I’ve never heard of “Siamese cannibals” or “self-cannibalism.”
I see. Thanks. No, not really.
You seem to be obsessed with cannibalism.
I was thinking more like the Stephen King short story.
The trouble with eating yourself is that there’s no leftovers.
Regards,
Shodan
That’s really gross.
No and no. Yes, the OP was not a denouncement of absolute ethics. And though I may have posted some odd things on here in the past (though if you weren’t po’ed about the BP spill, one of the greatest crimes in history, you are the one with the problem), you haven’t really identified what this thread has in common with some of my others, BigT.
What I do on here much of the time when starting threads is, yes, post first and think later. Someone towards the beginning posted something like, “I don’t understand the outrage.” It isn’t really outrage- it is cognitive dissonance. Yes, the cannibalism is disgusting and perhaps I have a bigger problem with it than many of you, but this thread, like many of my other ones, start out as something that I feel I need to ‘get to the bottom of’ and figure it out as I go.
In this case my ethical judgment of cannibalism is not consistent with how I usually make ethical judgments. I don’t like the ideological approach. “The Bible says x, therefore, end of discussion!” leads to all kinds of craziness. The GOP seems to have made idols of some of its positions too, which seems to demand that people not think about them either. This approach ultimately rely on the omission of relevant facts, a decision-making process that really, really bugs me.
But then along comes the story of the Jamestown necrocannibals, and yeah it is especially, historically disgusting, but my reaction to the news was giving me a headache. The only way to cure a cognitive dissonance headache is to get to the bottom of the matter.
So I’ve chewed on the subject for awhile. There have been tons of great jokes; even Shodan is cracking some funnies. But at this point I can see the conflict in trying to resolve the ‘cannibalism is wrong, end of discussion!’ view with the sympathy I should have for their circumstances. And what it comes down to is the quasi religious notion that I am not really a separate person, even though it does seem that way from the conventional point of view, but rather we are the same person.
Maybe you shouldn’t buy into it. This is how rigid ideologies take root- people believe something that doesn’t make sense and then try to rope everyone else into it. But, part of me thinks the Jamestown necrocannibals just didn’t get it- they were eating themselves; better to not even bother, cannibalism is therefore wrong.
People who think I am taking a religious view will frame this line of reasoning as what I’ve been calling ‘ideological’. OTOH, if my reasoning does in fact proceed from the way reality actually is (despite some appearances), why then it is just straightforward reasoning and not ideological after all.
I have enough detachment to be skeptical of my own oddball premise. But I guess part of me buys into it, which is why the Jamestown necrocannibal story gave me a headache, and it took me a couple days to hash it out. It isn’t ‘stupid’, it’s a pretty good thread actually.
What are you babbling on about?
Let’s start with you identifying which part you don’t understand.
Have you considered a name change to Try2B Comprehensible?
No. I make sense, but it isn’t always easy.
“Only in your mind, young padawan.”
Yah whatever Guin. If you posted something more than a one-liner sometime, someone might not understand what you were saying, too. Sorry my real issue here isn’t what you expect. There is plenty there for you to ask about specifically if you don’t get it.