Subject: Re: conformists and non-conformists
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 14:59:06 -0700
From: janosprohaska@earthlink.net (Plain, Simple, Blackhawk.)
Organization: mail is only accepted at "blackhawkisland@earthlink.net"
Newsgroups: alt.fan.tom-servo
In article <c5hluusdc197bpdg6e3creu500rf0trc5j@4ax.com>, Heck
<heck@toodamnmuchspambutreallycomputer.org> wrote:
> The definition of boundary from mathematics is, given a set,
\ /
\ / Hello, I am a given set.
_________\/_________ /
| ________________ | This is my boundry--,
| ' ' | |
| | (o) (o) | | |
| | __ | |<--------------------'
| | | |
| | \()/ | |
| ',______________,' |
|____________________|
/_______________\
> the boundary
> of that set is another set that contains points that are members of the
> first set and points that are not members of the first set.
\ /
\ / I think that depends
_________\/_________ / on what your point is!
| ________________ | All my points are members,
| ' ' | and the never leave home
| | (o) (o) | | without the American Boundry Card(tm)!
| | __ | |
| | | |
| | \()/ | |
| ',______________,' |
|____________________|
/_______________\
> Points that are and are not in the first set complement one another,
You look marvelous! You're pretty sharp yourself!
\ /
. .
point A point B
> in fact are connex - by definition, they entail one another, like, once you
> have the notion of parent, you must also admit the notion of child and vice
> versa.
Mom, is that you?
Stop /
entailing me! . . .__ I have a notion that I am.
\. .
I think __. .
we're connex . . .
/
What's happening?
> So it is socially, where both conformits and non-conformists support the
> whole. Each needs the other, the collective needs the contributions of
> both, the conformists for the continuity and substance and the
> non-conformist loyal opposition to enliven, to invigorate and to give
> boundary and limits to the group.
I'm sick of holding up this boundry!
\ But I need you for continuity
\ / and substance!
__(\___/)___ __(\___/)___
\_/_ _ (__/ \_/_ _ (__/
), (o \ ), (o \
/_ / \___ /_ / \___
\__,-' ~ || \ \__,-' ~ || \
||____||/ \ ||____||/ \
| === | \_\ | === | \_\
_| . |_/ ) _/| . |_/ )
_____ / | | / /\_____/ /| | / /\_______
| (_(| - (_(/ \_\| - \_\/ |
| | | | non | |
| | ' | | ' | |
| |conform| |conform| |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | |
| |__'____| |__'____| |
| || || || || |
|b'ger/BH_/ /\/ /\___________/ /\/ /\_________|
(_(_(_(_/ /_/_/_/_/
> This has theological, intellectual and physical instantiations, too. Top
> posting, full-quoting?
I don't know, but as far as this post was concerned, it...
> Don't make me laugh.
-*-
plain, simple, blackhawk.
How now, socially non-conformist cow?
Return to the Kamikaze Peep Squad.
Return to Selected Usenet Posts.