|
Godskicthen Carnival Review Thread (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| jonsimmonds |
| quote: | Originally posted by evil_bastard
I think you're making quite a few prejudgements mate.
Stamina and southerners does not go together. The South is tragic for stamina. You think I've never been south? More judgements.
|
excuse me??? I was born in London, and grew up in dorset - right on the south coast, only at leeds because of the uni, not a good thing to say as i have loads of stamina. |
|
|
| evil_bastard |
...for a Southerner :D
I've been to London about 15 times in my life, I've done more than my fair share of parties in South East London, and I attended the biggest rave ever in the UK which was in London.
I have seen both sides and I can make my own judgements. Take it as you please, disagree with it all you like, it's just my opinion.
As for the definition of normal, it comes down to semantics and interpretation. Briefly defined, I would judge it qualitatively, not quantitatively as you have done. Normal is the medium, there is no defining limit, but unless you're a hardline beaurocrat then you should accept it is the medium between two limits. The limits in this case are easy to define. Someone with all the latest cyber gear and thirty ecstacy pillsin his pocket being one extreme, someone in a Ben Sherman shirt who's just necked his 30th pint and is about to collapse being the other extreme. Normal would be tolerable limits by society as a whole.
If you care to disagree with this, then you disagree with society's definition of insane, as well as so many other definitions. Normal is that which fits within the middle sector of the spectrum. Hence why insane people, and extremely introvert people, are pushed out by society because they are not within that middle sector, or as society would say, they are not "normal".
To be perfectly honest, I would agree with society's liberal definition of this, because it's quite flexible and allows you to judge people on a case by case basis. Bear in mind, as is usually the case in life, sweeping generalisations are made as a joke or exaggeration, to eccentuate a point. That was the purpose of my first post, and I'm pretty sure people picked up on it, but the point still stands. |
|
|
| DuMonde TrAnCeR |
| quote: | Originally posted by evil_bastard
As for the definition of normal, it comes down to semantics and interpretation. Briefly defined, I would judge it qualitatively, not quantitatively as you have done. Normal is the medium, there is no defining limit, but unless you're a hardline beaurocrat then you should accept it is the medium between two limits. The limits in this case are easy to define. Someone with all the latest cyber gear and thirty ecstacy pillsin his pocket being one extreme, someone in a Ben Sherman shirt who's just necked his 30th pint and is about to collapse being the other extreme. Normal would be tolerable limits by society as a whole.
If you care to disagree with this, then you disagree with society's definition of insane, as well as so many other definitions. Normal is that which fits within the middle sector of the spectrum. Hence why insane people, and extremely introvert people, are pushed out by society because they are not within that middle sector, or as society would say, they are not "normal".
To be perfectly honest, I would agree with society's liberal definition of this, because it's quite flexible and allows you to judge people on a case by case basis. Bear in mind, as is usually the case in life, sweeping generalisations are made as a joke or exaggeration, to eccentuate a point. That was the purpose of my first post, and I'm pretty sure people picked up on it, but the point still stands. |
yeh shame after all that you read me wrong. i was pretty sure my point proves that normal is taken quantitativley, to which you thought i was tyring to say everything that is normal has to be in the majority, which in fact was what i was showing that its what most people think,which is indeed wrong. you cant judge normal qualitatively, because normal is not a quality which can be defined. its like saying "whats your shoe size" and someone replying "triangle" (not a qualitative example but i think it gets my point across) . the normal used in the worlds everyday is by how much something conforms to the normal, defined by the most popular example of whatever your talking about, be it job, accent or clothing. and by conforming to normal it is often heresy of your own beliefs for the satisfaction of others. maybe for you it isn't, then so be it. but think about it next time you try and tek the piss outta someone (not aimed at you specifically, just anyone in general) because they dont confine to some bent unwritten social rule. a good example of this would be racism. its been practically stamped out now, but we all know its only idiots who are racist these days, and are looked down upon because of it, maybe one day it will be the same with cultures, ie. the different social groups within cultures like the united kingdom, the dance culture etc. but we all know none of that wiull hapen, because, even though it sounds a cruel stereotypism, the world is always full of wankers. i on the other do not judge what is normal and what isnt normal, i judge what is right or wrong. cruel or kind. because a point of normal is fake whatever it maybe, and just because something is normal, doesnt mean it is right. for example, to go in the army and shoot peopel its normal, but its not right. good night to all and to all goodnight. :) |
|
|
| Project T |
| quote: | Originally posted by DuMonde TrAnCeR
im suprised you didnt see me i was right at the front about 50% of the time, holding up a sign saying "tune!"
or "ferry is not just another djtiesto" |
he aint kidding, he always had 1 sign out ;) |
|
|
| DuMonde TrAnCeR |
| until i lost my "tune!" sign |
|
|
| evil_bastard |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by DuMonde TrAnCeR
yeh shame after all that you read me wrong. i was pretty sure my point proves that normal is taken quantitativley,
I don't think it is.
What is that quantity? Does society have this number where if you don't fit in you're abnormal?
Cos I'd sure like to know what it is.
Is there some sort of "normalometre" that measures people in "normalograms"?
you cant judge normal qualitatively because normal is not a quality which can be defined.
Nor is it a quantity. Like I say, I'm dying to hear what this measurement is everyone goes by.
its like saying "whats your shoe size" and someone replying "triangle"
Or like saying "I am precisely 3.64% abnormal". Doesn't happen. It is not defined and never can be, there is no definite means of doing so, however a liberal acceptance of what does not fit the medium band, by finding the extremities and finding the mean average, is probably the best method, and is the way most people would "define" abnormal.
It's a case by case thing, but patterns emerge, for example cultural differences.
the normal used in the worlds everyday is by how much something conforms to the normal, defined by the most popular example of whatever your talking about
Yes, by "how much". But that how much has no official quantity. It's measured by each and every persons instinct, but the vast majority of people agree on what's normal, and in my opinion anyone who doesn't is a pedant or abnormal themselves.
specifically, just anyone in general) because they dont confine to some bent unwritten social rule. a good example of this would be racism.
Racism has nothing to do with "unwritten social rules". Tell me, where is being white an unwritten social rule? It's not, it's an ideology of a few people. The abnormal people are the racists, not the members of, to use that horrible term, "ethnic minotiries".
And like I said earlier, it is acceptable to persecute racists. Their views are not normal. Your explanation would advocate that we all leave racists alone, because we should leave alone minorities, like racists. I don't think we should. They are socially destructive, their views wander way outside the social norm.
its been practically stamped out now, but we all know its only idiots who are racist these days, and are looked down upon because of it, maybe one day it will be the same with cultures, ie. the different social groups within cultures like the united kingdom, the dance culture etc.
This won't happen for obvious reasons. You might think taking ecstacy and dancing into the small hours is perfectly harmless, but others would disagree with the use of drugs. You might think buying chips from McDonalds is perfectly harmless, but many far Eastern cultures despise commercialism and capitalism. So rather than encouraging the acceptance of social and cultural differences, which couldn't happen at all since many work in direct contradiction, you'd prefer everyone were the same culture. An interesting viewpoint and not totally flawed, but personally, I think cultural differences are interesting and enlightening.
i on the other do not judge what is normal and what isnt normal, i judge what is right or wrong.
Like it or lump it the two are separated by a fine line. What you consider normal, others don't. What you think is "normal", such as capitalism, is "wrong" in some cultures, such as Saudi Arabia.
In Australia the aborigines when they have twins fill the nostrils of one baby with sand to kill it, because they cannot afford to raise the two. To them this is normal, to me it is wrong. But it's the way the cookie crumbles.
for example, to go in the army and shoot peopel its normal, but its not right.
Well the Army are restricted by stringent rules, and many a soldier suffers from post battle stress. It is far from considered normal.
MUCH more British Falklands War soldiers committed suicide than were killed by the enemy, solely from the trauma of battle. I sincerely doubt they found it so "normal" they chose to end their own life through grief. |
|
|
| evil_bastard |
Btw, I'm certain I saw that "Tune" sign once, I think it was in Sundissential. What colour was it?
I never saw the other sign though.
Did you make the sign yourself? Also, how did you get it in, just carry it straight in? |
|
|
| DuMonde TrAnCeR |
and a4 piece of paper folded up ;). icant be arsed to talkmore about normal. because my response wasnt asking for an analyssy of my comments, merely clarifying my point which may have been unclear b4, and probably still reams, but who cares....
anyway, i didnt hold up the sign in sunny d, i sat near where it said "dont pass out" everywhere for about 30 mins while gibbo them got some food. i know hwich guy you saw, hsi sign was orange i think, made out of card, mine were just printouts folded up, not hard to getin at all. they patted myfull pockets and detected metal in them, yet never searched them, wierd. i cud of have 100 pills and a knife in there n theyd of been none the wiser, silly people! |
|
|
| evil_bastard |
Yea the searches were a bit pathetic.
Not as bad as at the Dome though. The guy just touched people on either shoulder and let em through. Then again they had 50,000 people to get through, and security was bloody everywhere.
How did they have metal in them if they were foldups? You've lost me... |
|
|
| Project T |
| quote: | Originally posted by DuMonde TrAnCeR
they patted myfull pockets and detected metal in them, yet never searched them, wierd. i cud of have 100 pills and a knife in there n theyd of been none the wiser, silly people! |
Yet me & Gibbo got stop searched, told 2 empty out pockets then this d00d nearly crushed me leg searchin for stuff on me. |
|
|
| goldenarmZ |
so what's the point to this bible length conversation..? :conf:
you two just aren't normal!! (which is a good thing.. because there's no such thing as a normal person :D) |
|
|
| G K Murray |
| gettin cought up in CYBER VS BEER BOYS battle. but don't try and speak to a GEORDIE about being able to last. As much as a rival i am with the fello North Easterners, they can put anything in there fooookin bodies and last (daft twats they are lol), sorry ALEX M8!!!! |
|
|
|
|
