amwosu

"I'm here to examine the norms of this forum; shake the tree; reach some conclusions. I intend to finish doing that later this month. I'll probably post my conclusions before leaving."

Oh GAWD! I'm thinking of a word. It starts with an N. Ends with a T. Classic!
Ann Marie

Improviser

I think some of you must really live in very small bubbles.

You have NO privacy in an online forum and anyone can use it for any purpose they choose. Fodors certainly does for example. Do you really think it is here as a public service?
ROTFLMAO

Gretchen

Yep, I have had 3 tips printed in various travel books, and been given a book as a thank you. Why do you say we expect privacy?

annhig

No, I'm not including myself annhig. I know why I am here and it is not for the same reasons as yourself.

I'm here to examine the norms of this forum; shake the tree; reach some conclusions. I intend to finish doing that later this month. I'll probably post my conclusions before leaving.

For me, my time 'living' here with Fodorites in Fodorland is like spending some time living in any real physical country. I'm interested in the culture, the behavioural norms, etc.>>

oh, what a shame I missed this gem up thread. it is what we in the legal profession describe technically as a load of bol..cks. were CW living at this hour!

Improvisor, you have NO idea why any of the rest of us come here, and frankly, we don't care why you come here either.

Peter_S_Aus

<<<< You have NO privacy in an online forum and anyone can use it for any purpose they choose. Fodors certainly does for example. Do you really think it is here as a public service?
ROTFLMAO >>>>

No, the forums are here to suit Fodors marketing purposes, and presumably there's some sort of commercial pay-off for Fodors for the advertising that they run. People can post here to share information, ask questions, pick arguments for no apparent reason with other posters, display their humility or arrogance, insult or compliment other posters, or even research the sociology of a travel forum.

One looks forward to the peer reviewed publication.

Improviser

Peer reviewed? Umm, I don't think so Peter.

Peter, I am going to give you a sincere tip. No bull, no attempt at sarcasm, insult or anything else you might think I might mean. This is a sincere and well intentioned suggestion.

You don't strike me as totally beyond help as some here do. So here's my tip. Get and read a book called Listen Little Man by Wilhelm Reich

Peter_S_Aus

For those that might be interested:
http://www.wilhelmreichtrust.org/listen_little_man.pdf

Explains quite a lot, I think. A man is known by the company he reads, so they say. I'd append that a man may well be known by the books that have influenced him.

(Apologies, I should include women too. But it sounded better that way.)

Peter_S_Aus

Apologies. ... "company he keeps" of course. Maybe a Freudian slip there.

Peter_S_Aus

Wilhelm Reich is a hoot. Sounds like a fore-runner to L. Ron Hubbard.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Reich for a laugh.

Where's the Lounge when you need it!

socaltraveler

I am so glad Rachie has moved on and reposted her travel questions. Now waiting for a certain poster to do same, if only unicorns could fly.

Improviser

Ah, take something out of context and hang your hat on it.

Do you believe that Einstein never made a mistake? That being a genuis meant he wasn't human too?
http://www.google.ca/search?site=&so...26.SD-y54ikhl8

That Reich was wrong about Orgon does not mean everything he had to say was wrong.

Einstein (arguably the greatest genius of the 20th century) got it wrong as often as he got it right. The same is true of Sigmund Freud and no doubt any other examples you might wish to consider. But Einstein gave us the key to the atom and Freud keys to the mind.

Reich was no different. He was human and made human mistakes. He also got some things right. Don't hang your hat on the mistakes Peter.

You can lead a horse to water................

PalenQ

Einstein (arguably the greatest genius of the 20th century) got it wrong as often as he got it right>

poppy cock - he made some gaffes only due to the limits of science of his age - to say he was wrong as much as right means improviser don't knew of what he/she/it is talking.

annhig

Wilhelm Reich is a hoot. Sounds like a fore-runner to L. Ron Hubbard.>>

I'm prepared to rely upon the verdict of my friend Peter, rather than read Mr Reigh myself.

Even without reading him, I'm willing to bet that he was no Einstein and no Freud.

Peter_S_Aus

“You can lead a horse to water ...”, but if the fount of knowledge has the intellectual depth of a bird bath, the horse may well decline to partake.

The merest reading about Reich, who unfortunately spent the last two years of his life in the slammer in the USA, does not make me see any particular wisdom in anything he promoted.

The whole Nietzsche “Mensch und Ubermensch” approach clearly appeals to Improvisor, as it may well have appealed to Reich, but it doesn’t do it for me. There’s a bit too much of the Ayn Randian thing about it. I’m surprised that Imp’s screen name is not John Galt.

I’d be interested to know what Improvisor believes Reich got right. The Orgon approach, and associated apparatus was just one of the things that he got wrong. Blackmailing his mother (oh, those Austrians), leading to her suicide was probably not the best thing he ever did. Another quaint practice was having his psychiatric patients remove most of their clothes prior to the session on the couch.

Maybe his “Listen Little Man” treatise suffered in the translation from German to English, leading to some exceptionally wooden prose. Unfortunately I don’t read German.

Peter_S_Aus

And while Einstein made a number of errors - not surprising when you consider his scientific contribuitin - he still stands pretty tall in the physics and maths communities.

Improviser

As I have already said, he was human and got things wrong. Again, that doesn't mean he got everything wrong. So I fail to see what your point is Peter in continuing on down the same path.

In 'Listen Little Man' he got a lot right. You can argue that if you like but anything outside of that is irrelevant.

To bring up negatives does not overrule ONE positive. Einstein got the equation to prove E=mc2 wrong seven times beteween 1905-1946. It did not make the equation E=mc2 wrong though did it.

I doubt you have yet read the whole of Listen Little Man Peter. Until you have (and probably several times) you are not arguing from a position of strength at all. You are taking some superficial points in the man's life and hanging your hat on them as proof that Listen Little Man is not worth reading. Ridiculous.

Peter_S_Aus

............, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing

Improviser

And comments like, "Blackmailing his mother (oh, those Austrians), leading to her suicide was probably not the best thing he ever did. Another quaint practice was having his psychiatric patients remove most of their clothes prior to the session on the couch.", signifies what Peter?

"Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"

cathies

A few more weeks and improviser will be gone, bring it on!