What is "you"?

[Bob]

What is the essential thing that makes a person a person?

If, for example, you lost a limb, you would still be you.  Wouldn't you?  You could even lose all limbs and still be you.  You could have a heart completely replaced. 

So what is the "you,"  the essence?

I would think "you" must reside in your brain since everything else I would think could be replaced.  However, I imagine you could exist with only part of a brain since people with brain damage are able to surve (and you see so many people with only part of their brain functioning anyway   ).   So, someone could survive without certain mental functions and still be themself.  So what is the "you" part of you then?  You could strip away the perception of color and you would still be you, right?  What about language?  Or movement?  Or the ability to reason?  Or read?    Or feel physically? 

Couldn't you?  What would be the part left that is "you?"

Or is that too much reduction?  Did you lose the "you" part somewhere in that process?  Maybe "you" is something entirely different than a part or mental process?

Maybe "you" is everything.  Everything you are and everything you do.  Maybe losing one part is not a big deal since there is so much.  Maybe someone parts are more important.  In that case, someone who quits piano would be sad -- because that "you/piano" part is dying off.    Or a "friends with another person/you."  When you leave that person for awhile, that part of you is still. 

Interesting things to think about.

[stevie]

this is why the two phrases 'you are beautiful' and 'you look beautiful' are very different to me.

this also reminds me of cloning, where it is possible to clone the exact same person, but is it really the same person?

possibly

[pianistimo]

not only with heart replacement, cloning, and twinning, but there is also identity theft - where the real you is replaced by the wanna- be you.

seriously, i've sometimes thought about this when napping.  i mean, as you drift off, you kind of lose awareness.  now, what if you were just going to sleep and someone suddenly opens the door, stomps in and asks you your full name, your social security number, your age, your telephone number and the name of your piano.  what if you are confused and cannot answer everything.  sort of, in slow motion, you try to remember who and where you are.  but, the only thing that is relevant is sleep at that point.  i think conciousness has something to do with who we perceive ourselves to be, rather than who we are just by being born.

birth is quite amazing.  it is at that point, that we enter the world fully ourselves.  no expectations other than the basics.  of course, if we stayed a baby, that wouldn't be good.  but, what if we weren't so dependent on exterior things to define us.  what if people were generally 'waldorfed' to enter society.  (*have to look up waldorfing again)

of course, choosing our own path too much can end up with everyone not willing to follow anyone, thus a bunch of renegades.  there is much to be said for moderation.  maybe God, in his wisdom, created some of us to be happy as followers, and some to be leaders and really be unhappy unless they feel they have more control over situations.  i say, give up a little control, and you won't feel responsible for the fate of the world.  and yet, on the same thought, you can't forget the responsibilites within your grasp.  for me, that is my family.  i am very happy to take care of my children, and i see that as the realest me.  the artistic me is pianist.   

ps  then there's what God wants us to be.  there's many scriptures about using your talents, and being able to help others by doing what is right and being an example.  in most average lives, we sort of equalize out good/bad.  whereas for a hard-core criminal who has no conscience and actually feels happy when killing people, i don't really know where 'the real you' ends and demon possession begins.  people can be influenced by so many things.  early childhood experiences seem to influence behavior throughout life, but are not the only influences.  i suppose brain injury, or drug addiction, alcohol, or other stimulants or drugs to treat depression can make people 'not themselves.' 

maybe the answer to who is you is taken by a sort of 'average' of your behavior.  i mean, if you are quote un- quote "normal' for many years, and then start exhibiting strange behavior, people know you by your old self.  they don't really worry about not knowing you.  whereas if you are autistic at birth or shortly thereafter (it is thought that some vaccines may be the cause of some autism in certain children!) you may never know or be aware of who you are in the same ways as others around you.

[gorbee natcase]

What is the essential thing that makes a person a person?

If, for example, you lost a limb, you would still be you.  Wouldn't you?  

If I lost any of my limbs I would go in to major depression and end it all seriously no question about it sorry but thats how I feel,

[Jacey1973]

I love you and your posts Bob...lol 

[Bob]

Maybe these posts are part of "me."  Hmm....  So if the pf site went down, a part of me would be lost.  But that's not quite the same as having a limb cut off.


Hmm....



?


(Bob notices a pickle slicer on the ground.  He screams and runs away.)

[pianistimo]

pianistimo picks up the pickle slicer and goes to the fresh meat thread to wait for a certain pf'r to show up. 

[m1469]

m1469 would just like a pickle, and forms a line where she waits patiently.  Do you make sandwiches ?

[pianistimo]

mayla, this is exactly how i got into trouble.  there are no such thing as innocent pickle sandwiches on a forum with lots of hormonally imbalanced teenagers.  you tell them you DON't like big feet, they think you like big feet?  you tell them you like pickles and would stand in line for a sandwich.  no, this is not the line for mayla.   

jerksm1469around the corner and whispers inutterable women's talk.  then returns with two pickle slicers.

[m1469]

oooohhhh my goodness, I'm really embarrassed 

*grabs pickle slicer and thanks pianistimo* 

[pianistimo]

just for fun, let's chase bob.

[m1469]

Well, hey.. you there... Bob    What do you fear most now ?

Slowly walks toward Bob with pickle slicer...

[pianistimo]

bob claims to be someone else.  he doesn't go by the name 'bob' anymore.   

[m1469]

*puts serious mask on*


Well, Bob.  I started thinking about this several years ago while I was out walking in a wilderness.  I got back to my station and asked a man there what he thought about this question, however, I was thinking in terms of a bird at that point.  What makes a bird, a bird ?

What he told me he thought, and what I like (though it has many layers), is that he felt it was the entire package.  It's the complete concept of whomever, whatever.  As it relates to somebody's limbs being removed, I admit I would have some challenges to work through if I were in that situation.  But, I don't think that the individual is any less complete because of something that seems to be missing.  The identity is intact.  I will not claim to have (at this point) a full and demostrative grasp on this, it's just my starting point.

There are a few examples in life, however, that I have thought about in direct regard to all of this.  I used to work with a quadriplegic man.  At first, I was nervous to know what to do.  He could not even talk and would point to letters on a board to let me know what he needed.  As I worked with him, I began to see him in an entirely new light.  He was NOT a quadriplegic, he was a man, and in a way, a perfect man.  I got better at understanding him and our report became such that everytime he came into this place, he would request for me to work with him.  I could see him, and he was complete.  He has been one of my greates teachers of life, though we have never actually had a "normal" conversation, and I have not had any contact with him in over 10 years.  I think about him A LOT.  He inspired me because of how he lived his life.  I could see how he thought of himself and frankly, it was astounding.

Another example is how one can often view children.  I have caught these glimpses of them in their fullness of person.  Not as children, but as individual, complete, people.  Though they have not "grown up" yet (and when do we ever truly get there ?), they are somehow every bit of who they ever will be.

I don't really have answers, as you can see.  I just have been thinking about these things too.


m1469

[pianistimo]

bob agrees while hobbling away.  starts a new life in canada.

[bernhard]

Well, hey.. you there... Bob    What do you fear most now ?

Slowly walks toward Bob with pickle slicer...

This reminds me of an old joke.

This guy works wahing dishes in a restaurant. His wife starts noticing that he is lookng aloof and sort of depressed. One day she questions him and he says:

"I can't hide it from you anymore. I have an enormous desire, you could say a compulsion even, to put my penis in the pckle slicer, and I don't know for how long I will be able to resist it."

She gets really worried and suggests some sort of therapy but he won't hear any of it.

A few days later he arrives earlier from work in a complete different mood. She asks:

"What are you doing home so early?".

He can hardly contain his excitement:

" I did it I did it! I put my penis in the pickle slicer!"

"Oh my God! what happened to you?"

"I got fired".

"What about the pickle slicer?"

"She got fired too".

 

[Bob]

Around and around goes the cycles of the pf site.    Where did I originally get the idea of the pickle slicer?

Like the Chistopher Reeve stuff, I imagine you would still be you even if you lost all sensation and all ability to move.  Of course, if it were ALL ability to move, you wouldn't be able to communicate.  But neck down loss, you'd still be you I would imagine.

So, I would think the "you" part must be in the brain -- a neural network.  But even with that, you could lose parts, like you ability to discern color or even to use language, and you would still be you.  I imagine you could even strip away your memories and your ability to do certain skills, like piano, and you would still be you. 

"You" must have something to do with your experiences in life.  The "you" you create during your life. 

Then I wonder if "you" is trapped in your body.  If "you" are really just a connection of brain networks, couldn't that be copied and recreated?  Eventually, I imagine a computer would be sophiscated enough to imitate this.  Couldn't someone copy "you?"  Would it be possible to "upload" "you" to a computer?  Like a Frankstein mind switching things you see in the movies.  If that's possible, "you" would actually have to transfer to some other place.  Otherwise, you'd have the original "you" (that's yourself) and this new "you."  And that new you couldn't possibly be "you" because you'd still be in your original place.

So I guess there can only be one "you." 

Say a computer is able to make a perfect copy of "you" and get that functioning.  Since you're still you, what would that new thing be?  It's not like "you" would transfer over to it, although I would think this second "you" would feel that way.  But what would it be that makes that second copy alive then and not just a computer copy? 

If it were possible to actually completely copy a person to a computer, would that mean the machine were alive?  Or maybe could it be just an extremely good imitator of life and not really be alive?

[m1469]

This reminds me of an old joke.

This guy works wahing dishes in a restaurant. His wife starts noticing that he is lookng aloof and sort of depressed. One day she questions him and he says:

"I can't hide it from you anymore. I have an enormous desire, you could say a compulsion even, to put my penis in the pckle slicer, and I don't know for how long I will be able to resist it."

She gets really worried and suggests some sort of therapy but he won't hear any of it.

A few days later he arrives earlier from work in a complete different mood. She asks:

"What are you doing home so early?".

He can hardly contain his excitement:

" I did it I did it! I put my penis in the pickle slicer!"

"Oh my God! what happened to you?"

"I got fired".

"What about the pickle slicer?"

"She got fired too".

 

uhmmm... he he 


*lurks in the corner*

[stevie]

hahahahahaha, gotta love the penis jokes

eve - whats that thing dangling between your legs adam?

adam - thanks for noticing, its my penis actually

[bernhard]

Here is the first conversation ever between Adam and Eve.

Adam meets Eve and shouts:

“Go back, go back, go back!!

“Why?”

“I don’t know what size this thing gets!”

(As if… )

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[stevie]

hahahahahaha, barely, but possibly, in actualy fact fairly true, if only mildly.

hmmmm...so these random jokes are ok here, but starting a topic about this kind of jokes...that would be nawty?

mildly, but barely possible.

[bernhard]

Actually there are several jokes' threads (although not perhaps on this specific subject)

[stevie]

indeed, but for anyone wanting to randomly make penis jokes, the advised location would be -

https://dasdc.net/forum.php

home of the serious pianophile, and the occasional arrogant orang-utan.

[Bob]

Yes, the hidden topics in the threads.  Nils can't delete the thread since it's got a serious topic. 

Is it significant that the topic starts off with "you" and ends with this topic?



So anyway.... you take this person.  Since you know you can replace limbs and all that (including other things mentioned in this thread I suppose), that leaves the brain.  If you took the brain and put it into a machine body, you would certainly still have that person right?  But then you could replace some of those mental functional with a machine computer -- the part of the brain that does movement, thinking, emotion, etc.   On on on...  All that without losing the essential person there.  Assuming the computer/machinery is sophisticated enough, the person would be exactly the same.  But at some point, you would have reduced the original person's material down to a very small fraction.  I would think the "person" would now be "in" part of that machinery too at some point.  Because eventually, I would think you could get down to that last bit of original material and replace that -- creating an entirely machine/person, and transferring someone from one body into another.  I would think.  Kind of like you transferred a "soul" that way.  Although, I would also imagine that you could just be creating a second being that way.  The original one being slowly killed off, while the second one grows and believes its the original.

Interesting no?  I see Halloween is coming up.  

So the difference is whether there would be an entirely new "soul" in a copy of a person or whether you could actually transfer one person into someone (machine) else.


It makes me wonder what it would be like to have all these things removed -- senses really.  How much would that be like being asleep or having a body part fall asleep?  Or maybe it would be like when you zone out or stare into space.   And at some point, if you kept removing functions I would imagine you would turn a person into something more like a plant -- alive, but not thinking or feeling like a person anymore.  And then I wonder how much rights a person like that would have, or if a person were actually transferred to a computer if they would still have rights etc. 


I sound like pianonut.

or at some point, you could "upload" someone's piano practicing so you wouldn't have to do it anymore.  Wouldn't that be nice? 

[pianistimo]

scary!  reminds me of headless bodies.

[Torp]

identity = perception

[Bob]

(Marvels at the awesomeness of the human body.  Imagine how long it would take scientists to make something that works just as well as your hands.  Loooonnngg time.  Eats cheeto's while marveling.)

[stevie]

(Marvels at the awesomeness of the human body

thanks, i try to keep fit and exercise regular, for myself really, but its nice to know that all my hard work is noticed. 

[bernhard]

Yes, the hidden topics in the threads.  Nils can't delete the thread since it's got a serious topic. 

Is it significant that the topic starts off with "you" and ends with this topic?



So anyway.... you take this person.  Since you know you can replace limbs and all that (including other things mentioned in this thread I suppose), that leaves the brain.  If you took the brain and put it into a machine body, you would certainly still have that person right?  But then you could replace some of those mental functional with a machine computer -- the part of the brain that does movement, thinking, emotion, etc.   On on on...  All that without losing the essential person there.  Assuming the computer/machinery is sophisticated enough, the person would be exactly the same.  But at some point, you would have reduced the original person's material down to a very small fraction.  I would think the "person" would now be "in" part of that machinery too at some point.  Because eventually, I would think you could get down to that last bit of original material and replace that -- creating an entirely machine/person, and transferring someone from one body into another.  I would think.  Kind of like you transferred a "soul" that way.  Although, I would also imagine that you could just be creating a second being that way.  The original one being slowly killed off, while the second one grows and believes its the original.

Interesting no?  I see Halloween is coming up.  

So the difference is whether there would be an entirely new "soul" in a copy of a person or whether you could actually transfer one person into someone (machine) else.


It makes me wonder what it would be like to have all these things removed -- senses really.  How much would that be like being asleep or having a body part fall asleep?  Or maybe it would be like when you zone out or stare into space.   And at some point, if you kept removing functions I would imagine you would turn a person into something more like a plant -- alive, but not thinking or feeling like a person anymore.  And then I wonder how much rights a person like that would have, or if a person were actually transferred to a computer if they would still have rights etc. 


I sound like pianonut.

or at some point, you could "upload" someone's piano practicing so you wouldn't have to do it anymore.  Wouldn't that be nice? 

You don’t have to go that far. It takes seven years for all the molecules in your body to be replaced. So every seven years there is a new “you” – at least in a completely physical sense. Most primitive societies seem to have perceived this fact having initiations rituals at the ages of seven, fourteen and twenty-one. Bones are the last to be replaced (skin: 28 days, blood: 2 – 3 months; muscle: 6 months - 1 year; internal organs – 2 – 3 years; bones 7 years) Hence in primitive societies bones are ascribed all sorts of magical properties in consequence.

[Bob]

So if all the material is being replace, I imagine "you" must be the connections in the mind, a neural network.  Probably very unique.  I would if you could create an exact copy if it would be the same person, the same "you" or what.

Or if you could transfer a person.   


Hmmm...

[leahcim]

Bones are the last to be replaced (skin: 28 days, blood: 2 – 3 months; muscle: 6 months - 1 year; internal organs – 2 – 3 years; bones 7 years) Hence in primitive societies bones are ascribed all sorts of magical properties in consequence.

Good to know they are wrong then because AIUI there are cells in your head that last longer, possibly your entire life - which might answer part of Bob's question w.r.t neural networks and why we feel 10/ 20/ 30 / 40 / 50 and 60, rather than 7 months old.

We clearly exhibit signs of age too, if my skin is only 28 days old, it was either a rough month or there's another process that makes the "replacement" rather moot. The little scar under my nose from when I fell over as a kid has been there for 30+ years too.

Cells copy themselves [although I'm sure some of the stuff is created anew or lost forever - there's nothing like "human water", it's just water so most of what we are is no different because it's replaced] - the copying, to me is different than the word "replace" might suggest - otherwise losing an arm or a leg wouldn't be so bad [or mebbe that conductor with the 7 second memory would be ok by now, because I believe the part of the brain he damaged that prevents new memories, does create new cells?]

I guess ultimately we're all sunlight, like trees.

[Torp]

I guess ultimately we're all sunlight, like trees.

That's not far off.  In actuality, we're all energy.  As is everything else.  However, that may only describe our physical aspect.  To Bob's line of questioning, is our identity, our soul, our essence something else?  Can it be something other than energy?  Did it exist before?  Will it exist after?  Or is it irrevocably attached to the energy that makes up our physical body, i.e. simply a part and extension of it?  I wonder.

[leahcim]

However, that may only describe our physical aspect..... I wonder.

I don't TBH. I think we are physical and if there's something you want to define then it has a physical aspect to it [albeit the physical aspect might not be the most constructive way to look at it, unless you're specifically studying it e.g if thinking / writing about abstract algebra causes a load of neurons in my mind to do this and that, obeying the same physics as everything else, we probably still think of the thoughts, dreams and ideas as abstract concepts and things rather than as the thing they are physically made of]

Why does it not need to be physical? Physics is strange / magical enough without needing to invent magic and, at least to me, the mystery is no less nor is the wonder subdued by something being physics.

On the contrary, it's probably a lot easier to invent something and thus invent how it works [or claim that it's ineffable by its very nature] than it is to understand the physics behind it.

[Apart from anything else, it's self-negating in a way, if there is something that exists that isn't currently covered by physics, it'll be physics when it's discovered]

[pianistimo]

what if it is spirit and physics don't apply to it?  this energy could be the touch of that finger of God at the beginning of creation...giving life to material things.  we cannot, as the best scientists in the world realize, give life to anything.

[Torp]

Physics is strange / magical enough without needing to invent magic and, at least to me, the mystery is no less nor is the wonder subdued by something being physics.

I couldn't agree with you more.  It is still interesting to ponder whether there is something beyond just our physical existence.  When we get down to the neuron level and are talking about vibrational energy, is that it?  Is there something beyond that that makes us who we are?  Or is it simply a matter of nueral pathways being affected by our environment over the period of our lives that determines who we are?

we cannot, as the best scientists in the world realize, give life to anything.

If it weren't for science a great number of people would die sooner than they need to.  Organ transplants, drugs, life-saving operations, etc. have all been made possible through the study and application of science.  People who have been dead have been revived and given life.

[leahcim]

what if it is spirit and physics don't apply to it?

You may as well say "What if it's googabagga yacca diddly boom bang?" - sure, fantasise away - the actual explanation will require more than handwaving and what ifs. My point is just that there's no more mystery by suggesting something is not physical - as you point out, there are things we can't do and don't understand.

this energy could be the touch of that finger of God at the beginning of creation...giving life to material things.

What energy? Again, couldn't the fling flang have boogied on the friggerland? Or perhaps it's the bash of the hammer of reggie at the dawn of time flinging the space gromits out? This Christian science sure puts the fun in fundamental.

we cannot, as the best scientists in the world realize, give life to anything.

As I said above, there are plenty of things we can't do. That doesn't show they aren't physical.

[Torp]

Again, couldn't the fling flang have boogied on the friggerland?

Have you been reading my dream journal?

That's classic!!

[pianistimo]

explain away - but there's some things that will always be a mystery - so don't fret.  you'll never understand until you experience something unusual.  beyond your control.  you don't have as much control as you think.  no one does.  therefore, why spend so much time trying to understand the physical universe, when the spiritual is what keeps countries from war.  technology has merely facilitated people living longer lives and making weapons of war.  what purpose is a long life as compared to a short life of someone who may be more selfless and spiritually minded.  kindness goes farther than knowledge.  like a clanging cymbal are words that have no meaning.

[leahcim]

I couldn't agree with you more.  It is still interesting to ponder whether there is something beyond just our physical existence.

Yes, ok, but I'd still say whatever it is can't separate us from anything else that's "alive" and then I think there's less mystery from the pov of Bob's points, and the points you make about identity, and our brains etc.

[pianistimo]

i believe, and you may laugh, that we can do nothing (good) by ourselves.  That's where the spirit of God comes in.  we are all 'evil' and think whatever thoughts we desire that fulfill our own purposes.  but, when we encounter good - it makes us wonder about the motivation first.  then, once we get past that - we say - what makes this person care about other people so much.  is it that person - or the spirit of God in that person.  changing them from who they were born as *under sin  to freedom in Christ.  just as we are born physically, we can be born again spiritually.  this freedom allows us a little better peek into the mystery of the universe, because God himself starts revealing himself (little by little).  we see that He has a plan in mind (and not just a psychologist God) to give us a future with an inheritance far beyond what we can imagine.  all we have to do is have faith that all things get their life from Him.  The opposite is believing in death!  that all things lead to death.  but, even that view - must acknowledge at one point someone gave life to everything. 

people can have lives extended (according to the mercies of God and not the heart surgery - as many patients die several months to years later anyway) - but the heart itself wouldn't beat if God did not give it the unexplainable energy to beat for a certain number of years (??) how is it our lifespan is usually 70 years and not 200 or 600 or whatever.  he makes it beat for a certain time - at regular intervals - to adapt to stress and calm - to do so much that we don't notice.

[leahcim]

explain away - but there's some things that will always be a mystery - so don't fret.  you'll never understand until you experience something unusual.  beyond your control.  you don't have as much control as you think. no one does.

I think you read "it's physics or it's physical" as "it's not mysterious at all, we understand it totally and it's completely under our control" which isn't what I said at all - in fact I said the exact opposite, nor is that what it means.

OTOH, I didn't give the explanations about how life is created by God's fingers, If you want mystery you need to stop inventing the answers

therefore, why spend so much time trying to understand the physical universe, when the spiritual is what keeps countries from war. 

You tell me - why do you spend so much time trying to explain it?

But please be honest - there have been plenty of wars and terrorism based on folks religion and spirituality, plenty here centuries ago right up to the present day. But not to be disengenious - these wars, like all wars are caused by people. There are no gods or devils creating wars or disasters or doing good things - just people doing them or natural things like earthquakes, hurricanes etc.

There are plenty of places you can visit wearing a big "I'm a Christian / Catholic / Protestant" sign if you want to test the theory though.

[leahcim]

i believe, and you may laugh, that we can do nothing (good) by ourselves.

Nah I don't laugh - TBH I find the concept offensive - especially as it diminishes acts, big and small, that people, whether they are religious or not [and let's remember that, to you, most of the world's population aren't religious] have done which are good. Worse, it seems an attempt for you to claim your religion can take by proxy good acts that it had nothing to do with as its own - coming just after a post that seeming ignored the horrendous acts that same religion has actually done.

I think it's probably best to leave it there.

[Torp]

Nah I don't laugh - TBH I find the concept offensive - especially as it diminishes acts, big and small, that people, whether they are religious or not [and let's remember that, to you, most of the world's population aren't religious] have done which are good.

I think it's probably best to leave it there.

Once again, I couldn't agree more.  Though I will be interested to see if it really gets left there.

[pianistimo]

Christ died so that all might be saved by grace.  for those who are near and those who are far.  why should we be so vain as to say we are good?  we know in our minds we want for ourselves.  have you ever had a baby?  they look so innocent, but by three months it is all about self.  you have to start right there teaching them discipline.  people think being a good parent is all about a happy child.  i don't thinks so.  just as God disciplines those He loves, we as parents (if we do a favor to society) start making them realize we are part of a family.  not gaping individuals - grabbing everything for self.  christians are not exempt from greed and corruption (i never said that!).  but, if you think mankind is good - why are we at the brink of extinction?  and, as you said, it's not the 'gods' fault.  well, maybe it is the demons that bring about ideas as how to exterminate people the best.  but, God's idea has always been life, peace, joy, happiness - much different goals that our societies today (whether christian, muslim (btw - i think there are more muslims), buddist, whatever. ) 

it's all about control today.  who controls what.  who is overseeing, big-brothering, watching, monitoring, surveilling - but, i can't wait to see - as God is starting to intervene - the look on people's faces when they can't control things.  certain things will always be beyond our control.  that's where faith comes in.  faith to see things to a better day.  otherwise it will be complete extinction (like the ice-ages).  people think the bible is all stories - but certain ones might come to mind such as elijah and the prophet of baal (or worshipping self - money - sensuality, etc).  elijah went beyond that story to another time as well - that was a period of famine.  we may experience famine as well - but also a famine for the hearing of God's word because God says 'will he find faith when he returns?'  for any christians who are reading this- i would say - know as many facts as possible - but don't rely on your facts.  rely on God!

[leahcim]

You seem very mixed up. WIth respect, perhaps time to find a church that shares your faith and revise?

God is all about "life peace joy and happiness", but we need to punish 3 month old children [spare us the details] because the people, and seemingly God too from your list, that think good parents have happy children aren't right

Do you really believe children should be miserable and babies punished - even though they can't be good even if they wanted to be, that's up to God after all if you recall what you said 2 posts ago. 50% of me thinks you're just saying stuff to get a rise or have a laugh?

I didn't say mankind was good or talk in such grand sweeping terms. Neither are the people I [and others] think have done something good being vain.

Does God support the spiteful, knicker-wetting anticipiation for gratification that you hope to get from watching the look on people's faces? Given the fact that you'd probably attribute any random act of nature or mankind to this God, I wonder what will have happened to the folk whose faces you'll be looking at with glee?

[pianistimo]

i never punished my children in the typical 'beat it out of them.' i just made them wait a little longer for things and tried to teach discipline and self control by making them adhere to my schedule for them and not their unscheduled wants at various times of the day.

i'm by no means a perfect parent, but with my first born son, i wanted him to be happy.  he is probably my guinea pig child because he is quite spoiled today.  i pretty much cleaned up everything after him - and although is motivated to do some things much better than i - he never really learned to clean up after himself.

with my daughter, i learned to schedule time for myself.  i wasn't so harried all the time.  i took time for myself to brush teeth, comb hair (and things i felt i didn't have time to when my son was born). and, when she was a toddler, i'd have her pick up toys and put them in the corner of her crib.  her schedule was still busy, and i was still enjoying time with her, but it was quality time and not just exhausted tired time.  basically, the schedule becomes better at night for babies (you end up getting your rest!   which makes you a more patient and loving mom during the day.

i never believed in spanking.  mostly, being kind and being an example.  occasionally every parent has an outburst of frustration and anger, but you have to learn to control it otherwise they  just learn violence.  i think scaring kids is not really the key.  it is showing them that he have less privledges within the family when they go against the rules.  when they are 18 they can do pretty much as they please - but hopefully will have learned to put others feelings as high as their own.

sometimes restraining kids from having full blown temper tantrums and talking to them is a good idea.  otherwise, you could see a house destroyed.  even with my daughter, she'll get angry and sass me.  i try to be patient (not always as patient as i should be) and tell her that it's more effective to look someone in the eye, to explain your feelings, and not run away and seek revenge on the person by avoiding them or being disrespectful.  i try to hear what she says and respect her person and space more - now that she's getting older (almost 11). 

having fun together is a really hard thing nowdays because of time pressures...but i think kids like to relax after the work of the week (homework, housework *dreams about kids doing some, activities).  i think my kids would respond better to my 'discipline' (rules) if they saw me engaged with them more.  friday nights seem to be a good time to talk without interruption.  card games, etc.  on school nights it's really hard to get everything done and just make it to bed at a decent hour.

[pianistimo]

ps about the last statement of yours, you're probably right.  but noone stands up for a pacisfist point of view now, do they?  might is right.   well, when might comes by God, might will be used very pointedly at people who have abused that right on others.

[chopiabin]

I think "you" is, in essence a collection of memories and experiences that affect the psyche and the unconscious mind.