Today I'll mainly be moaning about ...

[VFR]

2 hours ago, Malc1 said:

My moan today is just reading that the West Indies ? are seeking some ( well some dopey nutcase is ) £/$ 33 trillion in Reparations for ??? the Royal Family being slavers maybe or having too much sugar in their tea .  I don't know ....  but why don't they take it out on the African / Arabian Slavers that sold 'em to the other Slavers that sent them on their hols to the Caribbean !

Who's got a spare 33 Trln knocking about anyway I wonder ......  how much is a trillion by the way ..........  enough to buy some ice creams maybe 🤩

Did anyone else read that headline ?

Malc

 

As they now know that Charles the turd (opps that is my Irish accent, I mean the third) is in place and dopey enough to agree to anything woke, why not ?

[Ala Larj]

My moan is that the West Indies never qualified for the odi World Cup.  A sad indictment of the state of cricket these days!

[Malc1]

9 hours ago, VFR said:

As they now know that Charles the turd (opps that is my Irish accent, I mean the third) is in place and dopey enough to agree to anything woke, why not ?

So yes, maybe Reparations for our dear King Charles 111 allowing the West Indies to fall behind in the global cricket stakes when we have the amazing Rishi an ardent cricket fan who’s loyalties, if anywhere, would be supporting not just British cricket but that of India too

I'm surprised Cricket wasn’t higher up the agenda at the G20  

Malc 

[Boomer54]

Today I'll be moaning about the use of "no time wasters" in advertisements. As a turn off to any interest it is my undoubted number 1 phrase. The reason is it tells me all I need to know about the level of arrogance and presumption that the seller has with the rest of the world. For my part I do not want those people to touch upon my life and as such I would never dream of responding to an advertisement using that terminology.

[Mossypossy]

Can I add a competing phrase?

"The British People"

No, it's not the British People. It is some, perhaps even a minority. I don't recall being asked.

I know every internet rant ends up mentioning Hitler.....but.

[Boomer54]

7 hours ago, Mossypossy said:

Can I add a competing phrase?

"The British People"

No, it's not the British People. It is some, perhaps even a minority. I don't recall being asked.

I know every internet rant ends up mentioning Hitler.....but.

I shall test out this assertion "Hitler".

The British people can no longer buy Thorntons Smothered Chocolate Toffee and it was Hitler wot dun it !

Newberry Fruits with a liquid centre are no longer available for the British people to buy and it was Hitler wot dun it !

BY Jove I think your assertion stands up to examination. 😀

[LenT]

2 hours ago, Boomer54 said:

Newberry Fruits with a liquid centre are no longer available for the British people to buy and it was Hitler wot dun it !

There may indeed be some kind of connection.  It seems that the original Meltis New Berry Fruits - made in Bedfordshire from 1908 -  with their unique LIQUID centres,  have long ceased production and been replaced by New Berry Fruit Jewels!

These are an ersatz confection of SOFT centres made in Germany!

Mind you, it may also be possible to blame Brexit.

[dutchie01]

Who was Hitler??   Ask todays youth and it seems to me the vast majority have no clue too long ago like Napoleon. Maybe someone on TikTok?

[GMB]

Napoleon died 1821, Hitler 1945. To many kids both those dates are simply a long long time ago before their parents or grand parents were born. It's just the same ancient history.

Anyway, they don't teach kids proper stuff in school anymore, they just learn about social stuff and what gender a thing might be or not be or was or will be or thinks it is or just plain doesn't know.

[Boomer54]

1 hour ago, LenT said:

There may indeed be some kind of connection.  It seems that the original Meltis New Berry Fruits - made in Bedfordshire from 1908 -  with their unique LIQUID centres,  have long ceased production and been replaced by New Berry Fruit Jewels!

These are an ersatz confection of SOFT centres made in Germany!

Mind you, it may also be possible to blame Brexit.

I might declare war on this one.

[Malc1]

1 hour ago, GMB said:

Hitler 1945

did he really ......... .  I thought he might have sloped off to Bariloche to join his Nasty Nazi compatriots and died at a good old age ( maybe ) 

Malc

[Boomer54]

2 minutes ago, Malc1 said:

did he really ......... .  I thought he might have sloped off to Bariloche to join his Nasty Nazi compatriots and died at a good old age ( maybe ) 

Malc

Bet he had a good supply of Newberry Fruits. ..barsteward.

[First_Lexus]

1 hour ago, GMB said:

Napoleon died 1821, Hitler 1945. To many kids both those dates are simply a long long time ago before their parents or grand parents were born. It's just the same ancient history.

Anyway, they don't teach kids proper stuff in school anymore, they just learn about social stuff and what gender a thing might be or not be or was or will be or thinks it is or just plain doesn't know.

I’ve moaned about the state of education in this country previously, and you’ve hit one particular nail fairly and squarely on the head there!

Speaking with my extended family, and interacting with youngsters through volunteering at my former University, I see one aspect missing these days - context.

There seems to be a move towards a single ‘correct’ or ‘valid’ message, from which nobody should deviate. Teaching Elizabeth I simply with lots of references to the evils of colonisation and empire, or Henry VIII as a misogynist tyrant, the Great War trivialised as ‘lions LED by donkeys’ and ‘unnecessary slaughter’ - I could go on. Nowhere does there seem to be any appreciation of the context of the times, the simple truth that thought and belief was alien to how we think now.

That’s not to say that we shouldn’t teach the evils of the past, far from it. But, and it’s a big but, we need to give our children the appreciation that things have changed and will continue to change, and that reflecting our values onto history is at best problematic and at worst just lazy and ineffective teaching. 

I appreciate I’m going back some years, but our school made us - MADE US - debate and argue points of view with which we didn’t agree, simply so we could try and appreciate other viewpoints, and that there WERE other views than those we considered to be the consensus of the time.

[Malc1]

9 minutes ago, First_Lexus said:

I’ve moaned about the state of education in this country previously, and you’ve hit one particular nail fairly and squarely on the head there!

Speaking with my extended family, and interacting with youngsters through volunteering at my former University, I see one aspect missing these days - context.

There seems to be a move towards a single ‘correct’ or ‘valid’ message, from which nobody should deviate. Teaching Elizabeth I simply with lots of references to the evils of colonisation and empire, or Henry VIII as a misogynist tyrant, the Great War trivialised as ‘lions led by donkeys’ and ‘unnecessary slaughter’ - I could go on. Nowhere does there seem to be any appreciation of the context of the times, the simple truth that thought and belief was alien to how we think now.

That’s not to say that we shouldn’t teach the evils of the past, far from it. But, and it’s a big but, we need to give our children the appreciation that things have changed and will continue to change, and that reflecting our values onto history is at best problematic and at worst just lazy and ineffective teaching. 

I appreciate I’m going back some years, but our school made us - MADE US - debate and argue points of view with which we didn’t agree, simply so we could try and appreciate other viewpoints, and that there WERE other views than those we considered to be the consensus of the time.

and at my school we had a formal Debating Society too .  not sure at age teens we were usefully discussing anything, nay debating anything of much consequence I guess 😉

But it brought us up to consider the world in context I guess . oh, and the Headmaster wielded the cane occasionally too .  didn't do us any harm I'm sure ............ 

Malc

[Boomer54]

28 minutes ago, Malc1 said:

and at my school we had a formal Debating Society too .  not sure at age teens we were usefully discussing anything, nay debating anything of much consequence I guess 😉

But it brought us up to consider the world in context I guess . oh, and the Headmaster wielded the cane occasionally too .  didn't do us any harm I'm sure ............ 

Malc

We debated as well. Debated if we could afford a pint of lager after we had just bought 20 No.6 at the shop!

Real life Math problems every 13 year old needs to resolve.

[Bluemarlin]

4 hours ago, First_Lexus said:

I’ve moaned about the state of education in this country previously, and you’ve hit one particular nail fairly and squarely on the head there!

Speaking with my extended family, and interacting with youngsters through volunteering at my former University, I see one aspect missing these days - context.

There seems to be a move towards a single ‘correct’ or ‘valid’ message, from which nobody should deviate. Teaching Elizabeth I simply with lots of references to the evils of colonisation and empire, or Henry VIII as a misogynist tyrant, the Great War trivialised as ‘lions led by donkeys’ and ‘unnecessary slaughter’ - I could go on. Nowhere does there seem to be any appreciation of the context of the times, the simple truth that thought and belief was alien to how we think now.

 

This is so true, and one of my biggest gripes.

I think, in part at least, this is down to the nature of social media, and the tendency to condense everything into an "either, or" position. This kind of thing was called black and white thinking, which is at best considered an unhealthy coping mechanism, or at worst the symptoms of a personality disorder. It comes from people being unwilling to accept harsh truths, seeing them simply as an opinion they don't like, rather than a matter of fact. As such, they become more and more entrenched in their comfort zone and delusional bubble.

This also leads towards another trend, which I'm equally uncomfortable with, and that is that people nowadays seem unable to differentiate betweem someone stating a reality, and someone holding an opinion. For example, if I say women tend more towards emotional thinking than men, or that men tend towards being more aggressive than women, I'm stating well established facts. However, in debate today, people will take that as an opinion or preference, and label you sexist. And yet, without an understading and acceptance of those realities, there's no way of addressing any social issues they might cause.

It makes debate, or at least any attempt to reach solutions to complex issues almost impossible, as to do so means first understanding the realities of a situation, and the nuances and even contradictions that occur in the real world, before one can even consider how to solve things. Solutions often require compromise, which fundamentally requires understanding and validating the other person's point of view, even if you don't agree with it. Instead though, people  throw out their demands, like entitled toddlers, without care or comprehension of the wider implications.

[Boomer54]

40 minutes ago, Bluemarlin said:

This is so true, and one of my biggest gripes.

I think, in part at least, this is down to the nature of social media, and the tendency to condense everything into an "either, or" position. This kind of thing was called black and white thinking, which is at best considered an unhealthy coping mechanism, or at worst the symptoms of a personality disorder. It comes from people being unwilling to accept harsh truths, seeing them simply as an opinion they don't like, rather than a matter of fact. As such, they become more and more entrenched in their comfort zone and delusional bubble.

This also leads towards another trend, which I'm equally uncomfortable with, and that is that people nowadays seem unable to differentiate betweem someone stating a reality, and someone holding an opinion. For example, if I say women tend more towards emotional thinking than men, or that men tend towards being more aggressive than women, I'm stating well established facts. However, in debate today, people will take that as an opinion or preference, and label you sexist. And yet, without an understading and acceptance of those realities, there's no way of addressing any social issues they might cause.

It makes debate, or at least any attempt to reach solutions to complex issues almost impossible, as to do so means first understanding the realities of a situation, and the nuances and even contradictions that occur in the real world, before one can even consider how to solve things. Solutions often require compromise, which fundamentally requires understanding and validating the other person's point of view, even if you don't agree with it. Instead though, people  throw out their demands, like entitled toddlers, without care or comprehension of the wider implications.

I think you will find 'black and white thinking' a lot more complicated than that. There might on occasions be what you allude to as denial. Sometimes it may be a lack of (or stunted)cognitive development capable of appreciating the complexities of the argument in question. Oh dear ,got to go ,just as we were about to get into some really interesting issues.

[Bluemarlin]

46 minutes ago, Boomer54 said:

I think you will find 'black and white thinking' a lot more complicated than that. There might on occasions be what you allude to as denial. Sometimes it may be a lack of (or stunted)cognitive development capable of appreciating the complexities of the argument in question. Oh dear ,got to go ,just as we were about to get into some really interesting issues.

It's very interesting Stephen, and to some extent we all use black and white thinking in certain circumstances.

I was more referring to it in a strict sense, and the psychological interpretation and implications of it. rather than a casual understanding of it. And that a widespread,  general and overly applied usage of it, seems to be becoming more common, and unhealthy for society.

Here's a medical  article on what I'm referring to:

https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/black-and-white-thinking

[Boomer54]

22 minutes ago, Bluemarlin said:

It's very interesting Stephen, and to some extent we all use black and white thinking in certain circumstances.

I was more referring to it in a strict sense, and the psychological interpretation and implications of it. rather than a casual understanding of it. And that a widespread,  general and overly applied usage of it, seems to be becoming more common, and unhealthy for society.

Here's a medical  article on what I'm referring to:

https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/black-and-white-thinking

Decent article in that it can really only go so far to explain something that is hard to explain in a 200 page technical journal.

The reality is there are myriad protective mechanisms in play overlayered with nurture derived experiences that are driving the behaviour of rigid thinking. CBT (cognitive behavioural therapy) employs tools like thought challenging in an attempt to modify that method of thinking about things. It's success rate hardly achieves a random coin toss. Doesn't mean it is not worth doing so much as supports my earlier statement that this is a very complex issue and it cannot be explained in a sentence, or a statement ascribing to 'harsh realities'. If it really was that simple we would be much more successful at dealing with it than we currently are.

[First_Lexus]

16 hours ago, Bluemarlin said:

Solutions often require compromise, which fundamentally requires understanding and validating the other person's point of view, even if you don't agree with it. Instead though, people  throw out their demands, like entitled toddlers, without care or comprehension of the wider implications.

This is how I feel too. Every debate, whether about politics or gender or anything else has to be binary, i.e. there has to be a ‘correct’ answer, and anybody not in tune with ‘the message’ is somehow evil just for holding a different opinion. Conflating opinion and fact has, as you say, become endemic. I’ve said before on these pages, many years ago a very senior Civil Servant gave me advice that has stuck with me; 

“Never present an opinion as a fact, as others will think you a fool.”

For the avoidance of doubt, and in order to maintain some balance, I should also say that those who trumpet ‘free speech’ as a way of promulgating hideous views also have no place in society - or at least don’t deserve a platform to spread hate. My issue is that I’m not sure where the dividing lines are now, or what the rules are (assuming there are rules!)

As a liberal, the thought of causing offence to somebody makes me uneasy, but also as a liberal I feel I have the right to my opinions.

In the US, student activists have thrown red paint over the Lincoln Memorial, and other memorials and statues to him, ostensibly because he once owned slaves and prosecuted war and land theft from the Native Americans. This is problematic. By all means teach the whole person, stress that not everything he did or believed was right (by our modern standards, there’s that context again) but please don’t seek to CANCEL him entirely, that’s madness.

Churchill is similar in a UK context. Yes, he held problematic views by our standards, and those should be understood and taught appropriately. However, the obsession with a message of ‘Churchill bad’ ignoring undeniable examples of ‘Churchill good’ is academically poor practice. That is where we’re headed though I’m sorry to say…

I said earlier that I don’t know what the rules are any more. The best example I can think of comes from early years (primary) education. The Roman Empire is still taught - generally - as a force for good and civilisation in a style I recognise from my own childhood in the 1970s. Roman slavery is taught as a bad thing - often using the “how would you have felt as a slave” perspective - but it very much takes a back seat in the learning. Compare and contrast with teaching about the British Empire at the same ages and older. Fascinating…

[Boomer54]

50 minutes ago, First_Lexus said:

This is how I feel too. Every debate, whether about politics or gender or anything else has to be binary, i.e. there has to be a ‘correct’ answer, and anybody not in tune with ‘the message’ is somehow evil just for holding a different opinion. Conflating opinion and fact has, as you say, become endemic. I’ve said before on these pages, many years ago a very senior Civil Servant gave me advice that has stuck with me; 

“Never present an opinion as a fact, as others will think you a fool.”

For the avoidance of doubt, and in order to maintain some balance, I should also say that those who trumpet ‘free speech’ as a way of promulgating hideous views also have no place in society - or at least don’t deserve a platform to spread hate. My issue is that I’m not sure where the dividing lines are now, or what the rules are (assuming there are rules!)

As a liberal, the thought of causing offence to somebody makes me uneasy, but also as a liberal I feel I have the right to my opinions.

In the US, student activists have thrown red paint over the Lincoln Memorial, and other memorials and statues to him, ostensibly because he once owned slaves and prosecuted war and land theft from the Native Americans. This is problematic. By all means teach the whole person, stress that not everything he did or believed was right (by our modern standards, there’s that context again) but please don’t seek to CANCEL him entirely, that’s madness.

Churchill is similar in a UK context. Yes, he held problematic views by our standards, and those should be understood and taught appropriately. However, the obsession with a message of ‘Churchill bad’ ignoring undeniable examples of ‘Churchill good’ is academically poor practice. That is where we’re headed though I’m sorry to say…

I said earlier that I don’t know what the rules are any more. The best example I can think of comes from early years (primary) education. The Roman Empire is still taught - generally - as a force for good and civilisation in a style I recognise from my own childhood in the 1970s. Roman slavery is taught as a bad thing - often using the “how would you have felt as a slave” perspective - but it very much takes a back seat in the learning. Compare and contrast with teaching about the British Empire at the same ages and older. Fascinating…

I am sorry to say I think we have lost the war on this issue. Most of us here are of an age and our views tend to reflect that. My contact with younger people tells me there is no way I can phrase my argument that would cause them to reflect and may be think differently. Rigid thinking leads to polarisation which generally means they have taken an extreme position on issues. Challenging that position is taken as a 'threat' to their identity itself and is to be resisted at all costs. I, we, are identified as dinosaurs, out of touch, out of date, at best to be tolerated, at worst to be chastised and villified. I have learned to say nothing, just smile and walk away. Cowards way out? may be. Or may be the world now belongs to them not me, and they can make it of it what they will as they will be living with the consequences long after I have left.

[Malc1]

Stephen that’s a great way forward ……. Leave ‘em to it for sure …… the youth ( what age might that be one wonders …. under age 40 maybe 😂 ) and others of today that we’re never going to be at par with 

I totally avoid Social Media BUT get involved thru my business BUT never directly coz I simply don’t want to understand its ramifications …… and I never get personally involved ….. but it seems to bring profitable sales somehow 

My sales people understand it, they’re all kids under 40 👍

My personal life needs to be simple and void of complexity ……. hence I’m an ancient Ls400 owner 😂

Leave ‘em to it  methinks …… pour another glass please, break out the merlot 

Malc

[First_Lexus]

“Youth is wasted on the young. They’re brainless, and don't know what they have; they squander every opportunity of being young, on being young.”

George Bernard-Shaw

Seemed somehow appropriate… 😆

[dutchie01]

Social media or TikTok generation. Short focus and base your opinion on another opinion that in most cases is shallow and uninformed. No time/interest or capability to dive deeper into the facts look at history and form an opinion of yourself. Easier to follow the herd. Clearly visible in the Israel/Palestine conflict and the entire Woke movement. Same for Anti Slavery and XR Rebellion type movements.

Full circle to education here as they dont read books dont get trained to look at subjects from different perspectives dont get taught the difference between facts and opinion. Even worse as you sometimes hear "a fact is just an opinion". 

Lots of things have changed since i was a student but i sometimes just dont understand todays ways of doing things. I remember we had 16 hours of language per week. Maths was repetition repetition repetition never ending until right. We were forced to read study and discuss a pile of books. I know its all very old school for todays youth but i am sure it was better. 

[Boomer54]

29 minutes ago, First_Lexus said:

“Youth is wasted on the young. They’re brainless, and don't know what they have; they squander every opportunity of being young, on being young.”

George Bernard-Shaw

Seemed somehow appropriate… 😆

Fair enough, except of course we were all young once so ...hmm, that can only be written by someone old when you think about it and if so you might as well say we were all brainless at some point in our life. In that case you might also as well say to become smarter we have to start out knowing little and life's experiences will do the rest all things being equal.