TexasCHLforum.com

si fueris Romae, Romano vivito more
si fueris alibi, vivito sicut ibi

Elmer Fudd wrote: New poll: Can vegetarians ethically shoot animals in self-defense?

When that wascally wabbit is eating your cawwots, blast away.

Does "cutting edge technology" mean electric toothbrush, or does it have to be one with a USB port and WiFi?

RPB wrote:Does "cutting edge technology" mean electric toothbrush, or does it have to be one with a USB port and WiFi?

http://www.bedbathandbeyond.com/product ... U=10947766" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hoi Polloi wrote:

AndyC wrote:Culture is as relevant to the subject of self-defense as vegetarianism.

New poll: Can vegetarians ethically shoot animals in self-defense?


I'm teasing!

Can animals ethically eat vegetarians to give the rest of us a break?

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Hoi Polloi wrote:

AndyC wrote:Culture is as relevant to the subject of self-defense as vegetarianism.

New poll: Can vegetarians ethically shoot animals in self-defense?


I'm teasing!

Can animals ethically eat vegetarians to give the rest of us a break?

I don't think they could claim self-defense in that situation.

apostate wrote:si fueris Romae, Romano vivito more
si fueris alibi, vivito sicut ibi

You do, and you clean it up.

Culture-less barbarian -

Starting on that next week.

Still finishing up on my IINFIDEL this week!

Hoi Polloi wrote:Did I get it this time?

We got it. I obviously did not understand how forum polls work, and we were talking but not communicating. My bad. I have senior moments 24/7 now. So sorry. I never could keep my mouth shut. After all, I made my living by the sweat of my tongue for 'lo these many years.

I must say how pleasant it was talking with you, as is always the case, even 'tho I turned everything you said inside out.

Elmo

The Annoyed Man wrote:When my dad died, my brother and I inherited two weapons from him. One was the Ithaca 1911A1 which was his sidearm in WW2. The other was an old single shot .22 bolt action rifle that had been his since he was a boy in the 1920s. Unlike most of those dilletantes and their "art" show, my dad actually had killed human beings with weapons, in combat.

Oh, and my dad had TWO Ph.Ds, one in American Literature, the other in English Literature. He was friends with John Steinbeck, William Faulkner, and Ernest Hemmingway......and he owned guns. He also spoke fluent French, by the way, AND, before he met my mom (in Paris), he was a painter, living in a garret in the Latin Quarter, upstairs from a jazz club, where he used to hang out and listen to Charlie "The Bird" Parker and Thelonius Monk.

I'll match his "culture" credentials against any of these boojwah wannabe culture creatures.

I am envious of your dad's days in Paris, TAM. What an experience, and one never seen again.

As close as I can come was a long chat with Hemingway many long years ago in the La Floridita. I had many too many of his patented Daiquiris, ending up under the table. At the end of the evening he was as sober as he was at its beginning. I can never forget talking with him for hours, back in the mid-'50s, while sitting on the bar stool next to his 24/7 reserved corner. http://havanajournal.com/gallery/image_full/12/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

After his tragic death that stool became a national treasure, with a bronze life-sized casting now seated on it forever. http://floridita-cuba.com/contenido/res ... ticias.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Looking at this latter photo takes me back to that stool next to Ernest.

You brought on a serious case of nostalgia here, TAM, but that is the greatest part of one's later years. Thank you.

Elmo

One important element missing from this whole discussion is whether any particular definition of "cultured" makes one a better person. If we measured culture by knowledge of the arts, does that mean the someone who is more cultured is somehow better than someone who has never studied art? Is someone who can identify an wine by the way sunlight glistens off it better than someone who prefers to drink PBR from the can?
Some of the best people I have ever known would be, by common definitions, considered uncultured. I personally don't care whether people consider me cultured or not, as long as they recognize me as a whole person and not just by this one narrow measure of a person.

MasterOfNone wrote:One important element missing from this whole discussion is whether any particular definition of "cultured" makes one a better person. If we measured culture by knowledge of the arts, does that mean the someone who is more cultured is somehow better than someone who has never studied art? Is someone who can identify an wine by the way sunlight glistens off it better than someone who prefers to drink PBR from the can?
Some of the best people I have ever known would be, by common definitions, considered uncultured. I personally don't care whether people consider me cultured or not, as long as they recognize me as a whole person and not just by this one narrow measure of a person.

I don't think it does. In fact, IMHO, I think considering one's self "cultured", for the most part, makes one a worse person. You get arrogant and haughty, and your inflated sense of self-worth alienates those who would other wise be good friends and colleagues.

I see this here in the Valley. You have people who make more money than they've ever seen before, and they automatically believe they're better than anyone else. There are a few, also, who believe they could hang with the Northeast bluebloods, Chicago old money, and even the Dallas/San Antonio/Austin/Houston nouveau riche. Makes me laugh. I have fun knocking them down a peg or two.

Jasonw560 wrote:

MasterOfNone wrote:One important element missing from this whole discussion is whether any particular definition of "cultured" makes one a better person. If we measured culture by knowledge of the arts, does that mean the someone who is more cultured is somehow better than someone who has never studied art? Is someone who can identify an wine by the way sunlight glistens off it better than someone who prefers to drink PBR from the can?
Some of the best people I have ever known would be, by common definitions, considered uncultured. I personally don't care whether people consider me cultured or not, as long as they recognize me as a whole person and not just by this one narrow measure of a person.

I don't think it does. In fact, IMHO, I think considering one's self "cultured", for the most part, makes one a worse person. You get arrogant and haughty, and your inflated sense of self-worth alienates those who would other wise be good friends and colleagues.

I see this here in the Valley. You have people who make more money than they've ever seen before, and they automatically believe they're better than anyone else. There are a few, also, who believe they could hang with the Northeast bluebloods, Chicago old money, and even the Dallas/San Antonio/Austin/Houston nouveau riche. Makes me laugh. I have fun knocking them down a peg or two. [Emphasis added]

As this slamming is showing signs of going on forever, never to die an inglorious death, I simply must observe, with respect to the emphasized sentence above, "Now that is cultured."

We are, each and every one of us, "cultured," if we accept the definition of culture in the World English Dictionary:

1. the total of the inherited ideas, beliefs, values, and knowledge, which constitute the shared bases of social action
2. the total range of activities and ideas of a group of people with shared traditions, which are transmitted and reinforced by members of the group: the Mayan culture
3. a particular civilization at a particular period
4. the artistic and social pursuits, expression, and tastes valued by a society or class, as in the arts, manners, dress, etc
5. the enlightenment or refinement resulting from these pursuits
6. the attitudes, feelings, values, and behaviour that characterize and inform society as a whole or any social group within it: yob culture

Looking at #6, one must ask, are not the members of this forum a social group within our society? Have not the overwhelming majority of the comments we have seen here gone a long way toward defining that social group's "culture," or at least that of a large portion of that social group? How can that be denied?

I consider the above definition as being rather neutral as I look at the views expressed by commentators here.

Perhaps, on the other hand, they believe "culture" is as defined in the Bing Dictionary: Educated and sophisticated: educated and informed about the arts and related intellectual activity. Or perhaps as by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary: The act of developing the intellectual and moral faculties especially by education.

It appears clear to me that it is the latter definitions which are receiving the slamming. Perhaps one should not slam something here with first knowing what it is they are slamming. For that there is nothing like looking at a dictionary.

Elmo

b322da wrote:

Jasonw560 wrote:

MasterOfNone wrote:One important element missing from this whole discussion is whether any particular definition of "cultured" makes one a better person. If we measured culture by knowledge of the arts, does that mean the someone who is more cultured is somehow better than someone who has never studied art? Is someone who can identify an wine by the way sunlight glistens off it better than someone who prefers to drink PBR from the can?
Some of the best people I have ever known would be, by common definitions, considered uncultured. I personally don't care whether people consider me cultured or not, as long as they recognize me as a whole person and not just by this one narrow measure of a person.

I don't think it does. In fact, IMHO, I think considering one's self "cultured", for the most part, makes one a worse person. You get arrogant and haughty, and your inflated sense of self-worth alienates those who would other wise be good friends and colleagues.

I see this here in the Valley. You have people who make more money than they've ever seen before, and they automatically believe they're better than anyone else. There are a few, also, who believe they could hang with the Northeast bluebloods, Chicago old money, and even the Dallas/San Antonio/Austin/Houston nouveau riche. Makes me laugh. I have fun knocking them down a peg or two. [Emphasis added]

As this slamming is showing signs of going on forever, never to die an inglorious death, I simply must observe, with respect to the emphasized sentence above, "Now that is cultured."

We are, each and every one of us, "cultured," if we accept the definition of culture in the World English Dictionary:

1. the total of the inherited ideas, beliefs, values, and knowledge, which constitute the shared bases of social action
2. the total range of activities and ideas of a group of people with shared traditions, which are transmitted and reinforced by members of the group: the Mayan culture
3. a particular civilization at a particular period
4. the artistic and social pursuits, expression, and tastes valued by a society or class, as in the arts, manners, dress, etc
5. the enlightenment or refinement resulting from these pursuits
6. the attitudes, feelings, values, and behaviour that characterize and inform society as a whole or any social group within it: yob culture

Looking at #6, one must ask, are not the members of this forum a social group within our society? Have not the overwhelming majority of the comments we have seen here gone a long way toward defining that social group's "culture," or at least that of a large portion of that social group? How can that be denied?

I consider the above definition as being rather neutral as I look at the views expressed by commentators here.

Perhaps, on the other hand, they believe "culture" is as defined in the Bing Dictionary: Educated and sophisticated: educated and informed about the arts and related intellectual activity. Or perhaps as by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary: The act of developing the intellectual and moral faculties especially by education.

It appears clear to me that it is the latter definitions which are receiving the slamming. Perhaps one should not slam something here with first knowing what it is they are slamming. For that there is nothing like looking at a dictionary.

Elmo

OK. I'll beat the horse a little more, too.

First, some perspective.

I've studied Spanish. I've read books, I memorized words and phrases, I've practiced pronouncing and listening to the words. I can understand a lot of written Spanish but I cannot carry on a conversation because my brain cannot connect rapidly enough all of the mechanical things about the language to do what a child from a Spanish speaking home, without studying anything, can do - use the language to communicate. The child understands that language. I do not.

Regarding culture in general, most people seem not to follow the dictionary approach. It seems that they prefer to look at it based on the presence or the absence of specific elements. They do not take the language approach that I offered above and seek an understanding. I'm a musician by training so I'll use that as the basis for my argument but believe that the same logic applies to other cultural elements.

In some of our society, a person who can listen to and appreciate the 5th movement to the Mahler 2nd Symphony might be said to have culture. Mahler was an exquisite composer of melodies but he (and others) tended to obscure their beautiful melodies in heavy, ponderous orchestration. It takes practice and study to follow his melodic development. For those of us have made the commitment to study and listen to Mahler, it is a wonderful experience and can bring great joy and pull at the emotions.

For others, the mere mention of Mahler can bring on a case of indigestion. They equate Mahler's music with people that they consider to be pseudo-intellectuals and they dismiss any ties between it an modern culture. Scanning through the musical genre, the same pattern can be seen over and over. There are those who love country music and see that art form as a strong cultural base while others consider anyone who listens to country as an uncultured hick. Rap, jazz, folk, R&B all of their followings and detractors. The extremists on both ends of the scale dismiss those who cannot appreciate their favorite type of music as uncultured. People with eclectic tastes in music can alienate themselves from whole ranges of society because they actually enjoy too many types of music and for many with "culture", musical tastes are much more of a binary decision. Like what I like or don't hate what I hate and you have no culture.

I believe the cultural report card is less by quantity than by the presence or absence of provocative elements, as seen by those applying the judgement. I can have a good education, be will rounded in appreciating art, architecture, drama, literature, etc. but profess to listening the Heavy Metal music and get myself dismissed from any cultural consideration. The avant guarde guard extremists in any area are quick to label anyone who isn't a passionate follower of their most offering an uncultured bore. There are also, I believe, those who purposely try to create a supposedly artistic following based on their supposedly superior intellectual and artistic capabilities while mocking those same followers because of what they know are culturally baseless and shallow offerings, done soley for monetary gain. It is the classic case of selling sizzle more than the bacon.

So, in the end, it is not about the general range of culture that one has. Simply put, if you like guns, your are a barbarian even if you are a professional symphony conductor, playwright and ballerina wrapped into one by trade and can fluently speak seven languages

Personally, I have feet of clay on this matter. There are a couple of types of music which I cannot imagine how anyone who listens to it can have much culture. I also understand that many would say the same about me, because of my musical tastes. That's just how it is.