Monty Python star Jones has cancer

[Lare Kikkeli]

yeah man, terry jones, what a douche. i mean medicine is way more imporant than comedy, that guy had basically killed thousands of people by not becoming a doctor. he deserves cancer.

[Pop]

yeah man, terry jones, what a douche. i mean medicine is way more imporant than comedy, that guy had basically killed thousands of people by not becoming a doctor. he deserves cancer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't **** on the board. Both art and medicine have their value, but medicine has the kind of utility art doesn't even come close to. I'd rather have a polio vaccine than a Beatles record. Alexander Fleming is a hero and a savior of millions, Toby Jones wrote some funny sketches. But the implication that he deserves cancer is your retarded, simple logic, not mine. If we're lucky, somebody more important than he is will cure his cancer, and then everybody will be happy.

[Lare Kikkeli]

yeah man, terry jones, what a douche. i mean medicine is way more imporant than comedy, that guy had basically killed thousands of people by not becoming a doctor. he deserves cancer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't **** on the board. Both art and medicine have their value, but medicine has the kind of utility art doesn't even come close to. I'd rather have a polio vaccine than a Beatles record. Alexander Fleming is a hero and a savior of millions, Toby Jones wrote some funny sketches. But the implication that he deserves cancer is your retarded, simple logic, not mine. If we're lucky, somebody more important than he is will cure his cancer, and then everybody will be happy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

sarcasm dude, sarcasm.

 

and the thing is, you cant choose. i'm pretty damn happy for monty python, they've given me a lot of good moments.

 

and what does terry jones's achievements in comedy have anything to do with other peoples achievements in medicine/philosophy/anything else?

Edited October 23, 2006 by Lare Kikkeli

[Pop]

yeah man, terry jones, what a douche. i mean medicine is way more imporant than comedy, that guy had basically killed thousands of people by not becoming a doctor. he deserves cancer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't **** on the board. Both art and medicine have their value, but medicine has the kind of utility art doesn't even come close to. I'd rather have a polio vaccine than a Beatles record. Alexander Fleming is a hero and a savior of millions, Toby Jones wrote some funny sketches. But the implication that he deserves cancer is your retarded, simple logic, not mine. If we're lucky, somebody more important than he is will cure his cancer, and then everybody will be happy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

sarcasm dude, sarcasm.

 

and the thing is, you cant choose. i'm pretty damn happy for monty python, they've given me a lot of good moments.

 

and what does terry jones's achievements in comedy have anything to do with other peoples achievements in medicine/philosophy/anything else?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

WELL I'm sorry about that. I need an exclamation point, or bold / italics, or something. I've run into more outlandish logic out there. Honestly, I'm not even sure how it got to this point. I must have started the whole thing with meta.

[Lucius]

Why don't the ****heads who doesn't have anything nice to say about the funny guy with cancer just shut the **** up? Morons.

[Surreptishus]

Why don't the ****heads who doesn't have anything nice to say about the funny guy with cancer just shut the **** up? Morons.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I can agree with that.

[metadigital]

"Except Terry Jones might have contributed more to society than just raising a child to adulthood. wink.gif"

 

My dad wrote over 60 books, historical dramas and social satire mostly, I like  Monty Python but I would hesitate on calling any of their movies 'contributions to society'

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Without wishing to involve your family and personal affairs any more in this discussion, I would just like to point out that Terry Jones has contributed a lot more than "just" the Monty Python movies.

[Sofaking]

when I saw thw title I thought this topic was about Star Jones and I didn't understand what the title was saying.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Ditto.

[Lyric Suite]

but medicine has the kind of utility art doesn't even come close to.

 

Explain why staying alive is more important then actually living.

Edited October 24, 2006 by Lyric Suite

[Krookie]

but medicine has the kind of utility art doesn't even come close to.

 

Explain why staying alive is more important then actually living.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think he's got you on this one...

[Pop]

but medicine has the kind of utility art doesn't even come close to.

 

Explain why staying alive is more important then actually living.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First, that's a logical contradiction. Living is worthless when one is not alive.

 

Second, there is a heirarchy to happiness. We've got health on the one hand, and we've got aesthetic pleasure on the other. The argument can simply and effectively be presented as a comparison.

 

Consider that we're judging art and medicine on the basis of the "good" that they provide. First we have to define the "good", and for the purposes of my argument I'll define it under classical utilitarianism, as in the creation of happiness and the prevention of pain. Under this model, it becomes necessary to distinguish between the orders of happiness. The highest happinesses being the excercise of one's right to life and continued existence, and the lowest happinesses being the fulfillment of base desires. A desire for sketch comedy, in this case.

 

So let's weigh these two concepts. Creation and distribution of, say, antibiotics, or clean water, with sketch comedy. Sketch comedy may cause happiness and pleasure in those that watch it, this is undeniably true. But antibiotics cure plagues, prolong life and thus, maximize our potential for happiness. Many people would be happy that they were able to effectively cheat death. Reasonable calculus weighs medicine against art.

 

The assumption that life is not worth living without certain arbitrary sensory pleasures is irrational, animalistic hedonism. It also implies that those who are unable to enjoy art are not truly alive, which is a narcissistic claim at best.

Edited October 24, 2006 by Pop

[Lare Kikkeli]

but medicine has the kind of utility art doesn't even come close to.

 

Explain why staying alive is more important then actually living.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First, that's a logical contradiction. Living is worthless when one is not alive.

 

Second, there is a heirarchy to happiness. We've got health on the one hand, and we've got aesthetic pleasure on the other. The argument can simply and effectively be presented as a comparison.

 

Consider that we're judging art and medicine on the basis of the "good" that they provide. First we have to define the "good", and for the purposes of my argument I'll define it under classical utilitarianism, as in the creation of happiness and the prevention of pain. Under this model, it becomes necessary to distinguish between the orders of happiness. The highest happinesses being the excercise of one's right to life and continued existence, and the lowest happinesses being the fulfillment of base desires. A desire for sketch comedy, in this case.

 

So let's weigh these two concepts. Creation and distribution of, say, antibiotics, or clean water, with sketch comedy. Sketch comedy may cause happiness and pleasure in those that watch it, this is undeniably true. But antibiotics cure plagues, prolong life and thus, maximize our potential for happiness. Many people would be happy that they were able to effectively cheat death. Reasonable calculus weighs medicine against art.

 

The assumption that life is not worth living without certain arbitrary sensory pleasures is irrational, animalistic hedonism. It also implies that those who are unable to enjoy art are not truly alive, which is a narcissistic claim at best.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

zappa would disagree.

[Pop]

That's why I don't follow Zappa beyond his music Besides, he wasn't exactly a hedonist. Never did like drugs. Kicked some kids out of his band for doing lines.

[Walsingham]

you wouldn't be saying that if your mom had it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My mum does, as do two of my friends. And I still say you gotta die of something. But then it doesn't detract from the fact that it always sucks to die.