or the other, I suppose, but in the end only experience matters, unless it doesn't matter and the point is other than spiritual.

I think the main confusion arises from the vast range of interpretation and, in particular, from the divergence of popular vs. philosophical or "educated" views. — Apollodorus

This statement doesn't make sense because, if nothing else, all philosophical or "educated" views are not in agreement.

Good game, I enjoyed it.

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5
10. Nc4 Qe7
11. Qxh5 f5
12. e5 f4
13. Re1 Be6
14. Re4 Rf5
15. Qe2 Raf8
16. Bxf4 Rxf4
17. Rxf4 Rxf4
18. Nd2 Rxf2
19. Qxf2 Bxf2+
20. Kxf2 Qc5+

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5
10. Nc4 Qe7
11. Qxh5 f5
12. e5 f4
13. Re1 Be6
14. Re4 Rf5
15. Qe2 Raf8
16. Bxf4 Rxf4
17. Rxf4 Rxf4
18. Nd2 Rxf2
19. Qxf2 Bxf2+

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5
10. Nc4 Qe7
11. Qxh5 f5
12. e5 f4
13. Re1 Be6
14. Re4 Rf5
15. Qe2 Raf8
16. Bxf4 Rxf4
17. Rxf4 Rxf4
18. Nd2 Rxf2

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5
10. Nc4 Qe7
11. Qxh5 f5
12. e5 f4
13. Re1 Be6
14. Re4 Rf5
15. Qe2 Raf8
16. Bxf4 Rxf4
17. Rxf4 Rxf4

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5
10. Nc4 Qe7
11. Qxh5 f5
12. e5 f4
13. Re1 Be6
14. Re4 Rf5
15. Qe2 Raf8
16. Bxf4 Rxf4

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5
10. Nc4 Qe7
11. Qxh5 f5
12. e5 f4
13. Re1 Be6
14. Re4 Rf5
15. Qe2 Raf8

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5
10. Nc4 Qe7
11. Qxh5 f5
12. e5 f4
13. Re1 Be6
14. Re4 Rf5

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5
10. Nc4 Qe7
11. Qxh5 f5
12. e5 f4
13. Re1 Be6

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5
10. Nc4 Qe7
11. Qxh5 f5
12. e5 f4

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5
10. Nc4 Qe7
11. Qxh5 f5

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5
10. Nc4 Qe7

Funny, I ran through a bunch on scenarios but didn’t see that move. :monkey:

Where that saying is coming from is outside the ego-logical point of view through which we automatically interpret everything. — Wayfarer

If only people really did reason according to strict principles of validity more often. In truth though, it's the rare occasion that we do.

That’s what triggers the incredulous response, ‘what, you get nothing from it?’ — Wayfarer

It's unbelievable simply because it's not true.

There’s a saying in the Diamond Sutra which is one of the core texts of Zen, where the Buddha says ‘I have realized the supreme, ultimate truth, and I have gained nothing from it’. It’s a very hard saying, that, as we automatically interpret everything through the lens of gain and loss. It’s in our DNA, you might say. — Wayfarer

It's actually very easy to say. Religious leaders are forced to mystify because if their preachings weren't mystifying they would not be needed.

What did the Buddha realize? Emptiness. Emptiness is not a something, so in that sense, he gained nothing. You might say that he actually lost something, his sense of self. And if that were the case then there would have been no one to gain something, so even if there were something to gain there was no one to gain it. What's gained is a beneficial experience, to put it plainly.

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O
9. Nd2 Nh5

always remembering Suzuki-Roshi’s advice, ‘give up all gaining ideas.’ — Wayfarer

What do you hope to gain by giving up all gaining ideas? :lol:

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5
8. h3 O-O

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4
7. O-O Qxe5

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5
6. Nxe5 Qd4

ZzzoneiroCosm v. praxis

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
4. Bxc6 dxc6
5. d3 Bc5