Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor
  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
CODE PROJECT For Those Who Code
  • Home
  • Articles
  • FAQ
Community
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. John Ray: Dickens

John Ray: Dickens

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
htmlcomlounge
76 Posts 12 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • O Oakman

    Stan Shannon wrote:

    your's

    Here's your first clue for the evening: it's "yours," not "your's." You and Ilion make grammatical and orthographic errors that should not be considered acceptable in a third grader.

    Stan Shannon wrote:

    Of course there were. Is there any validity based upon those problems to arrive at a conclusion along the lines of "See what becomes of humanity without big government programs to care for the poor!!!!!"?

    Here's your second: To the best of my relatively extensive knowledge, Charles Dickens never called for any form of government intervention. Indeed, it is quite obvious in his best known work, A Christmas Carol, that he believes the road to redemption is paved not with the governmental poorhouses, but with private charity as exemplified by Scrooge after his conversion*. There are a number of other examples, but since I doubt your knowledge of the novels and certainly do not think it worth my time to explain them in the detail necessary, I shan't go into them. Here's your third: Artists whether they work with words or paint or stone or music often have "held the mirror up to nature" and shown in excruciating detail the miseries and pain they saw there. Dickens, Miller, Toulouse-Lautrec - none of them thought they had the answer and tried to shove it down anyone's throat the way you do. (Some second raters do try to provide all the right answers - Clifford Odets comes to mind -- but the greats don't bother.) Instead they simply ask all the right questions - by making us ask them. * "Lord bless me!" cried the gentleman, as if his breath were taken away. "My dear Mr Scrooge, are you serious?" "If you please," said Scrooge. "Not a farthing less. A great many back-payments are included in it, I assure you. Will you do me that favour?" "My dear sir," said the other, shaking hands with him. "I don't know what to say to such munificence."

    Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

    7 Offline
    7 Offline
    73Zeppelin
    wrote on last edited by
    #32

    I have to say, Jon, that I gauge the intelligence of other people by what I am able to learn from them. Your analyses of Dickens in the context of this thread are impressive.

    O 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • O Oakman

      Amazing, isn't it. Dickens became the most popular novelist of his time. His serialized stories sold thousand of newspapers. His own youth reflected that of many of his characters with his schooling interupted by the need to work in a factory while his father was in debtors' prison. (John Dickens was finally released when he inherited money from his mother who died while he was in prison.) and all this time he was fooling the public by describing an England that didn't exist. Luckily everyone in Britain was too dumb to notice. Dickens describes the debtors' prison in Little Dorrit with great loathing. Obviously he didn't know half as much about it as a semi-literate Australian who lived 150 years later. Or a prissy little twit from Indiana living in the same period. Lord Ashley, in 1848, referred to the more than thirty thousand children living on the streets as, "naked, filthy, roaming, lawless, and deserted children." Dickens wrote about them in Oliver Twist, but obviously they were fictional creatures. All 30,000. Cholera broke out in London in 1848 because the water supply had become contaminated with animal and human waste. Dickens wrote (in Oliver Twist), "It was market-morning. The ground was covered, nearly ankle-deep, with filth and mire; a thick steam, perpetually rising from the reeking bodies of the cattle, and mingling with the fog, which seemed to rest upon the chimney-tops, hung heavily above." But we are told by Troy that this was just political propaganda. The "New Poor Law," enacted in 1834, created workhouses where entire families were consigned into what was, essentially, a prison. Henry Mayhew wrote "London Labour and the London Poor" in 1851 - it happens to be available[^] on-line. Much of it seems Dickensenian so he, too must have been making it all up as a sort of John the Baptist for Karl Marx. Way to go Troy. You have revealed an amazing and abysmal ignorance.

      Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

      P Offline
      P Offline
      pseudonym67
      wrote on last edited by
      #33

      Nice The characters in the Pickwick Papers also spend some time in Newgate debtors prison as well. It's gone now its not far from Bank ( where the bank of england is ) and now is part of the city However the Old Curiosity Shop is still there. ( Turn right when you leave Holborn ).

      pseudonym67 My Articles[^] Beginning KDevelop Programming[^]

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • L Lost User

        Ilíon wrote:

        His novels were, however, political propaganda. Surprisingly, England in the Victorian era had a social welfare system that was both fairly comprehensive and independent of the government.

        Taken from Life in Victorian Britain: Bleak times?[^] The 1861 census was published online and that means checking geneology can be done on the internet... Look behind any one of millions of names which make an appearance in the 1851 census and lives are uncovered that are every bit as grim as those depicted by Dickens, only minus the vicious satire and comic timing of Bleak House. No individual is more representative than Elizabeth Bentley, who makes her appearance in the "Yorkshire" category of the category, as a " mill worker, born 1806, age 23". There is an immediate touch of Dickens about the particulars of her working life, gleaned from a public inquiry into factory conditions from the time. She works for the Dickensian-sounding Mr Busk, who ran a flax mill in Leeds. Work started there for her there at the age of six and she earned a pittance as a "doffer" (removing full spindles of thread or bolts of cloth from the spinning or weaving machinery) . She was allowed 40 minutes at noon for mealtimes but had no time for breakfast or drinks. Her home was two miles from the mill - naturally, she had to walk - and if she arrived late in the morning, she would be "quartered". In other words if she was quarter of an hour late, she would lose half an hour's pay. She was never beaten for being late but regularly saw boys beaten for being late. And Back-breaking work, 17-hour days, minimal pay: a glimpse inside the factories of Victorian Britain[^] where Charles Dickens was not wrong. The exploitation of children in Victorian factories was truly shocking – yet, curiously, neither the children themselv

        P Offline
        P Offline
        pseudonym67
        wrote on last edited by
        #34

        Richard A. Abbott wrote:

        Very often it was better to be in the workplace where you would be warm and fed, rather than at home, where conditions where far more cramped and squalid.

        Quite possibly true but at the time there was a general fear of the workhouse and what went on there. In the Our Mutual Friend there is an elderly lady who prefers to take her chances and ends up dying in a ditch to escape the workhouse.

        pseudonym67 My Articles[^] Beginning KDevelop Programming[^]

        L 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • P pseudonym67

          Richard A. Abbott wrote:

          Very often it was better to be in the workplace where you would be warm and fed, rather than at home, where conditions where far more cramped and squalid.

          Quite possibly true but at the time there was a general fear of the workhouse and what went on there. In the Our Mutual Friend there is an elderly lady who prefers to take her chances and ends up dying in a ditch to escape the workhouse.

          pseudonym67 My Articles[^] Beginning KDevelop Programming[^]

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Lost User
          wrote on last edited by
          #35

          Apparently, life in the workhouse was just above the quality of life experienced in Debtors Prisons. Horrible places no doubt but peoples of that era had little choices available to them.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • O Oakman

            Stan Shannon wrote:

            your's

            Here's your first clue for the evening: it's "yours," not "your's." You and Ilion make grammatical and orthographic errors that should not be considered acceptable in a third grader.

            Stan Shannon wrote:

            Of course there were. Is there any validity based upon those problems to arrive at a conclusion along the lines of "See what becomes of humanity without big government programs to care for the poor!!!!!"?

            Here's your second: To the best of my relatively extensive knowledge, Charles Dickens never called for any form of government intervention. Indeed, it is quite obvious in his best known work, A Christmas Carol, that he believes the road to redemption is paved not with the governmental poorhouses, but with private charity as exemplified by Scrooge after his conversion*. There are a number of other examples, but since I doubt your knowledge of the novels and certainly do not think it worth my time to explain them in the detail necessary, I shan't go into them. Here's your third: Artists whether they work with words or paint or stone or music often have "held the mirror up to nature" and shown in excruciating detail the miseries and pain they saw there. Dickens, Miller, Toulouse-Lautrec - none of them thought they had the answer and tried to shove it down anyone's throat the way you do. (Some second raters do try to provide all the right answers - Clifford Odets comes to mind -- but the greats don't bother.) Instead they simply ask all the right questions - by making us ask them. * "Lord bless me!" cried the gentleman, as if his breath were taken away. "My dear Mr Scrooge, are you serious?" "If you please," said Scrooge. "Not a farthing less. A great many back-payments are included in it, I assure you. Will you do me that favour?" "My dear sir," said the other, shaking hands with him. "I don't know what to say to such munificence."

            Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

            S Offline
            S Offline
            Stan Shannon
            wrote on last edited by
            #36

            Oakman wrote:

            none of them thought they had the answer and tried to shove it down anyone's throat the way you do.

            But I have not tried to shove anything down anyone's throat. The only people trying to do that are those trying to shove secular humanism and marxism down the troat of western civilization. My most intiment study of Charles Dickens happens to be Mister Magoo's Christmas Carol. However, my assertions about Dickens was that, as with modern liberals, he misidentifies the cause of problems. When you can invent the cause, you can invent the solution. I did not assert any thing that denies that there was a great deal of misery during that era. But out of it came new ways of thinking about the political relationships between institutions in our society. And one of those was certainly the notion that government was uniquely qualified and responsible for the resolution of such problems. And that, therefore, any institution within our society which conflicted in any way with the role of government was bad because government was good. All of which led inevitable to the rise of Adolph Hitler. So, yes, Jon, Charles Dickens casued the holocaust!!!!!!

            Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

            L O 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • S Stan Shannon

              Oakman wrote:

              none of them thought they had the answer and tried to shove it down anyone's throat the way you do.

              But I have not tried to shove anything down anyone's throat. The only people trying to do that are those trying to shove secular humanism and marxism down the troat of western civilization. My most intiment study of Charles Dickens happens to be Mister Magoo's Christmas Carol. However, my assertions about Dickens was that, as with modern liberals, he misidentifies the cause of problems. When you can invent the cause, you can invent the solution. I did not assert any thing that denies that there was a great deal of misery during that era. But out of it came new ways of thinking about the political relationships between institutions in our society. And one of those was certainly the notion that government was uniquely qualified and responsible for the resolution of such problems. And that, therefore, any institution within our society which conflicted in any way with the role of government was bad because government was good. All of which led inevitable to the rise of Adolph Hitler. So, yes, Jon, Charles Dickens casued the holocaust!!!!!!

              Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

              L Offline
              L Offline
              Lost User
              wrote on last edited by
              #37

              Charles Dickens was a teller of stories. These stories happened to reflect life as he saw it. But if you want to investigate further the time lines during that Victorian era, I do give references above (in my reply to Christian Graus) that should settle your mind to some extent. Read them, you might be surprised of what you might learn. And your suggestion that Charles Dickens caused the holocaust is ludicrous.

              S 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • T Tim Craig

                Oakman wrote:

                Troy has posted elsewhere, though it's my understanding that he was finally banned.

                Remember the ex-paratrooper turned biology professor who was looking to kick his ass?

                "Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke

                O Offline
                O Offline
                Oakman
                wrote on last edited by
                #38

                Tim Craig wrote:

                Remember the ex-paratrooper turned biology professor who was looking to kick his ass?

                I thought that was you. :laugh:

                Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                T 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • 7 73Zeppelin

                  It's not just Dickens. It's just about everything, including his own religion. He likes to pretend he knows things, but intellectual pretenders are quickly identified. What is particularly depressing and frustrating is that the more he tries to seem intelligent, the more he demonstrates his intellectual weakness. But that's just textbook narcissim - the pathological kind.

                  O Offline
                  O Offline
                  Oakman
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #39

                  73Zeppelin wrote:

                  It's not just Dickens

                  No, of course not. He tries hard to pass himself off as an intellectual, but it's all show. In this case he thought that reading a review of Dickens's oeuvre by an Aussie whose elevator doesn't go to the top floor all that often would somehow allow him to pass himself off as an expert on the man that some consider the second best writer to work in English. He should have known that someone would call him on it, but like a lot of third-raters he imagines everyone else to be as uneducated as he is.

                  Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • S Stan Shannon

                    Oakman wrote:

                    none of them thought they had the answer and tried to shove it down anyone's throat the way you do.

                    But I have not tried to shove anything down anyone's throat. The only people trying to do that are those trying to shove secular humanism and marxism down the troat of western civilization. My most intiment study of Charles Dickens happens to be Mister Magoo's Christmas Carol. However, my assertions about Dickens was that, as with modern liberals, he misidentifies the cause of problems. When you can invent the cause, you can invent the solution. I did not assert any thing that denies that there was a great deal of misery during that era. But out of it came new ways of thinking about the political relationships between institutions in our society. And one of those was certainly the notion that government was uniquely qualified and responsible for the resolution of such problems. And that, therefore, any institution within our society which conflicted in any way with the role of government was bad because government was good. All of which led inevitable to the rise of Adolph Hitler. So, yes, Jon, Charles Dickens casued the holocaust!!!!!!

                    Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                    O Offline
                    O Offline
                    Oakman
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #40

                    Stan Shannon wrote:

                    My most intiment study of Charles Dickens happens to be Mister Magoo's Christmas Carol.

                    That is not surprising.

                    Stan Shannon wrote:

                    However, my assertions about Dickens was that, as with modern liberals, he misidentifies the cause of problems.

                    And you know this from Mr. Magoo? You are as blind as he is. Stan, you don't know what you are talking about. You are trying to deal yourself into a high-stakes poker game and you don't even have enough for the ante. Your "analysis" is not only all wrong, it is pathetically bad. It classifies you with Ilion as a wannabee educated person trying hard to sound knowledgeable about something when every word you speak reveals your ignorance.

                    Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                    S 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • I Ilion

                      Incidentally, here is the New York Times (!) making much the same basic factual claims about the conditions of the work-houses that Ray does. I'd read this NYT piece a few days before Ray put up his post. NYT: In Reality, Oliver’s Diet Wasn’t Truly Dickensian[^]

                      O Offline
                      O Offline
                      Oakman
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #41

                      Ilíon wrote:

                      I'd read this NYT piece a few days before Ray put up his post.

                      You mean after staying awake all night trying to find something that you could claim supported your OP. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: This opinion piece first claims that Dickens was writing about a 400 calorie oatmeal gruel, but Dickens never said that. He then claims that some workhouses fed a more nuitritious oatmeal gruel and that Oliver would, in reality, be given that. Of course, nothing in Oliver Twist deals with the calorie content of the gruel. He goes on to suggest that Oliver might have had his gruel diet supplemented by meat and vegetables - but admits that such largesse from the orphanage would not have had to have happened, but is only a supposition on his part.

                      Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                      L I 2 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • 7 73Zeppelin

                        I have to say, Jon, that I gauge the intelligence of other people by what I am able to learn from them. Your analyses of Dickens in the context of this thread are impressive.

                        O Offline
                        O Offline
                        Oakman
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #42

                        73Zeppelin wrote:

                        Your analyses of Dickens in the context of this thread are impressive.

                        Thanks. I appreciate your thoughts. :)

                        Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • O Oakman

                          Ilíon wrote:

                          I'd read this NYT piece a few days before Ray put up his post.

                          You mean after staying awake all night trying to find something that you could claim supported your OP. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: This opinion piece first claims that Dickens was writing about a 400 calorie oatmeal gruel, but Dickens never said that. He then claims that some workhouses fed a more nuitritious oatmeal gruel and that Oliver would, in reality, be given that. Of course, nothing in Oliver Twist deals with the calorie content of the gruel. He goes on to suggest that Oliver might have had his gruel diet supplemented by meat and vegetables - but admits that such largesse from the orphanage would not have had to have happened, but is only a supposition on his part.

                          Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                          L Offline
                          L Offline
                          Lost User
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #43

                          The problem Jon is that both Ilion and Stan are taking the words of Dickens as a factual account of peoples lives of the time. But the truth is, they are works of fiction. Nothing more, nothing less, although they are great stories. But stories based upon what he saw and witnessed. Yet in terms of historical context, these works of Dickens are thought to indeed reflect some truth and reality. As far as Ilion and Stan are concerned, it is evident that they are placing things outside of historical context.

                          O I 2 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • I Ilion

                            Christian Graus wrote:

                            See, I still think it's bloody rude of you to provide links to things you refuse to discuss.

                            And I think it's bloody rude of you to be such a damned liar; you don't want to discuss anything.

                            C Offline
                            C Offline
                            Christian Graus
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #44

                            Yeah, that must be why I succeed in discussing things with most people. Because the problem is me, not you.

                            Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • O Oakman

                              Christian Graus wrote:

                              His, not so much.

                              That would qualify as an understatement so understated it was positively British.

                              Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                              C Offline
                              C Offline
                              Christian Graus
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #45

                              *grin* it's a Boratism that has drifted into every day use.

                              Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.

                              O 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • L Lost User

                                The problem Jon is that both Ilion and Stan are taking the words of Dickens as a factual account of peoples lives of the time. But the truth is, they are works of fiction. Nothing more, nothing less, although they are great stories. But stories based upon what he saw and witnessed. Yet in terms of historical context, these works of Dickens are thought to indeed reflect some truth and reality. As far as Ilion and Stan are concerned, it is evident that they are placing things outside of historical context.

                                O Offline
                                O Offline
                                Oakman
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #46

                                Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                                But the truth is, they are works of fiction

                                Of course. Dickens, like Shakespeare, Moliere, Updike, et al, first and foremost writes to tell a story. A saleable story. He described degradation and squalor not to have everyone run to the barricades but to arouse sympathy for his protagonist - which in turn would mean they would be happy when that protagonist overcame the odds and prospered. The thing these self-proclaim literary critics show no sign of understanding is that in order to have a happy ending, one needs to have an unhappy beginning. No-one will be glad at heart because Tiny Tim did not die, if we had not already been told that he would die within a year.

                                Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                                As far as Ilion and Stan are concerned, it is evident that they are placing things outside of historical context.

                                They have no idea what that context is. Ignorance, in this case, is not bliss, but asininity

                                Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • O Oakman

                                  Stan Shannon wrote:

                                  My most intiment study of Charles Dickens happens to be Mister Magoo's Christmas Carol.

                                  That is not surprising.

                                  Stan Shannon wrote:

                                  However, my assertions about Dickens was that, as with modern liberals, he misidentifies the cause of problems.

                                  And you know this from Mr. Magoo? You are as blind as he is. Stan, you don't know what you are talking about. You are trying to deal yourself into a high-stakes poker game and you don't even have enough for the ante. Your "analysis" is not only all wrong, it is pathetically bad. It classifies you with Ilion as a wannabee educated person trying hard to sound knowledgeable about something when every word you speak reveals your ignorance.

                                  Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                                  S Offline
                                  S Offline
                                  Stan Shannon
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #47

                                  Oakman wrote:

                                  You are trying to deal yourself into a high-stakes poker game and you don't even have enough for the ante. Your "analysis" is not only all wrong, it is pathetically bad. It classifies you with Ilion as a wannabee educated person trying hard to sound knowledgeable about something when every word you speak reveals your ignorance.

                                  And you, Jon, are not the final arbiter of what represents education. I am actually pretty damn sure that I am far more well educated than you are, both in terms of degrees held, and personal research. So, sorry, but I simply do not need your approval to register an opinion. I do not, and have not for a very long time, accepted the standard interpretation of history provided by the current educational system. It is simply fraught with blatant inaccuracies and leftwing biases. Again, your own ideas on the SOuth are a perfect example of that. YOu have clearly read a small bit of literature on the topic which supports your preconcieved opinions and have done no actual personal research on the topic at all. Hell, Jon, I see precious little evidence that you understand what an education even is. The ultimate goal of being educated is being able to formulate your own opinions and world views, not simply regurgitating and quoting the views of others. And your continued comparison of me to Illion is actually quite humorous. Illion and I have virtually nothing in common aside from a certain agreement concerning politics. What you, and others, demonstrate is that anyone who dare interject any disagreement with the standard left leaning model of history, government and society comprise a dangerous collective 'other' who must not be allowed into you little closely guarded intellectual circle. In other words, Jon, you are a perfect example of how the anti-intellectual left 'Palinizes' its opposition.

                                  Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                                  O 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • C Christian Graus

                                    *grin* it's a Boratism that has drifted into every day use.

                                    Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.

                                    O Offline
                                    O Offline
                                    Oakman
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #48

                                    Christian Graus wrote:

                                    *grin* it's a Boratism that has drifted into every day use.

                                    Actually I heard it used in Buffy the Vampire Slayer circa 1997, but in context, 'tis veddy veddy British, donchaknow.

                                    Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • L Lost User

                                      Charles Dickens was a teller of stories. These stories happened to reflect life as he saw it. But if you want to investigate further the time lines during that Victorian era, I do give references above (in my reply to Christian Graus) that should settle your mind to some extent. Read them, you might be surprised of what you might learn. And your suggestion that Charles Dickens caused the holocaust is ludicrous.

                                      S Offline
                                      S Offline
                                      Stan Shannon
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #49

                                      Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                                      Charles Dickens was a teller of stories. These stories happened to reflect life as he saw it.

                                      Well, hells bells, I just refer to Jane Austin than.

                                      Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                                      L 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • S Stan Shannon

                                        Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                                        Charles Dickens was a teller of stories. These stories happened to reflect life as he saw it.

                                        Well, hells bells, I just refer to Jane Austin than.

                                        Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                                        L Offline
                                        L Offline
                                        Lost User
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #50

                                        Jane Austin - another great story teller. But was a story teller of English middle and upper classes, and as with Dickens, there is some degree of truth to what she wrote about.

                                        O 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • S Stan Shannon

                                          Oakman wrote:

                                          You are trying to deal yourself into a high-stakes poker game and you don't even have enough for the ante. Your "analysis" is not only all wrong, it is pathetically bad. It classifies you with Ilion as a wannabee educated person trying hard to sound knowledgeable about something when every word you speak reveals your ignorance.

                                          And you, Jon, are not the final arbiter of what represents education. I am actually pretty damn sure that I am far more well educated than you are, both in terms of degrees held, and personal research. So, sorry, but I simply do not need your approval to register an opinion. I do not, and have not for a very long time, accepted the standard interpretation of history provided by the current educational system. It is simply fraught with blatant inaccuracies and leftwing biases. Again, your own ideas on the SOuth are a perfect example of that. YOu have clearly read a small bit of literature on the topic which supports your preconcieved opinions and have done no actual personal research on the topic at all. Hell, Jon, I see precious little evidence that you understand what an education even is. The ultimate goal of being educated is being able to formulate your own opinions and world views, not simply regurgitating and quoting the views of others. And your continued comparison of me to Illion is actually quite humorous. Illion and I have virtually nothing in common aside from a certain agreement concerning politics. What you, and others, demonstrate is that anyone who dare interject any disagreement with the standard left leaning model of history, government and society comprise a dangerous collective 'other' who must not be allowed into you little closely guarded intellectual circle. In other words, Jon, you are a perfect example of how the anti-intellectual left 'Palinizes' its opposition.

                                          Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                                          O Offline
                                          O Offline
                                          Oakman
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #51

                                          Stan Shannon wrote:

                                          I am actually pretty damn sure that I am far more well educated than you are, both in terms of degrees held, and personal research.

                                          Could be. However, I have trouble believing that anyone who claims English as his mother tongue and who has never read Dickens is worthy of the label, "educated." Illiterate seems far more appropriate.

                                          Stan Shannon wrote:

                                          I do not, and have not for a very long time, accepted the standard interpretation of history provided by the current educational system.

                                          Yes. I understand that. I can't imagine that there is anyone else in the world besides you and Ilion who thinks that Dickens is a cause of Hitler.

                                          Stan Shannon wrote:

                                          The ultimate goal of being educated is being able to formulate your own opinions and world views, not simply regurgitating and quoting the views of others.

                                          Really? I thought the idea was to learn about, and ultimately to understand some small part of, the universe. Perhaps if you spent more time receiving and less broadcasting, you might be shoocked to discover how much more there is to learn.

                                          Stan Shannon wrote:

                                          And your continued comparison of me to Illion is actually quite humorous.

                                          No, it sad. You have far more potential than he does, yet you emulate him in the forum more and more.

                                          Stan Shannon wrote:

                                          What you, and others, demonstrate is that anyone who dare interject any disagreement with the standard left leaning model of history, government and society comprise a dangerous collective 'other' who must not be allowed into you little closely guarded intellectual circle.

                                          Yes, I have noticed how Mr. Plankton, or Mike Gaskey have been ostracized for their non-left-leaning views. It is not your views, Stan. It is you that is being isolated, because you prove over and over again unable to learn. Unable to admit you are wrong. Unable to change. Unable to respect anyone's views that do not coincide with your own. Likewise, it is not Ilion's views that make his name synonymous with "asshole" in this forum, it is his behavior. If you want people to stop associating the two of you in their minds, it's up to you to stop acting like him.

                                          Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                                          S 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes

                                          • Login
                                          • Don't have an account? Register
                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups