catalyst

This is a fairly poor analogy. It would perhaps be more appropriate to say that someone getting paid to read a book is like someone getting paid to watch a sport.

Without the athlete, there is no sport, rather like without the writer, there is no book.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have to get back to reveiwing a book for the Amateur Athletic Union. And when I send them my opinion, they will send me a check.

Imagine that.

neo_mp5

you're not getting it. sports are recreational activities. you play them to have fun. reading is alsoa recreational activity. you read books to have fun. but nobody gets paid to read a book. much less paid in the thousands

xorbie

I don't consider myself a non-comformist. Moreover, it's literally impossible for every non-comformist to disagree about everything, so I don't know why you even bother bringing it up.

How is this a rediculous accusation? You are claiming something is immoral which you do not partake in and which other people do. Thus, placing yourself on a higher moral pedastal. As a sports fan, I haven't put all that much thought into the matter. However, I have put a lot of thought into moral theory, and nowhere have I come up with anything that would make watching or playing sports immoral in any way.

Your manner of insulting all the people who disagree with you ("wouldn't have put any thought into the matter") and simultaneously acting all shocked when I say anything about you "where do you get the rediculous accusations?") is not going to go over well at any board.

Joel

xorbie

So you are saying people who write books don't have fun? I understand that you don't like sports, but let me show you this analogy:

Artists have a lot of natural artistic talent.
Athelets have a lot of natural athletic ability.

Artists spend a long time developing their talent.
Athletes spend a lot of time developing their athletic ability, as well as practicing their sport/event.

Artists produce something (art) which is aesthetically pleasing.
Athletes produce something (sport) which is aesthetically pleasing.

Now I'd like to know where this analogy is wrong? Do you disagree with the third part? Because let me tell you, some of the stuff that basketball and soccer players do is literally beautiful to me, far more beautiful than most poetry is. That you don't appreciate this beauty doesn't change the fact that many do, and you have no argument when you state that one form of expression (poetry, painting, etc) is morally superior to another (playing sport).

Joel

Cutter

You have a very narrow view of what the words 'discussion' and 'argument' mean. I suggest you look them up in a dictionary.

Your opinion has been challenged. And you have had intelligent input and opinions on the subject. You simply refuse to acknowledge them because they don't fit your views.

Your last couple of posts have pretty much confirmed what I thought last time I posted; you came here expecting everyone to agree with your position, or at the very least not to challenge you. Regardless of your protestations to the contrary, it is clear from your posts that you weren't after any sort of discussion at all. Certainly not a discussion in the sense that I and, apparently, everyone else around here understands it.

And when that didn't happen, you threw I gigantic hissy fit, as evidenced by all the insults you've started slinging around.

Next time you decide to start a topic, either here or somewhere else, then you'd better be prepared for the fact that not everyone is going to agree with you, and there's an extremely good likelihood you will be challenged. Just as you have been here. And as things stand, you don't seem well equipped to handle such challenges. I'd suggest that before posting somewhere, you should read some other threads covering topics that interest you. It'd probably give you a good idea of how discussions work at the message board in question.

neo_mp5

"Artists produce something (art) which is aesthetically pleasing."

to others

"Athletes produce something (sport) which is aesthetically pleasing."

to themselves

art is also unproductive. there are very few people who have a real taste for art. they see it as an investment, or the artsy crowd is just the one they wanted to fit into. (remember the simpsons episode with the failed barbecue?)

"Now I'd like to know where this analogy is wrong? Do you disagree with the third part? Because let me tell you, some of the stuff that basketball and soccer players do is literally beautiful to me, far more beautiful than most poetry is. That you don't appreciate this beauty doesn't change the fact that many do, and you have no argument when you state that one form of expression (poetry, painting, etc) is morally superior to another (playing sport)."

sport isn't about expression. it's far too barbaric for that. it's simply a non-violent alternative to war, and has been since the greeks.

neo_mp5

"Your opinion has been challenged. And you have had intelligent input and opinions on the subject. You simply refuse to acknowledge them because they don't fit your views.

Your last couple of posts have pretty much confirmed what I thought last time I posted; you came here expecting everyone to agree with your position, or at the very least not to challenge you.

Regardless of your protestations to the contrary, it is clear from your posts that you weren't after any sort of discussion at all. Certainly not a discussion in the sense that I and, apparently, everyone else around here understands it.

And when that didn't happen, you threw I gigantic hissy fit, as evidenced by all the insults you've started slinging around.

Next time you decide to start a topic, either here or somewhere else, then you'd better be prepared for the fact that not everyone is going to agree with you, and there's an extremely good likelihood you will be challenged. Just as you have been here. And as things stand, you don't seem well equipped to handle such challenges. I'd suggest that before posting somewhere, you should read some other threads covering topics that interest you. It'd probably give you a good idea of how discussions work at the message board in question."

apperently it's time for more rediculous unfounded accusations. you don't even deserve whatever attention you were seeking with that rant. i'm going to ignore you now, as you apperently can't post a message that has a true word in it.

Opera Nut

Godot, I don't have a job. According to this society, I have no worth without a job as a wageearner. I have three college degrees and lots of skills, but if I cannot get a job, then I'm just worthless.

Your initial premise is wrong. I have worth and value outside of my ability to earn money in our present mediocre society.

I'm not wasting any one's time but my own.

Cutter

Opera Nut, which one of Godot's posts are you addressing? You've got me slightly confused here.

neo_mp5

money is not what gives a person value, in my opinion. contribution to society does. that's something athletes don't do.