JeffH
Senior Member Past Moderator
Offline
Don't stand behind me, I'm about to sling!
Posts: 354
Memphis, TN
Gender:
|
Dan,
First, anthropomorphizing is great to an extent, but implying that slings are psychological is beyond that extent. Slings are inanimate, without feeling, thought, volition, or anything else created or derived from we who use them. Slings do not teach, hypnotize or add to the body of knowledge and understanding held by humans. Slings do not know hunger, pain, thirst, love, pity, hate or fear. They are incapable of going to war, writing poetry or reproducing. Slings don't kill people; people kill people and sometimes use slings to do so. Slings do not compete in the olympics, yet I hope that someday someone will use a sling in them.
The DESIRE TO THROW is human and cannot be attributed to rocks, wool, leather, slings, catapults, trebuchets and so forth. I believe that what you are doing is projecting your own response to the sling back onto the sling and then saying that the sling is the source of the response. In reality, however, you could have the same response to any number of things (and probably do). Ipso, it is not the sling which produces the things you are describing, but your own mind.
Now, understand, I am not being argumentative here. I am, in fact, only trying to clarify some terms. I find that we often have trouble communicating because we don't define our terms very well. Case in point: English describes himself as a pacifist anarchist who is opposed to forcing ideas on others unless they try to force their ideas on him first. English is a nice guy who is contributing a considerable amount of information to this web site. But, his discription of himself contains mutually exclusive terms. That is, of course, his perogotive and I would argue on his behalf to hold to whatever ideology he likes. It is simply harder to get down to the business of talking about the sling when I am confusing the issue by trying to get into the sling's mind and figure out why it likes to throw rocks.
My point here is that it is we that promulgate war and peace, philosophy and literature. The sling is a tool we use to do so, nothing more or less. So, when we speak of "exceeding the materialistic" or the "psychological" and so on, we are speaking of ourselves. The instruments we use to test or carry out our ideas and desires are incidental. Therefore, discussing the sling itself is an exercise in the material and physiological. I refer to my first post in this thread for clarification on this point.
Second, my brain is not reptillian. It is a complex and unique structure designed and created by an infinite and personal God. That makes ME a personal, intentional and purposeful creation that behaves, more or less, as I was intended to behave because I, like any creation, am accountable to my creator and his design. This includes my desire to put my hand to things and make them work. Things like a table saw, milling machine, gun, computer, sling, etc. My desire to throw things is inate, but not accidental in any way.
Conversely, slings cannot relate to their creators on any level. They can neither praise nor hate those who make them. They are not personal and do not seek out relationships with their masters. They remain conspicously devoid of any human qualities.
Jeff <>< who really likes this thread
|