FourWinds
|
Re: sense of self
Sep 26, 2003, 08:24
|
If by 'always' you mean for a very, very, very long time then yes I do.
And yes, I agree, *we* did not die with *I*, but it's diminished quite a bit over time :-(
|
Rhiannon
|
Re: and another thing...
Sep 26, 2003, 08:46
|
Yeah, nice quote about the labels (I think there was a programme about that group on last night's tv?)
Anyway my other thought
Just been to Norfolk and indulged in a bit of birdwatching. It was like meditation, I hadn't felt so relaxed in I don't know how long. Was with an ex-twitcher. To those who don't know, twitchers will travel hundreds of miles having heard a rumour that some rare bird has dropped by. I'm not going to start a comparison of list-ticking twitchers with megaraks (probably untrue)
BUT
What connects 99.9% of twitchers, trainspotters and "megaraks"?
They are men.
From this you can draw your own conclusions. But whatever, I think this is another reason why I don't feel comfortable with the term and certainly don't want it applied to myself. Being a girl and that.
|
morfe
|
Re: In defence of science
Sep 26, 2003, 13:43
|
Agreed FW, but the big problem is the method of observation. Looking for 'reasons' is not as holistic as observing a process. It's the dialectical relationship of a process within the framework of existence which is lacking, and it's that crucial (and not easy) difference between rationalising and understanding. It's not a toss up between looking for a reason or observing a process, it's the two parts that give a bigger picture. Science is irresponsible without the bigger picture, and ironically more handtied because of it. Looking at external interacions as well as dynamics. Like seeing a 'bird flying' is different to seeing 'flying', the process, the interaction.
There's that's a whole 10p!
Ride on indeed :-)
|
FourWinds
|
Re: and another thing...
Sep 26, 2003, 13:48
|
Firends of mine often comment that only a bloke would do what I do the way that I do it.
I can never argue with 'em ....
|
morfe
|
Re: and another thing...
Sep 26, 2003, 13:50
|
"men are nerds and women are socialisers"
http://books.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4676361-99939,00.html
Ask your twitcher if he sees a 'bird flying' or if he sees 'flying'?
;-)
|
Rhiannon
|
Re: and another thing...
Sep 26, 2003, 14:24
|
|
are you saying you're a 'megarak' then 4W? I never thought of you like that. No, honestly. Thorough, yes. Geeky, no. Perhaps I don't realise the half of it.
|
Hob
|
Re: and another thing...
Sep 26, 2003, 15:07
|
<People who are autistic, or who have the related Asperger's syndrome, have minds which seem to be extreme versions of the male brain>
(From morfe's link)
So says Baron-Cohen, and who am I to argue?
But bear in mind this kinda thing is more accurately described as a continuum. Some people are more inclined to get obsessive and "anoraky" than others, they do seem to be more men in this category. However there are more variables used to describe the autistic continuum than obssesive behaviour, one of them is socialbility, another is empathy. The less sociable, less empathic, the further along the continuum an individual is said to be.
The fact that the self-proclaimed "megaraks" are chugging about on a forum such as this could be evidence either way, are they more sociable as they are communicating with each other, or are they less so as they would rather communicate via a screen than face to face? You decide. My missus is psychologistic, and I have had this "male-brain-geek=autistic-spectrum-disorder" discussion on a number of occasions.
I'm fairly sure I will have offended someone with the above remarks, if so, not my intention. No value-judgements attached. I get well hacked off at the labeling of individuals and the categorising of their traits. So what if men like to categorise things and obsess about them? That's probably why they moved all those stones all those years ago anyway! It's certainly less contentious than categorising and obsessing about people and their traits.
|
Rhiannon
|
Re: and another thing...
Sep 26, 2003, 15:55
|
|
I've heard/talked with people about that continuum too, and I've met people that I can certainly relate to it. Don't think that's my main point will you!! As far as I'm concerned people can visit for whatever reason they choose, and they can be as geeky as they like. I just don't want people to perceive ALL of us visitors the same way through a catchy nametag.
|
Hob
|
Re: and another thing...
Sep 26, 2003, 16:47
|
I get your drift, I think.
I can see that it would be extra convenient for those in the world of professional archaeology to view persistent amateurs as "geeks" or whatever. I should imagine it makes it easier for them to dismiss any valid points made by the type of folk who seem to inhabit this forum if they can do that.
For the record, Iv'e never been involved in archaeology in an organised capacity, but Iv'e learned more and been provoked to think more by this site than any other info source, be they books, telly, whatever. So if that's what geekery produces, long may it reign. Most of the people I know think I'm a total cracker. It's nice to see that you can go tromping about in the hills looking for ancient remains for fun, and know that there are others who feel the same, whatever the labels they attract.
|
Rhiannon
|
Re: and another thing...
Sep 26, 2003, 17:06
|
you're utterly right. Now it's Friday afternoon! We'd better get out to thee stones!!!
(if the train is n't bloody cancelled again)
have a nice weekend
|
