dust

Hehe. I don't know why, but I tried it. Came up with 'pubes'.

Five hundred thousand. A few hundred thousand. Half a million. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/16/revealed-none-of-britain-tech-unicorns-openly-support-brexit 'The absence of any public support for Brexit reflects the wider attitude of Britain’s technology sector. In March, a survey of members of the industry body Tech London Advocates revealed that 87% were against Brexit, with just 3% prepared to support leaving the EU. "... 60% of all European corporates of size now have their headquarters in London. That’s a great position and that’s why we’ve got in my view the best city in the world."'

When you say "hard money", you do realize you're talking about a few hundred thousand? Hardly devastating. You also realize that the IMF and World Bank and Bank of England are in favour of Britain in the EU? Is it a worldwide conspiracy, or is it simply that it makes more sense?

No! Not 15% and 23%, 15 people and 23 people. Out of 1081 people! That's 3.5% altogether. And yes, even that is still scary. But I bet, if we did a survey of even non-religious British people, at least 3% would "sympathize" with violence against Muslims. It's not a one-way thing. Surveys do show that the majority of non-Muslim Brits perceive Muslims as terrorists (and while I think we can agree that some are, we can also agree that most are not -- otherwise we'd have been blown to death already..). Like Texas? (I get your point, but find it slightly ironic that you mention the US constitution and then suggest not wanting to be part of a federal union -- the reason the USA grew to such an extent of power is precisely because it banded together, no?) Yeah, Britain would do fine on its own. And fine in the EU. We're all going to be pretty fine either way, I think.

Not you too... Islamic scripture absolutely encourages violence, sexism, oppression, etc, just as the other Abrahamic religions do. And in the religious world, there seems to be a greater ratio of fundamentalist Muslims than fundamentalist Christians. But the majority of Muslims in the UK do not support violent jihad or terrorism, and indeed are against it. People like to skew the numbers. An article says that "100,000 British Muslims sympathize with suicide bombers", neglecting to mention that this is less than 3% of the British Muslims population at the time and that this does not mean that all these people think suicide bombing is a good thing. If you look at the survey, out of 1081 people, Views on caliphate: 30 "Very strongly" support, 30 "Fairly strongly" Sympathetic to extremism: 15 "Very strongly" sympathetic, 23 "Fairly strongly" The majority in each case is "Very strongly" against stoning; condemn terrorist actions; condemn the caliphate; against violence; against extremism. There is a more even weight on the question of homosexuality, but if you look at Muslims vs Christians vs non-religious people in the UK: 52% of Muslims are against, around 37-47% of Christians are against, and around 20% non-religious are against. All of those numbers are too high in my opinion, but the Christians aren't actually much better than the Muslims. I'm not defending Islam -- all religions should be flushed, as far as I'm concerned. I am defending simple fucking honesty. There's a problem, sure, but it's not as bad as some of you seem to want it to be.

Always make sure you have a stock of good clean socks. Especially in the winter. In exploring Daoist philosophy, we probably learn this at some point, but it's good to know it beforehand as there's a lot of Daoist philosophy to take in, and sock supply isn't specifically mentioned in most of the Daoist texts. In exploring Daoist philosophy I think we also pick up one of two ideas: either that maintaining a supple and strong body and healthy breath and good flow of energy* is a worthwhile pursuit, or that it is better to simply let oneself be, without "over-managing" the muscles and breath. In the first case, qigong and other practices (stretching, yoga, etc) might be seen as worthwhile; in the second case, not so much. I tend to hold to the idea that spiritual cultivation and physical cultivation go hand in hand; general contentment is much easier with good health, a happy body, good energy. If qigong helps in this regard, do it. If not, don't. *whether you view 'energy' in terms of modern Western or ancient Eastern biology I don't think it matters -- we all depend on our energy

Going back to the whole refusal of service thing: One innkeeper I know really doesn't enjoy having Chinese or other Asian guests. She says they're messier, more demanding, more likely to check out late, etc -- and from my experience of Chinese people, I absolutely understand where she's coming from. Shouldn't she have the right to reject people on the basis of culture, knowing how much more likely certain cultures are to make a mess, make demands, treat the help like second-class citizens? Of course, if people started putting signs up saying "No Chinese" it would be a short space before "No Muslims", "No blacks", etc, and parts of society would eventually slide back into segregation, riots would ensue..... but I can't help but think that a business owner should have some kind of say over who she has dealings with..?

By a minority; the majority of people are simply trying to be accepting and non-judgemental of people, to accept non-binary expression along with the normal male/female paradigm. You do love to exaggerate eh? I reject a large portion of the culture in which I was raised -- because it's fucking stupid. I am free precisely because I'm not bound by the shackles of traditional British values. I have my own 'culture', my own way of life, and rather than being based on wholly unexamined beliefs, as most cultures are (indeed the definition of 'culture' is generally based on being born into a way of life, which necessarily means accepting things without thinking about them), many (though I realize, not all) of my beliefs and a large part of my way of life are rooted in the exploration and experience of other cultures, philosophies I was not exposed to as a child, etc.

I only take my laptop/notebook on journeys with long stays. If travelling around, using planes trains and automobiles, walking a lot, and staying in places where I'm not entirely sure of security in advance (small hotels, hostels, tents, etc), having any expensive or electronic equipment that isn't entirely necessary can become quite a hassle. It can be useful, but in my opinion not enough to be worth it. I'm not sure you need a computer if you're planning on getting as much experience as possible of the people and places you visit. Plan a general route beforehand, figure out transport and accommodation, figure out when and where you'll have access to the internet in case you need it, and then forget about needing it because you'll be having far too much fun to think about Skyping family or checking Facebook or coming on TDB! My other advice: don't forget insect repellent. You can obviously get it while you're there, but make sure you have it ASAP.

I hate poker. Going to watch some TV. Let me know when it's over.

The main problem the NHS faces, in my opinion, is an increasingly unhealthy and obnoxious population -- British and otherwise -- who refuse to do anything but drink, eat garbage, and fight and fuck like demented goats. I've a family member in an NHS hospital at the moment and every time I go in there, I'm awe-struck by the preponderance of fat, gormless, bizarrely-dressed people waddling around, smoking right outside the doors, stuffing their faces with chips and chocolate bars...

I don't know about the rest of you but I am from a wealthy, white upper-middle class family and went to two schools full of wealthy, white upper-middle- and upper class families, and I can tell you that nepotism and privilege are very much alive and well in this country, and that it would not hurt if a large portion of the upper-middle and upper classes were "brought down several rungs" -- as it would not hurt in almost every nation on Earth if the same were to happen to their upper classes. But that's not where I'm coming from; the end of the upper classes is certainly not something I'm hoping or praying for. I don't give the class system much thought these days. And I don't actually think it's relevant here. You talk of "free stuff" as if the major problem in this country is scroungers and lazy immigrants, and then somehow turn the paragraph into an indictment of anti-middle class 'nihilists'... To get back to the "free stuff" bit, then: The majority expenditure of the DWP is state pensions, followed by housing benefits and then disability allowance, etc. And some figures on benefits spending: • As of February 2015, of the 5.1 million working-age claimants of DWP benefits, 7.2% (371,220) were non-UK nationals when they first registered for a NINo (National Insurance No.) • Within this group, 113,960 claimants (2.2% of the total client group) were EU nationals when they first registered for a NINo, and 257,260 claimants (5% of the total) were non-EU nationals • 6% of working age non-UK nationals at point of NINo registration were claiming a DWP working age benefit in February 2015, compared to 14% of UK nationals So, more clearly: 7% of benefits claimants were non-UK nationals 6% of non-UK nationals (at point of NINo reg) were claiming a benefit of some description 6% is probably too much by anyone's standard, but it's not exactly strong evidence that all the immigrants are coming for "free stuff".

Karl, you repeatedly bring up these failed bureaucrats, the EU being a "club for big crony corporates", etc... What makes you think it would be any different on exit? Greed, corruption, and shitty politicians are a worldwide problem, not limited to Europe...

Ignore my comment about 'world power' -- see my later post.

Hi Apech. To be honest, though I don't particularly enjoy the man, I'm with Richard Dawkins on this one: “It is an outrage that people as ignorant as me are being asked to vote. This is a complicated matter of economics, politics, history, and we live in a representative democracy not a plebiscite democracy. You could make a case for having plebiscites on certain issues – I could imagine somebody arguing for one on fox hunting, for example – but not on something as involved as the European Union. This should be a matter for parliament.” However, as it's already happening and there's not much we can do about that, I suppose I will have to vote, and I would like to try and understand at least more than the average -- which is difficult, because nobody seems to have any actual effing idea what the future of the EU is or what would happen if we left. So... a couple of points Karl brought up interest me. That means on the 23rd we could well find ourselves in the EU but severely marginalised, unless we accept full Schengen and the adopt the Euro. Do we want to adopt the euro? It would seem to be an eventual inevitability of being part of an ever-closer EU. And what of trade deals? The argument is that EU has made the City of London less competitive through overregulation, and negotiates more protectionist and less effective trade deals on behalf of the UK. The WTO has basic rules for international trade by which both the EU and UK are obliged to abide; this would seem to limit the supposed likelihood of 1 in 10 British jobs being threatened by leaving..? ... despite 40 years of successive UK government promising to 'influence' Brussels, we have lost 78 out of 78 votes on things that we disagreed with. Even with the threat of leaving Cameron could change nothing significantly and managed to give away the Veto which might have a leat slowed things down. Despite what I said before, isn't it true that the UK is a major power and economy, and that the EU does little to enhance this? We have membership of the G20 and G8 Nations, a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, and seats on the International Monetary Fund Board of Governors and World Trade Organisation..

Thanks, Karl. I don't know if it is the precise stunningly cogent argument I was looking for, but it's pretty good. I'm sleepy so am not going to make a very good effort here. Will just cover a couple of things for now. I don't know about the status quo. Change is fine with me. What's wrong with a federation? The UK is no longer a major world power. Not better to be a part of something 'greater' rather than standing alone in the Atlantic? Even if it gave way to mass immigration (unlikely -- we could still enact border controls) and loss of law-making power (not entirely, though) wouldn't it be the better option in a very long-term view of things? You mean we can't control European immigration now, or wouldn't be able to in the future? Do we not have control over immigration right now?

I was hoping I wouldn't have to. Lazy? Perhaps. But I don't regret trying... I've heard very few cogent arguments at all, though absolutely none from Brexit supporters. I'll show you how I see it. A Brexit website, with a list of reasons to leave, and a Remain website, with a list of reasons to stay. 10 Reasons to Leave 1. Freedom to make stronger trade deals with other nations. 2. Freedom to spend UK resources presently through EU membership in the UK to the advantage of our citizens. 3. Freedom to control our national borders. 4. Freedom to restore Britain’s special legal system. 5. Freedom to deregulate the EU’s costly mass of laws. 6. Freedom to make major savings for British consumers. 7. Freedom to improve the British economy and generate more jobs. 8. Freedom to regenerate Britain’s fisheries. 9. Freedom to save the NHS from EU threats to undermine it by harmonising healthcare across the EU, and to reduce welfare payments to non-UK EU citizens. 10. Freedom to restore British customs and traditions. 12 Reasons to Stay 1. Jobs - Around 3.5 million British jobs are directly linked to British membership of the European Union’s single market – 1 in 10 British jobs. 2. Exports & investment - The EU buys over 50 per cent of UK exports (54 per cent of goods, 40 per cent of services). Over 300,000 British companies and 74 per cent of British exporters operate in other EU markets. American and Asian EU firms build factories in Britain because it is in the single market. 3. Trade - The EU negotiates trade agreements with the rest of the world. Outside the EU Britain would have to renegotiate trade deals alone. While the EU is the world’s largest market, a UK outside the EU would not be a high priority for other counties to negotiate a trade deal. 4. Consumer clout - British families enjoy lower mobile phone roaming charges, lower credit card fees, cheaper flights and proper compensation when flights are delayed or cancelled. These sorts of benefits could not be achieved by Britain alone. 5. Clean environment - Through commonly agreed EU standards, national Governments have achieved improvements to the quality of air, rivers and beaches. Good for Britain and good for Britons holidaying or living abroad! 6. Power to curb the multinationals - The EU has taken on multinational giants like Microsoft, Samsung and Toshiba for unfair competition. The UK would not be able to do this alone. 7. Freedom to work and study abroad – and easy travel - 1.4 million British people live abroad in the EU. More than 14,500 UK students took part in the European Union’s Erasmus student exchange scheme in 2012-13. Driving licences issued in the UK are valid throughout the EU. 8. Peace and democracy - The EU has helped secure peace among previously warring western European nations. It helped to consolidate democracy in Spain, Portugal, Greece and former Soviet bloc countries and helped preserve peace in the Balkans since the end of the Balkans War. With the UN it now plays a leading role in conflict prevention, peacekeeping and democracy building. 9. Equal pay and non-discrimination - Equal pay for men and women is enshrined in EU law, as are bans on discrimination by age, race or sexual orientation. This benefits Britain and British people who live in other EU countries. 10. Influence in the world - As 28 democracies, and as the world’s biggest market, we are strong when we work together. Britain is represented in many international organisations in joint EU delegations – giving Britain more influence than it would have alone. The EU has played a major role in climate, world trade and development. 11. Cutting red tape - Common rules for the common market make it unnecessary to have 28 sets of national regulations. 12. Fighting crime - The European Arrest Warrant replaced long extradition procedures and enables the UK to extradite criminals wanted in other EU countries, and bring to justice criminals wanted in the UK who are hiding in other EU countries. Eurojust helps UK authorities work with other EU countries’ to tackle international organised crime such as drug smuggling, people trafficking and money laundering. Well, yes. The Leave arguments are vague and unsupported by any kinds of numbers. The Stay arguments are concrete and explicit. And even if the Leave arguments were descriptive and well-supported, the individual points would not interest me as much as the Stay ones. I will respond to the Leave arguments very briefly. 1. Freedom to make stronger trade deals with other nations. -- answered in (3) from Stay 2. Freedom to spend UK resources presently through EU membership in the UK to the advantage of our citizens. -- at the cost of not being in the EU, though... 3. Freedom to control our national borders. -- in terms of Europeans. We have complete freedom when it comes to non-EU nationals, which is what most are worried about. But I'm not worried either way, as you know. 4. Freedom to restore Britain’s special legal system. -- what's wrong with the way it currently works? 5. Freedom to deregulate the EU’s costly mass of laws. -- vague. What? 6. Freedom to make major savings for British consumers. -- like...? 7. Freedom to improve the British economy and generate more jobs. -- haha! 8. Freedom to regenerate Britain’s fisheries. -- perhaps, though I don't really believe that the UK would have been any more competent than the EU in this regard in the last few decades.. 9. Freedom to save the NHS from EU threats to undermine it by harmonising healthcare across the EU, and to reduce welfare payments to non-UK EU citizens. -- I'm not entirely sure what they mean by "harmonising" but I think "save" is probably a bit strong. We can't save the NHS from ourselves. And we already spend less on welfare to EU migrants than France, Germany, Denmark, etc. 10. Freedom to restore British customs and traditions. -- haha. Every point starts with "Freedom". They really want me to believe that we're not free, don't they? I feel free. And I feel freer as a part of the EU than I would without it.

So, I haven't followed this thread at all, I don't think. What are the predominating opinions here? Stay or go? Why? https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/ Looks tighter than I would like. I am voting to stay -- unless someone shows me a stunningly cogent argument why we should not.

The Dharma Bums is sitting by my bed, yet to be read. A friend recommended it when I said On the Road is one of my favourite books. I first read On the Road when I was 15-16. It's not a complete exaggeration to say that it changed my life. Or, to put it another way, I believe my life would be quite different now if I had not read it. I can't say how close it is to The Dharma Bums, but it is the great Kerouac, and it is brilliant.

Are there specific objects..? Or, perhaps I should ask -- to be less controversial -- "What if we talk about space without reference to specific objects?" Can't we do that? Yes, I like the Buddhist definitions too. I only wanted to leave others to speak on that, as I wasn't sure I'd do it justice.

But without it, my definition would have said "A measure of distance (etc) in which there is no object (etc)." But in our normal use of the term, we cannot claim that there is no thing, only that we do not perceive or think of it... Ehm.. well... perhaps replace 'measure' with 'perception'?

I will have a go at my own definition. space, noun: A measure of distance, volume, or time, in or during which there is perceived to exist or occur no object, matter, or event. I think 'perceived' is key, along with inclusion of at least these 3 measurements (distance, volume, time). We cannot say that space is something that is nothing, but we can say that it is what we perceive as no-thing. We refer to a perceived absence (though of course in the 'space' between 2 cars there is a lot of 'stuff', the 'space' in which I live is filled with things, and in the 'space' between meals I do a lot of things).

I don't know if this has been brought up yet, but in my experience Google does a good job of giving definitions. noun 1. a continuous area or expanse which is free, available, or unoccupied 2. the dimensions of height, depth, and width within which all things exist and move 3. an interval of time 5. the freedom to live, think, and develop in a way that suits one verb 1. position (two or more items) at a distance from one another 2. be or become euphoric or unaware of one's surroundings, especially from taking drugs It is clearly related to distance and emptiness/vacancy, and in modern English, "to have space" even extends as far as describing the state of being able to live without interference. "I need some space," said I, "to space my things out in my own little space and space out for a short space of time." Thanks Karl for getting me thinking on that -- it is actually a wonderful word..

Acrophobia being 'extreme or irrational fear of heights' Vertigo being 'a sensation of whirling and loss of balance, associated particularly with looking down from a great height, or caused by disease affecting the inner ear or the vestibular nerve' (putting this in 'Healthy Bums' because in my case it is related to exercise, and potentially related to diet and certain treatments..) I've always feared heights, usually with the dizzy unbalanced sensation described above -- on a bridge, a tall building, a cliff edge, a ladder, etc, but also on much smaller heights, sometimes even something as low as my knees (e.g. a chair, if I feel like I might fall off). So... How can I overcome this nonsense? It's been a nuisance for a long time, keeping me from doing and enjoying certain things in life, including looking out of my own window in some apartments I've lived in, and it's currently keeping me from expanding my training (into bouldering, parkour, etc). For the first time I've decided to try and put some genuine effort into overcoming it. Yesterday I climbed up onto a tree stump, about chest height, and stood up. Almost instantly I became very dizzy and a little nauseated, and had to concentrate very hard just to lower myself to a sitting position. I think I was lucky not to topple off. Just thinking about it now is making me feel slightly sick. Does anyone have experience with all this? What about incremental exposure to heights? If I stay with it every day for, say, a year, will it eventually 'cure' the vertigo? Can one re-calibrate the brain like so? Might acupuncture or other treatments help? A type of qigong or other practice?

It is said that 'dao' cannot be known; no such thing is said about practice/religion/philosophy concerning 'dao', is it?