Words Mean Things.

Jestor wrote: Looking at our own fiction:

Luke's thoughts on Yoda or Ben..

Outside of our fiction...

-Bilbo's thoughts on Gandolf....
-Daniel-son's thoughts on Mr. Miagi....
-our own thoughts about our own parents....
-and more....

Actually, if you look at the 'Hermit'/'Sage' archetype in fiction, especially modern fiction, you'll notice something really, really interesting:

Has arcane knowledge he offers to pass to student:

• Ben Kenobi
• Yoda
• Gandalf
• Dumbledore
• Professor Xavier

Speaks cryptically and teaches "wisdom" in the form of pseudo-koan nonsense:

• Ben Kenobi
• Yoda
• Gandalf
• Dumbledore
• Professor Xavier

Willingly withholds information in an effort to manipulate the Hero to doing his bidding, even if this might jeopardize said Hero's life:

• Ben Kenobi
• Yoda
• Gandalf
• Dumbledore
• Professor Xavier

Blatantly disregards the safety or livelihood of the Hero for the sake of accomplishing a secret agenda, known only to a handful of people, until after the Hero has nearly died at least once:

• Ben Kenobi
• Yoda
• Gandalf
• Dumbledore
• Professor Xavier

...yes. yes, these should be our rolemodels.

steamboat28 wrote:
...yes. yes, these should be our rolemodels.

And who would you suggest, my angry friend?

Well, this was a topic about the way we talk...

And, those movies needed action, lol....

Ok, how about:

-Mr. Miagi you left him out of my previous list...
-Ketut, the wise man from "Eat, Pray, Love"..
- Pi, from the "Life of Pi"...
-"Master" from the original "Kung Fu" series....
-Katsumoto, from the Last Samurai
-almost any character Yun-Fat Chow played...
-I'm sure there's more, I'm just running out, lol...

Most of the mentors speak in a manner confusing to the student, mostly cause the student isn't in a place to understand what is actually being said...

They understand the words, as they understand them, but just looking at English, words can sound alike, and be spelled different, and be spelled alike and mean different....

And, not just is there the "loss of understanding", or maybe just "failure of understanding", but those of us who seem to talk funny have been in the shoes ofvthe ones who are confused... As we were once students too... So, when we laugh, or find it amusing, it is due to our seeing our younger selves in the frustrated one.... And so many times does the one seeking answers feels like the butt of the joke... They are not....

Its OK... I used to be pissy when people weren't clear too, lol, talking in their damn circles....

And, quite possibly, I'm crazy as hell, lol... Sitting in a room somewhere drooling on my shoes, LOL....

And I believe none of these guys put their students on a "trial by fire"...

Not to mention:

-Campbell
-Watts
-Kirschmurti
-Socrates
-Descartes
-and more....

steamboat28 wrote: ...yes. yes, these should be our rolemodels.

Who's role models? But yea models are simplified representations, so if talking about metaphorical characters as simplified representations of something, perhaps the attributes of those characters are somehow related to their portrayal - but it need not be obvious or direct. Goes back to how the best learning is discovery (IMO), and how patterns of teachings can draw outlines for the individual to discover a learning.

When I post, when I open my mouth, I do so with the sincere attempt to communicate and be understood.

I have little time for parables,koans, or riddles.

Given that most have trouble communicating in forums as it is, I put very little value in it being a viable teaching approach on one.

Also, I do not seek to teach, but simply communicate, and be understood.

I seek to refine my ability to do so constantly.

It's important, because communication is important.

Words are our method.

We can speak them, type them, sign them,and even put them in Braille.

They open doors, build bridges, etc.

However, only if everyone is being reciprocal in the desire to communicate.

Don't get caught up in the words and definitions, too literally perhaps, but also to liberally.

I know many times, people here halt a conversation to tell me there definitions for words, but not because of a misunderstanding of what I was trying to communicate.

Yes, it may not mean the same thing to you,(though given I use purposefully basic dictionary definitions for words I find that puzzling) but you know what I meant.

As such, communication becomes secondary to establishing individuality.

Something that I think, is a given, and you need not create your own verbal cipher to prove so.

Jestor wrote:
Most of the mentors speak in a manner confusing to the student, mostly cause the student isn't in a place to understand what is actually being said...

I think this is true far more often than people realize. And rather than slow down and try to understand, many people that I have seen get annoyed and feel that the "teacher" or the one that has said it is just being difficult refuses to just tell them in a way they can understand or they come to the conclusion that the individual doesn't know what they're talking about. It never seems to cross their minds that maybe they are the one that has yet to understand.

Now, I am not saying that all people in a place to "teach" others have all the answers or that we should just stop thinking and follow what is told us! In fact, quite the opposite. We should take time to understand and look for those answers rather than dismiss or judge.
:laugh:

Khaos wrote: When I post, when I open my mouth, I do so with the sincere attempt to communicate and be understood.

I have little time for parables,koans, or riddles.

How about similes, metaphors, and analogies?

Sometimes, when we speak, no matter how clearly, people still dont get the idea, so we resort to those measures to try to get the point across...

Granted, there are times when it may seem excessive, but, we all make mistakes... :lol:

Ever ask someone to "go grab that for you"? clearly meaning the wrench, you thought, and they grab the pliers, thinking that is what you meant...

It happens...

Don't get caught up in the words and definitions, too literally perhaps, but also to liberally.

Couldnt agree more...

I know many times, people here halt a conversation to tell me there definitions for words, but not because of a misunderstanding of what I was trying to communicate.

Yes, it may not mean the same thing to you,(though given I use purposefully basic dictionary definitions for words I find that puzzling) but you know what I meant.

As such, communication becomes secondary to establishing individuality.

Something that I think, is a given, and you need not create your own verbal cipher to prove so.

I think many people here are learning how to communicate, and dont quite get the line you describe with the "not too literally, and not too liberally"...

Seeing how we are all of different ages, from different areas and use words differently (not to mention the definitions of words change over time) I will post a definition of a word that I think is causing the miscommunication, rather it is a word I am using or someone else, just to see if we are all on the same page.

An example in another thread, Jestor had used the word prodding and I used it and even though we both use the word in a similar manner we have slightly differing definitions of the same word. So I clarified how I understood its use to be.

Since we communicate primarily in English and English is an ever changing language (in my opinion that’s because the people setting the standard don’t have the backbone to set the definitions and build us a solid base to communicate with ) there will be times when we have understandings that are not in line with the message attempting to be conveyed. And only through clarification can we resolve the miscommunication.

Why the English language is so confusing:

We’ll begin with a box, and the plural is boxes;
but the plural of ox became oxen not oxes.
One fowl is a goose, but two are called geese,
yet the plural of moose should never be meese.
You may find a lone mouse or a nest full of mice;
yet the plural of house is houses, not hice.
If the plural of man is always called men,
why shouldn’t the plural of pan be called pen?
If I spoke of my foot and show you my feet,
and I give you a boot, would a pair be called beet?
If one is a tooth and a whole set are teeth,
why shouldn’t the plural of booth be called beeth?
Then one may be that, and three would be those,
yet hat in the plural would never be hose,
and the plural of cat is cats, not cose.
We speak of a brother and also of brethren,
but though we say mother, we never say methren.
Then the masculine pronouns are he, his and him,
but imagine the feminine, she, shis and shim.

Some other reasons to be grateful if you grew up speaking English:

The bandage was wound around the wound.
The farm was used to produce produce.
The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse.
We must polish the Polish furniture.
He could lead if he would get the lead out.
The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert.
Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to present the present.
At the Army base, a bass was painted on the head of a bass drum.
When shot at, the dove dove into the bushes.
I did not object to the object.
The insurance was invalid for the invalid.
There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.
They were too close to the door to close it.
The buck does funny things when the does are present.
A seamstress and a sewer fell down into a sewer line.
To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.
The wind was too strong to wind the sail.
After a number of Novocain injections, my jaw got number.
Upon seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear.
I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.
How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?
I spent last evening evening out a pile of dirt.

Some other examples of strange pronounciations come into the picture with: if you have a rough cough, climbing can be tough when going through the bough on a tree!

There is no egg in eggplant nor ham in hamburger; neither apple nor pine in pineapple. English muffins weren’t invented in England.

If we explore the paradoxes, we find that quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.

And why is it that writers write but fingers don’t fing, grocers don’t groce and hammers don’t ham? Doesn’t it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend? If you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of them, what do you call it? If teachers taught, why didn’t preachers praught? If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat? In what other language do people recite at a play and play at a recital? Ship by truck and send cargo by ship? Have noses that run and feet that smell? How can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same, while a wise man and a wiseguy are opposites?

You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language in which your house can burn up as it burns down, in which you fill in a form by filling it out and in which an alarm goes off by going on. If Dad is Pop, how’s come Mom isn’t Mop?

Quote from Pinky and the Brain:
Pinky: If the plural of mouse is mice, wouldn't the plural of spouse be spice?