Stosh

When reading it , I thought the two terms were swapped. Do you agree that the warden is hoping for the blessings of whom he calls a 'Sage', but is really expecting that the Sage will be he whom would be more accurately called the ' Superior man' type guy. Whereas Yao, is the actual sage of Cz , and so, is refuted by the warden as "just being ' a Superior ,,but regular guy ? So this is a 'comedy of errors' the names are flipped by the Warden as are his opinions.? Have your coffee .. .. or vice versa, where it is the border warden who Is the sage , its hard to tell who made the long 'speech' But perhaps it doesnt matter. ( like a palindrome)

Whats another?

Logical.

I didn't spot the irony , but I think its typical of the typical story structure to reinforce the point being made.. and so ,agree completely. Cz didn't ever say Conf was stupid, and I think he in fact respected the smarts,, though in some ways I think, he felt it fell short of what could be , maybe that's the big issue between them,n why Cz uses Conf as his foil. In fact.. I will take your point one step more and point out that the guy is a warden at border, of the summit ,, one step shy , and is looking for the blessings of the sage , but doesn't recognize him right in his face , because he thinks he has the correct answers already.

This passage appears to be delineating the conceptual difference between 'sages. ' Worldly smarts , of Conf, ,vs wisdom that Cz would condone.

Oh its a workable scheme, works like a charm. However its not for everyone

I think I like Diana Krall's version best Bubles version is a little too much a mix of styles that are blended but still rather distinct , like the James bond theme. ( and now you say you love me portion sounds like one of those , which one Im trying to find out.. ) and thats odd because I think Bassey did this song , as well as some of the bond stuff right ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PI_SverY0w

good luck , but if you lose ten pounds in month one, youre gonna still be on the hook for five pounds month 2 right ?

Ok, I can live with that exception, as long as the point is to help others.

Fine, but what does that mean?

Well , they certainly have every right to have false senses of imaginary persistence through time.

Ill agree that you are not just the sum of your parts , but the son is also not identical to the father since you weren't produced by fission or budding. Epigenetics are a fair consideration , but those influences are also not constant in a genetic lineage to the point where you can say ...all members of this line will be fat or skinny based on them. These are 'historic ' influences but this would make our kids then be a 'product of their times' more so, than 'inheritors of that which made us , us," For instance, long life spans may be linked to nutritional circumstances of our ancestors and alternate with generations, .. but then would the kid be more like his dad , or be more like his grandfather? .. there are such effects , yes , but they are environmental or chance. Vitamin deficiencies can be due to the lack of them in the diet , but they can also be due to need for extra , which may not be abnormal requirement somewhere else. After several generations , the coding for us is decentralized , all our molecules have been replaced , all our memories gone , the only thing left is the ripple effect we had on the world and on society. this is getting complicated to explain.

No you're not any closer to mortality, Ill rephrase,,,, every gene that codes for you ,, is also coded in other people ,, unless you're some kind of mutant. If you had a kid, at most , half of your genes would be passed on, in that individual ,and the other half still , by the breeding public. Your genes don't have individuality, they're just coding. Your Y chromosome coding is the same as your dad and brothers coding,,. (If you were a mutant, that could be either a good thing or a bad thing , If its good , it should be perpetuated , and if its a bad one , it should be minimized. Which may or may not be rare , but only occasionally is of significance ) That which is you, but not coding or body, such as your experiences and concerns, can still be passed on without the genetic vessel of a kid. And even if you did have a kid there's no reason to expect that those things are going to be passed on. ( like how you built a birdhouse ,enjoy macaroni ,or do good deeds)

I wasn't presenting the sexual orientation of Gays as being ordinary , but rather that , functionally speaking , one doesn't have to produce young to advance the welfare of their genetic code. Human attitudes vary bigly from the motivations of animals , my comment is anti darwinesque- invalidation that personal procreation is needed for a being to be fit. A simple example might be wolves ,where not all breed, yet the common genetic pool is still promoted, or bonobos, where there's a social bonding aspect to sex, which advantages the group. Even for a breeding human , only half of ones code gets handed down to a child , and so ones brother is just as good a genetic substitute parent to the next gen ,as ones-self, so not all males need to compete for the ladies. Those males are still valuable though, as they can still help kick the ass of the unrelated neighbors out of the tree, as are, the intimate relations that may come about amongst women, as an extension of heightened social integration. Homosexuality happens in patriarchal societies just as much , ( I'm told) , so I don't believe the empowerment of women makes the men gay. Nuf said on my part , you can have the last word.

Think in terms of the 'win win" scenario. But the consideration of ones self second is still valid in The relationship between student and teacher Husband and wife producer and consumer king and subjects etc Without trying to punch holes in it , you will see that the idea works. Generally, If X puts himself first , then everyone else has to see to themselves first If X puts himself second then folks can work for each others benefit easily Its not perfect in all scenarios , especially because many folks are screwed up , but when I have put my students first , there was common interest , accord and respect. We had fun. If I made the whole thing about me , and promoting my wonderfulness, I doubt it would have been anything like that, or if the students were just entirely wrapped up in trying to do whatever they thought etc.

I thought it was there... ? now I dont see it either. ??? Well, there are some things which seem invalidating . I had an odd dream about an oval coin with an elk head on it which this person palmed and wouldnt return. Inexplicable it was.

Theres plenty of evidence even in the animal kingdom that not all members are geared to serve the species community by being the breeders , and considering that siblings share genetic code , there is no requirement to do that job in promoting ones kin.

Its fine and interesting, I just resented the implication that Luke and others are all malfunctioning. . Hes keeping his cool in the face of considerable opposition. Whats he supposed to say ? Im sorry about the magnetic field ?

Ridiculous BS n that stuff is hurtful and ignorant. Even if it was true there would be nothing other to do than join em. Homosexuality was as present in Ancient Europe as it is now , the statistics hold true across cultures and time. Whatever the reasons may be , its not due to solar flares magnetic variation or space aliens.

There is always some kind of attempt to prevail, there is also , rarely, hostility.... though its not the norm , so its best not to conflate the two. Imo

Its not good enough IMO to be white , and so you get some kind of pass , to resurrect that which you feel has been wrong. It's not a different thing. Its the same thing, and if minority groups , of which white men are also , ( do the math) , want these issues to go bye bye, then the issues have to be dropped , not preserved with reverse role positions. The thing that moves ahead the cause of any of these groups, is not the preservation of the group, but the dissolution of them, not teamed up enmity , but a desire to be principled and just. You undermine that, and you undermine the resolution, of that which you find repugnant. *( I presume)

Luke, its the definition of hypocritical, whether you say it or not. Leave your eyebrows down. Someone has instilled the idea in you that its fine to be -ist against white men , which it isn't, you lose the moral high ground if you're just as bad.

Fine fine ... just put the gun down