Cantousent

It's not like you guys are talking about ways to defeat the language filter. ...And I find this informative. I'm sure I'll buy one of these new fangled consoles somewhere along the line and this is an integral part of the product. Keep talking.

I recently read Dostoevsky's Brothers Karamazov. It's a masterpiece, no doubt. Still, for raw emotional impact, Crime and Punishment is better. I considered trying to learn the language after I read my first Russian author. That wasn't feasible at the time, so I just kept reading translations. At the time, I was reading the Aeneid in Latin, Herodotus in Greek, and a whole slew of Russian titles in translation, including Tolstoy's "Death of Ivan Ilych" and Dostoevsky's "Double" and Crime and Punishment. Great fun. ...But I was literally starting to go out of my mind. I needed to do a little light reading before I continued with the heavier themes. A friend warned me that my outlook was starting to be a bit warped by my reading selection and suggested that I try Enger's Game and Eragon. I loved Ender's Game. I thought Eragon was an excellent effort for so young a writer. I'm not a big fan of the book, but it was a quick read. So, while I have the time, I'm set to finish the Ender's series. After that, I just don't know. This is the first bit of light reading I've done in some time and I have to say, I enjoy it.

They did read them all. I dont' know if they finished and restarted, since it was just the reading that counted, not the selection. I have to say, however, that the Harry Potter books are quite large. Even if the reading is pretty swift in terms of the language, you can't really read the words aloud any faster. It was funny, apparently one of the companies supplied free ice-cream for the endeavor and the public came in and started eating the ice-cream. I don't really blame them. They probably thought the ice-cream was for everyone, not just the readers. Anyhow, after they started "exploring" the sleeping areas of the readers and poking around the readers personal items in the restrooms, the public was invited to stand outside the room and enjoy the readings. hahahaha. I really don't blame the public, though. After all, it was a pretty weird situation. Might make the readers a bit more careful about what they brought into the restrooms for the next attempt. Don't want someone to find your back issues of Playboy, now do you?

I'm reading Xenocide by Andrew Scott Card. I hope none of his names is in the language filter. Anyhow, I'm reading this one because I've enjoyed his earlier works in the Ender's series. however, as usual, I'm losing interest in the books progressively as I get away from the original book in the series. If I had read Speaker for the Dead first, I suspect it might have been my favorite. The rest, though, no chance. Don't get me wrong, the books are still fun, but there's not much chance I would have rushed out to buy the other books in the series had I not read Ender's Game or Speaker for the Dead first. So far, I'm on the third book of the Ender storyline and the fourth book of the Bean storyline.

See, I completely ignored the fictional jibe! It's true that there is an everyman theme in literature, but it almost invariably involves some everyman fellow doing things far beyond the ability of every man. The heroic aspect of everyday life, however, is remarkable, as are anti-heroes. Some folks suggest that Frodo Baggins is an anti-hero.

Time is nothing but the term we use to measure change. Time is change. Saying that we'll be able to go back in time is the same thing as saying we will be able to undo all the changes that have happened over a certain measurement. Does that mean that every change that has occured every in the universe will be reversed? I'm not saying that time travel is impossible. After all, we're constantly reassessing what is or is not impossible. Nevertheless, we don't seem to have a firm grasp of time in the first place. EDIT: BTW, you might want to look into the works of Democritus. He was quite a bit before his time.

I loved Ender's Game. What makes it compelling is that Ender is such a humane character. He regrets every death for which he is responsible.

My sister and fellow librarians in Henderson NV broke the record for consecutive hours reading aloud. They read the Harry Potter series of books for a total of 100 hours, crushing the previous record of 80 hours. It was tough work. They were forced to stay in the room the entire time with the exception of timed bathroom breaks. Unfortunately, I was not able to be there, but I am proud that she and her colleagues managed to remain steadfast in their endeavor. http://www.reviewjournal.com/index.html http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/200...s/26742543.html

Time travel forwards is not only possible, we're doing it right now.

Dolts! ...And what's worse is I don't know how to do it.

Is that you, Dr. Strangelove?

I'd like to see a gritty game where the angels are good and beautiful but they carry a fiery sword and deal out vengence. How's that for some old time religion? We could include some pyramids and maybe an oracle or two. Atlantis? I don't know about including Atlantis in this setting. Of course, the more I think about it, the easier it seems to do.

That's fascinating. Hey, are you Viet Namese, Steve?

Oh, give it a rest, you Tom Fools, before the hand of justice descends and locks the thread. :madr: I'm going to start reading Xenophile after I'm done with Shadow Puppets.

And the fact that the Bible's stories are borrowed says what about the piece? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Using this example, virtually all literture steals from somewhere. It's the same argument folks use to attack Shakespeare, Tolkien, Homer, and just about everyone else. That's why the word "stole" is such a loaded term. Of course the Bible had outside influences. That's not the point. The Bible managed to take those influences and create something vibrant and new. I always get a kick out of folks leveling the dread charge of "thief" against Greek classics, as if the stories and writings from the near east compare favorably. I've been keenly interested in other works that influenced Greek literature, but let's be honest, the Greek literture has endured extremely well over time. The term "stole" is nothing better than an overt attack. So, if you wish, declare that the Bible is bogus because some of the theology found therein is adopted from an outside source. I think that's going to create a bunch of trivial arguments, but at least it's not nearly so stupid as claiming that a literary work has no value because of outside influences. Of course, maybe that's not what folks are implying. All's I know is that folks are willing to use arguments against the Bible that they are not willing to make against other works of literature. You might not like the Bible as a work of literature, but it is a work of literature and it has endured extremely well.

It's stupid that the short form of Richard is in the filter anyhow. I've been reading through the Ender's game series. I've liked them all so far. Ender's Game is my favorite, followed by Speaker for the Dead. I'm losing a bit of steam on the Bean storyline. I'm almost done with Shadow Puppets and, while I find it entertaining, it's my least favorite.

At this one point, I disagree. The Bible is a transcendent literary work when you look at the parts. Different books of the Bible address different needs in the community at the time it was written. Some of the books are actually quite boring. However, critics still laud the book of Job as a classic work of literature. The parables of Christ still speak to people today, and not entirely due to religious fervor. As a Catholic, I hearken to the story of a Prodigal Son. As a human being, however, I love the story. It speaks to me on a personal level. After all, I

I am content to agree that there is an extreme to relativism just as there is to fundamentalism. I honestly did not understand, at the first, that we were using the term in two different ways. Relativism is to you what manners are to me. When I read the word "relativism" I think of it as extreme by definition. Of course, I see the word "fundamentalism" in the same way. At any rate, TEETH, I fear I've created animosity. That was not my intention. From now on, I will use your definition of "relativism" for the sake of discussion. Since relativism to you translates to tolerance, respect, and urbanity, then we'll have to find other sources of argument. As for the Bible? I'm glad that it has enjoyed outside influences. For one thing, it has saved information that might otherwise have been lost. It has also provided an extremely important historical document, and we owe a fair share of that to those outside influences. I would like to make a point, however, and I believe this to be true. You appear hostile to Christianity. That

You know, fundamentalism isn't so bad. It's a vast source of strength in a world that increasingly calls you a sucker if you look out for anyone other than yourself. It's the bedrock upon which to build beliefs in an age that increasingly calls you stupid for believing in anything. Nevertheless, while I don't like the downward slope of "relativism," I hope to act with good manners. Good manners, to me, mean taking another person at his word. Good manners means understanding their arguments with charity, and that I convey my own arguments as calmly and rationally as I can. As you know very well, sometimes my temper is at odds with my manners. So be it. I won't let some failure be an excuse for even greater failure. The problem I have with relativism is that it doesn't recognize that humans do have an innate sense of values. That virtually every culture abhors murder. Virtually every culture seeks a higher purpose for its members. There are boundaries of behavior beyond which there no relativity. The questions revolve around the specifics, not the generalities. The problem I have with fundamentalism is that it doesn't recognize the value of compromise. Every fundamentalist must recognize the fundamental beliefs of others, even if they don't agree with them. To do otherwise is to clasp deperately to a belief out of nothing but fear. For me, that cannot be the foundation of my faith. Hold the Lord not only in awe, but also in love. Why else would we have the capacity, sometimes the compulsion, for introspection?

Oh, I always give TEETH the benefit of the doubt. That doesn't mean I don't like giving him grief every now and then. I wish I weren't quick to anger, but it has had the side effect of making me quick to forgive. Hell, WITHTEETH provides us with some of the most interesting debates on this board.

There is no point in arguing against blind faith. That's why I don't understand why folks who have real animosity for the Bible attack it in the first place. Even if you're an atheist and think the Bible is nothing but fairy-tales, shouldn't it be discussed as literature? I'm not arguing that you should take the Bible as the first, middle, or final word on natural science. I'm really not. I'm just saying that we could discuss the Bible along different lines. Christians are actually far worse in this regard, in my experience. If I want to discuss the Bible in terms of, say, history, then I get a lot of hostility because I use a different method in assessing the Bible. For many Christians, acknowledging any influence other than the divine is a sin. I think that's unfortunate. The all or nothing approach to the bible overlooks so many legitimate aspects for discussion. Some parts of the Bible are quite beautiful in and of themselves, but atheist attack the package as a whole and Christians defend the package as a whole. I would like you to convert to Christianity. I'm a Christian and I would be lying if I claimed otherwise. Still, I respect the fact that you are not Christian. I respect the fact that you don't view the Bible as divinely inspired. I just wish that we could have a discussion on some of these issues that wasn't so bitter. If we discussed something like the Tao te Ching, would we be able to recognize the beauty of the work without buying into the mystical undertones? I hope so. Some books in the Bible are more appealing than others, of that there is no doubt. Still, there is something there worth seeing, even if it doesn't lead to your personal religious experience.

I'm a fan of random drops and such. I'm not a fan of the game assigning my stats, skills, and other attributes randomly. One of the elements of a role playing game is the ability to create the character you want to play. Anything that destroys that illussion just doesn't make sense to me.

HAHAHAHA That had me laughing out loud. "Ka-POW" It's true, though, the player knows the character's stats. The character doesn't. I don't see any workable way to resolve the difference, though.

bwahahaha, who cares about the Big Bang? We Americans will soon own the English language! Actually, some Americans use English spellings as a sort of affectation. I'm an Anglo-phile as much as anyone else, but I'm perfectly happy using American spellings. Some English idioms are quite funny, though. I especially like "Knocked up." comedy.

How utterly devoid of subtlety, TEETH