Re: OT: Theory of Reciprocity

[Jim <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

On Dec 8, 12:36=A0am, Frank Kurz <t...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 07/12/2011 10:04 AM, Jim wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 6, 1:35 pm, jackcsg<jack...@xxxxxxxxx> =A0wrote:
> >> Interesting when I see the term "theory", what comes next.
> >> Consistency is such a high achievement; most of us simply cannot at th=
e time understand how much simpler our lives would be; and while we can see=
 a National Highway System function: we have no desire to fully understand =
it's affects.
> >> We learn consistency at our infancy from our Parents, and then drift f=
urther and further away from it in our adult lives.
> >> What our Constitution gives us; the States take away.
> >> Imitation is the easy way out; a true consistency would make it all wo=
rth while.
> >> Imitation discredits the truth; by leaving it behind, for it's future =
survival.
> >> It only helps Chaos in its cause.
> >> Theory is just not good enough; it never made the things that truly wo=
rk, better.
> >> No one remembers great thinkers that have not applied their thoughts.
>
> > However, what would have ever been accomplished without someone first
> > having a theory of how something "might" work or play out? Being able
> > to theorize (anticipate/project/ imagine) =A0is a unique attribute of
> > humans.
> > Can you imagine what it would be like if we didn't have that talent?
>
> We'd be fighting for bananas instead of oil, most likely. =A0Wouldn't hav=
e
> brought our world to the brink of nuclear annihilation. =A0And you'd have
> a harem of perfect pairs. =A0Imagine that! =A0:-)-

Perfect pairs????   ya mean two little brown tabs covered with hair?

 Jeeeez ... your standards are a lot lower than mine.