The Forum > General Discussion > Sentimental or Rational?
Sentimental or Rational?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
-
- All
Posted by Grim, Wednesday, 29 July 2009 12:17:37 PM
| |
Grim:”If you were the only breadwinner at a large table of 'widows and orphans', would you feed them first, even if it meant going hungry yourself, or would you rationalise that as breadwinner you need to keep your strength up, to continue to provide?”
Feed them first. I read somewhere some time ago… men instinctively sit with their backs to the wall if sitting in a restaurant with their family and that if a female is without a male she will instinctively do the same thing. When a man is not around a female will take both roles. But yeah, I was a solo mum for four years, outside of living in the jungle you feed the children the good stuff, take a vitamin and eat a sandwich. I’ve never been impressed with lionesses – they do let their cubs get eaten quite regularly by competing males aye. Posted by The Pied Piper, Wednesday, 29 July 2009 1:01:35 PM
| |
"Equally, while a mother will defend her cubs fiercely and courageously, if pushed to the limit she will save herself; she has a better chance of surviving to have other cubs"
I was for many years sole parent and I do not think most mothers, most fathers will try to savy her/his life than the lifes from their children. Personaly I prefer to be dead than to feel as a killer of my children, in the rest of my life. I think there is a spider- mother which when does not have food enouph for her children lie down, allowing her babies to eat her body. I love the people who are strong enouph to stay over the death, who know to live and die with integrity, who never forget their "mission", Grim the fear is an extremely strong instict, our top defence system, but if we want to stand over our life, if we want to do something more important from our life, then we must release our self from the fear. We can not do it very often, but we must learn to do it! While it is easier to win the fear of the death and gife the food toy the children, it is not easy, or it is impossible to resist to tortures for long time. Unfortunatly in these cases there is not chance even to suiside and keep "clean" your integrity. ALWAYS FIRST THE CHILDREN! Antonios Symeonakis Adelaide Posted by AnSymeonakis, Thursday, 30 July 2009 11:19:05 AM
| |
it is usual that woman and children eat first...[in camp
but it is well known that the hunt..sheds blood..often the blood is drank[and the kill gets gutted]..things like the head/feet/tail get cut off...as often they serve little use...with the exception that the soft bits[brain/eyes are kept...if old people are in camp.. a fire is often built so scavenging meat eaters dont get attracted to the hunt zone...or then follow the blood trail back home..and the offall bits[liver heart etc]..often are eaten...as the spoil quickly my family totum is the head of the deer...i have the head,because in the time it was granted there were no old people needing its brain or eyes... there is the head of the kill..that is often left in the forrest out of respect for the nobil animal that gave its life in sacrifice..[that we may live]..often it was taken though..for its products[beyond feeding the old,.. ie its horns/antlers were usefull in creating weopens..[for egsample]...and in times of real hardship..they were boiled down to extract jelly..[or if the horns were fresh the blood within them]... thus..my other family totum is the single-horn of the ox of sacrifice...for the head was left free in the good early times..[and the single horn left..as sacrifice on the pyre in the hard times..when even the old..needed to give their share to the young ...for me the matter is beyond the symbolism of sentimentalism or rational..[for this is a time of plenty].thus my horn[now]..signifies the horn of plenty...yet also it sounds its call of warning..for some remember the times past..wernt as rational.. yet chose to remain full of delusional sentiment...that rationality without nationality shall avail Posted by one under god, Thursday, 30 July 2009 11:46:57 AM
| |
I would DEFINITELY feed them first and foremost. "Logic" would have nothing to do with my actions, because as you say in the animal world, if worse comes to worse, the parent will save his/her self and then go on to procreate and start all over again. But humans are a bit different to the rest of the animal kingdom; we are not necessarily as driven to "save ourselves". We are often prepared to give up our own lives, be it saving a child or being a suicide bomber. Human behaviour is often unfathomable.
Posted by Master, Friday, 31 July 2009 3:46:23 AM
| |
Interesting conundrum.
I think answer is to be found according to the urgency of the circumstances. For example, if in a plane and due to problems oxygen masks are required, we are advised to place the mask on ourselves first then help others like children or other people requiring assistance. This makes good sense in the immediacy of an emergency. In the case of a community as you described from the movie; the overall survival of the tribe is more important. The chief has greater access to hunting than widows and orphans, therefore, I would feed the widows and orphans first, knowing that my hunger is more temporary than theirs. Speaking of wisdom in unlikely places, in “High Sierra” another western made in 1941, starring Humphrey Bogart, part of the plot involves panning for gold dust in the High Sierra mountains. To do this the prospectors divert a stream and carve into the mountain-side, after they have found as much gold as they can, the elderly prospector who has lead Bogart to this location insists that they repair the damage done to the environment, saying something along the lines of “we have taken from mother nature and now we must put back.” I can’t remember the line exactly and it was not a necessary part of the narrative, however, it was one of those comments that remain in one’s mind. We have always known that we impact on the natural environment, it is nothing new. I hope you forgive my digression from your topic. Cheers Posted by Fractelle, Friday, 31 July 2009 2:55:47 PM
| |
Master
You are a great person and I am very sorry I did not tell it to you from the very begin! YOU ARE A GENTLEMAN/LADY! Thank you sir/madam always I like to read your posts! Antonios Symeonakis Adelaide Posted by AnSymeonakis, Saturday, 1 August 2009 1:58:44 AM
| |
Generaly I am a person whith passion, my moves seemed emotional but deep in the background I use litle bit my logical unit.
ALAWYS I AM PREPARING FOR WAR AS I LOVE THE PEACE! 4-5 years before the fabric I have worked sold. The union representative told us to be carefull because the new owners was planing to redunce many employees. The new manager from the new company decided for a general meeting of all employees(about 100 persons) to speak to us. Few hours before the general meeting the Union Representative asked from the members not to speak in the meeting and he said to me, "I do not worry from you, you have no bones!" then I opened a computer shop and I need money! A whole bastard migrant whithout bones? I migrated to australia for beter and I convert my self to a person without bones, without integrity? When the new manager asked if any one one wanted to speak I was ready! I said in my speak that we expect from the new company to respect labours rights, that we are ready to defent labours rights, that we, as union, are ready to undertake any legal action to protect the rights of the Union members. The manager was surprised from my speak, he did not expect this kind of welcome! A bastard migrant, a machine cleaner, send to the new manager from the new company a hard messege! When I finished my speak I saw the Union representative fast going to the exit door. He left the workplace place and never returned back! It is like I have got a special unit in my brain, an action unit for special cases, and I love it! Antonios Symeonakis Adelaide Posted by AnSymeonakis, Saturday, 1 August 2009 10:29:26 AM
| |
Antonios, I think you might be crazy. But that's alright, so am I. Sorry I didn't reply to your previous query,I've been distracted. I'm currently a Queenslander.
Any time you want to look me up, I hang out at http://thecomensality.com/avasay/, or at http://www.newdemocrats.org.au/ Cheers. Posted by Grim, Saturday, 1 August 2009 1:29:31 PM
| |
Grim
I know how you are! the question is if there are many people like you with democrats, what about democrats in South Australia? I want strong democrats but we will never become strong if we do not learn to fight for peole's rights, for people's interests. WE MUST LEARN TO WORK WITH PEOPLE WITHIN OUR SOCIETY, WE CAN NOT EXPECT FROM THE MAOUNTAINS TO COME TO US WE WILL GO TO THEM! I send an email to state secretary and asked her "to give me space to run, to give me a peace of the desert to convert it to a nice park for the children and aged people!" She never answered to me! May be she thought that I am a real crazy! I went in an informal meeting with the local senator and other members but if you have any contact tell them to give me space to move! Do not worry plenty of experiences in many kind of many organizations in many countries. Founder member of many organizations. Simple I never like to become member of ALP, it seem to me a dead, beauracritic party, the Greens are better but they have a problem with extrem environmentalists and with many communists, I do not like them! Democrats give promises but they must give us space to move! My specialite migrants, women rights, human rights, trade unions, I was working professional in Unions, (Union Officer) and I am very sensitive for aged people and youths, thats only as begin! We must find some current, important, basic problems of our society and fight for them, we must sent a CLEAR MESSEGE WE ARE ALIVE AND WE FIGHT FOR PEOPLE'S RIGHTS! ok my friend? Antonios Symeonakis Adelaide Posted by AnSymeonakis, Saturday, 1 August 2009 4:54:54 PM
|
The point that is interesting to me in this movie is a speech written, or dictated by the fictional chief of the Comanche, (played by Australian Michael Pate) and spoken by the Duke at a hearing concerned with moving the tribe to Fort Sills. In part, he says:
“It is the Comanche law that no chief ever eats, until he sees that the pots are full of meat in the lodges of widows and orphans.”
In the movie, the chief's name is Puma, not Quanah, and I have not been able to verify whether this is the true custom or not.
I would suggest this is a remarkably 'human' law. Predatory animals, like the great cats, can make instinctive calculations concerning economics. For instance, they will only chase their prey so far. They instinctively know that to expend too many calories on a lost cause (or on prey with too few calories) will weaken them too much for the next chase.
Equally, while a mother will defend her cubs fiercely and courageously, if pushed to the limit she will save herself; she has a better chance of surviving to have other cubs, than young cubs have of reaching breeding age.
So the question I pose is this. If you were the only breadwinner at a large table of 'widows and orphans', would you feed them first, even if it meant going hungry yourself, or would you rationalise that as breadwinner you need to keep your strength up, to continue to provide?