Can a leopard really change his spots?

[Guest012211-3]

Is that why they say "walk softly and carry a big stick"?

[rekcaSxT]

Originally Posted by Nicole Preston

Is that why they say "walk softly and carry a big stick"?

That's what she said!

[xperiment]

I need to read this part of the forum more often. Discussing philosophy, Quantum physics, Teddy Roosevelts global policy motto,.....whats next?

Originally Posted by Nicole Preston

Is that why they say "walk softly and carry a big stick"?

Sounds like a thiefs motto. A twist off of "speak softly......"

[Marcus Aurelius]

Originally Posted by xperiment

I need to read this part of the forum more often. Discussing philosophy, Quantum physics, Teddy Roosevelts global policy motto,.....whats next?

Don't forget cooking. We have some great cooks here.

[guest051510-1]

Originally Posted by rekcaSxT

The question isn't IF the bear shit in the woods. It is how far into the woods he walked. Which is only halfway.

I can't even find the woods, too many trees!

[Marcus Aurelius]

Originally Posted by Nicolette Bordeauxva

I can't even find the woods, too many trees!

LMAO! Now that's funny.

[Chevalier]

Originally Posted by Nicole Preston

A Philosopher walked into a bar.

The Bartender asked : "would you like a drink?"

The Philosopher answered: " I think not". And he disappeared.

You should have been watching the rerun of Criminal Minds on ION last night, for Dr. Reid's joke: "How many existentialists does it take to screw in a light bulb? Two. One to change the lightbulb and one to observe how the lightbulb symbolizes an incandescent beacon of subjectivity in a netherworld of Cosmic Nothingness."

OK, it didn't get a lot of laughs . . . .

[ElisabethWhispers]

Originally Posted by Chevalier

You should have been watching the rerun of Criminal Minds on ION last night, for Dr. Reid's joke: "How many existentialists does it take to screw in a light bulb? Two. One to change the lightbulb and one to observe how the lightbulb symbolizes an incandescent beacon of subjectivity in a netherworld of Cosmic Nothingness."

OK, it didn't get a lot of laughs . . . .

I've just started watching television again and just love that show. I have even seen that episode!!! (Isn't Dr. Reid just cute as a speckled pup? Especially with his hair long and fluffy!)

Well, as someone was once (or thirty+) times guilty of PWI, I find it always easy to forgive and forget. Actually, even while now painfully sober, it "can" be kindof fun to see a train wreck of postings as a result of someone obviously drinking.

And then? Sometimes not. At any rate, I'm glad that Charles is around and posting and causing many of us to think and react. That's all to the good!

Hugs,
Elisabeth

[Marcus Aurelius]

You're a good woman Elizabeth.
Though I believe I'd really not want to piss you off.

[guest051510-1]

Originally Posted by Chevalier

You should have been watching the rerun of Criminal Minds on ION last night, for Dr. Reid's joke: "How many existentialists does it take to screw in a light bulb? Two. One to change the lightbulb and one to observe how the lightbulb symbolizes an incandescent beacon of subjectivity in a netherworld of Cosmic Nothingness."

OK, it didn't get a lot of laughs . . . .

I love light bulb jokes.

Q: How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?

A: One, but the light bulb has to want to change.

[Marcus Aurelius]

How many men does it take to mop the kitchen floor?






None, it's a woman's job. LOL.

[guest051510-1]

Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius

How many men does it take to mop the kitchen floor?






None, it's a woman's job. LOL.

NO, it's the MAID's job.

[Marcus Aurelius]

I stand corrected.

[pjorourke]

Originally Posted by Chevalier

You should have been watching the rerun of Criminal Minds on ION last night, for Dr. Reid's joke: "How many existentialists does it take to screw in a light bulb? Two. One to change the lightbulb and one to observe how the lightbulb symbolizes an incandescent beacon of subjectivity in a netherworld of Cosmic Nothingness."

OK, it didn't get a lot of laughs . . . .

FWIW, I thought it was funny.

[Chevalier]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

FWIW, I thought it was funny.

So do I, although perhaps not as much as Nicole's joke.

I just wish that episode of Criminal Minds had included the Quantum Physics Knock-Knock joke they mentioned . . . .

In lieu of that, how about this classification of kisses.

Aristotelian kiss -- a kiss performed using techniques gained solely from theoretical speculation untainted by any experiential data by one who feels that the latter is irrelevant anyway.

Hegelian kiss -- dialiptical technique in which the kiss incorporates its own antithikiss, forming a synthekiss.

Wittgensteinian kiss -- the important thing about this type of kiss is that it refers only to the symbol (our internal mental representation we associate with the experience of the kiss--which must necessarilly also be differentiated from the act itself for obvious reasons and which need not be by any means the same or even similar for the different people experiencing the act) rather than the act itself and, as such, one must be careful not to make unwarranted generalizations about the act itself or the experience thereof based merely on our manipulation of the symbology therefor.

Godelian kiss -- a kiss that takes an extraordinarilly long time, yet leaves you unable to decide whether you've been kissed or not.

Socratic kiss -- really a Platonic kiss, but it's claimed to be the Socratic technique so it'll sound more authoritative; however, compared to most strictly Platonic kisses, Socratic kisses wander around a lot more and cover more ground.

Kantian kiss -- a kiss that, eschewing inferior "phenomenal" contact, is performed entirely on the superior "noumenal" plane; though you don't actually feel it at all, you are, nonetheless, free to declare it the best kiss you've ever given or received.

Kafkaesque kiss -- a kiss that starts out feeling like it's about to transform you but ends up just bugging you.

Sartrean kiss -- a kiss that you worry yourself to death about even though it really doesn't matter anyway.

Russell-Whiteheadian kiss -- a formal kiss in which each lip and tongue movement is rigorously and completely defined, even though it ends up seeming incomplete somehow.

Hertzsprung-Russellian kiss -- Oh, Be A Fine Girl/Guy, Kiss Me.

Pythagorean kiss -- a kiss given by someone who has developed some new and wonderful techniques but refuses to use them on anyone for fear that others would find out about them and copy them.

Cartesian kiss -- a particularly well-planned and coordinated movement: "I think, therefore, I aim." In general, a kiss does not count as Cartesian unless it is applied with enough force to remove all doubt that one has been kissed. (cf. Polar kiss, a more well-rounded movement involving greater nose-to-nose contact, but colder overall.)

Heisenbergian kiss -- a hard-to-define kiss--the more it moves you, the less sure you are of where the kiss was; the more energy it has, the more trouble you have figuring out how long it lasted. Extreme versions of this type of kiss are known as "virtual kisses" because the level of uncertainty is so high that you're not quite sure if you were kissed or not. Virtual kisses have the advantage, however, that you need not have anyone else in the room with you to enjoy them.

Nietzscheian kiss -- "she/he who does not kiss you, makes your lust stronger."

Epimenidian kiss -- a kiss given by someone who does not kiss.

Grouchoic kiss -- a kiss given by someone who will only kiss those who would
not kiss him or her.

Harpoic kiss -- shut up and kiss me.

Zenoian kiss -- your lips approach, closer and closer, but never actually touch.

Procrustean kiss -- suffice it to say that it is a technique that, once you've experienced it, you'll never forget it, especially when applied to areas of the anatomy other than the lips.