not values tho
HAPPYsamurai
baby steps ...
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/files/2007/11/2007fall-speakers_10-29_jensen.pdf
"One only need read the newspaper for five days in a row to be clear
that in every facet of life we are losing the war on the battlefield
of integrity
Everyone espouses integrity but few live it"
- i see this an an appeal to peoples values
but then?
"We use the word in this work according to Definitions 1 and 2. We do
not use it to refer to a moral or ethical code or to denote right vs.
wrong, or good vs. bad The way we use integrity is defined without
reference to values"
so if it's not the LACK OF VALUES we are reading about in the paper --
what is this mysterious "non-values-lack of integrity" we read
about....
"The state or condition of being whole, complete, unbroken,
unimpaired, sound, perfect condition"
right I was just reading about that in the paper...
errrr - how can a "person" or "company" be considered "WHOLE" if they
don't have "values"
if ENRON had values - wouldn't it have made their actions have more
integrity?
or is it WHAT these values are
are they WHOLESOME enough
are they MORALLY sound
are they FINANCIALLY sound
"And as workability declines the opportunity for performance declines
(e.g., corporate value, but however you wish to define performance)
"
oh don't we read about this EVERY DAY in the paper
how we are losing the battle on "workability"
GET REAL
the human race is "producing" more than it ever has in any other time
in history....
if "the integitrity of PRODUCTION systems" is really failing - so
what... we have an abundance of "stuff"
what concerns a lot of people is the LACK of values ....
"Why is out-of-integrity behavior so universally observed? "
err because we live in a time with a low emphasis on human VALUES
therefore people don't GIVE A SHIT
"Is a matter of that person's word, nothing more, nothing less in
this positive model of integrity "
yes well people don't VALUE - honoring their word
but when Clinton - did not have sex with that woman - and enron sunk
their workers pension funds
it's not just about honoring your word - it's about honoring the
PEOPLE involved
just don't mention values
"Keeping Your Word
You keep your word by: doing what you said you would do and on time
doing what you know to do and doing it the way it was meant to be
done, and on time, unless you have said you would not do it doing what
others would expect you to do even if you have never said you would
do it, and doing it on time, unless you have said you would not do
it and you have made your expectations of others clear to them by
making explicit requests being willing to be held accountable (when
you assert something) that others would accept your evidence on the
issue as valid"
well these are basic steps...
who can say that learning to honor your word is a bad thing
it certainly provides an EXPERIENTIAL relationship with ones own INNER
workings
shall i honor this - shall i not honor this
should I give my word here - should I not give my word here
will this guy honor his word to me or not
i look forward to living in a world where people honor their word
thanks werner
but I note the charter of ethics for LM is not available so we may
clearly observe whether it is HONORed or not
Tex
Your confusion is undersatandable, given that English is your second
language.
"HAPPYsamurai" <profst...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7f0dab5b-e6b2-4826...@b40g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
HAPPYsamurai
> LOL!!!
> Your confusion is undersatandable, given that English is your second
> language.
>
>
hey - I'm not the one saying values has nothing to do with integrity
I think you'll find guys like Covey say the opposite
we also say a bout is "sound" or a person is sound because we can
trust them
like trusting a boat not to sink
like trusting a friend
like trusting someone who honors their "values" as much as they honor
their word
http://develop-net.com/articles/mar1998.html
Covey believes that "a life of integrity is the most fundamental
source of personal worth." He defines integrity "as the value we place
on ourselves." He tells us that, "As we clearly identify our values
and proactively organize and execute around those values on a daily
basis, we develop self-awareness and independent will by making and
keeping meaningful promises and commitments . . . This requires an
integrated character, a oneness, primarily with self but also with
life."
Jung's integration theme
Tex
> On 17 Dec, 09:59, "Tex" <ritter_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> LOL!!!
>> Your confusion is undersatandable, given that English is your second
>> language.
>>
>> "HAPPYsamurai" <profstock...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>
>
>
> hey - I'm not the one saying values has nothing to do with integrity
>
>
> I think you'll find guys like Covey say the opposite
>
> we also say a bout is "sound" or a person is sound because we can
> trust them
>
> like trusting a boat not to sink
>
> like trusting a friend
>
>
>
> like trusting someone who honors their "values" as much as they honor
> their word
What if those "values" include blowing themselves up in a pizza parlor to
collect their "72 virgins?"
Or burning someone at the stake in an attempt to get them to "convert" to
Christianinty?
Be careful of those who honor their values.
You may be the victim of it.
Dakota
> http://develop-net.com/articles/mar1998.html
> Covey ... defines integrity "as the value we place
> on ourselves." He tells us that, "As we clearly identify our values
> and proactively organize and execute around those values on a daily
> basis, we develop self-awareness and independent will by making and
> keeping meaningful promises and commitments . . . This requires an
> integrated character, a oneness, primarily with self but also with
> life."
Covey and Erhard are saying the same thing, but using slightly
different terms. Covey is talking, at least in part, about
fundamental--not normative--values here. He's talking about natural
law as opposed to custom. Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo
frequently spoke of this distinction when writing his decisions.
http://www.constitution.org/haines/haines_012.htm
"Words strain,
Crack and sometimes break, under the burden,
Under the tension, slip, slide, perish,
Decay with imprecision, will not stay in place,
Will not stay still."
-- T.S. Eliot, The Four Quartets
HAPPYsamurai
>
> Covey and Erhard are saying the same thing, but using slightly
> different terms.
do I have your WORD on that ?
it seems to me that tho werner makes the split between moral integrity/
values and effectiveness/workability/orgstructure integrity
he doesn't seem to acknowledge [in the transcript] that values/moral
integrity have an integral influence on "organisational
workability" [werner's "new" integrity] -
whereas Covey makes that point clearly
and IF they ARE saying the SAME THING
why is werner CLAIMING this is a "NEW" definition.... ?
or is werners "new" definition of "NEW"
"something someone else has been saying for 20 or more years now"
?
Markus Welch
"Tex" <ritte...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:_redndNUfOJoVPja...@comcast.com...
>
> "HAPPYsamurai" <profst...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:6abbf261-3a01-481f...@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>> On 17 Dec, 09:59, "Tex" <ritter_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> LOL!!!
>>> Your confusion is undersatandable, given that English is your second
>>> language.
>>>
>>> "HAPPYsamurai" <profstock...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>
>>
>>
>> hey - I'm not the one saying values has nothing to do with integrity
>>
>>
>> I think you'll find guys like Covey say the opposite
>>
>> we also say a bout is "sound" or a person is sound because we can
>> trust them
>>
>> like trusting a boat not to sink
>>
>> like trusting a friend
>>
>>
>>
>> like trusting someone who honors their "values" as much as they honor
>> their word
>
> What if those "values" include blowing themselves up in a pizza parlor to
> collect their "72 virgins?"
> Or burning someone at the stake in an attempt to get them to "convert" to
> Christianinty?
>
> Be careful of those who honor their values.
> You may be the victim of it.
Some values remain better than others, and those who honor the better of
them don't deserve 'fear of values' as a response. Only a relativist or
some sort would bring up homicide/murder as a "value" to someone for some
reason, and think it was a legitimate argument.
HAPPYsamurai
>
> Some values remain better than others, and those who honor the better of
> them don't deserve 'fear of values' as a response. Only a relativist or
> some sort would bring up homicide/murder as a "value" to someone for some
> reason, and think it was a legitimate argument.
>
>
being more on the "junk" end of the scale
or more like poison
but because it goes thru the mouth it comes under the sub heading food
Tex
"Markus Welch" <mar...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:QgCaj.33881$Pv2....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...
So as our resident "Absolutist" Markus, why don't you list the values that
you think are "better than others."
You must have a clear cut list, not a relative one.
Does it include the one on the top of Patrick's list?
John 3:16
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that
whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Do you BELIEVE, Markus? :-D
Don't you want to have "eternal life?"
It's not to late to repent.
Markus, WHAT ARE YOUR VALUES???????????? {:-D
HAPPYsamurai
>
> What if those "values" include blowing themselves up in a pizza parlor to
> collect their "72 virgins?"
> Or burning someone at the stake in an attempt to get them to "convert" to
> Christianinty?
>
ACTION
not a VALUE
you can argue "because" some people have a BAD relationship whith
their own VALUES
that values are BAD - and should therefore be AVOIDED
i would suggest we need to look at VALUES more CLOSELY and thru this
attention seek to uplift them to higher levels of humaneness
-- in fact I would further suggest - it is not because these people
HAVE values that they blow stuff up -- but because they do not
QUESTION their values
Question your values people -- especially those handed to you by
others who want you to ACT on them
this requires EFFORT - so it is more likely that just forgetting about
it is a more SALEABLE philosophy
for those into SELLING philosphies
as for werners idea that: values are not related to organisational
performance or workability
i would suggest - that because Enron's values were "flawed" - enron is
no longer performing or workable....
Markus Welch
>
Where have I heard that before...oh yeah..terrorists being called freedom
fighters...it's all a matter of diet.... ;)
Get ready for the one man's poison is another man's food thing.... It could
be there is some TV network working on a program that shows some tribe
without the subversive effects of the wheel eating something that would
normally kill all of us. What a topsy universe... The network really
wanted to show the tribe...but everyone working for the network below top
management wanted to focus on the negative wheel...hmmm, or maybe damn us
for not dying off during the last plague. Top management just wanted
money.. :)
Add salt to taste..I think it's a cultural thing...ha...
And they are fighting for values....just not ours. or mine or yours. but we
have no moral claim.......according to some.
Markus Welch
Here is further evidence that Tex thinks values are relative to whatever
culture or whatever quacky things that comes up.
I am more thoughtful about the importance of values and good ones and I
respect folks that chose them. I am certainly not an absolutist holding
that values mean nothing or that they are relative and/or therefore morally
equal. You may want to think about your statements about absolutism, grad.
> You must have a clear cut list, not a relative one.
I recognized est/lec as something valueless, and I didn't even have to
attend to come to the conclusion.. Yes, it's no wonder the comparisons to
movie recommendations by the happy clappy crowd..
How good of a friend do you have to be to put yourself and your firends
through the nonsense?
There's a little bit of my absolutism....
> Does it include the one on the top of Patrick's list?
> John 3:16
> 16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that
> whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
>
> Do you BELIEVE, Markus? :-D
> Don't you want to have "eternal life?"
> It's not to late to repent.
>
> Markus, WHAT ARE YOUR VALUES???????????? {:-D
how many posts are you up to now tex...without ever attending you say? Do
I even need to ask what you value?
Tex
Where is the list of values that you ABSOLUTELY no are not simply a product
of moral relativism?
Well, we're waiting?
You could start your own religion.
Tex
I'm asking a question of you.
Since when is a question evidence?
>
> I am more thoughtful about the importance of values and good ones and I
> respect folks that chose them.
You are mixing tenses there, but I digress.
Name the values you cherish, not the things you find valueless.
> I am certainly not an absolutist holding that values mean nothing or that
> they are relative and/or therefore morally equal.
That's good Markus.
We now know what you are NOT.
So now tell us what values you cherish.
>You may want to think about your statements about absolutism, grad.
I want you to give us the "golden tablets" of moral certitude.
Here's a group that believes they have all the moral answers.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03539b.htm
>
>> You must have a clear cut list, not a relative one.
>
> I recognized est/lec as something valueless, and I didn't even have to
> attend to come to the conclusion.
You believe your own dogma then.
Congratulations.
We know what you view as valueless, but you still can't say what you value.
What are you afraid of, the scorn and ridicule of "anonymous cowards?"
>Yes, it's no wonder the comparisons to movie recommendations by the happy
>clappy crowd..
>
> How good of a friend do you have to be to put yourself and your firends
> through the nonsense?
>
> There's a little bit of my absolutism....
Answering questions with questions????????????
Okie dokie Markus.
Tex
> On 17 Dec, 13:59, "Tex" <ritter_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> What if those "values" include blowing themselves up in a pizza parlor to
>> collect their "72 virgins?"
>> Or burning someone at the stake in an attempt to get them to "convert" to
>> Christianinty?
>>
> blowing yourself up is an
>
> ACTION
>
> not a VALUE
Are you a complete idiot?
Were you and Markus separated at birth?
Jihadists value martyrdom.
Got it?
"[Even when] a martyr's organs are being chopped off, and he turns into torn
organs that spread all over, in order to meet Allah, Muhammad, and his
friends, it would not be [considered] a loss. This is the honor given to our
martyrs, the martyrs of the Islamic nation, who were killed due to their
loyalty to Allah... The sacrifice of convoys of martyrs [will continue]
until Allah grants us victory very soon. The willingness for sacrifice and
for death we see amongst those who were cast by Allah into a war with the
Jews, should not come at all as a surprise. Oh believing brothers, we do not
feel a loss... The martyr, if he meets Allah, is forgiven with the first
drop of blood; he is saved from the torments of the grave; he sees his place
in Paradise; he is saved from the Great Horror [of the day of judgment]; he
is given 72 black-eyed women; he vouches for 70 of his family to be accepted
to Paradise; he is crowned with the Crown of glory, whose precious stone is
better than all of this world and what is in it." - Sheikh Isma'il Aal
Radhwan
Serena Nordstrup
> "HAPPYsamurai" <profstock...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:aef08af8-3426-4a2c...@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On 17 Dec, 13:59, "Tex" <ritter_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> What if those "values" include blowing themselves up in a pizza parlor to
> >> collect their "72 virgins?"
> >> Or burning someone at the stake in an attempt to get them to "convert" to
> >> Christianinty?
>
> > blowing yourself up is an
>
> > ACTION
>
> > not a VALUE
>
> Are you a complete idiot?
> Were you and Markus separated at birth?
>
> Jihadists value martyrdom.
> Got it?
Given the concrete action (blowing oneself up) which abstraction might
you infer first, Tex: jihadism? or martyrdom? ior generalization?
On what grounds?
Markus Welch
Huh?? Can you ask the question again in something close to English?
Are you trying to say or to imply that values are a matter of cultural or
moral relativism?
> Well, we're waiting?
> You could start your own religion.
Huh??
Tex
Markus, where is the list?
We all need to know what is right and wrong, and you are obviously the only
person that knows the answers!!!
I think it's 42, but I'm guessing here.
Well, we're waiting.
Markus Welch
Where is the answer to my question?
This 'list' is your creation. I never claimed to have one. Scientific
study often results in a list of things (or wacky ideas) not proven to
date. The scientific method is as dynamic as any wacko's claims, in that it
can prove that the wacky claims remain unproven. Landmark is in what
category? Proven or fraud?
> We all need to know what is right and wrong, and you are obviously the
> only person that knows the answers!!!
I don't make any claims of the sort, or claim that est/landmark was a
positive value. You do.
> I think it's 42, but I'm guessing here.
Nice try to adopt Adams to your argument. Not really funny.
> Well, we're waiting.
I'm waiting for proof that est was anything other than a scam. We'll all
wait, except those of you here to defend est/landmark.
Tex
Some values definitely are a matter of cultural or moral values.
Straight from the dictionary.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/values
10. values, Sociology. the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a society
toward which the people of the group have an affective regard. These values
may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or negative, as
cruelty, crime, or blasphemy.
And from the same web page:
values
noun
beliefs of a person or social group in which they have an emotional
investment (either for or against something); "he has very conservatives
values"
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
>
> This 'list' is your creation. I never claimed to have one. Scientific
> study often results in a list of things (or wacky ideas) not proven to
> date. The scientific method is as dynamic as any wacko's claims, in that
> it can prove that the wacky claims remain unproven. Landmark is in what
> category? Proven or fraud?
>
>> We all need to know what is right and wrong, and you are obviously the
>> only person that knows the answers!!!
>
> I don't make any claims of the sort, or claim that est/landmark was a
> positive value. You do.
>
>
>> I think it's 42, but I'm guessing here.
>
> Nice try to adopt Adams to your argument. Not really funny.
>
>
>> Well, we're waiting.
>
> I'm waiting for proof that est was anything other than a scam.
Fair enough.
In many ways, it was a scam.
There ya go, happy now? ;-)
Tex
> relativism. (typo) :-) Straight from the dictionary.
Markus Welch
Nice try there to adopt the moral and cultural and meld them into one in you
response. Placing moral relavance on cultural values imply that there is no
objective moral guideline. Cultural values don't mean squat when it comes
to objectively moral values. The cultural "values" you speak of don't come
close to approaching objective value. You can continue to deny that any
objective values exist, but that is your problem, not mine.
> Straight from the dictionary.
>
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/values
> 10. values, Sociology. the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a
> society toward which the people of the group have an affective regard.
> These values may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or
> negative, as cruelty, crime, or blasphemy.
>
> And from the same web page:
>
> values
>
> noun
> beliefs of a person or social group in which they have an emotional
> investment (either for or against something); "he has very conservatives
> values"
>
> WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
I have values and could list them for you Tex. I have decided not to for
the moment. Perhaps you could consider what makes a proud former US Marine
and an EST grad different. A different mentality I think. They really
are too different things,est and the Marines...and only one is worthy of
praise if you think about it.
>
>>
>> This 'list' is your creation. I never claimed to have one. Scientific
>> study often results in a list of things (or wacky ideas) not proven to
>> date. The scientific method is as dynamic as any wacko's claims, in that
>> it can prove that the wacky claims remain unproven. Landmark is in what
>> category? Proven or fraud?
>>
>>> We all need to know what is right and wrong, and you are obviously the
>>> only person that knows the answers!!!
>>
>> I don't make any claims of the sort, or claim that est/landmark was a
>> positive value. You do.
>>
>>
>>> I think it's 42, but I'm guessing here.
>>
>> Nice try to adopt Adams to your argument. Not really funny.
>>
>>
>>> Well, we're waiting.
>>
>> I'm waiting for proof that est was anything other than a scam.
>
> Fair enough.
> In many ways, it was a scam.
> There ya go, happy now? ;-)
No. In what ways do you continue to claim it was not a scam, graduate.
I'm waiting for evidence that can be validated and proven by science, not
the commentary or anecdotes of graduates.
tubby Tanner
Good start for a discusion.
cheers B
"Markus Welch" <mar...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:aKVdj.33183$lD6...@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
Markus Welch
"tubby Tanner" <tub...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:47782fae$0$26179$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Why don't you tell us about your Objective values Markus.
> Good start for a discusion.
What exactly is the intent of such a phrase "your objective values"???
Your use of the language perhaps unintentionally exposes the problem: no
objective values.
Do you also not think there are any objective values?
Do you want me to tell you what they are??? You don't know or don't have an
approximation? What history have you read?? What history have you been
instructed?
What a crowd....... And it's not just in est/landmark grads that such "no
values" idiocy can be found. Look at US universities....
The EST/landmark grads are just the worst at promoting the "no values"
agenda.
tubby Tanner
>
> "tubby Tanner" <tub...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:47782fae$0$26179$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>> Why don't you tell us about your Objective values Markus.
>> Good start for a discusion.
>
> What exactly is the intent of such a phrase "your objective values"???
Simple just asking a question to clarify the discussion so I know what you
are talking about.
>
> Your use of the language perhaps unintentionally exposes the problem: no
> objective values.
>
> Do you also not think there are any objective values?
Good question Markus.I do think there are workable values that we can all
agree upon.
>
> Do you want me to tell you what they are??? You don't know or don't have
> an approximation? What history have you read?? What history have you
> been instructed?
I was trying to help out in the discussion Marcus since you and Tex were
nagging at each other. Do you find my question out of place??????
>
> What a crowd....... And it's not just in est/landmark grads that such "no
> values" idiocy can be found. Look at US universities....
>
> The EST/landmark grads are just the worst at promoting the "no values"
> agenda.
Well Covey has some values which he thinks are worrth exploring and
holding. I think he is
clear about his intentions and goals, and holds his values close by to
support him.
I was only trying to help Marcus.
Happy new Year to you all
cheers bruno
Tex
What cultural values have I spoken of?
>You can continue to deny that any objective values exist, but that is your
problem, not mine.
I've never denied that, I'm asking you to list YOUR objective values,or just
name one.
This should be quite easy for you.
Name one.
You do understand what the word objective means, don't you?
Here is an example of an objective reference.
Straight from the dictionary
Objective
not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice;
based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.
intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than
with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.
of or pertaining to something that can be known, or to something that
is an object or a part of an object; existing independent of thought or an
observer as part of realit
>> Straight from the dictionary.
>
>
>
>>
>> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/values
>> 10. values, Sociology. the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a
>> society toward which the people of the group have an affective regard.
>> These values may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or
>> negative, as cruelty, crime, or blasphemy.
>>
>> And from the same web page:
>>
>> values
>>
>> noun
>> beliefs of a person or social group in which they have an emotional
>> investment (either for or against something); "he has very conservatives
>> values"
>>
>> WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
>
> I have values and could list them for you Tex. I have decided not to for
> the moment.
Or for any moment in the last several years.
> Perhaps you could consider what makes a proud former US Marine and an EST
> grad different. A different mentality I think. They really are too
> different things,est and the Marines...and only one is worthy of praise
> if you think about it.
>
Do you praise these Marines, Markus?
Are you experiencing any cognitive dissonance at this moment?
Are you "proud" of how these Corp members behaved?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1784307,00.html
Marines may face trial over Iraq massacre
· Report likely to say troops shot 24 unarmed civilians
· Murder charges likely after killings and cover-up
In the Marine Corps, they are quietly calling it their My Lai, the massacre
of hundreds of villagers in 1968 that became a symbol for American brutality
in the Vietnam war. In this generation's war, the village is Haditha,
north-west of Baghdad, where US marines killed two dozen Iraqi civilians,
including 11 women and children.
In what is being viewed as the gravest allegation to date of war crimes in
Iraq, a military investigation is expected to present findings in Baghdad
next week that a small group of troops shot dead 24 unarmed Iraqi civilians,
including five men in a taxi, and women and children at homes in the town
last November 19.
Other marines then tried to cover up the killings, the investigation has
found.
Two lawyers quoted yesterday by the New York Times said they thought the
investigation could result in murder charges, making the events at Haditha
the worst case of abuse in three years of war.
The Los Angeles Times said the report would conclude that a dozen marines
acted improperly and could face charges including murder, negligent
homicide, dereliction of duty, and falsifying reports.
Allegations of a massacre at Haditha, a largely Sunni town active in the
insurgency, were first reported by Time magazine last March. But the full
scale of what happened has been slow to emerge.
>
>>
>>>
>>> This 'list' is your creation. I never claimed to have one. Scientific
>>> study often results in a list of things (or wacky ideas) not proven to
>>> date. The scientific method is as dynamic as any wacko's claims, in
>>> that it can prove that the wacky claims remain unproven. Landmark is in
>>> what category? Proven or fraud?
>>>
>>>> We all need to know what is right and wrong, and you are obviously the
>>>> only person that knows the answers!!!
>>>
>>> I don't make any claims of the sort, or claim that est/landmark was a
>>> positive value. You do.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I think it's 42, but I'm guessing here.
>>>
>>> Nice try to adopt Adams to your argument. Not really funny.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Well, we're waiting.
>>>
>>> I'm waiting for proof that est was anything other than a scam.
>>
>> Fair enough.
>> In many ways, it was a scam.
>> There ya go, happy now? ;-)
>
>
> No. In what ways do you continue to claim it was not a scam, graduate.
>
> I'm waiting for evidence that can be validated and proven by science, not
> the commentary or anecdotes of graduates.
Here's a play you may like, Markus.
http://samuel-beckett.net/Waiting_for_Godot_Part1.html
Tex
>
> "tubby Tanner" <tub...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:47782fae$0$26179$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>> Why don't you tell us about your Objective values Markus.
>> Good start for a discusion.
>
> What exactly is the intent of such a phrase "your objective values"???
>
> Your use of the language perhaps unintentionally exposes the problem: no
> objective values.
>
> Do you also not think there are any objective values?
>
> Do you want me to tell you what they are??? You don't know or don't have
> an approximation? What history have you read?? What history have you
> been instructed?
>
> What a crowd....... And it's not just in est/landmark grads that such "no
> values" idiocy can be found. Look at US universities....
>
> The EST/landmark grads are just the worst at promoting the "no values"
> agenda.
Bruno has discussed what he values many times here, Markus.
Again, he is asking you to tell us what these objectively determined values
are.
We would like them in gold tablets or at least carved in marble or granite,
but a usenet post would also suffice.
WELL......
We're still waiting!!!!!
Anytime now.
Tex
>
> "Markus Welch" <mar...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:nqWdj.33186$lD6....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "tubby Tanner" <tub...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:47782fae$0$26179$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>> Why don't you tell us about your Objective values Markus.
>>> Good start for a discusion.
>>
>> What exactly is the intent of such a phrase "your objective values"???
>
> Simple just asking a question to clarify the discussion so I know what you
> are talking about.
>>
>> Your use of the language perhaps unintentionally exposes the problem: no
>> objective values.
>>
>> Do you also not think there are any objective values?
>
> Good question Markus.I do think there are workable values that we can all
> agree upon.
>>
>> Do you want me to tell you what they are??? You don't know or don't have
>> an approximation? What history have you read?? What history have you
>> been instructed?
>
> I was trying to help out in the discussion Marcus since you and Tex were
> nagging at each other. Do you find my question out of place??????
LOL!
I think you struck a nerve with him, "objectively speaking," of course.
Markus Welch
>
> "Markus Welch" <mar...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:nqWdj.33186$lD6....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "tubby Tanner" <tub...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:47782fae$0$26179$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>> Why don't you tell us about your Objective values Markus.
>>> Good start for a discusion.
>>
>> What exactly is the intent of such a phrase "your objective values"???
>>
>> Your use of the language perhaps unintentionally exposes the problem: no
>> objective values.
>>
>> Do you also not think there are any objective values?
>>
>> Do you want me to tell you what they are??? You don't know or don't have
>> an approximation? What history have you read?? What history have you
>> been instructed?
>>
>> What a crowd....... And it's not just in est/landmark grads that such
>> "no values" idiocy can be found. Look at US universities....
>>
>> The EST/landmark grads are just the worst at promoting the "no values"
>> agenda.
>
> Bruno has discussed what he values many times here, Markus.
This discussion is not about what he values, never has been.
> Again, he is asking you to tell us what these objectively determined
> values are.
>
> We would like them in gold tablets or at least carved in marble or
> granite, but a usenet post would also suffice.
What is it you want me to tell you? That some values are not personal (or
cultural) interpretations? That some values may actually reflect some sort
of order required to survive alone or in a society? That's one hell of a
starting point if that is where you (and the rest of the grad's) are, and I
suspect that is exactly the case. --Depressing, but not unexpected.
>
> WELL......
> We're still waiting!!!!!
> Anytime now.
Nice top-posting gang you have met.
Markus Welch
Of what "objective" values have you spoken in all of your 7500+ posts?
> >You can continue to deny that any objective values exist, but that is
> >your
> problem, not mine.
>
> I've never denied that, I'm asking you to list YOUR objective values,or
> just name one.
HUH? Are you not understanding English or something? Objective values
can't exist when you require the subjective "interpretation" qualifier.
> This should be quite easy for you.
> Name one.
I joined the Marines in defense of values Tex. I don't create my own
realities ~graduate~.
Why don't you name one objective value I didn't defend by joining the
Marines. I bet you can't. Twit.
> You do understand what the word objective means, don't you?
> Here is an example of an objective reference.
> Straight from the dictionary
>
> Objective
> not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice;
> based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.
>
>
> intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than
> with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.
>
> of or pertaining to something that can be known, or to something that
> is an object or a part of an object; existing independent of thought or an
> observer as part of realit
So why would you say something as idiotic as "YOUR objective values"
graduate? You made my point for me without ever showing an understanding
the issue.
>
>
>>> Straight from the dictionary.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/values
>>> 10. values, Sociology. the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a
>>> society toward which the people of the group have an affective regard.
>>> These values may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or
>>> negative, as cruelty, crime, or blasphemy.
>>>
>>> And from the same web page:
>>>
>>> values
>>>
>>> noun
>>> beliefs of a person or social group in which they have an emotional
>>> investment (either for or against something); "he has very conservatives
>>> values"
>>>
>>> WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
>>
>> I have values and could list them for you Tex. I have decided not to for
>> the moment.
>
> Or for any moment in the last several years.
See above.
>
>> Perhaps you could consider what makes a proud former US Marine and an
>> EST grad different. A different mentality I think. They really are
>> too different things,est and the Marines...and only one is worthy of
>> praise if you think about it.
>>
>
> Do you praise these Marines, Markus?
> Are you experiencing any cognitive dissonance at this moment?
>
> Are you "proud" of how these Corp members behaved?
Do you know the current status of this case, you disgraceful piece of shit?
Or are you willing to post this crap regardless of the current status
because you are a fucking idiot? Or are you more than just an idiot?
Tex
>
> "Tex" <ritte...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:haadnb6xgNHgD-Xa...@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Markus Welch" <mar...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>> news:nqWdj.33186$lD6....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>>>
>>> "tubby Tanner" <tub...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
>>> news:47782fae$0$26179$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>> Why don't you tell us about your Objective values Markus.
>>>> Good start for a discusion.
>>>
>>> What exactly is the intent of such a phrase "your objective values"???
>>>
>>> Your use of the language perhaps unintentionally exposes the problem:
>>> no objective values.
>>>
>>> Do you also not think there are any objective values?
>>>
>>> Do you want me to tell you what they are??? You don't know or don't
>>> have an approximation? What history have you read?? What history have
>>> you been instructed?
>>>
>>> What a crowd....... And it's not just in est/landmark grads that such
>>> "no values" idiocy can be found. Look at US universities....
>>>
>>> The EST/landmark grads are just the worst at promoting the "no values"
>>> agenda.
>>
>> Bruno has discussed what he values many times here, Markus.
>
> This discussion is not about what he values, never has been.
You said, "The EST/landmark grads are just the worst at promoting the "no
values" agenda."
Perhaps you are oblivious to the fact that Bruno is a Landmark "grad."
>
>> Again, he is asking you to tell us what these objectively determined
>> values are.
>>
>> We would like them in gold tablets or at least carved in marble or
>> granite, but a usenet post would also suffice.
>
> What is it you want me to tell you? That some values are not personal (or
> cultural) interpretations? That some values may actually reflect some
> >sort of order required to survive alone or in a society? That's one
> hell of a starting point if that is where you (and the rest of the grad's)
> are, and I suspect that is exactly the case. --Depressing, but not
> unexpected.
Just as I expected, no answers but just more questions followed by
assumptions of what others might think.
Are you afraid to tell us what you think, Markus?
>
>
>>
>> WELL......
>> We're still waiting!!!!!
>> Anytime now.
>
> Nice top-posting gang you have met.
Sometimes they even bottom-post.
Perhaps this will help them understand the "error" of their ways.
Perhaps this is one of the "values" you wish to impart on the rest of the
group.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting#Top-posting
Markus Welch
No. It's quite obvious he is a "grad". There is no reason for you to say
this. You have spent enough time (years) on this board to know what I think
of Bruno. You can't be that stupid.
>
>>
>>> Again, he is asking you to tell us what these objectively determined
>>> values are.
>>>
>>> We would like them in gold tablets or at least carved in marble or
>>> granite, but a usenet post would also suffice.
>>
>> What is it you want me to tell you? That some values are not personal
>> (or cultural) interpretations? That some values may actually reflect
>> some >sort of order required to survive alone or in a society? That's
>> one hell of a starting point if that is where you (and the rest of the
>> grad's) are, and I suspect that is exactly the case. --Depressing, but
>> not unexpected.
>
> Just as I expected, no answers but just more questions followed by
> assumptions of what others might think.
> Are you afraid to tell us what you think, Markus?
You have nothing to offer, comical and proud graduate of est. It is a
matter of value.
Tex
Do you always answer questions with more questions?
Why are you afraid to state what you think?
>
> Of what "objective" values have you spoken in all of your 7500+ posts?
I'm asking you to supply one "objective" value.
You obviously can not, or you would have done so at least once in the last
3-4 years.
>
>
>> >You can continue to deny that any objective values exist, but that is
>> >your
>> problem, not mine.
>>
>> I've never denied that, I'm asking you to list YOUR objective values,or
>> just name one.
>
> HUH? Are you not understanding English or something? Objective values
> can't exist when you require the subjective "interpretation" qualifier.
Got it.
They don't exist.
Thanks for admitting as much.
>
>
>> This should be quite easy for you.
>> Name one.
>
> I joined the Marines in defense of values Tex. I don't create my own
> realities ~graduate~
Did you sing happy birthday dear Jesus at Christmas time as a Marine,
Markus?
http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/showthread.php?p=307635
Do you still recite the Marine Prayer?
Marines' Prayer
Almighty Father, whose command is over all and whose love never fails, make
me aware of Thy presence and obedient to Thy will. Keep me true to my best
self, guarding me against dishonesty in purpose in deed and helping me to
live so that I can face my fellow Marines, my loved ones and Thee without
shame or fear. Protect my family. Give me the will to do the work of a
Marine and to accept my share of responsibilities with vigor and enthusiasm.
Grant me the courage to be proficient in my daily performance. Keep me loyal
and faithful to my superiors and to the duties my country and my Marine
Corps have entrusted to me. Make me considerate of those committed to my
leadership. Help me to wear my uniform with dignity, and let it remind me
daily of the traditions which I must uphold. If I am inclined to doubt,
steady my faith; If I am tempted, make me strong to resist; If I should miss
the mark, give me courage to try again. Guide me with the light of truth and
grant me wisdom by which I may understand the answer to my prayer. Amen.
>
> Why don't you name one objective value I didn't defend by joining the
> Marines. I bet you can't. Twit.
Why don't you just ask how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, Markus?
You really DON'T know what the word objective means, do you?
>
>
>> You do understand what the word objective means, don't you?
>> Here is an example of an objective reference.
>> Straight from the dictionary
>>
>> Objective
>> not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice;
>> based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.
>>
>>
>> intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than
>> with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.
>>
>> of or pertaining to something that can be known, or to something
>> that is an object or a part of an object; existing independent of thought
>> or an observer as part of realit
>
> So why would you say something as idiotic as "YOUR objective values"
> graduate?
Of course, I forgot, if only you could supply the "gold tablets" with the
ABSOLUTE "objective values" listed for us.
And it was Bruno that asked for "YOUR objective values," you moron.
LOL!!!!
Why don't you supply some OBJECTIVE evidence to the contrary, MArkus?
Wouldn't that be more impressive than your typical expletive filled tirades?
Emotionality becomes you, Markus.
Perhaps you should say the Marine Prayer now, to center yourself?
> Or are you willing to post this crap regardless of the current status
> because you are a fucking idiot? Or are you more than just an idiot?
Here is the current status regarding Marine Corps Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich,
you stupid shit.
December 31st, 2007.
(Below is an example of an objective reference)
Do you see how this works yet?
I didn't think so. ;-)
http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=4069776
In a statement, Camp Pendleton in California said the commander of U.S.
Marine Corps Forces Central, Lt. Gen. Samuel Helland, decided that Wuterich
would not face charges of unpremeditated murder of 17 Iraqis.
"The charges referred against Staff Sgt. Wuterich are voluntary
manslaughter, aggravated assault, reckless endangerment, dereliction of duty
and obstruction of justice," the statement said. "Lt. Gen. Helland dismissed
the charges of unpremeditated murder, soliciting another to commit an
offense and false official statement."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He faces a maximum penalty of more than 160 years in prison, according to
Marine spokesman Lt. Col. Sean Gibson.
Tex
And apparently, neither do you, other than a subjective view of
"objectivity."
Markus Welch
I joined the Marines. Fear isn't MY issue.
>>
>> Of what "objective" values have you spoken in all of your 7500+ posts?
>
> I'm asking you to supply one "objective" value.
> You obviously can not, or you would have done so at least once in the last
> 3-4 years.
I'm sure the USMC defends VALUE. What does est/lec or any of the other
names do? Nothing? What do you do, btw?
It's like a burden of proof issue. Est grads and the "other" particpants
come up short in every category I can think of. Hmmm...
>>
>>
>>> >You can continue to deny that any objective values exist, but that is
>>> >your
>>> problem, not mine.
>>>
>>> I've never denied that, I'm asking you to list YOUR objective values,or
>>> just name one.
>>
>> HUH? Are you not understanding English or something? Objective values
>> can't exist when you require the subjective "interpretation" qualifier.
>
> Got it
Nope. You didn't.
.
> They don't exist.
Wrong. They do.
> Thanks for admitting as much.
There was no admission.
You can invent all the wacko realities you want, ~graduate.~ but you can't
make me submit to your interpretation, and your ~inventions~don't change a
damned thing.
>
>>
>>
>>> This should be quite easy for you.
>>> Name one.
>>
>> I joined the Marines in defense of values Tex. I don't create my own
>> realities ~graduate~
>
>
> Did you sing happy birthday dear Jesus at Christmas time as a Marine,
> Markus?
> http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/showthread.php?p=307635
>
> Do you still recite the Marine Prayer?
> Marines' Prayer
> Almighty Father, whose command is over all and whose love never fails,
> make me aware of Thy presence and obedient to Thy will. Keep me true to my
> best self, guarding me against dishonesty in purpose in deed and helping
> me to live so that I can face my fellow Marines, my loved ones and Thee
> without shame or fear. Protect my family. Give me the will to do the work
> of a Marine and to accept my share of responsibilities with vigor and
> enthusiasm. Grant me the courage to be proficient in my daily performance.
> Keep me loyal and faithful to my superiors and to the duties my country
> and my Marine Corps have entrusted to me. Make me considerate of those
> committed to my leadership. Help me to wear my uniform with dignity, and
> let it remind me daily of the traditions which I must uphold. If I am
> inclined to doubt, steady my faith; If I am tempted, make me strong to
> resist; If I should miss the mark, give me courage to try again. Guide me
> with the light of truth and grant me wisdom by which I may understand the
> answer to my prayer. Amen.
Very weak, Anonymous coward, defender of LEC.
>
>>
>> Why don't you name one objective value I didn't defend by joining the
>> Marines. I bet you can't. Twit.
>
> Why don't you just ask how many angels can fit on the head of a pin,
> Markus?
> You really DON'T know what the word objective means, do you?
HA...
This after I destroyed your argument when you said "YOUR objective values?"
What a joke.
Your irrationality is of someone who thinks est is worth a graduation.
Loser.
>
>>
>>
>>> You do understand what the word objective means, don't you?
>>> Here is an example of an objective reference.
>>> Straight from the dictionary
>>>
>>> Objective
>>> not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice;
>>> based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>> intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than
>>> with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.
>>>
>>> of or pertaining to something that can be known, or to something
>>> that is an object or a part of an object; existing independent of
>>> thought or an observer as part of realit
>>
>> So why would you say something as idiotic as "YOUR objective values"
>> graduate?
>
> Of course, I forgot, if only you could supply the "gold tablets" with the
> ABSOLUTE "objective values" listed for us.
> And it was Bruno that asked for "YOUR objective values," you moron.
What part of YOUR do you not understand when dealing with objective
values....IDIOT.
> Why don't you supply some OBJECTIVE evidence to the contrary, Markus?
Hey SHITHEAD. Do you realize that most have been cleared?
And did it ever occur to you that nothing the USMC does when trying to
defend you makes a damned bit of DIFFERENCE with respect to LANDMARK and the
efficacy of LANDMARK's CLAIMS?
When will you address that, dumbass!!
The Marine Corps defends values.....what does est do again? oh that's
right...it specialized in feel good activities.....
> Wouldn't that be more impressive than your typical expletive filled
> tirades?
Fuck you Tex. You wouldn't know a value if it hit you in the head.
> Emotionality becomes you, Markus.
> Perhaps you should say the Marine Prayer now, to center yourself?
Go fuck yourself Tex, proud Graduate of est. that's my Prayer.
>
>> Or are you willing to post this crap regardless of the current status
>> because you are a fucking idiot? Or are you more than just an idiot?
>
> Here is the current status regarding Marine Corps Staff Sgt. Frank
> Wuterich, you stupid shit.
Fuck you Tex.
> December 31st, 2007.
>
> (Below is an example of an objective reference)
> Do you see how this works yet?
Fuck you Tex.
> I didn't think so. ;-)
>
> http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=4069776
>
> In a statement, Camp Pendleton in California said the commander of U.S.
> Marine Corps Forces Central, Lt. Gen. Samuel Helland, decided that
> Wuterich would not face charges of unpremeditated murder of 17 Iraqis.
>
> "The charges referred against Staff Sgt. Wuterich are voluntary
> manslaughter, aggravated assault, reckless endangerment, dereliction of
> duty and obstruction of justice," the statement said. "Lt. Gen. Helland
> dismissed the charges of unpremeditated murder, soliciting another to
> commit an offense and false official statement."
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> He faces a maximum penalty of more than 160 years in prison, according to
> Marine spokesman Lt. Col. Sean Gibson.
>
Far cry from that first article and who knows what really happened. But you
sure were there to use it for whatever gain you could, eh TEX? I'm sure you
are proud, eh graduate? Whatever it takes.....
You asshole.
Markus Welch
You can't accept that 'objectivity' requires the lack of interpretation, or
subjectivity. The proof requirement remains with those that think feeling
something is the color blue or not can make it so. Like est
graduates......and maybe others.
Tex
Then tell us what you think.
Stop pussy-footing around.
>>>
>>> Of what "objective" values have you spoken in all of your 7500+ posts?
>>
>> I'm asking you to supply one "objective" value.
>> You obviously can not, or you would have done so at least once in the
>> last 3-4 years.
>
> I'm sure the USMC defends VALUE.
I'm asking you to supply one "objective" value.
I'm not asking you what the Marines do.
>What does est/lec or any of the other names do? Nothing? What do you do,
>btw?
I'm asking you to supply one "objective" value.
tick....tick...tick..... ZZZzzzzZZZZ..............
>
> It's like a burden of proof issue. Est grads and the "other" particpants
> come up short in every category I can think of. Hmmm...
How many do you know, Objectivist.
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>> >You can continue to deny that any objective values exist, but that is
>>>> >your
>>>> problem, not mine.
>>>>
>>>> I've never denied that, I'm asking you to list YOUR objective values,or
>>>> just name one.
>>>
>>> HUH? Are you not understanding English or something? Objective values
>>> can't exist when you require the subjective "interpretation" qualifier.
>>
>> Got it
>
> Nope. You didn't.
> .
>> They don't exist.
>
> Wrong. They do.
Name one.
tick...tick...tick
>
>> Thanks for admitting as much.
>
> There was no admission.
> You can invent all the wacko realities you want, ~graduate.~ but you can't
> make me submit to your interpretation, and your ~inventions~don't >change
> a damned thing.
So name the unchanging, ever present, constant, absolute, objective values
that exist, according to your subjective musings.
That was Bruno's question, you ferrous cranus moron.
http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm
Of course your inability to supply one objective reference makes you a
subjectivist masquarading as an objectivist.
WWARD? (What Would Ayn Rand Do)
>
> Your irrationality is of someone who thinks est is worth a graduation.
When did I ever say that?
> Loser.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> You do understand what the word objective means, don't you?
>>>> Here is an example of an objective reference.
>>>> Straight from the dictionary
>>>>
>>>> Objective
>>>> not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or
>>>> prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than
>>>> with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.
>>>>
>>>> of or pertaining to something that can be known, or to something
>>>> that is an object or a part of an object; existing independent of
>>>> thought or an observer as part of realit
>>>
>>> So why would you say something as idiotic as "YOUR objective values"
>>> graduate?
>>
>> Of course, I forgot, if only you could supply the "gold tablets" with the
>> ABSOLUTE "objective values" listed for us.
>> And it was Bruno that asked for "YOUR objective values," you moron.
>
> What part of YOUR do you not understand when dealing with objective
> values....IDIOT.
I know it is only YOUR subjective musings, Markus.
Let me run the definition by you again.
objective
not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on
facts; unbiased: an objective opinion
Supply an objective value for us, Markus.
It should be measurable, indiependent of "personal feelings,
interpretations, or prejudice," based on facts.
Values
values, Sociology. the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a society
toward which the people of the group have an affective regard. These values
may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or negative, as
cruelty, crime, or blasphemy.
affective
1.. Influenced by or resulting from the emotions.
2.. Concerned with or arousing feelings or emotions; emotional
Maybe your former C.O. can explain these "big" words to you, Markus.
Oo-rah.
LOL!!
That's quite an irrational ramble and non sequitor.
I think you are becoming unhinged, Markus.
Better go read a few chapters of "Atlas Shrugged" before beddy-bye time.
>
> When will you address that, dumbass!!
>
> The Marine Corps defends values.....what does est do again? oh that's
> right...it specialized in feel good activities.....
Not really.
You have heard all the stories by Ellen talking about est as some kind of
"boot camp," have you not?
Not really a feel good activity, was it?
>
>
>
>
>
>> Wouldn't that be more impressive than your typical expletive filled
>> tirades?
>
> Fuck you Tex. You wouldn't know a value if it hit you in the head.
>
>
>
>> Emotionality becomes you, Markus.
>> Perhaps you should say the Marine Prayer now, to center yourself?
>
> Go fuck yourself Tex, proud Graduate of est. that's my Prayer.
LOL!!!!
Good come back Markus.
You're even dumber than I thought.
Tex
I've actually posted this definition several times.
Try to see where the notion of "objective values" falls flat on it's face.
objective
not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on
facts; unbiased: an objective opinion
Supply an objective value for us, Markus.
It should be measurable, indiependent of "personal feelings,
interpretations, or prejudice," based on facts.
Values
values, Sociology. the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a society
toward which the people of the group have an affective regard. These values
may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or negative, as
cruelty, crime, or blasphemy.
affective
1.. Influenced by or resulting from the emotions.
2.. Concerned with or arousing feelings or emotions; emotional
Markus Welch
I think you are a coward. Post your name and put your reputation behind
your posts, graduate.
Or are you too afraid.....
Shithead ~graduate~
>>>>
>>>> Of what "objective" values have you spoken in all of your 7500+ posts?
>>>
>>> I'm asking you to supply one "objective" value.
>>> You obviously can not, or you would have done so at least once in the
>>> last 3-4 years.
>>
>> I'm sure the USMC defends VALUE.
>
> I'm asking you to supply one "objective" value.
That's the beauty of it....you want to destroy value....my mere claim of
value would mean you could discredit it (BECAUSE I CLAIM IT). It's how you
SICK, psycho cult worshippers think. Destroy the value, anonymous
coward...Enjoy the moment.....
> I'm not asking you what the Marines do.
I'm telling you Marines preserves/defends value. You don't have to like it,
fuckface.
>
>
>
>>What does est/lec or any of the other names do? Nothing? What do you
>>do, btw?
>
> I'm asking you to supply one "objective" value.
> tick....tick...tick..... ZZZzzzzZZZZ..............
When you are wronged by some action, how do you know? Some cultural bias?
Good luck answering that....
Or how do you reconcile two cultures perhaps stuck in some needless combat,
with neither having the possibility of being right? (objectively)???
I'm kidding, you don't need to answer that dipshit......I know that's how
you see things.
>
>>
>> It's like a burden of proof issue. Est grads and the "other" particpants
>> come up short in every category I can think of. Hmmm...
> How many do you know, Objectivist.
A small but pure sample....BTW ~grad~ I'm more Marine than Objectivist, if
you have to label me.
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> >You can continue to deny that any objective values exist, but that is
>>>>> >your
>>>>> problem, not mine.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've never denied that, I'm asking you to list YOUR objective
>>>>> values,or just name one.
>>>>
>>>> HUH? Are you not understanding English or something? Objective values
>>>> can't exist when you require the subjective "interpretation" qualifier.
>>>
>>> Got it
>>
>> Nope. You didn't.
>> .
>>> They don't exist.
>>
>> Wrong. They do.
>
> Name one.
> tick...tick...tick
Life itself is a value.
>>
>>> Thanks for admitting as much.
>>
>> There was no admission.
>> You can invent all the wacko realities you want, ~graduate.~ but you
>> can't make me submit to your interpretation, and your ~inventions~don't
>> >change a damned thing.
>
> So name the unchanging, ever present, constant, absolute, objective values
> that exist, according to your subjective musings.
>
Let's see how you handle the above...shithead.
How could you know this? HOW? Unless you had a preconceived notion about
observation, science, etc.
>
> Let me run the definition by you again.
>
> objective
>
> not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based
> on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion
>
> Supply an objective value for us, Markus.
> It should be measurable, indiependent of "personal feelings,
> interpretations, or prejudice," based on facts.
>
> Values
>
> values, Sociology. the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a society
> toward which the people of the group have an affective regard. These
> values may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or
> negative, as cruelty, crime, or blasphemy.
>
> affective
>
> 1.. Influenced by or resulting from the emotions.
> 2.. Concerned with or arousing feelings or emotions; emotional
> Maybe your former C.O. can explain these "big" words to you, Markus.
> Oo-rah.
You seem confused.
You seem to think that every observation is skewed by the observer....that
every observation is inherently subjective.
I can't see what else your problem could be if not that. But then again,
you are a fucking idiot landmark supporter.
I'm not the shithead posting a very dated article about US Marines whose
very lives are in question, and have since been mostly exonerated...to make
a point about LANDMARK and whether no objective values exist!!!! GOD You
are a worthless piece of shit.
>
>>
>> When will you address that, dumbass!!
>>
>> The Marine Corps defends values.....what does est do again? oh that's
>> right...it specialized in feel good activities.....
> Not really.
> You have heard all the stories by Ellen talking about est as some kind of
> "boot camp," have you not?
> Not really a feel good activity, was it?
You coward. You PAID for your PARTICIPATION in some wacko LGAT EST and
LEC are all about feelings and creating your own reality. A fucking hippie
joy ride.
Not even close pal. You're a shithead for even trying to bring it up.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Wouldn't that be more impressive than your typical expletive filled
>>> tirades?
>>
>> Fuck you Tex. You wouldn't know a value if it hit you in the head.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Emotionality becomes you, Markus.
>>> Perhaps you should say the Marine Prayer now, to center yourself?
>>
>> Go fuck yourself Tex, proud Graduate of est. that's my Prayer.
>
> LOL!!!!
> Good come back Markus.
> You're even dumber than I thought.
You are a disgrace. No wonder you are anonymous. POS coward.
Tex
LOL!!!!
Another variation of a Ferrous Cranus pathetic, recorded response, when you
have nothing to say.
Good comeback Markus, again.
http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm
>
>>>>>
>>>>> Of what "objective" values have you spoken in all of your 7500+
>>>>> posts?
>>>>
>>>> I'm asking you to supply one "objective" value.
>>>> You obviously can not, or you would have done so at least once in the
>>>> last 3-4 years.
>>>
>>> I'm sure the USMC defends VALUE.
>>
>> I'm asking you to supply one "objective" value.
>
> That's the beauty of it....you want to destroy value....my mere claim of
> value would mean you could discredit it (BECAUSE I CLAIM IT). It's >how
> you SICK, psycho cult worshippers think. Destroy the value, anonymous
> coward...Enjoy the moment.....
I have no interest in "destroying value," Markus.
And what "cult" am I worshipping again?
You've posted many passages here quoting Ayn Rand.
You do know some regard her initial Objectivist movement as a cult, do you
not?
http://www.amazon.com/Ayn-Rand-Cult-Jeff-Walker/dp/0812693906
The nature of your posts, with your emotional outbursts and tirades,
indicate you could be a psycho, and you could also be an Ayn Rand "cult
worshipper" too.
>
>> I'm not asking you what the Marines do.
>
> I'm telling you Marines preserves/defends value. You don't have to like
> it, fuckface.
I do like that. Honor, Courage and Commitment, among others.
>>
>>
>>
>>>What does est/lec or any of the other names do? Nothing? What do you
>>>do, btw?
>>
>> I'm asking you to supply one "objective" value.
>> tick....tick...tick..... ZZZzzzzZZZZ..............
>
> When you are wronged by some action, how do you know? Some cultural bias?
>
> Good luck answering that....
>
> Or how do you reconcile two cultures perhaps stuck in some needless
> combat, with neither having the possibility of being right?
> (objectively)???
>
> I'm kidding, you don't need to answer that dipshit......I know that's how
> you see things.
You can answer your own pointless questions, but not ones that would simply
prove the point you are trying to make.
Perhaps you should simply continue to have a conversation with yourself?
Then you can answer your own questions by putting words in others mouths.
Now what does that say about your living by the 3 values of the Corp?
Is Courage for you simply calling people names and then taking your "ball"
home with you when people don't play the way you want them to?
I know, you are Markus Welch and I'm just an "anonymous coward."
>
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> It's like a burden of proof issue. Est grads and the "other"
>>> particpants come up short in every category I can think of. Hmmm...
>> How many do you know, Objectivist.
>
> A small but pure sample....BTW ~grad~ I'm more Marine than Objectivist, if
> you have to label me.
I see that as a good thing, Markus.
But I don't see you quoting the core values of the Corp as much as promoting
Ayn Rand's "philosophy."
If you could have supplied a single "objective value" you would have,
Markus.
The nature of "objective" has been stated in this post many times.
I'm all for values. I'm challenging you to provide one that is objective.
Given the definition of values, I think this would be hard to do, but
perhaps you know something I don't.
OK, now can continue to call me names. :-)
values
values, Sociology. the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a society
toward which the people of the group have an affective regard. These values
may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or negative, as
cruelty, crime, or blasphemy.
affective
of, caused by, or expressing emotion or feeling; emotional.
2. causing emotion or feeling.
You certainly have the emotional attachment part down, regarding what you
value.
>>
>> Let me run the definition by you again.
>>
>> objective
>>
>> not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based
>> on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion
>>
>> Supply an objective value for us, Markus.
>> It should be measurable, independent of "personal feelings,
>> interpretations, or prejudice," based on facts.
>>
>> Values
>>
>> values, Sociology. the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a society
>> toward which the people of the group have an affective regard. These
>> values may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or
>> negative, as cruelty, crime, or blasphemy.
>>
>> affective
>>
>> 1.. Influenced by or resulting from the emotions.
>> 2.. Concerned with or arousing feelings or emotions; emotional
>> Maybe your former C.O. can explain these "big" words to you, Markus.
>> Oo-rah.
>
> You seem confused.
>
> You seem to think that every observation is skewed by the observer....that
> every observation is inherently subjective.
No, I'm saying your observations are skewed, regarding this discussion.
If there are "objective values," this conversation would be over.
You would simply supply objective, factual, incontrovertible proof, and I
would say thank you for answering my question.
The fact that you can not illustrates the futility of your subjective
musings regarding objectivity, a definition I have posted for you several
times now.
>
> I can't see what else your problem could be if not that. But then again,
> you are a fucking idiot landmark supporter.
I don't support Landmark at all.
And of course, being called a "fucking idiot" by a fucking idiot" really
doesn't bother me at all. :-D
> You are a worthless piece of shit.l
And what do you think of the 24 people, mostly women, old men and children,
that were killed by the Marines, Markus?
Are they also worthless pieces of shit?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/03/AR2006060300710_pf.html
At 5 p.m. Nov. 19, near the end of one of the most violent days the Marine
Corps had experienced in the Upper Euphrates Valley, a call went out for
trucks to collect the bodies of 24 Iraqi civilians.
The unit that arrived in the farming town of Haditha found babies, women and
children shot in the head and chest. An old man in a wheelchair had been
shot nine times. A group of girls, ages 1 to 14, lay dead. Everyone had been
killed by gunfire, according to death certificates issued later.