Yes, it's time to cut down on what 9/11 caused.

It isn't really that. To the extent that you can say that the US has a culture, we were never in favor of wholesale spying on US citizens after 9/11.

We generally (to the extent that the average 'merican exists) believe that spying will be abused. Based on historical examples and even the slightest glance at human nature, it will be abused if it isn't controlled.

We (again, same average 'merican) also believe that the right to privacy is sacrosanct. Not your privacy, of course. Just us 'mericans. It is ok for us to spy on you because we can't use "we'll tell your wife" against you like we could within our own borders. Well, that and it is us against you.

Why do you think there haven't been close to any acts of terror in the US after 9/11? The Boston bombing was an exception, they slipped. You are a continent for Christ's sake! Do you really think there hasn't got to be internal spying? Get real! Naturally they have checked up on close to everything. The spying is just more kind nowadays, people get to choose a new government if the don't behave and start accusing innocents, etc. They will not spend resources on dead ends. They must have computer programs for primary analyzing all the stuff. Question is if any person there reads this text personally, before seeing it as something a foreign harmless smartass wrote on a minor forum.

We know there has been internal spying. We have all sorts of laws that basically say that if the gov't has reason for suspicion, that spying on citizens is completely ok. There is pretty much no one in the US who is against that sort of thing except for the ones wearing tinfoil hats.

That should be the end of my post, but I haven't gotten out my daily quota of spewing yet, so I continue:

The US hasn't been the target of internally based terrorism over a fairly long time basically because everyone who could pull off something decently destructive knows that there isn't a point to it.

We don't do the European, "oh, they must be upset. We should engage in talks with them." Our policy as a society is a heck of a like what BruceZ would say (if I may channel him for a moment*), "step on my toe to make a point and we will kill you and your associates with absolutely no reservations and your point won't exist anymore."

On 9/11 I watched both planes hit the towers and then went to work. When Boston happened, I watched it on the evening news and thought "well, I'm glad I'm not much of a runner. I wonder who we will have to kill to make it even." Both were as interesting as far as my actions as the weather report.

A humorous quote from our previous head of our head of transportation safety that pretty much sums up the 'merican viewpoint:

*Bruce may obviously correct me on my take of his chosen persona on SMP, but it is pretty much our attitude about it. We have our differences, and those become apparent when we feel safe, but everyone knows that if you **** with team 'merica, we will come together in a united colors of Benetton sort of militaristic way and crush you.

Useful to stick to main topic of OP and related discussion. Veering too far off course will cause random deletions and eventual destruction. There is a Politics forum over there <<<<<<someplace. Thanks.

Describing != endorsing.

Fixed?

Arm every passenger with battle axes.


We might have done a little bit of fightin' amongst ourselves,
But you outside people best leave us alone.
"Cause we'll all stick together,
And you can take that to the bank.
That's the cowboys, and the hippies,
And the rebels and the yanks.
You just go and lay your hand
On a Pittsburgh Steelers fan,
And I think you're gonna finally understand.



Now this nation that I love has fallen under attack.
A mighty sucker punch came flyin’ in from somewhere in the back.
Soon as we could see clearly through our two black eyes,
Man, we lit up your world like the 4th of July.

Hey Uncle Sam put your name at the top of his list,
And the Statue of Liberty started shakin’ her fist,
And the eagle will fly, man, it’s gonna be hell,
When you hear Mother Freedom start ringin’ her bell,
And it feels like the whole wide world is raining down on you.
Brought to you courtesy of the Red White and Blue.

Justice will be served and the battle will rage.
This big dog will fight when you rattle his cage.
And you’ll be sorry that you messed with the U.S. of A.
`Cause we`ll put a boot in your ass, it's the American way.

(i may appear to be preaching again but forget the style for a while that is founded rather in true love for whatever good attracted me to this country in spite of some occasional ugliness and which in part appreciating it was made possible by the strong culture of the one before that i came from. It is possible to love both more than each one alone. It is possible by this combination to be finally a citizen of the planet and feel pain for both when you(i) fail them and they fail you(me) and their promise.)

What boot is that $18 trillion later and with 2-1=1 tower still missing in the skyline?

What makes a country strong is not the brief unity of its citizens after being attacked for like a couple years (and then back to division games) and the sacrifice of only 1% of its population a decade later. A country is made strong because of its unity before its attacked. It is made strong by its own beauty and ideals; science, education, technology, justice, freedom, democracy, rich culture, diversity, wisdom of old generations, passion of new ones, strong intelligently designed economy and by the care it has for its members precisely because of that beauty and because that care enables all those other things through generations of its citizens. It is made strong because it is important and it matters. It is relevant for mankind. It represents a hope for the future. And it often brings that future to others a lot closer.

The moment you stop caring for those things in the name of narrow self interest, the moment you spoil your society and divide it, the moment you no longer care for your history and original ideals (one of them being the motivation for continued change and improvement), the moment your culture fails to rise up to the challenge of changing times, the moment you raise false idols (eg money, poor culture, celebrate poor education and exploit it in others) and embrace corruption and laziness, that is the moment you lose, well before you are even attacked. What wins the war later is not that sudden rise in unity and patriotism in the face of disaster. What wins the war later is to have something worth fighting and dying for, something worth protecting and improving (by 100% of the population not just the soldiers). So you want to be a true patriot. Forget about uniting in crisis and unite now today in everything that improves your world. And finally prove worthy of these ancients trees and the proud eagles above them!

Study where the ones before in history failed and learn from them. Or join them and open the door to the next ones enabling the succession because of that inability to recognize and learn from your errors. Until finally there is only one left and its called mankind, united, confident and finally wise, finally stronger because of all the fallen before...

A true patriot is not a conservative or a liberal in the terms defined in our times only to divide you(us). What you need is to be wise, flexible, adaptive, compassionate, responsible and active. You need to not be a hypocrite and apply in your own life what you hold as important. You need to care for others and not to be culturally brutal and arrogant. You need to be progressive and eager to embrace new ideas but still respectful of all the old ones that have worked so far and have taken you here. You need to be a genuine creative rebel with a pure cause that matters and improves society not a spoiled, ignorant, ungrateful, incoherent radical that blindly rejects everything old and conservative only to replace it with new mistakes. You need to be confident and culturally strong and eager to work well with others, without being a slave to conformity and scared to be isolated, you need to believe in their power and value and to expect from them greatness even if that forces you on occasion to disagree with them (but never to hate them). You need to be self critical and recognize your own failures. You are not the one that constantly improves the others, the others can improve you too. You need to place value in what improves the human condition and that is wisdom, knowledge, virtue. The moment you have elevated something else above that, something like money for example, that moment you create the conditions for your demise. A country to remain relevant must find ways to constantly improve and apply the qualities and passions of all its members. It wont do that if it remains undemocratic, divided, exploited by few and culturally lazy.

And that is the only boot your opponents really deserve! And oh boy they so much do!


PS: and dont be so fast to think the above doesnt relate to the thread and how teachers and students should interact to build a strong country/culture.

FYP?

I agree with Masque, except the part about not coveting false divisions or idols, in a writing about strengthening nationalistic interests.

A mind that sees only nationalistically, cannot do most of the things listed in their post.

About the op. Its not so much a question to be answered I think but a tool we can use to keep our mind from being stale, stagnant, overconfident etc. Intelligence by my understanding has an eternal unrest to it, and must continually question itself. One might try to counter this by suggesting, intelligence should know its own truths, and enter resolve. We might re counter with As for what intellect and crazy refer too. We need to see that here intelligence refers to the collection and ability to use knowledge. Peoples here might define it differently which is fine, but I mean to say this in relation to another possible kind of 'intellect', we might call Wisdom.

Wisdom, or what I see as maybe a different kind of intelligence, comes not from accumulation of knowledge, but more so the opposite of it. Like a monk that studies nothing, contemplates nothing, and considers this meditation. An ability to disconnect with all things and reside or resolve in a place or time, or non place non time, that is the opposite of accumulated knowledge.

So if it is possible this 'wisdom', is of some higher order than 'intelligence', we must ask if accumulation of knowledge would or could ever lead to 'wisdom'. And we would hope so, and expect so, especially if we were functioning from an 'intelligent' stand point. Yet if not, then we must ask how one can get to 'wisdom', without accumulating the knowledge to do so.

And of the word 'crazy', we have two types of meanings for this word that are pertinent. We have peoples we accept with brain deficiencies, who cannot seem to function normally in this world. We also have a type of crazy which is defined by the lines of 'intelligence' and 'wisdom', that those who seek the accumulation of knowledge are 'sane' and those that spend their time dissolving their attraction to it are 'crazy'. This follows with the divisions of those who seeks individual capital type gain, vs those that seek wholistic success for everyone.

So you do have, and don't have, hypocrisy in these words and their relation to each other in your op, but you should allow the question to remain unanswered, and develop it, and let itself develop.

This should help you improve your understanding:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom

This was wiki on intelligence. Which definition is correctest?



It seems fine to me to define the words in the context we mean them for the scope of a writing or conversation (much like programming). It also seems to me under almost all definitions of the word intelligence, that an intelligent being would be able to easily traverse such semantical communication issues without putting blame fully on the other party. And that rather than nitpicking peoples choices in their use of language, we spend time learning how to relate to peoples in the way they communicate.

Then we could become super communicators, or super communable as you might call it, or just communicators how i refer to it.

Nice judo move there. Pull him in the direction he's coming at you, then stick out your leg and trip him.

newguy, you have more smart views than I anticipated.


"Which definition is the correctest?"

Everything is not just a contest.

Not sure who is tori/uke (I don't actually know these words) but I would think in highest level judo we would never want to trip them. In practice (lower level) I guess we might move onto the next in the sequence of the chain.

Leg throws. SWEEP THE LEG!

But the basic principle is circular movement that uses his own force against him, which can take the form of leg throws, hip throws, shoulder throws, asutameze (sp?) etc. That's called applied physics.

I've come to the belief (understanding), the basic principle should be (is) cooperative learning through the means of gentleness, which is not so aimed at beating your partner (and therefore you never should) but instead to teach each other the equilibriums so that we might be able to better relate to one another in a cooperative manner.

In brazillian ju jitsu, tight nit family/dojos, compete against each other (within their dojo) to tap out, in the name of growth and learning? But what is it we need to learn?

In the conversation of semantics, what plane is it to discuss why we might call a certain art Brazillian ju jitsu, and not by some Portuguese translation of the word....and whether it makes sense for a Canadian to adopt the brazillian translation of a Japanese art?

We begin to realize, Ju Jistu, is not Japanese and not the real 'gentle art'.

They all work. They are all describing the same thing.

In the context of this thread, OP was concerned with intelligence meaning reasoning skills and academic knowledge. He was also concerned with whether you can sound like you are speaking nonsense (what he meant by "crazy") if you are more intelligent (reasoning and academic knowledge again) than someone else.

Did I nitpick? You said what you thought intelligence and wisdom are and I gave you additional reading material so that you could learn more about the subjects.

I would recommend clear (aka easy to understand) and concise (aka gets to the point quickly) communication as an alternative. I would call communicating in that clear and concise manner "good communication."

Anyway, I understood what you meant I think. Let me check my understanding: You wanted to say that the things that you like are good and the things you don't like are bad. To you, wisdom means "being the way that newguy would like people to be." Intelligence means "thinking like the people that newguy thinks are good." You weren't clear on exactly what you meant by crazy, but you indicated that people who like the sorts of things you like and do the sorts of things you like aren't crazy.

It's always cooperative. You cooperate with your attacker in putting him on his ass.


What is the need to learn? For most people it is the desire to defend themselves or their loved ones from being killed, raped or maimed, and to kill or maim the enemy. To this end, almost everyone wastes their time studying the martial arts. The martial arts teach you how to subdue an enemy while doing the least amount of damage. Certainly ju jitsu can do that, the problem is that unless you're against a much weaker attacker, you have to be very very good to pull that off in a real world situation, and almost no one reaches that level. Their training probably puts them in greater danger than if they had none. On top of that, they are more open to lawsuits if they actually do manage to do some damage. On the other hand, you need virtually no training to learn how to kill or maim an attacker. What you do need is the proper mental preparation to act decisively at the proper instant that it is required.

I think he was mistaking proper behavior in a dojo (no breaking your fellow students) for the martial art itself.

If the objective was to learn how to cooperate sans the whole learn how to defend yourself bit, they'd just build a barn together or something.

The difference is, where I train (when I do), instead of spending your time not getting put in a certain armlock, you spend your time in the armlock, learning how to get out.

Or the time spent 'tapping' and resetting the match is better spent working out of the situation.

Otherwise we develop affinities and aversions for certain lines of action and defense.

I would suggest any intelligent deduction you make, can be observed in the schools of past masters, almost regardless of the art, and should not be evaluated in comparison with those (schools) of today.

When you're interested in training warriors, you have to break people down in order to build them back up stronger.

I used to hate the damn asutameze because I was a little kid training against adults, and they showed me no mercy. It got so I hated to show up. You do learn how to fall though, and that's very important. After awhile I got the idea that I could dive from heights onto hard surfaces as if they were water as long as I roll correctly. Then I'd do swan dives and ****. It's also useful in skiing when you're tumbling hundreds of feet down an icy rock laden chute backwards.