> Instead, he encourages us to “genuine rebellion.” This is a fruitful action, which requires us to recognize that everybody is in the same boat. He suggests that rebellion should foster in us a sense of solidarity and respect for the dignity of others as they grapple with absurdism.
which reminds me of Buddhist compassion and a certain understanding of Jesus Christ as being humiliated and persecuted in solidarity with us.
> He then considers turning to other, transcendental sources for meaning. However, he rejects this as a kind of “philosophical suicide,” that also tries to sidestep the problem of dealing with an absurd universe by imposing a system on it, like that of Christianity or Communism, which will only end up running into the meaninglessness of the universe again and again while also keeping us from working things out for ourselves.
@GratefulDisciple I'll be frank. I don't hold a high opinion of Christianity.SE 'core users', the people you see curating, commenting and answering every question. I suspect they wouldn't hold a high opinion of someone like me either. It's full of science skeptics who haven't respected dissenting opinions on multiple occasions that I have seen.
So that poster claiming it's better suited to Philosophy.SE has a very narrow vision of what's permissible on that site, and it's going to be hard convincing him.
@Vikas how likely is it that they didn't like his skin tone? Genuinely asking, because I haven't been following him
@M.A.R. I appreciate your frankness. I really do. And I'm afraid I agree with your assessment too. That is why the book I mentioned a few days ago (Unintended Reformation) explains a LOT to me and saddens me on why they are so anti-science and anti-reason.
@M.A.R. It's an uphill battle for me. But thankfully the moderators are on my side.
@Robusto Yes, but it doesn't have to be that way. We can turn back the clock to 500 years ago while retaining the positive contribution of science and philosophy as "all the things that have been tried" so we are not doomed to repeat them.
In "The Tale of Benjamin Bunny" Beatrix Potter writes "Old Mr. Bunny had no opinion whatever of cats." What does it mean?
The cat looked up and saw old Mr. Benjamin Bunny prancing along the
top of the wall of the upper terrace.
He was smoking a pipe of rabbit-tobacco, and had a little ...
Haha I'm comparing myself to a character in a children's book about little animals who talk and think and are fluffy and cute but may at any moment be eaten by another fluffy cute animal in the story.
@Mitch It looks like your answer is almost tied with the accepted answer, but both answers are so different. As someone who doesn't know English as well as you guys, I don't know which one is right save to do my own investigation. I tend to want to side with you and @tchrist though.
@Mitch Not knowing how to read cats (when I was little I had a dog), I hesitate to attribute "missing the squirrel" to when the cat noticed it was gone. But the cat seems to have a definitively apathetic face, expressing neither thanks / annoyance. What's your reading?
@GratefulDisciple It's complicated. I tried to give the nuance but wasn't exactly clear. on the surface the words mean what they say, that the bunny did not have an opinion of that cat, didn't really ever think of the cat, didn't care, didn't know enough to care or not care.
But practically speaking, if you say that, that probably means you -do- have an opinion and it is not good and you just don't want to say it out loud. It's kind of an understatement, or maybe a way of being superior by not noticing something. Kind of snooty. I think Tim Lymington's answer says this.
@Mitch So I take it the expression "has no opinion whatsoever of <something>" is ambiguous? It can mean either "has low opinion" or "has no opinion either way"?
@GratefulDisciple I don't think cats' faces really show emotion the way humans (and presumably dogs) do. We interpret that as aloof or apathetic but really they aren't showing inner state through their face.
@GratefulDisciple 🫡 I salute your perspicacity, if that is indeed the appropriate word.
The turn of phrase '...have no opinion whatever...' has a bit of a whiff of the UK to me.
@Mitch Yeah, I want to be careful reading an animal according to its species instead of projecting doggyness to them. I heard cows are very sensitive animal and sometimes even block their owners from leaving, get comforted by Mozart's music to produce more milk, and sympathize when their cowmates are being led to slaughter.
@Mitch It's been my experience too, that I only seem to read it in British books.
@GratefulDisciple Yeah, animals (at least mammals) seem to have complex inner lives, or at least moreso than their blank faces show. But those inner lives are not what we expect as humans. I feel like we should anthropomorphize animals more, but also be prepared to be wrong about it.
@Mitch For sure. Science and "anthropological" techniques should guide us in this, especially with primates.
Since I'm not an animal researchers, I just want my inner lives to be understood correctly by my wife and kids :-). Thankfully I'm not a mere cat / dog, I can speak. What a blessing. Even when I do so, I may not be heard. But I can fight for my right to be heard correctly.
@Mitch Not to mention their alpha drive to be dominant too. Surely now they do those kind of sociological studies, applying what social scientists observe in humans to animals?
My dog had his favorites. When I'm not home, he is reportedly more docile to others than when I'm home, feeling that he has his protector with him.
@alphabet The beginning scene of Star Trek: First Contact with Cpt. Picard having a dream spoiler is one memorable scene that scares the s*** out of some first-time viewers.
@M.A.R. Have you watched Star Trek: First Contact? That's the movie that first taught me historiography by showing me how people tend to idolize "heroes" which in turn bias the writing of the history of an era: how they were much mistaken to their chagrin when they first encountered the real Zefram Cochrane. I feel the same way now about the Reformation. But yet, as in Star Trek, what we do remain critical and will be part of future history.
Word of the day: broligarch. "A politically influential younger male tycoon, particularly one involved in technology. Seemingly derived from tech bro."
@Cerberus Just wondering, since in Star Trek: First Contact the 24th century crew no longer knows what it means. We'll see whether that survives into our 24th century :-).
@Cerberus No, it's appropriate. Go and see it, but you would enjoy it even more after watching a few STNG and STVY episodes.
@MetaEd Yeah.... same here.... the transformation of Zefram Cochrane for one, and many others. At least 3 major characters had growth including Capt. Picard in the Capt. Ahab scene.
@Cerberus For a Trekkie the plot takes a backseat to provide the setting for the ideals of humanity seeping through every line in the dialog, motivating and fleshing out the characters. The technology details, military analogies, standard operating procedures, and the artifacts making up the backdrop are of course nice bonus, not to mention giving the etymologies of standard phrases in ST lore.
I would say this is the one movie approaching the grandeur of a drama like LOTR as humanity reviews its problems, spell out what heroes need to do, and tempt humans to want the future depicted there.
@Cerberus For myself, after being attracted by a few STNG episode reruns on TV, I started watching every STNG episode and every movie chronologically, and then STVOY and STDS9. I quit after 1-2 seasons of STENT. But that's enough for me to see lots of parallel between real humanity and ST vision of it.
@Cerberus Yeah, I'm too young for ST Original series, though I watched a few of them. So that's probably why I don't appreciate ST Enterprise that much (yet).
@Cerberus Production-wise it's of course very different, and Star Trek timeline wise very different as well. But I suspect there are a lot of future-references to STOS that I miss in STENT. Those future references in First Contact on the other hand, is to the STNG generation and I believe I catch all of them.
Many of the ST movies are not as inspiring as ST First Contact (1996), unfortunately. The same with the reboot movies (alternate timeline) that were made in 2009, 2013, and 2016, even though the production is a lot more advanced because of CGI.
New tag proposal for EL&U: comma-chameleonFor when you just can't make up your mind whether to put a comma in, take it out, or just leave it alone while you stew in your anxiety.
The only movie I almost cried at was Babe. Something about the big scene at the end.
I mean the duck and Xmas dinner and all was sorta funny?
Many people think of Titanic as a tear jerker, but gah it is so long get to the iceberg part already. I'm too bored to care about anybody enough to cry.
@Conrado those Sumerians and their obscure metaphors. I don't get it.