Does it harm you to "miss out on childhood"?
Personally I think the basic answer is that this child genius would be harmed by being forced to have a "normal childhood" if he does not want it. Just as much as a child would be harmed by being forced to forego a childhood he wants. I think one of the most holy and absolute principles in life is that every person must make every decision in his own life.
26 comments:
PS.
I have an IQ higher than most people I've yet to meet.
Laurie.
It didn't work out for William James Sidis.
You're right. Making your own choices is very much the Holy Grail. Regardless of your age. Other people can help you in your choices, offer advice, but in the end, the choice should always be yours.
I have an IQ higher than most people I've yet to meet.
Laurie.
Just the fact you would say that shows how meaningless an I.Q. score is, and how inadequate.
I think one of the most holy and absolute principles in life is that every person must make every decision in his own life.
Sorry Eolake but I disagree. Every decision is based upon a particular situation. Yes, often we must "make our own decisions" but at times it's better to let another make it for us. (Especially under extreme stress and emotional disarray.) Had Bush been stopped by his decision of raping and stealing Iraq's oil and land there would have been no blood shed at least I believe.
Other matters are also considered as well. Don't get me wrong, I believe most decisions should be made by the individual but some (early age considered as well) are often left to the elders.
And should be.
There's an old bumper sticker that reads, "God is my co-pilot" I'd scratch that and put God IS MY PILOT for he is perfect in his ways and I am not. But even in that I've made a decision :)
PS.........IQ's are only fumbling numbers to boast the egos in many areas.
there would have been no blood shed at least I believe.
Except of course that done by Saddam himself. Don't take that for support of Bush, however; he's a war criminal and should end his days the way Saddam did.
Actually, the IQ was originally a medical tool designed for detecting intellectual development problems in children, thus ensuring an optimally early specific management of their education. No point in letting a child flunk classes repeatedly if he can't help it and is only suffering of social pressure.
Intelligence is certainly a very complex thing that can't be summed up to a simple number.
As for your Bush example, Terry, every single voter who has supported (and re-elected!) him shares responsibility, and every person who was in a position to stop that war or support it also made their own decisions. Bush alone would be nothing, had he not an army to command and a country providing him with that army. (Daddy's boy never even learnt to fight himself! Boo! Chicken-hawk!)
The price of liberty is that mistakes will be made.
Speaking of mistakes, r.a.f., you'll never score with inadequate lines like that, honey.
every single voter who has supported (and re-elected!) him shares responsibility, and every person who was in a position to stop that war or support it also made their own decisions. Bush alone would be nothing,
Oh, I don't know, Pascal, remember what happened after World War II. They didn't put every single German soldier on trial, they only tried the big dogs.
Speaking of mistakes, r.a.f., you'll never score with inadequate lines like that, honey.
I don't think that's the Real McRAF, Pascal. As much as it lacks subtlety, it's still not as heavyhanded as the genuine article.
and every person who was in a position to stop that war or support it also made their own decisions. Bush alone would be nothing, had he not an army to command and a country providing him with that army. (Daddy's boy never even learnt to fight himself! Boo! Chicken-hawk!)
Pascal my dear friend, my grown children and myself fought agaisn't the re-selection of Bush. We stood united on the courthouse square in our town and supported Senator Kerry. We fought long and hard! We made telephone calls from Senator Kerry's headquarters, left pamplets, did everything we could from stopping Bush in our county, but sadly it's a conservative county we dwell in. But I'm still proud of my children for sticking with me agaisn't this blood sucking oil mongrel. We tried my friend. We tried so hard. Forgive those who were deceived by Dubya. My hands aren't soaked with the blood of the innocent.
Joe Dick said...
"I don't think that's the Real McRAF, Pascal."
Very perceptive. You're quite right. They spell differently, if you've noticed the subtle difference. ;-)
Not to mention the difference in subtlety! :-D
WW2 German soldiers can hardly be compared to free voters. You couldn't decently put them on trial for just following orders and fighting the war! If they didn't commit war crimes, that's that.
After WW1, the whole of Germany and its people were "punished" by the winners. This eventually led to the rise of Hitler and WW2. After WW2, the Western countries realized you only eliminate an enemy by turning it into a friend. (To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln.) So no more collective sanctions were taken.
Terry defended...
"my grown children and myself fought agaisn't the re-selection of Bush."
Then I don't think you guys are very guilty, eh? :-)
Proud you can be, YOU did your part for the dignity of your country and people.
"Re-selection"... now that's refined irony. Good one.
"Forgive those who were deceived by Dubya."
Responsibility is different from guilt, I only mean it as freedom of choice.
If forgiveness means renouncing anger and dreams of punishment, then I've forgiven them long ago. Doesn't mean they were smart. I pray they end up finding wisdom.
And then, maybe they can work on forgiving themselves, and making their peace with the Universe. Which can only happen by learning and understanding.
I think it is one of the core teachings of Jesus: he who doesn't condemn others, automatically frees himself from the same. "Judge not" is a double-edged "anti-weapon", if you'll pass me the expression. Non-judgementalism, forgiveness, and the inner peace it brings you are their own supreme rewards.
I'm way too busy improving myself to waste my life grading others to get even. Their fate, their soul, their choices. We can only offer guidance and shared wisdom to those adults willing to accept it.
Sure, I'll see that this or that is dumb, unwise, selfish, etc. But it doesn't make me want to emulate the Punisher. All I genuinely yearn for, is for tragic mistakes and errors to end. Prevent the innocents from being harmed, and let God handle the guilty if they don't repent and change their ways. Including that sorry bunch tarnishing the White House. I only feel they need to be stopped, I need not get even with them. Not MY holy vocation.
Peace, y'all.
WW2 German soldiers can hardly be compared to free voters. You couldn't decently put them on trial for just following orders and fighting the war! If they didn't commit war crimes, that's that.
My point was only that the logistics of putting that many people on trial would be more than could be handled - in 1945 or now.
After WW1, the whole of Germany and its people were "punished" by the winners. This eventually led to the rise of Hitler and WW2. After WW2, the Western countries realized you only eliminate an enemy by turning it into a friend. (To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln.) So no more collective sanctions were taken.
What they should have done is listened to Arthur Currie. "Currie did not support the Armistice agreement. He believed that unless the Allied forces pushed onward and completely destroyed the German army, then they would have to come back and fight again in 25 years."
I think it is one of the core teachings of Jesus: he who doesn't condemn others, automatically frees himself from the same.
I prefer one of Jesus' lesser known sayings: "Let he who is without sin kick the first ass." Okay, that's from Family Guy.
I remind you that Jesus is supposed to be saving all his judging up till the end, when he unleashes the shitstorm of judgement, the judgement to end all judgements.
Pascal said:
WW2 German soldiers can hardly be compared to free voters. You couldn't decently put them on trial for just following orders and fighting the war! If they didn't commit war crimes, that's that.
They had a choice. They didn't have to follow orders. That excuse was not accepted at the time and shouldn't be now.
I agree that it's a question of logistics. How do you put an entire people on trial? The Allies certainly would have if it had been possible.
They wanted to do more trials of lower ranking Germans but it didn't work out.
Don't be leaching off me, you parasite! Come up with your own ideas you shit!
I used to think I would have wanted less freedom as a child. I feel rather "un-groomed" for the success that I wanted. Britney Spears' mother, now THERE'S someone who involved herself properly in a child's upbringing. Made sure the talent was nurtured rather than just turning it over to some half-baked recent-grad education majors at a public school. Boy, THAT made sure Britney turned out all right ...
Leave Britney alooooone!! Waaaaaaaaahh!
"the logistics of putting that many people on trial would be more than could be handled - in 1945 or now."
Which poses a far more serious dilemma in Rwanda, where a vast proportion of the whole population committed slaughters and a collective genocide.
Say what you will about the intellectual level of Africans today, but in Rwanda they realized -by themselves- that the situation required a wiser approach. Executing all those who committed murders would be a second genocide! So they aptly used an old local tradition, which you could define as "repentance and forgiveness". Only the master planners of the thing will (maybe) be tried.
Wisdom, or resignation? I don't know. A country where such atrocious things would happen EVERYWHERE AT ONCE, I'd hardly call "civilized". But maybe, just maybe, all's not hopeless yet for Africa, the martyr continent. It DID give birth to an awesome spirit like Nelson Mandela, to name but one.
"What they should have done is listened to Arthur Currie."
From seeing TODAY's Germany (and Japan), I'm happy Currie's advice was not carried out. Hate spawns hate. I'm not saying we should be spineless lambs, but justice and equity are better than "crushing". Instead of raw, burning dreams of revenge, you often harvest respect.
Or, what, should "liberated" Iraq be crushed too, so that it would really be "Mission accomplished"? They already tried that and failed in Vietnam.
No offense, Joe, but maybe a Diplomat's career is not what would suit you best. I picture you better in the military. :-)
Battles are won on the battlefield. Wars are won by avoiding them.
"I remind you that Jesus is supposed to be saving all his judging up till the end"
The automatic consequence (call it the Theorem of Pascal ;-) is that he who would be in a greater hurry than Jesus (or God) Himself had better come up with some hell of a good excuse for double-crossing the Boss!
Anonymous said...
"[WW2 German soldiers] had a choice. They didn't have to follow orders."
They could just tell the SS officers to shoot them on the spot as "traitors"? Most of that stuff in the historical movies wasn't made up, you know.
Refusing to follow orders is often the best choice, but it's ALWAYS the hardest and most dangerous. The typical "straight and narrow", and a stiff climb. Especially in a fascist regime that "cleansed" its own people's old and handicapped to "purify the race".
Even as we speak, in the 21st century, today, this minute, there are countries where children are being coaxed into becoming killing soldiers. It's not always as simple as "just saying no".
I won't judge situations which I have not lived. I don't grant myself that "privilege". I'll consider that war crimes are unforgivable (meaning, they should all be prosecuted), but simple war-making I have no right to condemn on the level of a drafted national soldier.
Having said that, I pray that I never, ever, have to choose between killing and letting myself be killed. Whatever the issue, it's a no-win situation.
I also pray I never have to make the same choices as Britney, or Lindsay Lohan, or Elvis. "Please, everybody, all around the world, DO NOT worship my (admittedly magnificent) glorious self!" I'm not sure I can handle the pressure, however deserved.
;-)
I don't get the Rwanda thing. Everybody must have known what was happening. So: 1: why did "everybody" *do* it? and 2: why was it not a civil war rather than slaughter? Did they not defend themselves? It happened over a span of time, not in five minutes.
And by the way, I think that Total Forgiveness would work far better than "justice", which is really Revenge.
Big E, the answers to those questions can be found in the book "Shake Hands with the Devil" by Romeo Dallaire, the general in charge of the UN forces there. The UN knew what was going on there but did nothing. Dallaire did what he could and saved some people, but still over 800,000 Tutsis were killed.
From seeing TODAY's Germany (and Japan), I'm happy Currie's advice was not carried out.
That's the benefit of hindsight I guess. I don't know that he ever actually gave that advice to anyone at the time, but it was clear that he was pushing on trying to accomplish that goal before the armistice. Remember that at the time he could not possibly have known what kind of peace treaty would have been made. Also, the treaty they made was done so without the Germans being fully defeated, and had that been accomplished the Allies might have made better terms. We'll never know.
They could just tell the SS officers to shoot them on the spot as "traitors"? Most of that stuff in the historical movies wasn't made up, you know.
True enough. The same thing did happen on the other side at least in WWI; any who refused to go over the top were shot.
Some of the Germans did desert toward the end, including the current Pope.
The inability to simply refuse to fight was probably part of the reason most German soldiers wouldn't have been prosecuted anyway, even if it had been possible.
Especially in a fascist regime that "cleansed" its own people's old and handicapped to "purify the race".
Of course, this was hardly a new thing. The Romans used to routinely execute the handicapped, throwing them off the Tarpeian Rock. They believed them to be cursed by the gods. You can maybe excuse a primitive people for such actions, but by the 20th century we should have learned something. No wonder eugenics declined in popularity after the war.
Having said that, I pray that I never, ever, have to choose between killing and letting myself be killed. Whatever the issue, it's a no-win situation.
I too hope to avoid that, and if it came to it I don't know what I'd do. Likely self-preservation would allow me to kill.
I also pray I never have to make the same choices as Britney, or Lindsay Lohan, or Elvis.
I wouldn't mind having the money where I could shoot my TV with impunity if I didn't like a show. I wouldn't even have to get up off my ass, I'd just tell my lazy butler to bring in another one and hook it up.
"Also, the treaty they made was done so without the Germans being fully defeated, and had that been accomplished the Allies might have made better terms. We'll never know."
At that time, the new world peril, namely Stalin, was already becoming more than obvious. Ending the war was a priority, to avoid as much as possible the spread of the looming Iron Curtain. :-(
My grandmother was russian in origin. She met my grandfather when they were both prisoners in Germany, and they got married.
After the end of the war, the Soviet Union demanded that all its citizens be brought back, by force if necessary. My grandma avoided this fate by hiding from the FRENCH police, but to this day she won't hear anything about the KGB being ancient history. She's never, ever going back.
Such vivid fear after 62 years is telling enough, I believe.
Even in 1944, few people would have trusted Stalin enough to lend him their attention without a signed receipt. :-P
"The same thing did happen on the other side at least in WWI"
And I really, really, really hope those countries have drawn a lesson from those supremely shameful episodes. Today, mercifully, we have the expression "duty of disobedience".
Very slowly, our species is making overall painstaking progress.
"I wouldn't mind having the money where I could shoot my TV with impunity if I didn't like a show. I wouldn't even have to get up off my ass, I'd just tell my lazy butler to bring in another one and hook it up."
Ah, the dream life of an obese sloth... :-)
I wouldn't mind having that kind of money myself either, let's be honest (who in their right mind WOULD mind?). But I like to believe I'd do something more useful with it than letting it destroy all my enjoyment of life and turn me into a depressive drug addict.
How can you say that? That's my highest goal.
My highest goal in life is to be a lardo on workman's comp. "I wash myself with a rag on a stick!"
At that time, the new world peril, namely Stalin, was already becoming more than obvious. Ending the war was a priority, to avoid as much as possible the spread of the looming Iron Curtain. :-(
I'm not sure that Russian communism was much of a threat to the world at large in 1918.
Post a Comment