Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?  (Read 132459 times)

furcifer

  • Guest
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #630 on: February 07, 2012, 04:34:48 PM »
Nothing. Proof that people come here to get away from the angst that is the JD.  :P
Any release I guess huh? Beats walking into traffic I guess.  ::)




Interesting avatar as well! The question that has baffled scientists, academics and pub bores through the ages: What came first, the chicken or the egg?


It points out the futility of identifying the first case of a circular cause and consequence. The predestination paradox (also called either a causal loop or a causality loop) is a paradox of time travel that is often used as a convention in science fiction. It exists when a time traveller is caught in a loop of events that "predestines" him/her to travel back in time. Because of the possibility of influencing the past while time travelling, one way of explaining why history does not change is by saying that whatever has happened was meant to happen. A time traveller attempting to alter the past in this model, intentionally or not, would only be fulfilling his role in creating history as we know it, not changing it. The predestination paradox is in some ways the opposite of the grandfather paradox, the famous example of the traveller killing his own grandfather before his parent is conceived, thereby precluding his own travel to the past by canceling his own existence.

A dual example of a predestination paradox is depicted in the classic Ancient Greek play 'Oedipus'. Laius hears a prophecy that his son will kill him. Fearing the prophecy, Laius pierces Oedipus' feet and leaves him out to die, but a herdsman finds him and takes him away from Thebes. Oedipus, not knowing he was adopted, leaves home in fear of the same prophecy that he would kill his father and marry his mother. Laius, meanwhile, ventures out to find a solution to the Sphinx's riddle. As prophesied, Oedipus crossed paths with Laius and this leads to a fight where Oedipus slays Laius. Oedipus then defeats the Sphinx by solving a mysterious riddle to become king. He marries the widow queen Jocasta not knowing she is his mother.

A typical example of a predestination paradox (used in The Twilight Zone episode "No Time Like the Past") is as follows: A man travels back in time to discover the cause of a famous fire. While in the building where the fire started, he accidentally knocks over a kerosene lantern and causes a fire, the same fire that would inspire him, years later, to travel back in time.

A variation on the predestination paradoxes which involves information, rather than objects, traveling through time is similar to the self-fulfilling prophecy: A man receives information about his own future, telling him that he will die from a heart attack. He resolves to get fit so as to avoid that fate, but in doing so overexerts himself, causing him to suffer the heart attack that kills him. In both examples, causality is turned on its head, as the flanking events are both causes and effects of each other, and this is where the paradox lies. In the second example, the person would not have traveled back in time but for the fire that he or she caused by traveling back in time. Similarly, in the third example, the man would not have overexerted himself but for the future information he receives. In most examples of the predestination paradox, the person travels back in time and ends up fulfilling their role in an event that has already occurred. In a self-fulfilling prophecy, the person is fulfilling their role in an event that has yet to occur, and it is usually information that travels in time (for example, in the form of a prophecy) rather than a person. In either situation, the attempts to avert the course of past or future history both fail.


ismile, you're really making us smile, what does explaining this has to do with the thread's original topic?

Country Day

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #631 on: February 10, 2012, 06:24:39 PM »

Exactly, 2 young 2, spillover can't even pretend s/he was being friendly to Meria when putting it bluntly and telling her about the whole thing as it is - I mean, we're not living in some kind of ex-communist country where people called themselves "brothers" and "sisters," pretending that they really were such to a certain extent!

In the Western world, people draw strict boundaries between one another - in fact, they are expected to fully rely on themselves psychologically and economically for their own maintenance (be self-sufficient) - with solidarity and like concepts not being too much attended to.

Things function in these societies bureaucratically, based on the laws, drawn and enforced by the governments, the ones that same people elected to govern them.

So they do not, for instance, go and kill their fellow citizen to get even for him having say, raped, their child - they address the issue with the government - take the guy to the courts of law.

The government, on the other hand, has to abide by a set of norms (laws) and not overstep them, abusing the power conferred on it by the people. It can not curtail their citizens' liberties, for instance, overtly or covertly, unless good cause is shown first.

It can not resort to illegal tactics and strategies that by actually being used and reluctantly endorsed by its citizens have the effect of legitimizing them, with the end result being over-accumulation of power, beyond that that was originally intended to be invested, and conferred, by the people onto their government.

And so, the more innocent their victim of persecution, the more afraid people will be - as they too might as well be in the victim's place - with more and more power that governments will be able to steal from the people.


Will you walk me 2 my car, I can see your post has elicited a bit of controversy - I'd have to say that there are safeguards in place that would not allow a certain branch of the government go off the limits and employ "illegal" tactics, as you say, on its citizens - the executive body, would need, for instance, a warrant from a judge (the legislative), which would make the tactic that you talk about, "legal."

The Investment of Power by the People into its own Government, as outlined in the Constitution, works in such a way that there exists a separation of powers between the 3 branches of the government (thus, operating on a system of checks and balances).

James Madison, writing in "The Federalist," No. 47, said, that the accumulation of all powers - legislative, executive, and judiciary - in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, lead to the very definition of tyranny [dictatorship].

I believe the word is "Vestment of Power."

Saction8

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #632 on: February 13, 2012, 04:55:05 PM »

I wouldn't blame them for posting this crap, santropez -- I mean, you can find weird stuff even on CNN -- take a look at this one LOL ;)

New Yorkers stuck with syrupy smell, but can breathe easy

NEW YORK (CNN) -- The source of a mysterious maple syrup-like smell that has periodically blanketed New York is not a particularly aromatic pancake house but a New Jersey factory involved in the processing of fenugreek seeds, Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced Thursday. The sweet aroma first descended upon Manhattan and northern New Jersey in October 2005, initially triggering several building evacuations as well as concern the scent was physically harmful. Authorities from the Office of Emergency Management soon concluded it posed no danger to the public. The odor made several return appearances in subsequent years, each time confounding nostrils before vanishing as perplexingly as it arrived.

Comparing information about local wind speed, wind direction and air humidity against the locations of citizen complaints about the smell, officials from the city's Department of Environmental Protection narrowed down the potential source to four factories in northern New Jersey that produce food additives and fragrances. Last week, when several dozen residents of Upper Manhattan called to complain about the smell, the environmental department, having developed a new evidence gathering procedure, gathered air samples from each suspected source in canisters. Tests revealed the pungent perpetrator of that incident was a Hudson County facility owned by Frutorom, a company that develops and manufactures flavors for the food, fragrance and pharmaceutical industries.

The specific chemical agents responsible for the scent are esters, compounds "created by the reaction between an alcohol and an acid" during the processing of fenugreek seeds, according to Bloomberg. Toasted fenugreek seeds are often used in the production of artificial syrups and in the cuisines of a number of cultures. The mayor said New Jersey officials, who cooperated with New York in the investigation, had concluded that Frutorom had not violated any rules. He said New Yorkers will have to tolerate the syrup smell's occasional return, noting that it's a relatively benign odor. "All things considered I can think of a lot of things worse than maple syrup," he said.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/02/05/NY.syrup.smell/index.html


It may seem "crap" and "weird stuff" to you, beyond aurora, but if you'd visit NYC even for a single day you'd easily notice this is indeed a serious issue to be dealt with!


I know it will sound strange to you, but New York City sucks greatly - and I'm not talking Brooklyn here (which we all know is ghetto) - I used to live temporarily near Central Park in a hotel-like apartment and I am telling you girls - they would pick up the trash once a week - that's right, ONCE PER WEEK - the whole place stunk (I'm sure you can imagine it!)


I'm sure that's an overstatement (exaggeration) - that's surely not the case, even in Brooklyn!

entitatitivity

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #633 on: February 14, 2012, 07:53:35 PM »

Don't take the babies thing lightly! Take a look here,

http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/prelaw/index.php/topic,33732.0.html


As I understand it, you don't have to actually go with a guy to have a baby. I think I am goin' for it! ;)


Mother here ... I was like, do I post post this, or is it better not to post it at all ... but then, I thought, I'm gonna post it anyway ... I am aware that talking about two men having a baby sounds crazy and that several posters on this board may ridicule the idea ... now, I don't know if I'm being naive, but science has made possible for us things that 50 years ago we'd think were impossible ... my question is - is this something that scientists are working on and that they are bound to bring to fruition? I have a son who's gay, who very much loves his partner  - I know deep down myself he loves children, it's just that he does not go with women. I sometimes 'rave' he might have a biological child with his partner, his boyfriend ... now I wonder, is this just a poor woman's imagination, or something that will come true sooner or later?


Meria, in all due respect, I'm trying to think what is it that you're really thinking?! You say, "it's 'just' that he does not go with women" - I mean, what's that supposed to mean - for this kind of thing, going with women really matters!

Just take a look at the date the electronic article was posted on BBC - more than 10 years ago - doesn't that make you think they're not making their "best efforts" on that?!


spillover - I would take a different approach - I don't want the poster who was asking on the status of the all-male-babies thing to misunderstand me or something, but I would suggest, quite simply, the two males having babies concieved by one or both of them (with eggs donated by women). I would not think the two of them would not love the baby/-ies enough, just like they love each-other.

pick

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #634 on: February 15, 2012, 05:29:45 PM »

[...]

Things function in these societies bureaucratically, based on the laws, drawn and enforced by the governments, the ones that same people elected to govern them.

So they do not, for instance, go and kill their fellow citizen to get even for him having say, raped, their child - they address the issue with the government - take the guy to the courts of law.

The government, on the other hand, has to abide by a set of norms (laws) and not overstep them, abusing the power conferred on it by the people. It can not curtail their citizens' liberties, for instance, overtly or covertly, unless good cause is shown first.

It can not resort to illegal tactics and strategies that by actually being used and reluctantly endorsed by its citizens have the effect of legitimizing them, with the end result being over-accumulation of power, beyond that that was originally intended to be invested, and conferred, by the people onto their government.

And so, the more innocent their victim of persecution, the more afraid people will be - as they too might as well be in the victim's place - with more and more power that governments will be able to steal from the people.


Will you walk me 2 my car [...] would not allow a certain branch of the government go off the limits and employ "illegal" tactics, as you say, on its citizens - the executive body, would need, for instance, a warrant from a judge (the legislative), which would make the tactic that you talk about, "legal."


Assuming, of course, that they use the "warrant" (if they ever get one) to do exactly what the warrant was asked for and provided for - but, honey, with all the * & ^ % we've heard the American government has done, even on its own people - sincerely I can't give you much credit here!

Metodi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #635 on: February 16, 2012, 05:19:26 PM »

Quote

Well, the fact is that it's the police that deals with violent and dangerous criminals. For instance, local cops deal with many more drugs kingpins than all the other agencies put together. It's all about perception and promotion - for God's sake, Hoover could have well been a public relations guy hitting big with all his ad campaigns!

There was this French philosopher, Jean Baudrillard, who said that power is dead, dissolved, canceled and made hyperreal through simulations, models, codes. In the new Postmodern universe of mediablitz, we no longer have power per se -- but something like a simulation of power.

For instance, Ronald Reagan ruled like a king merely by posing -- by offering signs of power in photo ops and sound bites -- rather than by exercising power.


barabar, would this be the counterpart of the coded situation that the teacher puts the workers in, the one that Lovdie talks about?


[...]

It is by means of critical thinking that individuals will be able to understand the world in totality, not in fragments, achieving a clearer perception of the whole. To this end, a dialectical method of thought, exemplified in the analysis of a "coded" situation is presented. The "decoding" on the part of students/learners will guarantee moving from the part to the whole and then returning to the parts, so that the Subject recognizes oneself in the coded concrete situation and recognizes the latter as a situation in which he finds himself, as well as with the other people; accomplished as it should, this makes possible for the abstract to be "transported" to the concrete realm, by the critical perception of the subject himself. The task of the teacher becomes the "representing" of the universe of themes to the people from whom it was initially received -- presented to them as a "problem."


manual

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #636 on: February 23, 2012, 04:55:39 PM »

When people stub their toe, they get angry, curse, and through hobbled grimace and gritted teeth, ignore the pain. How much quicker the heal and more pleasant the day, if that poor throbbing toe were held and its pain acknowledged instead.

Then comforted by warm, sympathetic hands till pain eases and ends. After all, no matter the shoe, the speed, or the rocky path pointed, the toe never lets body down.

If small this change in thought does seem, apply that small principle to a larger scale, and note what differences result with change of belief. When the body is sick or diseased, the prescribed policy is to view the disease with winner-loser hostility. Rather than stiffening resolve and muscle and steadying nerve to control pain, rather than declaring all-out war and focusing energy and resources on destroying the invader, flip perspectives instead.

Focus light on body's plight, for it's every bit in need of caress as that stubbed toe once was. Accept the pain, validate its existence. The body system may be confused as to which is friend and which is foe. The body for allowing disease to enter or disease for daring to enter? Wars are always confusing. As peace can follow surrender in war, heal and cure can follow surrender in body disease.

[...] Applying the simple principle further, farther, wider; how far from acceptance and cooperation ever healing is? Both come inextricably bound and wound when love visits. When children stub their toe, they cry out in acknowledgment of pain.

With love in heart and hand, adults comfort and massage their sore wee toe and kiss and cuddle to ease pain.

I wonder if we do not view each other as stubbed toes too-often, and too-readily in life. It seems avoidance is easier than care, anger is faster than understanding, complaint is quicker than compliment, and ignoring common, if not prevalent.

When others hurt, they are generally left to fend for themselves, as stubbed toe often must do. When our children hurt, we hurt too. What's the difference?

Other than pedigree and proximity, nothing.


injunction, these are some great words, but truth-be-told, we're not taught to "acknowledge the pain," (we're actually told to "take it like a man")!

When love visits?! As things are - as you even say it yourself - those visitations are "allowed" for children only, so to speak! I mean, would you expect much tenderness and affection displayed before (let alone after) the, let's say, average sexual relationship? With people going thru hundreds of partners - and with your wife having become like your sister to you - what kind of affection would you expect to show towards your partner? It's more like sex conducted in a militaristic manner, just like you do it in the middle of a mess (all that other stuff you've to do)!

But your idea, of love being an end in itself, is truly great!

citifax

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #637 on: February 24, 2012, 03:55:36 PM »

This is just my wild guess you know - correct me if I'm wrong - but is this what you mean - am I really connecting the dots here? :)


For Jung, the mandala represents the 'Self' - another term that he borrowed from Eastern philosophy. This 'Self' is NOT what we ordinarily refer to as the 'ego', 'I' or everyday 'self' (without a capital 'S'), but stands in relation to these in such a way that when, during the 'enlightenment' of the individual, the personality shifts from its center in the 'ego' to its center in the 'Self', such a shift can either be understood as the attainment of a state of 'egolessness' or the accomplishment of 'Self-realization'.



Hardly a seamless monument!



When will these old blowhards learn that no matter where they plop themselves down, as long as there are just two of them they won't be able to say they are sitting in a circle? Even if you have nine lives to devote to finding a solution to this dilemma, it won't matter. One thing is for sure, though - they made us laugh so hard our insides fell out!

In their book Glassman and Fields describe it in the following way:

Quote
"Most people think [that spiritual self-sufficiency] involves building up a strong sense of self. But building oneself up - becoming the whole universe - really consists of what Dogen calls 'forgetting the self'... It's as if we become a point that has no dimension, but that point is the center of an all-encompassing circle. There's no longer any separation between us and everything else."

The visual figure that Glassman and Fields use as their central metaphor for 'realization' - the dimensionless central point that spawns an all-encompassing circle - is none other than the figure of the mandala! Plotinus used this metaphor to describe God. English poet and clergyman Thomas Traherne also spoke of a 'center' that 'surrounds'


Truth-be-told, these concepts are entirely foreign to the Western way of thought! Center that surrounds?! Gimme a @ # ! * i n g break! Assuming someone would be able to "translate" them to some sort of actionable philosophy - such would lead to nothing but irrationality in our society - a d m i n i s t r a t o r, this "prescription" you give to people leads to madness!

Not to mention that the first post, the "jewels" in the net thing, entails the absence of hierarchy, which is essential to the way Western societies are built and function!

Would you, for instance, envision a form of democracy where people decide for themselves and there is no central government at all? There has been some experiments on that, but nothing that would really work in practice.

Eastern religions ways of thinking are non-dualistic, meaning they tend to initiate a mode of thinking that collapses distinctions between opposites (A can be both A and not-A). This is very difficult to be accepted by the Western world that has held opposites, in language and in logic, as the central pillars of civilized thought. It would mean questioning the very foundations of one's life and of the societal influences that affect one. It would something totally irrational, hence labeled "insane."


Will you walk, I wouldn't be so divisive when it comes to Western philo and Buddhism. For example,

Nagarjuna was an important Buddhist teacher and philosopher. His tetralemma is famous with its logical propositions:

X (affirmation)
non-X (negation)
X and non-X (both)
neither X nor non-X (neither)

Now, the tetralemma is a figure that features prominently in the classical logic of the Greeks. It states that with reference to any a logical proposition X, there are four possibilities

X (affirmation)
X (negation)
X Λ X both (eqiv.)
(XX) (neither)

e l i

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #638 on: February 25, 2012, 06:24:32 PM »

When people stub their toe, they get angry, curse, and through hobbled grimace and gritted teeth, ignore the pain. How much quicker the heal and more pleasant the day, if that poor throbbing toe were held and its pain acknowledged instead.

Then comforted by warm, sympathetic hands till pain eases and ends. After all, no matter the shoe, the speed, or the rocky path pointed, the toe never lets body down.

If small this change in thought does seem, apply that small principle to a larger scale, and note what differences result with change of belief. When the body is sick or diseased, the prescribed policy is to view the disease with winner-loser hostility. Rather than stiffening resolve and muscle and steadying nerve to control pain, rather than declaring all-out war and focusing energy and resources on destroying the invader, flip perspectives instead.

Focus light on body's plight, for it's every bit in need of caress as that stubbed toe once was. Accept the pain, validate its existence. The body system may be confused as to which is friend and which is foe. The body for allowing disease to enter or disease for daring to enter? Wars are always confusing. As peace can follow surrender in war, heal and cure can follow surrender in body disease.

[...] Applying the simple principle further, farther, wider; how far from acceptance and cooperation ever healing is? Both come inextricably bound and wound when love visits. When children stub their toe, they cry out in acknowledgment of pain.

With love in heart and hand, adults comfort and massage their sore wee toe and kiss and cuddle to ease pain.

I wonder if we do not view each other as stubbed toes too-often, and too-readily in life. It seems avoidance is easier than care, anger is faster than understanding, complaint is quicker than compliment, and ignoring common, if not prevalent.

When others hurt, they are generally left to fend for themselves, as stubbed toe often must do. When our children hurt, we hurt too. What's the difference?

Other than pedigree and proximity, nothing.


injunction, these are some great words, but truth-be-told, we're not taught to "acknowledge the pain," (we're actually told to "take it like a man")!

When love visits?! As things are - as you even say it yourself - those visitations are "allowed" for children only, so to speak! I mean, would you expect much tenderness and affection displayed before (let alone after) the, let's say, average sexual relationship? With people going thru hundreds of partners - and with your wife having become like your sister to you - what kind of affection would you expect to show towards your partner? It's more like sex conducted in a militaristic manner, just like you do it in the middle of a mess (all that other stuff you've to do)!

But your idea, of love being an end in itself, is truly great!


manual, could you please expand a bit? Sounds to me really interesting ..

B Ashton

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #639 on: February 28, 2012, 03:06:27 PM »

Quote

Quote

As a Mother, I totally understand these objections, and so far as I am concerned, I wouldn't endorse PGD.

And yet, if one takes if one takes the stance of the devil's advocate [...]


Mother, does one take the stance very often?


LOL Habibe, you're so funny! ;)


beepster, some people (like the case certainly is with some law professors, for instance) will take ridiculous stances like these all the time - it is, I guess, kind of like that omnipotent ruler who has so much power in his hands that he goes literally insane.

Remember Caligula - the guy, the one who planned to planned to make his horse, Incitatus, consul?!

Fast-forwarding a bit, Hitler, Stalin were all paranoid leaders who couldn't trust anyone. Their absolute power was what corrupted them and made them all the leaders of corrupted, twisted nations under totalitarian regimes. The paranoia and lack of trust that characterizes many of the dictators is one of the things that allows them to take power. It is also the thing that leads them to murder their friends, confidants and the citizens in their country, thereafter.