And I agree with you, too actually. But I have a problem with the 'news' media representing itself as objective and presenting all sides when they clearly don't....they cover things, as you said, that boosts their ratings and leave people in the dark about so many topics and ideas and flat out mislead them about others. So, it's not really news or current events but rather entertainment. I'm not sure too many people understand that at all....even here.
Have you ever watched the Newshour with Jim Lehrer...? It's on PBS. Of all the news shows I've watched, it seem to do the best job of covering issues and concerns...
I also suggest checking out Mosaic - News from the Middle East...it's on Linktv and can be viewed online...if you think our media is bad...just take a look at some of the state run media broadcasts shown on Mosaic...it's an eye opener...
Have you ever watched the Newshour with Jim Lehrer...? It's on PBS. Of all the news shows I've watched, it seem to do the best job of covering issues and concerns...
I also suggest checking out Mosaic - News from the Middle East...it's on Linktv and can be viewed online...if you think our media is bad...just take a look at some of the state run media broadcasts shown on Mosaic...it's an eye opener...
It's not what I'm watching that I view as causing the problems to be frank. I only have basic cable but have watched Jim Lehrer and still find it quite lacking...just had a conversation about just how lacking with someone a few days ago, actually.
I don't watch tv...hardly ever. I watch some shows from tv on dvd or the internet.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
It's not what I'm watching that I view as causing the problems to be frank. I only have basic cable but have watched Jim Lehrer and still find it quite lacking...just had a conversation about just how lacking with someone a few days ago, actually.
I don't watch tv...hardly ever. I watch some shows from tv on dvd or the internet.
oh...ok...
I have to ask...what sort of "news" are you seeking...? what would make a news show unlacking...?
question: Do you own any of the following: car, house, tv, cell phone?
No car, rent an apartment across from work, have tv for husband and I often fantasize about shooting it or bashing it in with a sledgehammer, have a cell phone purchased for me by my husband who complains that I never pay attention to it, meanwhile I continue to refer to it as an electronic leash.
Walking can be a real trip
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
I don't think he meant everyone who owns a car, house, tv or cell phone sold his soul. I think he's saying more and more people consider these things and the pursuit of these things more important than anything else, it has become their purpose to own more. They need to have the newest cell phone, the biggest tv, the biggest house... These are things they don't really need, they can easily live without them. They're working jobs, to earn more money, so they can buy more and spend more... But it's not necessary at all. They associate happiness with new things. It's becoming an addiction.
Materialism.
Well stated, thank you.
I hate my cell phone. I understand its usefulness, but I would be just fine with a basic pay-as-you-go phone.
I seriously want to kill my television.
I used to want a house, but considering what I had to sacrifice in time and energy to get it, it wasn't worth it. Now that I've found I can live very comfortably in 600 sq ft with a linebacker sized husband, two large dogs and a cat, I see most homes as a tremendous waste.
Not having a house gave us the freedom to give up our car and it has been lovely getting to know my city by foot.
Walking can be a real trip
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
I have to ask...what sort of "news" are you seeking...? what would make a news show unlacking...?
I'm not seeking anything. The kind of news I'm speaking of is already out there but you have to be willing to look outside the usual, mainstream sources and decide for yourself which ones are worth taking stock in. I guess I wish that people would become more interested in objective news outlets and coverage instead of the sensationalistic coverage they get from the evening news every night. Those news outlets aren't worried about covering the reality of what's going on in the world and the real problems behind these issues....they are only worrying about entertaining and making profits...as was already stated.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I think it's a good reminder of what corporations will do to sway your dollars and thought processes towards their objectives.
It should be watched at least twice a year, IMO. We do have short attention spans, after all. :rolleyes:
There's another website I haven't completely excavated yet, but it's seems worth a look. tamingthecorporation.org
Walking can be a real trip
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
Thanks for the link. Yes, sweatshops do exist. They are at best questionnable, at worst horribly criminal. But the reason they exist is not just because of some businessman's love of "profit". Rather, they exist largely because of some consumer's love of "LOW PRICES".
There are a lot of places two where the options are sweatshop or no job at all, or if you are a women/girl prostitute. Based on those choices making Air Jordan's seems very far away from the worst choice.
"Old George Orwell got it backward. Big Brother isn’t watching. [...] Big Brother’s busy holding your attention every moment you’re awake. He’s making sure you’re always distracted. He’s making sure you’re fully absorbed. [...] He’s making sure your attention is always filled. [...] With the world always filling you, no one has to worry about what’s in your mind. With everyone’s imagination atrophied, no one will ever be a threat to the world."
Chuck Palahniuk
chuck palahniuk is one of my favorite authors, thanks for posting that
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
a computer could be argued as being necessary...it is a way to obtain media and sources you wouldn't be able to obtain nearly as easy w/o a computer for one example
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Whats ironic about this thread is.. Posting on this message board is proof of being guilty for feeding the corporate machine..
Microsoft, ComEd, Intel, PC make,..
You have to give a little to take a little. Only big corporations can give us the gadgets we use. PCs, Cell phones, iPods, Internet,.. Would you give up all these things to end the war in Iraq?
You want to be free of corporations controlling your life? Throw your PC away, burn your iPod, smash your cell phone, drive your car into a lake..
Keep feeding the machine and it will have power over you.
a computer could be argued as being necessary...it is a way to obtain media and sources you wouldn't be able to obtain nearly as easy w/o a computer for one example
Most people didn't own a PC when Pearl Jam released their first album. Most people didn't yet have internet when No Code came out.. It's not a necessity.
And you're still feeding the corporate machine thousands of dollars for what? To argue on the internet?
For as many more facts the internet spreads, its spreads just as much propaganda. Nothing changes.
i worded the op very poorly, so my apologies. i knew it wasn't worded the way i wanted to so i shouldn't have submitted it until i had it put better.
of course there's nothing wrong w/ hobbies as long as they are moderate. like safaris and hunting (unless you're gonna eat it) i wouldn't be for.
i'm aware there are good corporations, good lobbyists. but the point is are they the ones who seem to have the most influence? which corporations did cheney meet w/ in secret to craft the energy policy? do you think they had the nations best interests at heart or their profit margin??
yes, corporations and lobbyists can be a subset, but they abuse their power and money to push things that are harmful to the public. of course this is not 100% but it seems the norm.
look at shitty pharmaceutical and health care type bills, is it a coincidence they spend a lot of money lobbying congress during those times??
you can put it off as they are simply better at playing the game but i believe it's they have more money and that opens more doors and when it comes to the well being of the public i don't think that should happen.
i didn't mean 'our media' in the possessive form, like it's mine. i meant it as our accepted forms of media. you said make my own media. ok, i could do that w/ youtube or make a website...but the reality is that an overwhelming number would dismiss it b/c it's not from the mainstream sources of media. i've heard from plenty of ppl 'if that were true it'd be all over the news!'
now, you can argue that's what we get b/c we don't want to be informed. but that, in a way, is a cop out b/c i feel these media establishments, if they are gonna pass themselves off as news much less fair and balanced or the name we can trust...then they have an obligation to actually inform us. a better informed public is a great asset but that's not what they want. they want consumers who can't pay attention very long. and how do they know what news we want and don't want? i've never been asked. you can say don't turn on, and i don't, i haven't watched tv (except for a few shows like lost, the office, daily show... online) for a very long time, other than breaks at work. but to many ppl they think this is news. maybe it's naive on their part and they should be looking further themselves.
i also said they shape our views (or did i?) the mass media helps assimilate us into this state. many ppl think if it were true and if it were news worthy than the major networks wouldn't cover it. and like i said before; if i made a website or a youtube clip most of those ppl would dismiss 'my media' right off the bat.
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
You have to give a little to take a little. Only big corporations can give us the gadgets we use. PCs, Cell phones, iPods, Internet,.. Would you give up all these things to end the war in Iraq?
yes!!!! that's like the argument about pharmaceuticals saying they have to make their money back before allowing it to be generic...what happened to doing sometihng to help your fellow man?
and i would give up all these things to end war, actually that seems like the only obvious answer...maybe it's the pisces in me
Most people didn't own a PC when Pearl Jam released their first album. Most people didn't yet have internet when No Code came out.. It's not a necessity.
And you're still feeding the corporate machine thousands of dollars for what? To argue on the internet?
For as many more facts the internet spreads, its spreads just as much propaganda. Nothing changes.
having or knowing about pearl jam's first album or no code weren't a necessity, either. i don't just look up pj albums and 'argue on a message board', i do use the internet for a lot of other things like research into all sorts of things like foods, health, current events, philosophy, history, mediation, singularity, evolution, corporations....
some ppl say the consumer should be informed, it's up to them to find out what's in their food or where it comes from...how would i go about finding what's in the food processed on the other side of the country? there's all sorts of information on other things you would need the internet to obtain.
and i don't pay them thousands for it. my internet bill isn't even a single thousand a year. i guess you could argue the laptop but that was a one time purchase, not like i have to keep paying HP. and b/c of the laptop i no longer need flyers from the grocery store, i can go to their site. i don't need to drive to the library or a book store to find a recipe, i can look it up. i can find which product would be a better purchase w/o having to drive to multiple stores to compare. i am better informed b/c i have the internet.
how would i know which consumers were worth my support? i sure won't find that answer on tv
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Actually, it does get old. It's a ridiculous argument and it is used, again and again, as a means to ignore the point that is being made. One might even say it's childish.
are you saying one cannot be enlightened by what is on a television?
1. yes, you can be educated via things on television. thats the television i like to watch actually. but i understand what television is and why it is there. it is there to entertain me. and sometimes you come across some good edutainment in the process
Actually, it does get old. It's a ridiculous argument and it is used, again and again, as a means to ignore the point that is being made. One might even say it's childish.
The point that was being made was that no one should buy things they don't need to survive. That's a pretty stupid thing to say on an electronic message board, the existence of which depends on countless items bought by people for reasons other than survival. Obviously this person doesn't even believe their own bullshit.
People here struggle time and time again with the concepts of "need" and "necessity", too often failing to understand that both of those words are not absolute concepts, but rather measures against standards that too often remain unnamed. To say "I need x" is a statment that begs the question: for what? Against survival, "need" begs a very small list of things.
The point that was being made was that no one should buy things they don't need to survive. That's a pretty stupid thing to say on an electronic message board, the existence of which depends on countless items bought by people for reasons other than survival. Obviously this person doesn't even believe their own bullshit.
People here struggle time and time again with the concepts of "need" and "necessity", too often failing to understand that both of those words are not absolute concepts, but rather measures against standards that too often remain unnamed. To say "I need x" is a statment that begs the question: for what? Against survival, "need" begs a very small list of things.
I don't really disagree with what you're saying. But it seems rather silly to think he actually meant survival in the sense of living out in the woods with a two sticks and a stone, because if that's your standard you really don't need anything at all. Is it really that hard to imagine he might have meant survival in today's society? And yes, believe it or not, to survive in today's society a computer is a necessity for many people.
When I read statements like his, I immediately know or at least have a general idea of what he's saying and even though I could also point out that he doesn't "need" a computer to live, I realize that's not what he meant and doing so would only distract attention from his real argument. And I might be mistaken here but I think he's referring to massive consumerism. To give a concrete example people don't "need" five TVs, people don't "need" 4 cars, people don't "need" a huge mansion... However, people might need a computer for their job, they might need a house to live in...
Actually, the rest of his post explains it quite clearly what he meant. But I suppose saying "you don't need a computer" is much easier than actually discussing what he suggested.
...i understand what television is and why it is there. it is there to entertain me. and sometimes you come across some good edutainment in the process
This is your view of what you think television is, as opposed to the next guy's view.
Many see it as a very effective platform for information and to be used for the betterment of humanity.
Others think that if a specific group...the media on television, for example...claim they are fair and objective, that they are to be held to that standard. It's all about the context.
Because you see one way does not invalidate another way. People with all intents and purposes are in television or watch television, all for different reasons.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I don't really disagree with what you're saying. But it seems rather silly to think he actually meant survival in the sense of living out in the woods with a two sticks and a stone, because if that's your standard you really don't need anything at all. Is it really that hard to imagine he might have meant survival in today's society? And yes, believe it or not, to survive in today's society a computer is a necessity for many people.
No, it's really not. Millions of people do not have computers and manage not to starve or suddenly burst into flames.
A computer is a necessity in today's society for all sorts of things, but not for survival! Again, when we use words like "need" or "necessity", we have to understand what they mean. They imply a requirement against a standard. I need a computer to respond to your post. I need a double-shot latte to feel cool. I need a plasma TV to impress my friends. I don't need any of those things to survive.
When I read statements like his, I immediately know or at least have a general idea of what he's saying and even though I could also point out that he doesn't "need" a computer to live, I realize that's not what he meant and doing so would only distract attention from his real argument. And I might be mistaken here but I think he's referring to massive consumerism. To give a concrete example people don't "need" five TVs, people don't "need" 4 cars, people don't "need" a huge mansion... However, people might need a computer for their job, they might need a house to live in...
Actually, the rest of his post explains it quite clearly what he meant. But I suppose saying "you don't need a computer" is much easier than actually discussing what he suggested.
I think we are discussing the above, so it's kind of disproving your point. Anyway, do you see the problem with these fuzzy applications of the word "need"? Of course no one "needs" five TVs, except the guy who has five TVs will probably give you the same equivocations about them as you're now giving about computers. Personally, I own probably 50 computers. Do I need them? Absolutely not! However, are they linked in ways to my own survival at a given standard and my happiness to a certain extent? Sure.
The unfortunate consequence of debating "need" against fuzzy standards is that one simply seeks to impose one's values on others. I can invent all sorts of reasons why I need my computers, but certainy you don't need your millions of dollars or your 5 bedroom house or your fancy new watch. The fact of the matter is that people seek out the things that make them happy and absolutely should be allowed to do so based on their standards. And if they amass material fortune expecting joy and find nothing but misery there, so be it. Why should I care? If any of us believes we have a right to seek out happiness on our own standards, then we absolutely need to have the ability to do so without others imposing their definitions of happiness or need upon us.
Between the religious zealots, the Marxists, and even many of the self-proclaimed capitalists, far too many people have been made to suffer the foolish and contradictory standards and concomittant guilt of someone else's definition of "need". Catholicism told me I didn't need to have sex. Maxists told me I didn't need to have wealth. Capitalists told me I didn't need to question their abilities. Turns out that when I challenged each of those assertions and acquired the things they told me I didn't need, I found some of the greatest joys I've every experienced. I accepted my own standards of need against my own goals of happiness, and I found success there. Is that the path for everyone? Probably not. But it was the path for me, and I would much rather see everyone able to follow their path, for better or worse, than attempts by anyone to apply their standard to all.
Comments
Well said
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Have you ever watched the Newshour with Jim Lehrer...? It's on PBS. Of all the news shows I've watched, it seem to do the best job of covering issues and concerns...
I also suggest checking out Mosaic - News from the Middle East...it's on Linktv and can be viewed online...if you think our media is bad...just take a look at some of the state run media broadcasts shown on Mosaic...it's an eye opener...
It's not what I'm watching that I view as causing the problems to be frank. I only have basic cable but have watched Jim Lehrer and still find it quite lacking...just had a conversation about just how lacking with someone a few days ago, actually.
I don't watch tv...hardly ever. I watch some shows from tv on dvd or the internet.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
oh...ok...
I have to ask...what sort of "news" are you seeking...? what would make a news show unlacking...?
No car, rent an apartment across from work, have tv for husband and I often fantasize about shooting it or bashing it in with a sledgehammer, have a cell phone purchased for me by my husband who complains that I never pay attention to it, meanwhile I continue to refer to it as an electronic leash.
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
Well stated, thank you.
I hate my cell phone. I understand its usefulness, but I would be just fine with a basic pay-as-you-go phone.
I seriously want to kill my television.
I used to want a house, but considering what I had to sacrifice in time and energy to get it, it wasn't worth it. Now that I've found I can live very comfortably in 600 sq ft with a linebacker sized husband, two large dogs and a cat, I see most homes as a tremendous waste.
Not having a house gave us the freedom to give up our car and it has been lovely getting to know my city by foot.
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
I'm not seeking anything. The kind of news I'm speaking of is already out there but you have to be willing to look outside the usual, mainstream sources and decide for yourself which ones are worth taking stock in. I guess I wish that people would become more interested in objective news outlets and coverage instead of the sensationalistic coverage they get from the evening news every night. Those news outlets aren't worried about covering the reality of what's going on in the world and the real problems behind these issues....they are only worrying about entertaining and making profits...as was already stated.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I think it's a good reminder of what corporations will do to sway your dollars and thought processes towards their objectives.
It should be watched at least twice a year, IMO. We do have short attention spans, after all. :rolleyes:
There's another website I haven't completely excavated yet, but it's seems worth a look. tamingthecorporation.org
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
There are a lot of places two where the options are sweatshop or no job at all, or if you are a women/girl prostitute. Based on those choices making Air Jordan's seems very far away from the worst choice.
chuck palahniuk is one of my favorite authors, thanks for posting that
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
a computer could be argued as being necessary...it is a way to obtain media and sources you wouldn't be able to obtain nearly as easy w/o a computer for one example
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Microsoft, ComEd, Intel, PC make,..
You have to give a little to take a little. Only big corporations can give us the gadgets we use. PCs, Cell phones, iPods, Internet,.. Would you give up all these things to end the war in Iraq?
You want to be free of corporations controlling your life? Throw your PC away, burn your iPod, smash your cell phone, drive your car into a lake..
Keep feeding the machine and it will have power over you.
And you're still feeding the corporate machine thousands of dollars for what? To argue on the internet?
For as many more facts the internet spreads, its spreads just as much propaganda. Nothing changes.
of course there's nothing wrong w/ hobbies as long as they are moderate. like safaris and hunting (unless you're gonna eat it) i wouldn't be for.
i'm aware there are good corporations, good lobbyists. but the point is are they the ones who seem to have the most influence? which corporations did cheney meet w/ in secret to craft the energy policy? do you think they had the nations best interests at heart or their profit margin??
yes, corporations and lobbyists can be a subset, but they abuse their power and money to push things that are harmful to the public. of course this is not 100% but it seems the norm.
look at shitty pharmaceutical and health care type bills, is it a coincidence they spend a lot of money lobbying congress during those times??
you can put it off as they are simply better at playing the game but i believe it's they have more money and that opens more doors and when it comes to the well being of the public i don't think that should happen.
i didn't mean 'our media' in the possessive form, like it's mine. i meant it as our accepted forms of media. you said make my own media. ok, i could do that w/ youtube or make a website...but the reality is that an overwhelming number would dismiss it b/c it's not from the mainstream sources of media. i've heard from plenty of ppl 'if that were true it'd be all over the news!'
now, you can argue that's what we get b/c we don't want to be informed. but that, in a way, is a cop out b/c i feel these media establishments, if they are gonna pass themselves off as news much less fair and balanced or the name we can trust...then they have an obligation to actually inform us. a better informed public is a great asset but that's not what they want. they want consumers who can't pay attention very long. and how do they know what news we want and don't want? i've never been asked. you can say don't turn on, and i don't, i haven't watched tv (except for a few shows like lost, the office, daily show... online) for a very long time, other than breaks at work. but to many ppl they think this is news. maybe it's naive on their part and they should be looking further themselves.
i also said they shape our views (or did i?) the mass media helps assimilate us into this state. many ppl think if it were true and if it were news worthy than the major networks wouldn't cover it. and like i said before; if i made a website or a youtube clip most of those ppl would dismiss 'my media' right off the bat.
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Nothing changes???
That's a load of shit. Sorry.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
yes!!!! that's like the argument about pharmaceuticals saying they have to make their money back before allowing it to be generic...what happened to doing sometihng to help your fellow man?
and i would give up all these things to end war, actually that seems like the only obvious answer...maybe it's the pisces in me
having or knowing about pearl jam's first album or no code weren't a necessity, either. i don't just look up pj albums and 'argue on a message board', i do use the internet for a lot of other things like research into all sorts of things like foods, health, current events, philosophy, history, mediation, singularity, evolution, corporations....
some ppl say the consumer should be informed, it's up to them to find out what's in their food or where it comes from...how would i go about finding what's in the food processed on the other side of the country? there's all sorts of information on other things you would need the internet to obtain.
and i don't pay them thousands for it. my internet bill isn't even a single thousand a year. i guess you could argue the laptop but that was a one time purchase, not like i have to keep paying HP. and b/c of the laptop i no longer need flyers from the grocery store, i can go to their site. i don't need to drive to the library or a book store to find a recipe, i can look it up. i can find which product would be a better purchase w/o having to drive to multiple stores to compare. i am better informed b/c i have the internet.
how would i know which consumers were worth my support? i sure won't find that answer on tv
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Lullaby.
naděje umírá poslední
you're kidding right?
are you saying one cannot be enlightened by what is on a television?
Actually, it does get old. It's a ridiculous argument and it is used, again and again, as a means to ignore the point that is being made. One might even say it's childish.
naděje umírá poslední
1. yes, you can be educated via things on television. thats the television i like to watch actually. but i understand what television is and why it is there. it is there to entertain me. and sometimes you come across some good edutainment in the process
The point that was being made was that no one should buy things they don't need to survive. That's a pretty stupid thing to say on an electronic message board, the existence of which depends on countless items bought by people for reasons other than survival. Obviously this person doesn't even believe their own bullshit.
People here struggle time and time again with the concepts of "need" and "necessity", too often failing to understand that both of those words are not absolute concepts, but rather measures against standards that too often remain unnamed. To say "I need x" is a statment that begs the question: for what? Against survival, "need" begs a very small list of things.
I don't really disagree with what you're saying. But it seems rather silly to think he actually meant survival in the sense of living out in the woods with a two sticks and a stone, because if that's your standard you really don't need anything at all. Is it really that hard to imagine he might have meant survival in today's society? And yes, believe it or not, to survive in today's society a computer is a necessity for many people.
When I read statements like his, I immediately know or at least have a general idea of what he's saying and even though I could also point out that he doesn't "need" a computer to live, I realize that's not what he meant and doing so would only distract attention from his real argument. And I might be mistaken here but I think he's referring to massive consumerism. To give a concrete example people don't "need" five TVs, people don't "need" 4 cars, people don't "need" a huge mansion... However, people might need a computer for their job, they might need a house to live in...
Actually, the rest of his post explains it quite clearly what he meant. But I suppose saying "you don't need a computer" is much easier than actually discussing what he suggested.
naděje umírá poslední
Many see it as a very effective platform for information and to be used for the betterment of humanity.
Others think that if a specific group...the media on television, for example...claim they are fair and objective, that they are to be held to that standard. It's all about the context.
Because you see one way does not invalidate another way. People with all intents and purposes are in television or watch television, all for different reasons.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
tell that to the OP
No, it's really not. Millions of people do not have computers and manage not to starve or suddenly burst into flames.
A computer is a necessity in today's society for all sorts of things, but not for survival! Again, when we use words like "need" or "necessity", we have to understand what they mean. They imply a requirement against a standard. I need a computer to respond to your post. I need a double-shot latte to feel cool. I need a plasma TV to impress my friends. I don't need any of those things to survive.
I think we are discussing the above, so it's kind of disproving your point. Anyway, do you see the problem with these fuzzy applications of the word "need"? Of course no one "needs" five TVs, except the guy who has five TVs will probably give you the same equivocations about them as you're now giving about computers. Personally, I own probably 50 computers. Do I need them? Absolutely not! However, are they linked in ways to my own survival at a given standard and my happiness to a certain extent? Sure.
The unfortunate consequence of debating "need" against fuzzy standards is that one simply seeks to impose one's values on others. I can invent all sorts of reasons why I need my computers, but certainy you don't need your millions of dollars or your 5 bedroom house or your fancy new watch. The fact of the matter is that people seek out the things that make them happy and absolutely should be allowed to do so based on their standards. And if they amass material fortune expecting joy and find nothing but misery there, so be it. Why should I care? If any of us believes we have a right to seek out happiness on our own standards, then we absolutely need to have the ability to do so without others imposing their definitions of happiness or need upon us.
Between the religious zealots, the Marxists, and even many of the self-proclaimed capitalists, far too many people have been made to suffer the foolish and contradictory standards and concomittant guilt of someone else's definition of "need". Catholicism told me I didn't need to have sex. Maxists told me I didn't need to have wealth. Capitalists told me I didn't need to question their abilities. Turns out that when I challenged each of those assertions and acquired the things they told me I didn't need, I found some of the greatest joys I've every experienced. I accepted my own standards of need against my own goals of happiness, and I found success there. Is that the path for everyone? Probably not. But it was the path for me, and I would much rather see everyone able to follow their path, for better or worse, than attempts by anyone to apply their standard to all.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I'm in!!!
((((((HUGS))))))) to everyone and especially to you, NMyTree....and my2hands.....!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!