Woman's Survival

I agree, quitting is not the way to go. I am hopeful Darkelf will return. If she does, she will have more to add. If she doesn't return, well she can benefit from just reading our posts.

Back on track;
I think learning to protect yourself is a great idea. There are disciplines that allow you to be in harmony with peace while learning to defend. You can repeatedly flip your attacker to the ground every time he strikes. This will keep you from harm and make him exhaust himself. I feat though that if there are multiple attackers, you choices are limited to fight or flight.

Still no matter how or what tool you choose to utilize...the technology is great but if you are lousy in skills.....well the skills still need to be maintained, refined, even nutured.

(Borrowed from the firearms thread)

The fact of having to practice is true. (and lacking space and equipment is truly irritating, as I've quite a fondness for the bow and arrow...)

Is a part of that practice the mental willingness to 'do what is necessary'?

...is that something that one may actively practice?

THank you for your educational background..in your courses you are taking.

You're quite welcome. Did the knowledge bring about any thoughts?

If nothing else, it's easier to understand why I live in a bubble..

Indeed, it is through my studies in philosophy this semester that I stumbled upon another idea that fits quite well with Dark Elf's (paraphrased) words: To sit on the fence is to get a sore bum.

The idea then is Praxis -- an intersection of action and theory. Not only a meeting place, but a complete interaction of the two.
The image I have of praxis is a person walking along a line on the ground - one foot on one side, one foot on the other.
To walk directly on the line is to do neither, and to walk only on one side or another is to be incomplete. (And of course, in the end, the line is artificial.)

One cannot have just action, nor just thought; it's not an issue of think, then act, but acting-thinking, or vice versa. Thinking while acting, acting while thinking.


I bring this to light because it augments our previous discussion: There is, I think, a necessary intersection, interaction between theory/morals and action/self-defense.

Likewise, in another class, we discussed the "only" justifiable form of murder -- which is self-defense. The rest of the class automatically agreed, even the teacher (who is, otherwise, a pacifist). However, the discussion continued to include that people (assuming they are of a sound mind) who have killed in self-defense are more often than not messed up from the experience. (of course, this begs the question: was the act of self-defense worth it, if one is able to keep living, but will always be horribly affected by this traumatic experience?)


There are many ways to defend oneself that does not automatically presume to beat the ever-lovin' crap out of someone. I accept that. However, it returns around to the issue of being willing (and able when the time comes) to physically carry through with those actions.

Any situation is possible, and to even begin thinking of all the variations gives me a headache. (I tried, it didn't work the way I thought it should.)
I am armed with how to hurt, maim and kill people... not only from movies, but from people who've explained various techniques... (nevermind my own morbidity which provides an entire host of ways to inflict various levels of pain).

But, there's a very deep and wide line for me between thinking about hurting someone (how many people have I killed in my thoughts and dreams?), and actually _doing_ it.
That is the border which I am completely unsure that I am willing to cross.

Again, I know that I _can_... I beat up a pillow once, but discontinued due to thinking about the possible consequences. There's only one time in my life where I was seriously in a position to do lethal damage, and, well frankly, I put myself there as a challenge to and of myself.
In both of these situations, I was acting and thinking.

At this moment, I realize that I am not practicing praxis. I'm thinking about acting, but not acting. (And, considering the genre of this particular conversation, I'm grateful for that!) I'm not even practicing actions because, when it all boils down, I'm not sure that I want that knowledge or responsibility.

Conversely, I have a responsibility to myself and to my loved ones...


hrm. As always, I shall keep pondering. However, right now, I must find something to eat and review for class.

Thank you Orange Tom -- you are right. In all respects, life and conversation, we must survive.

~Diseria


P.S. I thought of another possibility -- because we have access to the text directly by/under our nicknames, she may have changed her text color and added 'banned member' in herself. Maybe she's taking an ats vacation, maybe her hubby got the transfer...?

Diseria,

Yes it is part of the practice including the mental willingness to do what is necessary for ones survival. THe key operative word here is survival.

For the Human of the species this included the surviavl of their offspring. Huge calcualted critical decisions are involved here for people every day in the practice of survival. Most of them involving the presence of instinct and basics in training ....through Love. We want our offspring to survive...to survive even ourselves. Though I must admit ..with much modern education and rationalization, this as Whitewave clearly states, is often instinct gone arwy. She is correct and in the Bulls Eye..on this one. In some arenas of this field...education ...people have chosen to sacrafice thier children for ease and relaxation. For a lifestyle. For this fingerprint I vote no confidence in modern education.
In my heavy handed bias this instinct and schooling/knowlege has been replaced with a remote controller and telephone keypad...even a keyboard or a game controller. Not real survival training and thinking.

No reasonable thinking person wants to outlive thier offspring. We dont want to perish early in our lives for sure...but most thinking loving parents want their offspring to survive them and also the assurance that they will in fact survive them. How many people..adults do you know that when their grandchildren come to visit ..they literally light up..in delight?? Very telling here. Very telling.

Yes this instinct is something that one can cultivate and practice. Motherhood is a prime example as is Fatherhood. Proper raising has alot to do with developing the instinct and knowlege.

However the learning in our lives actually never ends...there comes a time for us when school is out. YOu must put it into practice. With this actual utilization comes confidence and the intimate knowlege that the instincts/training are correct. The training/schooling is and was correct. WHy..??? Because school is out and you are now in the field actually putting what works into practice...not theoretical..but actual.

Class room education and actual field experience are often related but in practicality quite different. The basics apply but are often applied differently from the very sanitary convenient theoretical labratory conditions of classrooms.

This is when you realize that School is Out!!!!

I am tonight getting ready to go on 12 hour shifts...on a special job. I have been training for this job for almost two years. School is out now.
The rubber will meet the road here. I will be doing this in the field ...for a long part of this year. School is definitely out. This does not mean the learning stops..not at all...but school is out so to speak. This is where for me the rubber will meet the road.

By the way...your posting on Praxis is intresting. I have heard of the Aristotillian method and have also heard from selected peoples that in theoretical science there is a type of dichomoty going on in logic between Aristotillian methods and reasoning and Platonic methods and reasoning. Some scientists advocating one method and the other around thier other champion. I was startled to learn this from a teacher. I got the feeling this began to touch on mysticism so to speak. It was the background the basis for thier scientific religious system of thinking. Very intresting to sense that in the deep hallowed halls of scientific reasoning and logic it can border on mysticism. These are their gods of logic.

Yes understand about your courses...this also accounts for your usage of the term.."your bubble." No problem here. I myself choose to live in much of a bubble. Hence my positing earlier that I am very antisocial with those I choose to be so. I am particular about the company I keep.

I also have a insight into your sensitivity on these subjects and concepts.
Thank you.

Gotta shove off here...alot of preparations before begining 12 hour shifts.

Thanks,
Orangetom

OrangeTom,

In some arenas of this field...education ...people have chosen to sacrafice thier children for ease and relaxation. For a lifestyle. For this fingerprint I vote no confidence in modern education. [snip] Not real survival training and thinking.

No argument there. Technology has given people the opportunity to be lazy, and they've taken advantage of that. Makes it very difficult to change minds... assuming that the minds have ever even developed!

Logic should be a requirement in middle school, not only for philosophy in college. Critical thinking likewise.

And survival has changed its face... instead of hunting for our meals, we hunt for paychecks. Instead of sharing our meals, we are involved in heartless competition...

Check out Gandhi's Seven Deadly Sins.

This is why I did not go into business management! I refuse to exchange my passion for a paycheck. This system is not the most correct it could be... (of course, what is the alternative? ...and how to affect that change? I don't know - been pondering that one for years.)

However the learning in our lives actually never ends...there comes a time for us when school is out. YOu must put it into practice. With this actual utilization comes confidence and the intimate knowlege that the instincts/training are correct. The training/schooling is and was correct. WHy..??? Because school is out and you are now in the field actually putting what works into practice...not theoretical..but actual.

Class room education and actual field experience are often related but in practicality quite different. The basics apply but are often applied differently from the very sanitary convenient theoretical labratory conditions of classrooms.

The beautiful thing with ethics/morality is that you _can_ practice what you learn... I'm no social butterfly, but I am required to engage with people socially when I get groceries, or go to class. I have finally realized that I _am_ a social creature... (I always was, but I completely denied it because I wanted no part of a society gone wrong.) And now I have to figure out what it means for me to be part of this society...



As far as the differences between the Aristotillian method and the Platonic method, I shall have to do further research. I'm familiar with Aristotle, because the Logic that I am learning is based on his teachings, as well as my understanding of Virtue Ethics. I'm aware of plato/socrates, but I haven't actually dug into much of his/their work.

However, your thoughts on the methods' connections to mysticism intrigues me. Would you elaborate?

Yes understand about your courses...this also accounts for your usage of the term.."your bubble." No problem here. I myself choose to live in much of a bubble. Hence my positing earlier that I am very antisocial with those I choose to be so. I am particular about the company I keep.

You have chosen your bubble. And to some extent, so have I. However, in the same breath, I must add that my bubble was also given to me. I was sheltered, and have chosen to remain sheltered. Arguably, you've lived more life than I (most people have ), so to some extent you left the bubble your parents gave you, went out into the world, probably got into a few scuffles (for purposes of this thread) and chose to return (or rather, create a new bubble).

If I may ask (and maybe you've answered this and I am simply failing to remember), what is it that you do? ...especially that required 2 years of schooling?

Off to class again! Let's see if I understand more today than I did tuesday..


As always, i Thank You.
~Diseria

(taken from Cut Global Warming by Vegetarianism?)

Originally posted by Anok
It's like the old proverb...

If you see your friend getting beaten up by a dozen people, you wouldn't join in cause you couldn't do anything about it.

My reply: Then I'd have to question the friendship... (This is one reason why I don't have many friends -- because I *would* jump in.)



That was my knee-jerk reaction to Anok's statement. I've never had many friends, not only because I'm quite the odd duckling, but simply _because_ I would lay my life down for them. Never had the opportunity to prove my statement, but was close a few times to decking people who wouldn't back off.

So, now I'm curious when that particular thought process changed, and, more importantly, why...

Was I that angry in high skool that I was willing to hurt someone? (Am I not angry anymore?) I was angry with the world, with my immediate society... but that hasn't changed. (Although, arguably I see the possibility of working towards a change in society, which I did not see before.) Maybe I've internalized my anger? re-directed it so that the only anger that shows is twisted back to myself?

Was it that, at that particular time in my life, Friends (do notice the capital F) were rare? (....frankly, they are still exceedingly rare...)

Was it an issue of honor? 'You're my Friend, thus I must defend your honor when you cannot?' If it was, it was totally subconscious as I don't recall any notions of honor...

So, wtf changed!?

Have I drawn some weird line within myself when I began studying philosophy, ethics, morality?

If that is the case, then I've crossed over the line and gone to the other side -- which is equally as incomplete as the other side (pacifism verses aggression).

.....hrm. I'm gonna hafta ponder this for awhile...

What a great thread. Ladies what can i say, my mother use to tell me "the meek shall inherit the earth" this translates to "the women shall inherit the earth" and that always put a smile on my face. If it ever comes about IMO that will be great day, she also explained to me why women are put down by men. Women give life something small minded men fear, so they've always attempted to control women, in truth the power lies with them.

I just hope that if situation x does happen men will understand their role. Humanity will not be saved by men they are in fact dispensable when considering priorities for long term survival. All men need to think about is providing shelter, food and security for the women and children in their group.

.

Originally posted by Diseria
OrangeTom,

As far as the differences between the Aristotillian method and the Platonic method, I shall have to do further research. I'm familiar with Aristotle, because the Logic that I am learning is based on his teachings, as well as my understanding of Virtue Ethics. I'm aware of plato/socrates, but I haven't actually dug into much of his/their work.

However, your thoughts on the methods' connections to mysticism intrigues me. Would you elaborate?

I have been taught that the two areas of philosphy involving the scientific community stem from two sources with often two different results due to the methods. These are from a begining point of logic Aristotlian origins and Platonic origins.

What I have also been taught in methods and I found very amusing was that in the scientific community in their wilder speculations and philosophys, if you were to read some of thier material before it was cleaned up their wilder speculations or begining points would look something to the effect of.....

"A long time ago in a galaxy far far away......"

This is the mystical part...the philosophy part.

I have also been taught that there are two different types of scientist/thinkers at work here. The pure scientific types ...pure logic Mr Spock. Speculative thinkers, number cruncher types.
And then there are the practical scientist/engineer types...who look for ways to use all this speculation and turn it into workable practical every day solutions to problems.

Truth be known we need both to get things done. I am also told that they often make fun of each other..where the public cannot see it openly.

But we do need both parts. To my knowlege the sequence of events is such that some deep philosphical thinker who in actuality can hardly tie thier shoes without messing it up...comes up with an idea and then often years and years later when enough hardware and techniques have been mastered by the practical scientists this early philosopher/scientist's ideas can be brought to frutition.

This can reach mystical almost Holy proportions when a breakthrough is made on earlier work.
I do find it intresting history to read the sequence of events of inventions and patterns of thought which have been turned into products which today make our lives easier and more comfortable. Most peoples have no reason at all to seek this information or pattern of thinking but I find it fascinating.

If I may ask (and maybe you've answered this and I am simply failing to remember), what is it that you do? ...especially that required 2 years of schooling?

I probably did not exactly state this correctly ....2 years of schooling and training.
I am a machinist with a special qualification as a nuclear fueler.

Gotta go get ready..long shift tonight.
Thanks,
Orangetom