dust

A close friend of mine learned using only pinyin at first, and has done OK (well, he's settled down in China with a lovely wife and cushy job and speaks close to native level). It is, likely, more efficient to get to a decent speaking/listening level. Then again, once he figured he could already speak Chinese, later on he found it difficult to find the time and energy to learn the characters ("Ah, it's good enough for now") and connecting the dots was not as easy as it would've been if he'd just learned it all together. And I'd say it is helpful to be literate, especially if one plans on living in a place.

Not saying I have better information or experience. I have nearly no experience of such situations / claims. Just wondering. Couldn't it be that a 'dark spirit' or this 'dark energy' comes from within the person? Especially if drugs are involved.

I'm guessing it was a vaguely tongue-in-cheek reference to Harry Potter -- Defence Against the Dark Arts is a core wizarding class What if some sceptics are sceptics because they have better information, or more experience? You wouldn't listen?

Interesting. This comes at a time.. by no means the most difficult in my life, but a time when I am hoping to move forward but cannot see a path. I miss the 'good old days', miss where I was in years past. Just the other day, I did a little, very short reminder Tai Chi session -- my first practice since around 2004. It was relaxing, and a little difficult, and I enjoyed the movement. I started to remember once more that it was steady Tai Chi practice, weekly classes and almost daily solo practice for one year, that enhanced my fascination with China and led me onto a decade-long path of adventure... although the Taiji practice ended as abruptly as it had begun. Reading your comments, I'm encouraged even more to try and pick it up again. If it is only more relaxation and enjoyable movement that I get out of it, that's enough, but perhaps I'll find more. Thanks. oak: I don't think I can be a 'Tai Chi friend' at this point, but I hope you continue to do what you love, and that the year improves before it's out.

This talk makes me sick. Really, this is filth. Back up your claims. You are as bad as anyone else on here you accuse of having unfounded beliefs. When it comes down to it, you never back it up. I have continuously provided evidence, in every topically similar discussion, and I don't recall seeing any evidence to the contrary, or any evidence suggesting that I or others like me are "anti-capitalist" or that my apparent "anti-capitalism" is going to make us all die.

Perhaps, but this is nothing compared to the varied list of nasty things I listed above, and the extent of species extinction right now. Yes, we are single-handedly as a species responsible for the endangerment and extinction of various species that would not be threatened if we behaved responsibly. You cannot possibly argue with that. The evidence is overwhelming. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/22/11-extinct-animals_n_4078988.html 'We are presently losing dozens of species every day, according to the Center for Biological Diversity. ... "Unlike past mass extinctions, caused by events like asteroid strikes, volcanic eruptions and natural climate shifts, the current crisis is almost entirely caused by us -- humans," explains the Center for Biological Diversity. "In fact, 99 percent of currently threatened species are at risk from human activities, primarily those driving habitat loss, introduction of exotic species and global warming."' Just the first search result. Lots more. So much evidence. Let's say we agree that some ancients -- some -- did kill and burn without regard, and that their survival did somehow depend on it. Firstly, their populations were small relative to now, very small -- their impact was far less. There were literally billions fewer of them, billions fewer to hunt and poach, billions fewer to chop and burn, billions fewer to spread waste, etc; and they did not have the technology we have now, the efficient machines that mean we don't even need to think about what we're doing. Secondly, if their survival depended on it, then they had cause -- but ours does not. In fact, our survival not only does not depend on the things I've listed, but is threatened by them. You seem intent on ignoring this entirely, but I will continue to point it out: our greed for food, greed for objects, our refusal to examine our lifestyles, our carelessness, our obsession with growth, our obsession with meat, our over-reliance on new technology to fix what the old technology broke, our willful ignorance of it all, is what is going to be our downfall. Your obsession with capitalism, or this notion of anti-capitalism, is misleading. One can believe in free trade, a competitive market, without needing to believe that aggressive industrialism, gluttonous overconsumption, reveling in ignorance, and our general ignorance of it all, is the only way, and without insisting that all but humankind must become extinct because the way we currently do things and our freedom to continue being destructive is more important than health and harmony.

Ahh.. let's get this over with as quickly as possible, yes? I can't let such a debate go unanswered..but I don't want a long rape conversation either.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_China "Marital rape is not illegal in China. Same-sex sexual assault between males was made illegal in late 2015." "Luo Tsun-yin, a social psychologist at Shih Hsin University in Taiwan, asserts that fewer than one in 10 rape cases in China are reported. The United Nations's 2013 Multi-country Study on Men and Violence asked men in both rural and urban areas of China if they had ever coerced a female into having sex (including alcohol facilitated rape). 22.2% said yes. 9.3% had done so in the past year. 19.4% raped their partner. 55% of the men who had raped had done so more than once and 9% had raped four or more women. 86% cited sexual entitlement as their motive (the highest percentage in the study) and 57% answered that they raped out of boredom. 72.4% experienced no legal consequences." "Victims of rape in China often remain silent and do not report the crime because traditional culture holds that being raped is shameful and should be kept private." My opinion on China was informed by the experience of having lived in the country and observed with a relatively dispassionate eye. Yes, I have a great fondness for China, but I think that I am quite honest about its problems. The above info, as well as other info available, I think confirms my opinion to an extent. My opinion of the situation in the USA is less informed by experience. I believe the statistics are more reliable (though still not actually reliable) and I have some idea of the cultural tendencies of Americans, having had various American friends and judging that with respect to rape and rape law, the UK and USA are not dissimilar. In my opinion, sometimes informed opinion is more useful and reliable than statistics -- especially official stats. Though I do admit the need to actually show evidence of having a well-informed opinion.

I agree on our relative softness and dimwittedness, and that ancient humans were unconcerned about 'protecting' the environment, but not the rest. Ancient humans had neither a need to protect, nor any conception of what 'protecting the environment' is. They did not threaten their habitats, or global habitats, with destruction; they were not single-handedly gradually forcing other species into extinction; they were not making their own air more difficult to breath; they were not cutting down forests thousands of acres at a time; they were not pouring millions of gallons of poisonous waste into the oceans; etc. The only way we, the current strain of humankind, will allow our children or grandchildren to successfully raise their own children is if we stop doing all that nasty shit. Our ancient, quick-witted ancestors would have no problems: they'd see what needed to be done and get on with it.

Well, I don't know that this is the place for that discussion anyway. I told MTL that America isn't all that great, and he said that if movies are to be believed China is full of rapists (because he supposedly thinks I'm Chinese?), and you posted figures saying maybe not, and I said........blah blah. A little off topic. Anyway I don't think another discussion on the 'finer points' of rape is what this website needs... Suffice to say that in my opinion if there was a way to produce an accurate list of such statistics, the USA would have lower numbers than China, but still much higher than many places. And in my opinion, all we can produce is opinion; the statistics are just that untrustworthy.

I haven't looked at the subsequent posts (I see mindtooloud has had a go at you... honestly still can't tell if he's trolling or just..special?) so I don't know what else has been said on this but I would point out that rape stats are rarely trustworthy. In some nations (Northern Europe, for example) rape is more broadly defined and far more likely to be reported. In others, rape is only rape if a total stranger forcibly has sex with a woman, and sexual assault of any kind is far less likely to be reported. Rape is almost certainly at least as common in China as it is in the USA, but far less likely to be reported or treated as rape.

Depends on what time scale you're talking about...? In the end, no. Long-term, definitely no. My question is, why does it haunt you? Investing great emotion in the long-term survival of your species seems a waste of energy. It's primal, but also useless. Logically, (1) it will happen sooner or later, you can do little to nothing about that, (2) you will likely be long dead when humanity does get squashed out, and (3) what's so special about humankind? Have you considered whether or not we 'deserve' to survive? edit: Look, (Karl in particular), I'm not saying we deserve to all die, simply asking if he's considered why in particular we should survive...?

Hehe!

Food: Meridian peanut butter. No added sugar or salt, no palm oil. Delicious, healthful, harmless. Amazing. Websites: deviantART, YouTube, Netflix/Amazon/other video sites. I use all these daily. Look at a lot of art, listen to a lot of music, watch a lot of TV. (Watching 'Luke Cage' right now and it is terrific. Also check out 'Mr Robot'!) Other than that... nothing in particular. No favourite brands or gadgets. Nothing is indispensable. I very much like owning a computer, to store files, access the internet, watch TV shows, and dabble in art, but the particular brand of computer is irrelevant. Anything modern.

I don't want to 'rain on' what is a nice idea, but I felt that something was missing: If you need consciousness, you'll be afraid of the mind's inevitable decline. Everything you listed is true, but so -- I think -- is this. If we need anything, we'll be afraid to lose it. And of course we need consciousness/mind in order to be happy, as happiness is a process of the consciousness/mind. And the end of consciousness is death.

I'm curious that it elicited such an extreme response. I still have some difficulty deciphering her language, but the video itself, the movement.. well, I'd agree that the ability to move and manipulate the spine is more fundamental than we modern humans realize. The quotes are from (Mair's translation of) the DDJ! (I wasn't responding to anything about the spinal wave video.) You can be you and modify, if you allow that part of being you is modifying when you feel the need to.

The rigid person is a disciple of death; the soft, supple, and delicate are lovers of life. An army that is inflexible will not conquer; a tree that is inflexible will snap. The unyielding and mighty shall be brought low; the soft, supple, and delicate will be set above. (76) Nothing under heaven is softer or weaker than water, and yet nothing is better for attacking what is hard and strong. (78) On another note, What are your most / least flexible portions? Do you find that different muscles / muscle groups require different treatment / stretching routines? Do you find that basic qigong and/or Taiji alone are sufficient for maintaining your suppleness?

Interesting.

Hehe. Sounds like 'Taoists' are just as susceptible as anyone else to congruence bias and cognitive inertia. (clever phrases! -- I looked them up on Wiki... I mean: the inability/unwillingness to consider alternative hypotheses or revise already-formed beliefs, regardless of contradictory evidence.)

mindtooloud, I'd just like to mention that the USA doesn't really come top of any lists concerning anything important. 10th for GDP (PPP); 22nd on the Freedom Index; 31st for life expectancy; 15th on the 'World Happiness Report'; etc The wonderful USA is not the happiest, healthiest, richest, or most free.

Even just one proves your statement false, though (that "every Middle Eastern country" votes hardline Islamist). I will not argue that majority Muslim nations and/or Middle Eastern nations in general are not more likely than others to sit low on the ladders of freedom, equality, peace, and justice. To recycle a graph: (from the Gender Gap Report) -- we can see fairly clearly the pattern of majority-Muslim nations lagging way behind in relation to majority-Christian nations. But we can also see (if you look up the original charts) that majority-Buddhist nations also sit near the bottom of the table, as do a number of Christian places. It's not just about religion; it's also not just about geography. It's all a result of so many factors that we would be foolish to blame it on any one. I've struggled for years with a hatred of religion, contempt for religious people, and my tendency to quick judgement vs. my desire to treat every individual as an individual, to judge based on experience and knowledge of a person or group (and not unfounded prejudices), and my desire for a peaceful life. I suspect the struggle will continue for a while yet. But however much I struggle with it, I can always see that humanity is fundamentally the same across the board. The scum in this country is just as bad as the scum in another; it is circumstance that differs. To speak of hardline Islamists invading and breeding reeks of racism. It is not inherently racist, I know, to say that Muslims are the problem (as Islam is only a religion, not a 'race'), but when you start to generalise not just whole nations but a whole section of the world, a section in which many beautiful people live (and die, horribly), you are certainly not being egalitarian.

Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey prove you wrong to begin.

Skimming through, I haven't been able to tell if you're joking or not. Either way, great comment. "Dey took our jerbs! Dey starved our fish!"

Maybe not exactly what you're looking for, but... well.. mobility, strength, and stability are an important first step in any area, but especially when it comes to the spine. I think most of us are way backwards in this area these days. As Taomeow points out, we're all looking forwards -- and, likely, slouching over a desk too. So... this video has some of the things I've been doing recently to try and mobilize (no idea who the guy is, just seemed like a good summary of movements):

I do have to agree that, though this test is less simplistic and silly than most I've seen/done, it covers one of the most complex and broad topics that it is possible to make such a test for, so it still fails to adequately encapsulate the nature of the whole thing. Just having Left---Right + Authoritarian---Libertarian is far too simple. There are at least 3 layers...they could be demonstrated in a 3D model, but not 2D 'compass' graph like the one on the test. And left-right is certainly not descriptive enough; to some it conjures politics, to some economics, to some other things. These things all need to be separated. There are: Economics: Free market----Controlled market Governance / Political process: Democratic----Undemocratic (e.g. voting vs. dictator) Liberal----Authoritarian (i.e. let people do what they will vs. the government [be it democratically elected or not] forces people to do things) Nationalist----Globalist Society: Equality----Inequality (i.e. sex, colour, religion, etc) etc In theory, a society could be any combination of these (and more), though obviously some fit together better than others. capitalist and undemocratic and authoritarian with basic social sex/ethnic equality (China) (though no true freedom of religion) capitalist and undemocratic and authoritarian with basic ethnic/gender/religion inequality (Saudi) communist and undemocratic and authoritarian with basic sex equality (China 40 years ago) capitalist and democratic and liberal with basic social equality (in theory: UK, USA, etc) capitalist and democratic and authoritarian with general inequality (Russia..?) communist and democratic and liberal? etc Nazi Germany was a communist economy, essentially democratically elected government turned dictatorship, with fundamental social inequality -- doesn't seem like this should be possible (communism + fundamental inequality arising from democracy), but there we are. I suppose I stand behind a capitalist, democratic, liberal, equal society in which the government does nonetheless take some measures to ensure that business is kept in check. Or anarchy. As has been said, a test like this can't account for anarchy because it doesn't fall within the framework -- the whole point is that the framework of government and politics is unnecessary. A free market, but 'no government' means no concept of democratic/undemocratic or liberal/authoritarian.

There are relatively few majority-Buddhist countries, but those few aren't actually known for their peacefulness or equality or prosperity. Places like Bhutan, Myanmar, and Cambodia are relatively recent democracies with debatable legitimacy and poor human rights records; Sri Lanka was hit by civil war until fairly recently; most majority-Buddhist nations are ranked low on the Gender Gap Report; and in many, environmental responsibility is overshadowed by other concerns (Cambodia's environment is getting totally fucked). My point being, just because a place is nominally 'Buddhist' doesn't mean the government or the masses behave in a respectably Buddhist way. The USA is supposedly majority-Christian, but they love to kill shit. For example.