Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 49 of 49

Thread: Normal Teenage Problems

  1. #41
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The Green Mountains
    Posts
    356

    Default Two more cents

    Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
    You will need to resolve two practical, moral questions - maybe not at your age, certainly before making a choice - can you kill people and always obey (lawful) orders? If you cannot answer those two questions in the affirmative the military is not for you.
    Very good advice.

    My only addition, and this is probably just because I'm a guy who took home a dreaded "boombox" (double Marksman awards) from the TBS range two weeks ago, is it wouldn't hurt to do some shooting and become familiar with marksmanship. They will teach it to you, but it will be fast and it wouldn't hurt to come in with a background as long as you don't have bad habits.

    Other than that, get a good physical fitness foundation, read lots (especially military history), and don't make any really bad decisions (kids, drugs, academic failure). And if you're not a people person, become one. In my very limited experience, the guys that struggle on the path to becoming officers mainly have problems in that area.

    Merry Christmas all.

  2. #42
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Schoolkid View Post
    Adam L-
    Don’t state a thesis well. How hard is it to say, “Mac McLeod uses manipulation to dictate the tempo of action.”, or “For decades this Dream has reduced generation after generation of Americans to ashes.”
    Many scholars some how fail to decide on and stick to their thesis. As I mentioned before, I can give you an example of this when I get home and have access to my books. I know this may sound like something that would be very hard to do, but when the topic of the essay is complex this can occur.

    Quote Originally Posted by Schoolkid View Post
    Can you give me an example of a cyclical argument? The only ones I have seen are example, Mr. Lyon is the greatest teacher ever because he is the best.
    That is a very basic example. This is the basic idea:

    Argument A is true because of argument B. Argument B is true because of argument C. Argument C is true becaue of argument A.

    I will find you a good example of this when I get home.

    Adam L
    Last edited by Adam L; 12-25-2009 at 04:06 AM.

  3. #43
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Cole,

    Quote Originally Posted by Schoolkid View Post
    Our teacher forces us to view most lesson through the 6 major approaches to psychology: functionalism, behaviorism, psychoanalytic, physiological, social-cognitive, and humanistic.
    Okay, that's a good start then. Most of the psych I've been playing with recently is evolutionary psych and neuro-psych, although i'm familiar with the rest of it (not my field, really, but related).

    Quote Originally Posted by Schoolkid View Post
    I created a new account because I didn’t want anyone to think I was trolling due to the email address I was using.
    I thought so ! Just wanted to clarify that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Schoolkid View Post
    Truth varies from person to person. To a schizophrenic person the truth could be that all cats really are conspiring to assassinate them. It all depends on perceptions. What I mean to say that the “Truth” is shapeless and will transform according to what and how important the information I take in is.
    This could be a fun discussion ! I've spent a fair bit of time playing with this for the past 10-12 years, and there is some very good thinking on it around. One of the really important things is to distinguish, analytically and verbally, between objective "Truth" and subjective "truths" (we should get WM in on this discussion!). Perception, and interpretive schemas, define subjective "truths", while objective "Truth" appears to be non-definable due to the subject nature of the symbol systems we attempt to define it with such as languages (including mathematics). We can come up with some excellent (i.e. 99.999% predictive validity) "definitions" of some component parts of objective "Truth", but they are extremely limited and contingent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Schoolkid View Post
    Oh, and alternatively, find twenty role models and take what you like from each.
    That works, too .

    Quote Originally Posted by Schoolkid View Post
    Don’t state a thesis well. How hard is it to say, “Mac McLeod uses manipulation to dictate the tempo of action.”, or “For decades this Dream has reduced generation after generation of Americans to ashes.” Can you give me an example of a cyclical argument? The only ones I have seen are example, Mr. Lyon is the greatest teacher ever because he is the best.
    Actually, all symbol systems are tautologies because they are self referential with only limited connections to sharable, externally verifiable (and perceptible) "reality". Leaving that general problem behind, any type of argument that uses a nomonological-deductive format will be "circular" IFF (if and only if) it must exclude verifyiable and perceptible sensory input that a) cannot be conceptually included (e.g. so-called excluded outliers) and/or b) its logic cannot accurately (at, say, 95%+) post-dict past events.

    Cheers and Merry Christmas!

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  4. #44
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Levi-
    I always wondered how a PMC’s life is compared to a government soldier. How are they thought of in the civilian world? Are they well supplied and supported, and of course the pay?

    Granite State-
    What do you mean by a people person?

    Marct-
    Why don’t we just have the discussion on truth now? A few years before the movie came out, my teacher and I discussed the “truth” perceived by the six main characters from Watchmen. When did you discover the concept of multiple “truths”?

    All-
    Actually the skills I was talking about learning are the ones that you would need for life in that field, but which the military only brushes upon or skips altogether.

    Oh, and happy new year.

  5. #45
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Cole,

    Quote Originally Posted by Schoolkid View Post
    Marct-
    Why don’t we just have the discussion on truth now? A few years before the movie came out, my teacher and I discussed the “truth” perceived by the six main characters from Watchmen. When did you discover the concept of multiple “truths”?
    We've actually had a fair number of discussions that circle around it here. I'm not averse to starting another one, but I'm not sure I have the time at the moment . 'sides that, how much philosophy do we really want to get into ?!?

    When did I "discover" the concept? Hmmm, hard to say really, I grew up with it along with multiple religions, languages and cultures, so stance point epistemology and ontology were "normal" for me, as was a via negativa epistemological bias.

    Cheers, and a happy new year to you, too.

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  6. #46
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Make sure you include a theoretical physicist in your discussion. That way when you finally get tired of it he will explain that until they (physicists) find a way to resolve relativity and quantumn mechanics, this discussion is pointless. LOL! (I once had this discussion with a group comprised of 3 engineers, 2 physicist (one theoretical the other bio,) 1 anthropologist, 1 industrial psychologist and a psychiatrist. If it hadn't been for the theoretical physicist I think we would still be sitting there, actually standing there, discussing the issue. Of course, I find that theoretical physicists try to claim that membrane theory (the current way of resolving the two) must be understood in order to deal with any problem.)

    Happy New Year!

    Adam L

  7. #47
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Adam,

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam L View Post
    Make sure you include a theoretical physicist in your discussion. That way when you finally get tired of it he will explain that until they (physicists) find a way to resolve relativity and quantumn mechanics, this discussion is pointless. LOL! (I once had this discussion with a group comprised of 3 engineers, 2 physicist (one theoretical the other bio,) 1 anthropologist, 1 industrial psychologist and a psychiatrist. If it hadn't been for the theoretical physicist I think we would still be sitting there, actually standing there, discussing the issue. Of course, I find that theoretical physicists try to claim that membrane theory (the current way of resolving the two) must be understood in order to deal with any problem.)
    LOL!

    Trying to re-create the Tower of Babel ?

    Actually, I do agree, although I have a suspicion that you would have to pick your theoretical physicist pretty carefully to avoid one of the superstring theologians !

    There was a really good debate in cosmology in the 1990's or so that led to the concept of quantum consciousness (via Roger Penrose's The Emperor's New Mind and some of Daniel Dennet's work). I haven't really kept up with it too much, but it was a lot of fun. I'll have to check out membrane theory.... when i get a free moment !

    Cheers,

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  8. #48
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Marc:

    I remember the "quantum mind" movement. I blame it for that damned movie "What The Bleep Do We Know?"! LOL!

    Schoolkid: Marc has reminded me of a book that you will have fun with given your interests. The Terminal Man by Michael Crichton.

    Adam L

  9. #49
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hey Adam,

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam L View Post
    I remember the "quantum mind" movement. I blame it for that damned movie "What The Bleep Do We Know?"! LOL!
    At the time I started reading that stuff, say 1990 for the earlier cosmology material, I was doing a lot of research on mysticism and mystical states. After slogging through Roger's book later on (and his father was a much better writer !), I started playing around with the idea of how perception fields can be influenced in both single world and multiple world variants. Pretty cool stuff, since it looks like the same very rough models work in both. I just wish that my math was better .

    Cheers,

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

Similar Threads

  1. Site access problems?
    By SWCAdmin in forum Small Wars Council / Journal
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-08-2008, 11:00 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •