It was a romantic day from the start. I know that contradicts the title of the post, but you'll soon understand. As I was saying this particular day was one where my wife and I just seemed to be connecting on all levels. Of course we usually get along. We aren't the type of couple to have disagreements or fight. In fact most couples would say that after five years of marriage we are still sickly sweet to one another. I like it that way. This day though was one that had our relationship firing on all cylinders.
We awoke together after sleeping in just a bit, cuddled a while and turned on the radio as we started the day. While cleaning is much of a romantic thing to do we made the best of it. We laughed joked and snapped each other with towels, just the general flirtatous behavior you should expect from a couple.
We both had a commitment for the early afternoon so we bid farewell with a kiss and left to accomplish our tasks. I had been contemplating what a great morning it had been, and on my way home decided to call my wife and ask her on a date. By the time I arrived home she was ready to go. The work I'd been doing involved tearing up a floor so I was in definete need of a shower. My wife waited patiently as I hurriedly finished a shower and changed into fresh clothes.
Soon we were on the road to the restaurant of her choosing. She chose a sports bar. While it was far from a romantic setting I knew she did it to allow me to see some of the sporting events I was missing. My wife really does love me. After a wonderful dinner we took in a movie. It wasn't good, but it mattered not. We spent the evening together.
By the time we arrived home we were certainly feeling romantic after this day spent together. I lit a candle, shut the bedroom door and embraced my wife in my arms. It wasn't long before I heard our cat push open the door. Sure this was an intrusion into our private time, but I was not going to be detered.
"What is that smell" my wife said with a hint of disgust in her voice. I could smell it too. Yes it was bad. It was then that we looked over and nearly in unison cried out in horror as to what we were seeing. The cat's tail was on FIRE! She hadn't yet appeared to notice, and I believe it was our screams that sent the flaming ball of fire scurrying through the house.
Needless to say our moment of intimacy was over. We spent the next few moments chasing down the cat whose tail was now charred.
No the cat didn't really die, either by flame or my frustrated hands.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Time To Make A Choice
There is one thing that "almost" everyone I talk to can agree upon. Whether republican or democrat it seems we have all come to the conclusion that we can't continue to run budget deficits forever.
If you read this and the first thing you want to do is begin blaming one party or the other, don't bother. WE are all to blame.
We can not continue the path we are on. We must either decide to make very deep cuts to social service programs, or raise taxes significantly on EVERYONE. Not just the very rich. Just taxing the rich more wouldn't be enough.
Every dollar taken in in taxes in a year is consumed to pay for Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security alone. That leaves every other program and service including DOT, DOD, Treasury, and countless other programs to be funded by loans.
With recent reports of 45 percent of households having at least one member receiving aid from government and nearly half of all people paying zero dollars in taxes, I'm afraid there is no cutting of the programs. At least not without riots in the streets.
All this leaves us in a position where taxes will need to go up dramatically in order to pay our every expanding debts. This could include a VAT tax on top of income taxes, high taxes on corporations (which would likely be very detrimental to business), higher personal income taxes across the board or maybe even all of the above.
How would you solve the problem. Cut programs, raise taxes or a combination of the two.
Just a hint for those of you who would blame Iraq/Afghanistan war operations for the deficit, fine, but realize that ALL the money spent on all the war operations in the last 9 years is still 300 billion less than the budget deficit this year alone. So, you can say we need to stop the wars, and that would be a good start. However, one year's worth of war costs is less than 9 percent of the deficit. We've got a long way to go. It's time to make a choice.
If you read this and the first thing you want to do is begin blaming one party or the other, don't bother. WE are all to blame.
We can not continue the path we are on. We must either decide to make very deep cuts to social service programs, or raise taxes significantly on EVERYONE. Not just the very rich. Just taxing the rich more wouldn't be enough.
Every dollar taken in in taxes in a year is consumed to pay for Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security alone. That leaves every other program and service including DOT, DOD, Treasury, and countless other programs to be funded by loans.
With recent reports of 45 percent of households having at least one member receiving aid from government and nearly half of all people paying zero dollars in taxes, I'm afraid there is no cutting of the programs. At least not without riots in the streets.
All this leaves us in a position where taxes will need to go up dramatically in order to pay our every expanding debts. This could include a VAT tax on top of income taxes, high taxes on corporations (which would likely be very detrimental to business), higher personal income taxes across the board or maybe even all of the above.
How would you solve the problem. Cut programs, raise taxes or a combination of the two.
Just a hint for those of you who would blame Iraq/Afghanistan war operations for the deficit, fine, but realize that ALL the money spent on all the war operations in the last 9 years is still 300 billion less than the budget deficit this year alone. So, you can say we need to stop the wars, and that would be a good start. However, one year's worth of war costs is less than 9 percent of the deficit. We've got a long way to go. It's time to make a choice.
A Liberal Point of View
I have been contemplating for a while whether or not to continue this blog. It isn't that I don't enjoy writing it. I certainly have. I'm just not sure that it is productive. I'm fairly certain the words I write aren't changing any ones opinion regarding the topics covered. Anyway onto the purpose for this post.
I read the following phrase on a blog I follow:
"I feel that people should be able to do what they want UNLESS it is totally distasteful, insensitive or just plain stupid."
This is not a person who lacks the mental capacity to have an intelligent conversation. To the contrary I have found her posts to be well thought and well written, even if I rarely agree.
This quote on the the other hand shows a rather telling lack of foresight. The problems with this line of thought are obvious, and I don't feel the need to explain them. If I do have to explain you won't understand anyway.
I read the following phrase on a blog I follow:
"I feel that people should be able to do what they want UNLESS it is totally distasteful, insensitive or just plain stupid."
This is not a person who lacks the mental capacity to have an intelligent conversation. To the contrary I have found her posts to be well thought and well written, even if I rarely agree.
This quote on the the other hand shows a rather telling lack of foresight. The problems with this line of thought are obvious, and I don't feel the need to explain them. If I do have to explain you won't understand anyway.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Assault on Capitalism
To say that there is an assault on capitalism in this country is an understatement. From the bailouts of wall street and motor companies to the calls for the Venezuela style take over of BP the assault is obvious. I have only two quick thoughts I'd like to share.
1. We don't currently have a capitalist system. The government is intertwined in both banking the motor companies, oil, just about every sector of the economy we see struggling is already highly regulated by our government. The arguments that it was capitalism that led to the economic troubles we see is a fallacy.
2. (And this was the real point of this post) Nearly every day I hear people whining and complaining about how much money the gas stations make on a gallon of gas. I hear people complaining about the cost of health care, insurance... etc.
The same question always remains. If you really believe they have such a high profit margin, then why haven't you opened your own business. You could undercut their price and make money hand over fist. You don't even have to become a doctor. Just open a clinic, hire some docs, charge a lower rate and watch the people flock in your doors. They will be glad you are charging less, and you can swim in all your profits like scrooge mcduck. But you don't. I wonder why. Either you are not willing to take the risk, or you don't really believe what you are claiming.
There is also another option. It is possible that you don't believe there should be a profit allowed. That clinics and doctors should be run as non-profits. In which case you are a hypocrite.
I think your industry should be non-profit.
1. We don't currently have a capitalist system. The government is intertwined in both banking the motor companies, oil, just about every sector of the economy we see struggling is already highly regulated by our government. The arguments that it was capitalism that led to the economic troubles we see is a fallacy.
2. (And this was the real point of this post) Nearly every day I hear people whining and complaining about how much money the gas stations make on a gallon of gas. I hear people complaining about the cost of health care, insurance... etc.
The same question always remains. If you really believe they have such a high profit margin, then why haven't you opened your own business. You could undercut their price and make money hand over fist. You don't even have to become a doctor. Just open a clinic, hire some docs, charge a lower rate and watch the people flock in your doors. They will be glad you are charging less, and you can swim in all your profits like scrooge mcduck. But you don't. I wonder why. Either you are not willing to take the risk, or you don't really believe what you are claiming.
There is also another option. It is possible that you don't believe there should be a profit allowed. That clinics and doctors should be run as non-profits. In which case you are a hypocrite.
I think your industry should be non-profit.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Arizona Law - Constitutional?
Before we get into this immigration law I'd like to take a moment and give my personal thoughts on immigration. My solution to the Hispanic illegal alien problem is very simple. Armed troops with authority to shoot anyone crossing the border at any place other than an authorized check station. We do this in other police actions to control movement half way around the world. Surely our own borders should be no less a priority. This would be very effective. You only have to step over a few dead bodies before you reconsider your method of entering this country.
Second, we need to make it MUCH easier for immigrants to enter this country to work as productive members of society. I am not against immigration. It is what makes this country strong. I am against illegal aliens crossing our border damaging our social services and creating a drain on our nation.
Now to the Arizona law.
I have two issues with this law that I believe violate your constitutional rights.
1. The law allows police officers to stop and question anyone they "have reason to believe" may be in the country illegally. What could this possibly mean in Arizona other than a hostile environment for anyone of Hispanic dissent. It is very plausible that a single individual driving to work could be stopped multiple times for simple having brown skin. This is the Hispanic version of "driving while black". This is not acceptable.
2. This law requires all individuals to carry on their person documentation showing their immigration status. This could mean a green card for an immigrant, or a social security card or birth certificate for a citizen. The problem with this is that it places the burden of proof on the accused. Rather than the principle accepted by the Supreme Court since the very inception of our country as a the standard of guilt.
This second point brings to mind the gestapo asking you for your papers. You have a right in this country under the 4th amendment to a reasonable degree of privacy and security in your person. In my opinion this law is a clear violation.
Some have criticized my opinion as hypocritical as I want to shoot people crossing the boarder with out due process. Depriving them of their life without a trial constituting a violation of their 5th amendment. To these people I retort that those crossing the border are not citizens of the United States, and therefore not protected by the bill of rights. However I will concede that it may be best to claim a few hundred feet this side of the border as military base property, thereby making a trespass an invasion.
Second, we need to make it MUCH easier for immigrants to enter this country to work as productive members of society. I am not against immigration. It is what makes this country strong. I am against illegal aliens crossing our border damaging our social services and creating a drain on our nation.
Now to the Arizona law.
I have two issues with this law that I believe violate your constitutional rights.
1. The law allows police officers to stop and question anyone they "have reason to believe" may be in the country illegally. What could this possibly mean in Arizona other than a hostile environment for anyone of Hispanic dissent. It is very plausible that a single individual driving to work could be stopped multiple times for simple having brown skin. This is the Hispanic version of "driving while black". This is not acceptable.
2. This law requires all individuals to carry on their person documentation showing their immigration status. This could mean a green card for an immigrant, or a social security card or birth certificate for a citizen. The problem with this is that it places the burden of proof on the accused. Rather than the principle accepted by the Supreme Court since the very inception of our country as a the standard of guilt.
This second point brings to mind the gestapo asking you for your papers. You have a right in this country under the 4th amendment to a reasonable degree of privacy and security in your person. In my opinion this law is a clear violation.
Some have criticized my opinion as hypocritical as I want to shoot people crossing the boarder with out due process. Depriving them of their life without a trial constituting a violation of their 5th amendment. To these people I retort that those crossing the border are not citizens of the United States, and therefore not protected by the bill of rights. However I will concede that it may be best to claim a few hundred feet this side of the border as military base property, thereby making a trespass an invasion.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Selling My Home in the New Government Era
About a month and a half ago my wife and I listed our home with a real estate agent. We have been renting for the last few years as we waited for the market to improve. In the mean time we had renters in our home to assist us pay the mortgage. We signed the papers with our realtor on a Friday morning. Friday afternoon she placed the sign in our yard. The house was shown Saturday morning, and that afternoon we had an offer in front of us. Wow, we were happy. While it wasn't quite full asking price, it was close.
{cue the "Imperial March" music}
Enter the government. The buyer of our home is doing so through a government guaranteed loan, so of course there will be an inspection to ensure the house meets minimum requirements. The inspector asked that we:
Replace a few shingles - No problem. I have extras.
Repair flashing around Chimney - Not a big deal.
Update outlets - Sigh. Okay.
Repair cracked window in basement. Fine.
Enter bank appraiser who asks for a vapor barrier under the addition. (This is a 10'x8' room. - Why do they care. It was fine when we bought it 5 years ago.
Enter City inspector who demands we:
Replace all smoke detectors. - Why? They still work! The city just wants new ones.
Replace 60amp electrical box with 120amp. - At this point I'm pulling my hair out. The city is requiring more than even the federal government. Oh by the way, if you don't make all repairs they will not allow the transfer of the deed. UNDER WHAT AUTHORITY?
Of course you have to use their "approved" electricians. (There are only two.) You can't do the work on your own. How can this be constitutional?
It is no wonder the housing market is hurting. The government forces so many regulations that it eats up all your equity, if you are lucky enough to have some.
{cue the "Imperial March" music}
Enter the government. The buyer of our home is doing so through a government guaranteed loan, so of course there will be an inspection to ensure the house meets minimum requirements. The inspector asked that we:
Replace a few shingles - No problem. I have extras.
Repair flashing around Chimney - Not a big deal.
Update outlets - Sigh. Okay.
Repair cracked window in basement. Fine.
Enter bank appraiser who asks for a vapor barrier under the addition. (This is a 10'x8' room. - Why do they care. It was fine when we bought it 5 years ago.
Enter City inspector who demands we:
Replace all smoke detectors. - Why? They still work! The city just wants new ones.
Replace 60amp electrical box with 120amp. - At this point I'm pulling my hair out. The city is requiring more than even the federal government. Oh by the way, if you don't make all repairs they will not allow the transfer of the deed. UNDER WHAT AUTHORITY?
Of course you have to use their "approved" electricians. (There are only two.) You can't do the work on your own. How can this be constitutional?
It is no wonder the housing market is hurting. The government forces so many regulations that it eats up all your equity, if you are lucky enough to have some.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Is it Time to Repeal the 17th Amendment?
The 17th amendment to the constitution states that United States Senators will be elected by a vote of the people in the states. What else would we do? Well prior to the 17th amendment Senators were chosen by state legislators to represent the state at the federal level. They had control over the U.S. Senator in that they would even tell them how they were expected to vote on various bills.
Originally the people of the states would vote for their U.S. House representatives every 2 years, and the state legislators would appoint a U.S. Senator every 6 years. This gave the people representation in the government, but also allowed the state, as a state, to be represented.
In 1835 8 U.S. Senators were forced by their states to resign from their posts after not following the states will in their voting regarding President Andrew Jackson's war against the Bank of the United States. So you can see that consequences to Senators under this system are swift and severe. Contrast that with today where U.S. Senators only face voters every 6th year.
The 17th amendment was ratified in 1912. It took more than 85 years to become law since the first time it was introduced.
Originally the people of the states would vote for their U.S. House representatives every 2 years, and the state legislators would appoint a U.S. Senator every 6 years. This gave the people representation in the government, but also allowed the state, as a state, to be represented.
In 1835 8 U.S. Senators were forced by their states to resign from their posts after not following the states will in their voting regarding President Andrew Jackson's war against the Bank of the United States. So you can see that consequences to Senators under this system are swift and severe. Contrast that with today where U.S. Senators only face voters every 6th year.
The 17th amendment was ratified in 1912. It took more than 85 years to become law since the first time it was introduced.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Bizaro World
What do you do when you are in the midst of an economic crisis, you have jobs leaving your state in record numbers and not enough money to fund the programs you have in place? I know. Create a policy demanding an end to the evil use of coal. Sure you'll have to raise electric rates to sky high levels to get there, but what are a few more homeless people in Los Angeles.
That is exactly what is currently happening. Here is a link to the story in the L.A. Times. Sure they only raised the rates 20 percent this time around, but more are on the way.
Wait here is the best part. What are they going to do with the money?
"Villaraigosa said the money would help pay for the hiring of "green doctors" to evaluate the energy efficiency of homes and stepped-up efforts to help residents obtain energy-efficient light bulbs and refrigerators."
Yep. They are going to take your money so that they can hire someone to sniff around in your fridge to make sure it is using the most efficient light bulb possible. God forbid you can't afford a new fridge due to the higher electric bills, because you know some of those fridges are killing polar bears. You are definitely going to need to be taxed for not having a more efficient fridge.
Wait do you hear that.... It's the sound of more businesses leaving California.
That is exactly what is currently happening. Here is a link to the story in the L.A. Times. Sure they only raised the rates 20 percent this time around, but more are on the way.
Wait here is the best part. What are they going to do with the money?
"Villaraigosa said the money would help pay for the hiring of "green doctors" to evaluate the energy efficiency of homes and stepped-up efforts to help residents obtain energy-efficient light bulbs and refrigerators."
Yep. They are going to take your money so that they can hire someone to sniff around in your fridge to make sure it is using the most efficient light bulb possible. God forbid you can't afford a new fridge due to the higher electric bills, because you know some of those fridges are killing polar bears. You are definitely going to need to be taxed for not having a more efficient fridge.
Wait do you hear that.... It's the sound of more businesses leaving California.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Thoughts on Forgiveness
All of us have some things in our life for which we needed to ask forgiveness. We have hurt our friends, family, co-workers, etc... However, in the same vein we have all been harmed at one time or another and to one degree or another. While the extent of our harm varies we all share in that we are not perfect. We have both harmed, and been harmed. Hence the need for forgiveness.
It occurs to me that forgiveness is not for the person who has done the trespass. Forgiveness is for the person who has been harmed. Follow me for a moment here.
Have you ever been angry with someone for something they did to you? Did they know you were mad at them? If so, did they care? If they cared about your relationship perhaps they did, but what if they didn't. You could be angry and they would never know. You would sit up at night and they would sleep. You could let the harm shape the rest of your life, ruining relationships. You could even hate them. It won't matter. They'll sleep like a baby.
The only exception I see to this is when a person feeling guilt requests forgiveness. In that case however, the person asking for forgiveness often feels as thought they have harmed themselves while harming you. In the end whether you forgive them they must forgive themselves.
Do yourself a favor. Forgive the person who has hurt you the most because they aren't even thinking about you. Forgive yourself too. You deserve it.
It occurs to me that forgiveness is not for the person who has done the trespass. Forgiveness is for the person who has been harmed. Follow me for a moment here.
Have you ever been angry with someone for something they did to you? Did they know you were mad at them? If so, did they care? If they cared about your relationship perhaps they did, but what if they didn't. You could be angry and they would never know. You would sit up at night and they would sleep. You could let the harm shape the rest of your life, ruining relationships. You could even hate them. It won't matter. They'll sleep like a baby.
The only exception I see to this is when a person feeling guilt requests forgiveness. In that case however, the person asking for forgiveness often feels as thought they have harmed themselves while harming you. In the end whether you forgive them they must forgive themselves.
Do yourself a favor. Forgive the person who has hurt you the most because they aren't even thinking about you. Forgive yourself too. You deserve it.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Obama, Not so Concerned With Amendment #4
Not too awful long ago I wrote a post regarding my change of heart concerning the patriot act. Mostly the reason boils down to that I don't believe you can trust the government of the United States, or any government for that matter, to do the right thing. Well that goes for Bush and Obama alike. You may have read the story recently where officials in the Obama administration said the following regarding tracking citizens via their cell phones without a warrant. Here is the full story.
In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking
is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in
their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts.
In the times we live it seems that privacy really has become something the government believes is not a right. The fourth amendment to the constitution disagrees and reads as follows:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
While cell phones obviously had not been conceived at the time, the word "effects" applies to all your possessions. Including a cell phone and it's where abouts.
In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking
is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in
their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts.
In the times we live it seems that privacy really has become something the government believes is not a right. The fourth amendment to the constitution disagrees and reads as follows:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
While cell phones obviously had not been conceived at the time, the word "effects" applies to all your possessions. Including a cell phone and it's where abouts.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Abortion Thoughts
I read a number of blogs of women who are ardently pro-choice. I don’t know why I read them. Perhaps it is just because I like to read the thoughts of people who have a radically different world view than my own. I am bored to tears reading the words of those who I agree with on most every subject. Especially if I disagree with the way the promote their ideas.
For some reason those who are pro-life have been labeled Super-Christians, murderers, haters, and so forth. I wish I could disagree with you, but when I look around I see much of the same even as a pro-life Christian. Here are some of my thoughts.
As a Christian you are called to love others. It is tough to do that standing in front of an abortion clinic holding a sign that calls scared teenage girls murderers.
As a Christian you are called to proclaim the good news of Christ, which is about forgiveness of sin. You are not called to convict others of their sin. That is the Holy Spirits job. You aren’t any good at it anyway.
Abortion is a sin…… So is hating someone. In fact it is the same as murder to God. I wonder if you are guilty of that. As you know, if you have broken just one of the laws you are guilty of breaking the whole law, hence the need for Christ and His good news.
Do I believe abortion is a good thing? No. But I believe as Christians we are fighting the wrong battle. Instead we should love those who are hurting, provide food for those in need. We should provide medical care for those in need, and show the lost world that there is a better way. Not doing so with an air of contempt, but with compassion and understanding.
Women who have had abortions have not done so on a whim, and many times they are hurting over the difficult decision. Standing in front of them calling them murderers is not what Christ would do. He would show compassion. Will you?
For some reason those who are pro-life have been labeled Super-Christians, murderers, haters, and so forth. I wish I could disagree with you, but when I look around I see much of the same even as a pro-life Christian. Here are some of my thoughts.
As a Christian you are called to love others. It is tough to do that standing in front of an abortion clinic holding a sign that calls scared teenage girls murderers.
As a Christian you are called to proclaim the good news of Christ, which is about forgiveness of sin. You are not called to convict others of their sin. That is the Holy Spirits job. You aren’t any good at it anyway.
Abortion is a sin…… So is hating someone. In fact it is the same as murder to God. I wonder if you are guilty of that. As you know, if you have broken just one of the laws you are guilty of breaking the whole law, hence the need for Christ and His good news.
Do I believe abortion is a good thing? No. But I believe as Christians we are fighting the wrong battle. Instead we should love those who are hurting, provide food for those in need. We should provide medical care for those in need, and show the lost world that there is a better way. Not doing so with an air of contempt, but with compassion and understanding.
Women who have had abortions have not done so on a whim, and many times they are hurting over the difficult decision. Standing in front of them calling them murderers is not what Christ would do. He would show compassion. Will you?
Friday, January 29, 2010
Another Pregnant Man
The headline to the story reads "Another Pregnant Man". I remember when the first of these stories came out a while back, and my reaction is the same the second time around. THIS IS NOT A MAN.
For some reason the media promotes this as though it were a man who by some freak of nature was able to conceive a child and carry it to term I don't know somewhere in his urethra. That is obviously not the case here. Just like the first time around we have a woman who has been changed surgically to look like a man. Fine. I don't care what you want to do to your own body. If you want to add a third eyeball because you feel that you were supposed to be born a tri-clops, whatever, that is your business. But please then don't act as though you are doing something special.
You may look like a man, but so what, all your parts are still woman on the inside. I mean for goodness sake the lunch lady at the high school has a moustache and is well on the way to a beard. That doesn't make her a man either. For the record, no man has EVER given birth to a child, and they never will.
To add to the odd factor here, the partner is also a woman. So, we have two women who are both surgically altered to appear like men. They then couple up and date another woman who looks like a man.
For the sake of this child I really pray these parents can provide some sort of positive identity to this life they have created. This baby will have two mothers pretending to be fathers, and no one to actually be a mother or is that father. You see the dilemma.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Where does the meaning reside?
Is meaning in words, or people? This is a discussion my wife and I have repeated time and time again beginning shortly after we began dating. At the time she was in her second year of her undergraduate degree in communications. She was taking a class on interpersonal communications, and loving every minute of it. Today we find ourselves discussing it again as she prepares to begin teaching the very class next Tuesday.
One of the class discussions was whether words have meaning. The class teaches that they do not. According to the text words are simply tools which we use to communicate meaning to another individual using our background, history, education, etc. They will then use their background, history, education and so forth to interpret meaning. You can imagine the game of telephone where the meaning of what we say is open for interpretation.
I respectfully disagree. I believe words do in fact have meaning. We have a book dedicated to just that, a dictionary. It lines out in very unambiguous terms the meaning of each word. Should I choose a word incorrectly, or you interpret the word to mean something it does not. Then there is a failure in knowledge, and the words was used/interpreted incorrectly.
On the other hand we can all think of words that have come to mean other things through out the years; cool, hip, rad, groovy, mouse. I'm sure you can come up with many more. What do you think? Does the meaning reside in the words, or in people.
One of the class discussions was whether words have meaning. The class teaches that they do not. According to the text words are simply tools which we use to communicate meaning to another individual using our background, history, education, etc. They will then use their background, history, education and so forth to interpret meaning. You can imagine the game of telephone where the meaning of what we say is open for interpretation.
I respectfully disagree. I believe words do in fact have meaning. We have a book dedicated to just that, a dictionary. It lines out in very unambiguous terms the meaning of each word. Should I choose a word incorrectly, or you interpret the word to mean something it does not. Then there is a failure in knowledge, and the words was used/interpreted incorrectly.
On the other hand we can all think of words that have come to mean other things through out the years; cool, hip, rad, groovy, mouse. I'm sure you can come up with many more. What do you think? Does the meaning reside in the words, or in people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)