If you chased down a multi-ton rhino on foot, then killed it with a wooden spear, just to grind up it's horn... you'd get wood too.
All Ha-Ha aside, I agree with you some. While I'm currently an artist for a toy company, my education is in the Social Sciences, having received a Masters in both Psychology and Sociology. While sometimes people stumbled upon solid science (ie. aspirin) that works, I think many of the so called "folk cures" call upon the placebo effect more so than a solid scientific basis. If we take the erectile dysfunction as an example, we know that many cases of ED are psychologically based, and not physical. If the patient truly believes that the medicine man could cure him with rhino horn, dried deer penis, cobra venom, or what have you... then that belief would allow him to "rise to the occasion." Although I will grant that, naturally, being a psychologist at heart I am still a firm believer that our greatest medical tool is "mind over matter."
ironclad Copyright laws in a country that would rather execute you than listen to what you have to say.
/Counts the days to a world wide boycott on Music/Movies following the first Copyright Infringement conviction that is followed by the person's execution.
I have read most of the comments regarding MMO's lack of immersion. Being a 27 year old I have to say that people are forgeting about the day and age that younger people were raised. I was on the Nintendo at 13 getting instant gratification by smashing Goomas flat. The younger people were raised with a shallow immersion factor, it is what we are used to. Now as a lvl 50 Druid I don't find WoW to be shallow at all. I find myself trying to stretch the limits of the game. I have swam to the bottom of the ocean in Aquatic form just to see if there was a bottom. I try to climb the highest mountain just KNOWING that there has to be a way up there. Everything new that I see and do truly astounds me at the shear size and complexity of Azeroth. At lower lvl I tried my best to get into places where I really wasn't supposed to be, just to see if I could do it. I have screen shots of me in front of the Dark Port at lvl 38, and the time I slipped into Scholo behind a group of lvl 60 Horde players at lvl 37. There is so much to do and see, and so many ways to have fun in this game instead just killing and lvl'ing.
IMHO D&D always took itself too seriously, striving to make the scenarios as life-like as a bunch of mages, warriors, and necromancers could be. Books upon Books have been published detailing every imaginable facet. Now, personally, I don't find having to memorize and read book after book to properly play a game alot of fun. WoW isn't like this, it is balanced between seriousness and aloofness. The flirting, dancing, kissing, etc. are all added into bring a lightness to the gameplay. This provides a much needed break after slaughtering Oynixa, the infidels at the Temple in Zul'Farrack, or some lvl 61 Boss. Not to mention I don't have to buy/read all the books.
Like I said this is all my own opinion just like veryone else on here, but I think people need to remember that different generations have different ideas of fun. I do agree that it is a shame that our entertainment is becoming shallower and shallower, but so is the way of the world these days.
I say lets all ask permission. We start writing a letter for every CD we own, asking for permission to format-shift it for digital players. After a few million letters in their mailbox, and a few million emails I think they might just backdown. Hell, they would have to create a new division and hire a load of new people just to open all the damn letters.
And what if we must send letters to the actual artists? Then we do that as well, maybe then the Artists themselves will see what a bunch of greedy mornons the RIAA is.
This is my first post, so please forgive me I resonate "noob."
What is the point of all the banter regarding this topic? Do we really need to write a collabrative work labelling this article (as well as religion, science, history, etc.)as a circular argument, USING circular arguments no less? Religion is a matter of the heart PERIOD, there is no proving or disproving it. It is a belief... nothing more. But, let us always keep in mind the other beliefs and people that were laughed at in the past. Babbage's "computer," Galileo, Columbus, etc. etc. etc. The list of innovators goes on and on, while the lists of naysayers would be 100x longer.
Does God exist? Honestly, as a man of science, I don't know. I can't prove it one way or the other. But, as a Christian, I know he is there. I know that in my times of need I have a comforter that I can ask for help. Maybe it is a placebo effect? Maybe my believe creates a reality for me where a nonexistant God gives me the strength I need to carry on. Does it really matter as long as I get what I need out of the equation? If someone found that a placebo treatment cured cancer, do we denounce it simply because a "REAL" cure doesn't exist? That because science hasn't fully been able to understand the mind/body connection in healing and health, it simply cannot be. You wouldn't be able to beat the Pharmacutical company off with a ball bat as they lined up to create sugar pills for you and make trillions of dollars doing it.
Ultimately, I find the logic of ID and Evolution to be rediculous. Yes, I believe in adaptation, natural selection, and that God created everything. One might automatically call me on those three things crying "Foul! Those three items don't fit in the same Zone!" Okay, but don't ask me to believe in trans-species jumps without proof (evolutionists), don't ask me to believe that the Earth is only 8,000 years old (ID), and don't tell me that I'm "atavistic" fir believing in God (scientists in general). For years evolutionists have asked for religous people to side with them. To look at the fossil record, to look at adapation of modern day species, to finally see what they see. But, now that we are the evolutionists are on our backs again because we want to believe it happened the way they say it did, only that God got the ball rolling.
*rolls eyes*
In a nut shell, scientists say religion has its good points and bad points, and religion says the same about science. But the way I see it, there are only 2 real difference. One is the scientist's ability to imagine. Early science was many times an attempt to part fact from the supernatural. If scientists automatically dismiss the supernatural on principle, where does that leave them; separating the kinda facts from the sorta facts? Secondly, scientists haven't gone to war over what they believe, religions have on many occasions. Which makes me wonder... When will that happen, and will pocket protectors be standard issue with the guns?
Slashdot Mirror
If you chased down a multi-ton rhino on foot, then killed it with a wooden spear, just to grind up it's horn ... you'd get wood too.
... then that belief would allow him to "rise to the occasion." Although I will grant that, naturally, being a psychologist at heart I am still a firm believer that our greatest medical tool is "mind over matter."
All Ha-Ha aside, I agree with you some. While I'm currently an artist for a toy company, my education is in the Social Sciences, having received a Masters in both Psychology and Sociology. While sometimes people stumbled upon solid science (ie. aspirin) that works, I think many of the so called "folk cures" call upon the placebo effect more so than a solid scientific basis. If we take the erectile dysfunction as an example, we know that many cases of ED are psychologically based, and not physical. If the patient truly believes that the medicine man could cure him with rhino horn, dried deer penis, cobra venom, or what have you
Well of course it looks like Al Gore, didnt you know he invented Mars?
ironclad Copyright laws in a country that would rather execute you than listen to what you have to say.
/Counts the days to a world wide boycott on Music/Movies following the first Copyright Infringement conviction that is followed by the person's execution.
I have read most of the comments regarding MMO's lack of immersion. Being a 27 year old I have to say that people are forgeting about the day and age that younger people were raised. I was on the Nintendo at 13 getting instant gratification by smashing Goomas flat. The younger people were raised with a shallow immersion factor, it is what we are used to. Now as a lvl 50 Druid I don't find WoW to be shallow at all. I find myself trying to stretch the limits of the game. I have swam to the bottom of the ocean in Aquatic form just to see if there was a bottom. I try to climb the highest mountain just KNOWING that there has to be a way up there. Everything new that I see and do truly astounds me at the shear size and complexity of Azeroth. At lower lvl I tried my best to get into places where I really wasn't supposed to be, just to see if I could do it. I have screen shots of me in front of the Dark Port at lvl 38, and the time I slipped into Scholo behind a group of lvl 60 Horde players at lvl 37. There is so much to do and see, and so many ways to have fun in this game instead just killing and lvl'ing.
IMHO D&D always took itself too seriously, striving to make the scenarios as life-like as a bunch of mages, warriors, and necromancers could be. Books upon Books have been published detailing every imaginable facet. Now, personally, I don't find having to memorize and read book after book to properly play a game alot of fun. WoW isn't like this, it is balanced between seriousness and aloofness. The flirting, dancing, kissing, etc. are all added into bring a lightness to the gameplay. This provides a much needed break after slaughtering Oynixa, the infidels at the Temple in Zul'Farrack, or some lvl 61 Boss. Not to mention I don't have to buy/read all the books.
Like I said this is all my own opinion just like veryone else on here, but I think people need to remember that different generations have different ideas of fun. I do agree that it is a shame that our entertainment is becoming shallower and shallower, but so is the way of the world these days.
I say lets all ask permission. We start writing a letter for every CD we own, asking for permission to format-shift it for digital players. After a few million letters in their mailbox, and a few million emails I think they might just backdown. Hell, they would have to create a new division and hire a load of new people just to open all the damn letters.
And what if we must send letters to the actual artists? Then we do that as well, maybe then the Artists themselves will see what a bunch of greedy mornons the RIAA is.
Just my 2 cents.
This is my first post, so please forgive me I resonate "noob." What is the point of all the banter regarding this topic? Do we really need to write a collabrative work labelling this article (as well as religion, science, history, etc.)as a circular argument, USING circular arguments no less? Religion is a matter of the heart PERIOD, there is no proving or disproving it. It is a belief ... nothing more. But, let us always keep in mind the other beliefs and people that were laughed at in the past. Babbage's "computer," Galileo, Columbus, etc. etc. etc. The list of innovators goes on and on, while the lists of naysayers would be 100x longer.
Does God exist? Honestly, as a man of science, I don't know. I can't prove it one way or the other. But, as a Christian, I know he is there. I know that in my times of need I have a comforter that I can ask for help. Maybe it is a placebo effect? Maybe my believe creates a reality for me where a nonexistant God gives me the strength I need to carry on. Does it really matter as long as I get what I need out of the equation? If someone found that a placebo treatment cured cancer, do we denounce it simply because a "REAL" cure doesn't exist? That because science hasn't fully been able to understand the mind/body connection in healing and health, it simply cannot be. You wouldn't be able to beat the Pharmacutical company off with a ball bat as they lined up to create sugar pills for you and make trillions of dollars doing it.
Ultimately, I find the logic of ID and Evolution to be rediculous. Yes, I believe in adaptation, natural selection, and that God created everything. One might automatically call me on those three things crying "Foul! Those three items don't fit in the same Zone!" Okay, but don't ask me to believe in trans-species jumps without proof (evolutionists), don't ask me to believe that the Earth is only 8,000 years old (ID), and don't tell me that I'm "atavistic" fir believing in God (scientists in general). For years evolutionists have asked for religous people to side with them. To look at the fossil record, to look at adapation of modern day species, to finally see what they see. But, now that we are the evolutionists are on our backs again because we want to believe it happened the way they say it did, only that God got the ball rolling.
*rolls eyes*
In a nut shell, scientists say religion has its good points and bad points, and religion says the same about science. But the way I see it, there are only 2 real difference. One is the scientist's ability to imagine. Early science was many times an attempt to part fact from the supernatural. If scientists automatically dismiss the supernatural on principle, where does that leave them; separating the kinda facts from the sorta facts? Secondly, scientists haven't gone to war over what they believe, religions have on many occasions. Which makes me wonder ... When will that happen, and will pocket protectors be standard issue with the guns?