The bonds that unite people

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
User avatar
Enki
Posts: 5052
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 6:04 pm

The bonds that unite people

Post by Enki »

One of the most interesting topics to me is the nature of common cause. I find that I often lack the vocabulary to describe the minute fixtures of common relationship that bind people together. For instance let me illustrate a picture of two characters.

Steve is a black gay man who is an actuary from Louisiana.

Jeff is a white gay man who is a truck driver from Mississippi.

Now, they have something in common, they are both gay, they have something not in common in that they are different races, they have something in common in that they are both from the gulf coast, but have something not in common that they are of different professions.

What interests me in this is the nature of how our bonds of friendship come along and are built out of many tiny characteristics of commonality.

The strongest bond builder or bond breaker can be shared experience. A married couple is about as close as two people can be, but a divorced couple is about as estranged as two people can be. In both instances the common and shared experience of marriage either binds or separates them. Young people who are in the course of building relationships often build friendship off of superficial criteria, like whether or not they like the same music or the same movies. Then there are deeper relationships built on shared interests, like both of them are studying engineeering together at the same university.

Any thoughts? Can people help me with my vocabulary problem? I am looking at it from a semiotics point of view, like each little relationship criteria is a semiotic category.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
User avatar
Juggernaut Nihilism
Posts: 1417
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:55 pm

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Juggernaut Nihilism »

Social dynamics, including, but not limited to, hierarchical relationships are a primary concern of all pack animals, and most mammals in general. Most creatures have evolved bloodless ways to sort out differences; therefore a non-alpha wolf can roll over for the pack leader without having to resort to a deathmatch, and typically a show of force is all that is necessary, if anything overt is necessary at all. Instinct is sufficient to sort out nearly all social problems that may arise, and presumably humans operated on this level for quite some time. With the advent of agriculture, however, the size of social groups living side by side with non-kin began to grow at a rate far outstripping instinct's ability to evolve in response. The complexity of social relationships became such that natural response became completely insufficient. Instead of simple dominant/submissive relationships, innumerable degrees of each became necessary to navigate social life. And it didn't happen all at once: in extremely primitive kinship tribes, we found that simple dominance of the father and elder brothers was the general rule; as the tribes become larger and more complex, however, we see complex kinship systems in which there are rules dictating where one's father's brother's second son stands in relation to one's mother's uncles daughter's husband.

At a certain level of growth, even such systems of conflict resolution and social governance proved unwieldy and impossible, and artificial institutions such as the rudimentary state (and its social hierarchy) and the rule of law were imposed on people by force. The state monopoly on violence probably arose when blood feuds between two large kinship groups became so vast and violent that the stability of the social group itself was threatened every time a serious dispute arose; the mandatory submission to the judgments of a chief, as opposed to having resort to blood revenge (the normal state of criminal justice before the state), likely arose a necessary stage of social evolution. Under even a totalitarian system, something like a rule of law exists for the common man: a typical citizen cannot oppress or destroy another typical citizen without a cause delineated by law or decree, regardless of his relationship to the latter. That one was stronger, or older, than another citizen was irrelevant to one's place relative to him in the social hierarchy, which was determined by the king and by the state structure (although a particular state structure may have institutionalized the priority of the stronger or elder).

Under such a system, in which one's neighbor has no natural, kinship relation to one, and in which one's interactions with others are governed by rules written on tablets rather than upon the central nervous system, navigating a complex social environment becomes one of the most demanding tasks a typical human being faces, particularly in a time such as ours, when the validity of traditional roles and hierarchies has been called into question. It is not without cause that the running circular thoughts of neurotics are very often rehearsals of what one will say to another in an upcoming confrontation, or wishes or regrets over missed opportunities to have said something different in a previous interaction, or just general psychological preparation for possible upcoming interactions with others. Consciousness is not called upon to solve problems that instinct and habit can handle on their own, but to work through problems for which instinct and habit cannot account. If the big football star, relatively comfortable and secure in his one-dimensional social relationships, seems shallower than the skinny emo nerd, it is because he spends less time reflecting on his limitations, and tends to simply act in accordance with his assumed status in relation to most others he meets, rather than spending a tremendous amount of energy constantly trying to figure out where he stands and what the required protocols are for a particular position. Nor is it an accident that so much of waking consciousness is spent on sexual matters: that one should not sleep with the wife of a man one sees as weak and socially submissive simply due to an artificial custom is a matter not to be left to the instincts, but managed by consciousness. Ever since proto-human female apes stopped going into heat seasonally, and instead adopted a menstrual cycle making them fertile and prepared to reproduce year-round, a rare situation has existed for humans: non-alpha males were able to mate regularly, since a single leader couldn't possibly handle the duties of mating with all the females when they were constantly in heat. Much has been written on the social implications of this development, and the theory is, roughly: combined with the long period of natal dependency of human infants/children, females became more dependent on men to procure food; the monthly menstrual bleeding required that females have a greater input of iron, so meat consumption necessarily increased. Since there were enough eligible females to go around, non-dominant males could still find other ways to court and compete for mates, especially by providing needed meat. Thus courage, strength, and savagery became valuable traits and the males who could bring it to bear the best in the hunt were the ones who procreated. The base and violent drives so out of fashion today, as well as those toward achievement and desire for glory, were bred into us over a hundred thousand years. Whatever kind of neurotic losers your parents might have been, speaking in terms of greater historical cycles we are all the progeny a thousand generations of great and powerful men.

It is one of the most difficult things in the world to adjust one's social relationships without going to extremes. It is difficult to move a person from trusted friend to non-friend without making them into an enemy. It is difficult to divorce a spouse and merely demote them to trusted friend. It is difficult to have a position of relative dominance relative to another person without becoming a bully if they ever push back.

Never before have there been so many claims on our loyalty. Not only family, state, and church, but innumerable other institutions, creeds, guilds, and groups ask us to identify with them first and foremost, and each seeks to undermine the validity of the others' claims. For example, throughout history the most natural and common source of affiliation came from having a common ancestry. However, today this is called racism and is one of most heinous sins, sufficient to bring down even the most popular and powerful people if convicted. This is because identification by ancestry is a mortal threat to the social system we live under, namely, the state, which demands one's allegiance, at the expense of one's blood ancestors if necessary. The establishment of social bonds today, therefore, is a far more conscious act than perhaps ever before in the past. One can don and doff roles like hats: there is very little to prevent one from being a committed father and husband one day to abandoning the family altogether in favor of a cult, or taking up for the state and going off to war as a volunteer. Just pay your child support and no one will bother you. The invalidation of traditional roles and relationships, and the proliferation of alternatives, has required that consciousness be called upon to sort these out as "problems", whereas they were not problems to be solved in the past (not to the extent that they are today).

Many people today fail to recognize that fact when thinking about times other than our own. They assume that the problems of today were the problems of yesterday. Thinking of a time, for example, when women were compelled to get married at a certain age and to begin bearing children and caring for the home, today's feminists usually treat this as if every girl chafed under this form of smiling slavery, and yearned to be free of the domestic yoke. Or, if they didn't, it was only because of the psychological slavery that kept them blinded to other possibilities. But this is wrong-headed. Women at the random time I'm using as an example wished to marry and raise their children and home just as today people wish to have a house and a car. It's an apt comparison, because there are people today who tell us that we have brainwashed into wanting a house and car, and that if only we would open our minds to other possibilities, we would be much freer. And I suppose it is true that we will be freer, but we will almost certainly not be less neurotic. For creating more options where previously there were few also creates problems where previously there were none. People who are simply thrown out into the world and told they can be whatever they want, do whatever they want, etc are not healthier or happier than people who come up under a stricter structure. But they are freer, and there is more room for growth, if they can handle the pressures without being destroyed.

Deprived of natural bonds today, nearly every social bond is a conscious attempt to establish structure in a sea of social chaos. In a world where almost everyone, even one's parents once one becomes a teenager, are Other, people are trying to form an Us to stand together in opposition to the rest of the unfamiliar world. The upside of such consciously chosen relationships is simply that: they are freely chosen. The downside of these artificial bonds is that they leave little room for adjustment: if it turns out that I was mistaken about you, or the nature of our relationship, this is a dangerous situation and you must once again be considered Other. Consider the difficulty that would typically arise if one has a "best" friend that becomes supplanted by a new "best" friend, although one's affection for the former has not diminished. Very few people could make such a transition seamlessly. This is not so in more primitive situations where natural relationships override bonds that arise after the fact.

So yeah, you were talking about common cause and shared experience, and I totally went off on a tangent and didn't address that at all. Sorry.
Last edited by Juggernaut Nihilism on Tue Sep 04, 2012 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The fundamental rule of political analysis from the point of psychology is, follow the sacredness, and around it is a ring of motivated ignorance."
User avatar
Endovelico
Posts: 3038
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Endovelico »

Common cause is a damn difficult balance act to achieve. If the feeling is too weak, society falls apart. If it is too strong, it enslaves society and it leads to aggressiveness. More later.
Simple Minded

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Simple Minded »

interesting topic, thanks Tinker.

Posted with out reading other responses. I look forward to the responses of the more serious intellects.

IMSMO,

- People do not respond to reality, they respond to what they interpret as reality.
- Any time one is conscious, one controls three variables that each play a huge role in determining one's life. Focus, interpretation, and response. How and why each person chooses each depends upon an infinite number of variables, experiences, and opinions. The mysteries of the mind…
- “Mismatchers” see a penny, a nickel, and a dime as all being different. “Matchers” see a penny, a dime, and a nickel as all similar.
- Optimist: “Life just can’t get any better!” Pessimist: “I’m afraid you’re right!”


A couple weeks ago I was mowing the lawn and a neighbor was out walking. I shut off the mower and we shot the bull for about a half hour. While discussing current events and human nature he told me of the problems his grandson was facing due to what his grandson's parents neglected to teach him. From there the conversation turned to our parents and their expectations of their "chirrun." He a black man, 10 years my senior, raised in Virginia. Me, a honky, raised in New York. You would have thought we had the same parents or lived next door to each other. Evidently, Old Bullshitters come in various colors, shapes, and live in different locations....... they are everywhere!


I have no doubt that even the most vitriolic opponents on this forum would get along just fine as neighbors, since they would then have common ground/cause. But in the world of cyberspace, where nothing is cheaper than talk, and all are expressing opinions of what they would do if they were king, and none have the responsibility/burden of actually following thru,it is easier to focus on differences in ideals rather than the commonalities of reality.

Guess we could all be happy in Realityville, but none in Idealisticburg.......

“The virtues or faults a person actually possesses are minimal compared to what you can mentally endow upon them.”

“Nothing is either good or bad but thinking makes it so!”

"Expectations influence happiness as much or more than reality."

We all live in the world we create, both physically and mentally. How much more just (better?) could life be?
Simple Minded

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Simple Minded »

Juggernaut Nihilism wrote: So yeah, you were talking about common cause and shared experience, and I totally went off on a tangent and didn't address that at all. Sorry.
Dude,

Don't apologize, great rant, relevant analysis, lots of food for thought.

Isn't that the point of starting threads....?

Opression in the eyes of one, is opportunity/progess in the eyes of another.

I have often thought that man is not well suited for life in large groups. We don't adapt as quickly as technology.

Technology often functions as force mulitpliers and information multipliers.... Smart multipliers are tougher! ;)
Simple Minded

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Simple Minded »

Simple Minded wrote: Guess we could all be happy in Realityville, but none in Idealisticburg.......

Maybe that is why those who seem to have the most resources at their command, often seem to be the unhappiest?

Or has information age technology just made us aware of more ways than ever before that life does not meet up to our ideals?
User avatar
Marcus
Posts: 2409
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: Alaska

The ties that bind . . .

Post by Marcus »

Enki wrote:. . common cause. I find that I often lack the vocabulary to describe the minute fixtures of common relationship that bind people together. . .
You could do much worse than:

The Four Loves by C. S. Lewis

The Quest For Community by Robert Nisbet

ENVY: A Theory of Social Behaviour by Helmut Schoeck
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Ibrahim »

Enki wrote:One of the most interesting topics to me is the nature of common cause. I find that I often lack the vocabulary to describe the minute fixtures of common relationship that bind people together. For instance let me illustrate a picture of two characters.

Steve is a black gay man who is an actuary from Louisiana.

Jeff is a white gay man who is a truck driver from Mississippi.

Now, they have something in common, they are both gay, they have something not in common in that they are different races, they have something in common in that they are both from the gulf coast, but have something not in common that they are of different professions.

What interests me in this is the nature of how our bonds of friendship come along and are built out of many tiny characteristics of commonality.

The strongest bond builder or bond breaker can be shared experience. A married couple is about as close as two people can be, but a divorced couple is about as estranged as two people can be. In both instances the common and shared experience of marriage either binds or separates them. Young people who are in the course of building relationships often build friendship off of superficial criteria, like whether or not they like the same music or the same movies. Then there are deeper relationships built on shared interests, like both of them are studying engineeering together at the same university.

Any thoughts? Can people help me with my vocabulary problem? I am looking at it from a semiotics point of view, like each little relationship criteria is a semiotic category.

The simplest way to look at it is as a Venn diagram. If more of your shared interests overlap, then you have common cause with somebody. E.g. the Occupy crowd was mocked for having all of these different views about different subjects, but all the different ideological camps overlapped on basic objection to modern bourgeois capitalism and economic oligarchy. That's bigger than whether or not you're vegan.

The problem, and Marx and Engles drone on about this point, is that people often harbor illusions about what their interests are and who they share them with. So in the end it boils down to the Socratic injunction to know thyself. If I know what my real interests are I will make common cause with, and grow close to, the right people.
User avatar
Enki
Posts: 5052
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 6:04 pm

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Enki »

Great posts guys. Thanks for the book recommendations Marcus.

Ibrahim, your comment about the poor ability to identify one's own interests is a good point.

Does anyone have any idea for vocabulary terms? I am specifically looking for terms like 'asabiyah', which means shared group identity and trust, social cohesion.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
User avatar
Marcus
Posts: 2409
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Marcus »

Enki wrote:. . Does anyone have any idea for vocabulary terms? I am specifically looking for terms like 'asabiyah', which means shared group identity and trust, social cohesion.
Might I suggest contemplation of the Trinity. Human community cannot be understood by an appeal to some imagined, evolutionary past as pack animals. We are made in the image of God, and human social conflict between the One and the Many is resolved only in the community of the Godhead.
The One and the Many by Rushdoony is the book that has been most important in developing my philosophy as a Christian. Rushdoony shows how human philosophy always struggles with the problem of which is ultimate, the unifying "one" or the liberating "many." This philosophical issue lies at the root of such issues as the individual versus the state, the individual versus marriage, and anarchy versus tyranny. Rushdoony shows that principled, unaided human reason can only lead to one extreme or the other. Balanced positions must be pragmatic or emotionally based. This means unaided human reason cannot get to right answers.

Rushdoony finds the solution in the tri-une God of Christianity, where both the "oneness" and "threeness" of the trinity are "equally ultimate." In the tri-une God of the Bible we have a "concrete universal," as opposed to an abstract universal. Dependent human thinking based on divine revelation is both possible and valid.

The introductory chapter of this book lays this all out, The subsequent chapters expound on this view by examining its outworking in human history, including Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Persian, and modern philosophies.
***************************

. . a survey of Western and near Eastern history (up to the early A.D. 1960s) in terms of how Trinitarian the leaders were. Because God is triune (Father, Son, Holy Ghost), He shows us unity and diversity in perfect balance, which is a key problem for politics to solve. Islam says God is simply one, all alone, with one prophet superseding all previous prophets; thus dictatorship and tyranny come natural to Islam, as experience confirms. Atheism tends to be dog eat dog until one dog becomes top dog. (The recent Chinese, I'd say, have learned from Christendom, specifically from the Victorian enclave of Hong Kong and the Victorian remodeling of Japan by Meiji and later by MacArthur.)

—reader reviews of the book referenced above
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of supply and demand; it is the privilege of human beings to live under the laws of justice and mercy."

—Wendell Berry
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Ibrahim »

Enki wrote:Ibrahim, your comment about the poor ability to identify one's own interests is a good point.

Does anyone have any idea for vocabulary terms? I am specifically looking for terms like 'asabiyah', which means shared group identity and trust, social cohesion.
You can adopt existing terminology from ideological movements or religious traditions. It seems like anarcho-sydicalism is closest to your ideas, so perhaps you might want to use some of their terms? I'm not up on all the literature in this field, but Georges Sorel springs to mind. Perhaps Daniel DeLeon.
User avatar
Juggernaut Nihilism
Posts: 1417
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:55 pm

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Juggernaut Nihilism »

Most people who say they are for free association don't take their thinking through to its conclusion regarding anti-discrimination laws.
"The fundamental rule of political analysis from the point of psychology is, follow the sacredness, and around it is a ring of motivated ignorance."
User avatar
Enki
Posts: 5052
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 6:04 pm

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Enki »

My thinking in this was not to take it to our normal political religious aspect, but to speak directly to the ideas in the abstract. Like rather than, "Christianity says people are united by this and this and this.", I would say, "Religion is a strong unifying force."

But to take the idea to a specific place, circumcision is an interesting one. As we had the discussion recently about the fact that though it's not medically indicated it is specifically a designation of tribal affiliation for Jews. If gentiles stop having it done to their children it will again be a mark of Jewishness.

One of my favorite concepts in this regard is the concept of the shibboleth, the artifacts of culture that are readily apparent and obvious to a member of that culture but can mark outsiders instantly. One of my favorite apocryphal stories is regarding how an American spy in Germany ate his pie tip to crust, whereas in germany they eat the crust first. Or how in Inglourious Basterds they knew the British spy because when he held up his hand to denote three he held up the wrong three fingers.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: THe bonds that unite people

Post by Mr. Perfect »

I've usually had the most chemistry with people who were very different from me. With some exceptions.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Juggernaut Nihilism
Posts: 1417
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:55 pm

Re: The bonds that unite people

Post by Juggernaut Nihilism »

Mr. Perfect wrote:I've usually had the most chemistry with people who were very different from me. With some exceptions.
That's probably because most people like you are hard to get along with.
"The fundamental rule of political analysis from the point of psychology is, follow the sacredness, and around it is a ring of motivated ignorance."
User avatar
Juggernaut Nihilism
Posts: 1417
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:55 pm

Re: The bonds that unite people

Post by Juggernaut Nihilism »

The lack of built-in cohesive social bonds in this country probably has a lot to do with the romantic relationship America has to street gangs, the mafia, Hell's Angels, outlaw cowboy groups, etc.
"The fundamental rule of political analysis from the point of psychology is, follow the sacredness, and around it is a ring of motivated ignorance."
noddy
Posts: 11318
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: The bonds that unite people

Post by noddy »

Juggernaut Nihilism wrote:The lack of built-in cohesive social bonds in this country probably has a lot to do with the romantic relationship America has to street gangs, the mafia, Hell's Angels, outlaw cowboy groups, etc.
add corporate brands (gm vs ford et all) and you have also described my country.
ultracrepidarian
Simple Minded

Re: The bonds that unite people

Post by Simple Minded »

Juggernaut Nihilism wrote:
Mr. Perfect wrote:I've usually had the most chemistry with people who were very different from me. With some exceptions.
That's probably because most people like you are hard to get along with.
:lol:

Amen! Me guilty too!

No two people dislike each other more than two individuals who are similar. Especially when it comes to parents and children.

I've always found that people who very similar to me are boring, stupid, obnoxious, ill-informed, simple minded, and always stating the obvious!

Very difficult to respect their opinions........

duh! I knew that..!

Kinda splains all the animosity on this forum.....
User avatar
Enki
Posts: 5052
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 6:04 pm

Re: The bonds that unite people

Post by Enki »

I actually get along pretty well with people who are like me. My best friend and I are very similar in a lot of ways.

But my social engagement is very much premeditated. I seek people out based upon wanting things. Like if I want to throw a rave, I hang out with the guy who has the sound system. If I want to get into politics I hang out with the guy who is a good potential candidate. I am just now in a position in life where a lot of social obligations resolved all at once and I am floating in a kind of torpor. New stuff hasn't come to fruition and a lot of stuff starts engaging in the Spring. I should go out socially without an agenda at all. It's been literally years since I have done that.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
User avatar
Juggernaut Nihilism
Posts: 1417
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:55 pm

Re: The bonds that unite people

Post by Juggernaut Nihilism »

Enki wrote:I actually get along pretty well with people who are like me. My best friend and I are very similar in a lot of ways.

But my social engagement is very much premeditated. I seek people out based upon wanting things. Like if I want to throw a rave, I hang out with the guy who has the sound system. If I want to get into politics I hang out with the guy who is a good potential candidate. I am just now in a position in life where a lot of social obligations resolved all at once and I am floating in a kind of torpor. New stuff hasn't come to fruition and a lot of stuff starts engaging in the Spring. I should go out socially without an agenda at all. It's been literally years since I have done that.
Great. Now I know you're only my Facebook friend for my looks... I'M MORE THAN JUST A PENIS ATTACHED TO A PERFECT BODY EREK!!!!1
"The fundamental rule of political analysis from the point of psychology is, follow the sacredness, and around it is a ring of motivated ignorance."
Simple Minded

Re: The bonds that unite people

Post by Simple Minded »

Juggernaut Nihilism wrote:
Enki wrote:I actually get along pretty well with people who are like me. My best friend and I are very similar in a lot of ways.

But my social engagement is very much premeditated. I seek people out based upon wanting things. Like if I want to throw a rave, I hang out with the guy who has the sound system. If I want to get into politics I hang out with the guy who is a good potential candidate. I am just now in a position in life where a lot of social obligations resolved all at once and I am floating in a kind of torpor. New stuff hasn't come to fruition and a lot of stuff starts engaging in the Spring. I should go out socially without an agenda at all. It's been literally years since I have done that.
Great. Now I know you're only my Facebook friend for my looks... I'M MORE THAN JUST A PENIS ATTACHED TO A PERFECT BODY EREK!!!!1
:lol: :lol: There's a name for people who are only nice to you cause they want something..... women!

Tinker.... you ignorant slut..... ;)
User avatar
Enki
Posts: 5052
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 6:04 pm

Re: The bonds that unite people

Post by Enki »

I am nice to everyone. But usually my time to go out is spent networking. Especially now that I have kids. I look at every moment spent socializing as time away from my kids and ask myself whether or not it is worth it.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: The bonds that unite people

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Enki wrote:I am nice to everyone. But usually my time to go out is spent networking. Especially now that I have kids. I look at every moment spent socializing as time away from my kids and ask myself whether or not it is worth it.
As a father, that is like saying every moment I spend socializing is like taking time away from looking at myself in a mirror. Healthy kids do remarkably well on their own, and they learn by imitation.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Enki
Posts: 5052
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 6:04 pm

Re: The bonds that unite people

Post by Enki »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:
Enki wrote:I am nice to everyone. But usually my time to go out is spent networking. Especially now that I have kids. I look at every moment spent socializing as time away from my kids and ask myself whether or not it is worth it.
As a father, that is like saying every moment I spend socializing is like taking time away from looking at myself in a mirror. Healthy kids do remarkably well on their own, and they learn by imitation.
Heh, it's not as much for their benefit as mine. They are only going to be cuddly and squishable for a few years!

Also, I am out about three nights a week usually.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: The bonds that unite people

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Enki wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote:
Enki wrote:I am nice to everyone. But usually my time to go out is spent networking. Especially now that I have kids. I look at every moment spent socializing as time away from my kids and ask myself whether or not it is worth it.
As a father, that is like saying every moment I spend socializing is like taking time away from looking at myself in a mirror. Healthy kids do remarkably well on their own, and they learn by imitation.
Heh, it's not as much for their benefit as mine. They are only going to be cuddly and squishable for a few years!

Also, I am out about three nights a week usually.
Glad you got my joke, Enki. Just stay out of jail at all costs.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
Post Reply