TDB

This reminds me of a sort of rhetorical problem. In a podcast a year or more ago, Stef was engaged in disproving the existence of god. He mentioned as a sort of illustrative aside and without further clarification that the united states of america did not exist. Now, I am pretty sure I know what Stef means when he says the US does not exist. But I can just imagine a hostile listener thinking "This guy doesn't even think the US exists, who would listen to his opinions about god?" I've never understood the attraction of this sort of rhetorical flourish,which tempts the careless listener to misunderstand, while adding no positive contribution to the conversation that I am aware of. If the US does not exist, what follows? Does my family exist? Apple Inc.? Boy Scouts of America? The human race? The English language? And more importantly, restricting the word "existence" in this way, does it make any difference to anyone? Or does this usage reduce it to meaningless jargon? How should my behavior change if I accept that "The United States of America" does not exist? Imagine two parallel universes, one where I fastidiously avoid mentioning this phrase when describing territories, bureaucrats, laws, etc. and one where I use the ordinary phrase in the ordinary way. What differences would we observe between these two universes, other than the words coming out of my mouth?

Seems like Faith immediately went on the defensive and stopped listening. You were offering empathy but she refused to hear that. Do you think it could be one of those situations, where using text communication causes an emotional miscommunication? Or something else? She seems to get a different message, something judgemental, like "unmet needs = bad mom, feel guilty and reform" whereas I hope you meant something like "unmet needs = imperfect communication, relax and try to connect."

Abigail: enjoyed the violence, vindictive Slug: violent, compassionate? Gregory: uptight asshole Sinbad: kind of a lowlife Ivan: not clear what he could do if he wanted to, no obligation to do so Only question in my mind is how to order Abigail & Slug. Did she encourage Slug to engage in violence, or just feel pleased that he did so? If she would have discouraged Slug, I'd have found her less objectionable. I am assuming she could have dissuaded him, but that's a pretty big assumption. Although there are no lifeboats mentioned in the story (perhaps that was how Sinbad took her across the river?), it seems pretty artificial, so I don't give much weight to my answer. Sounds like they should all get therapy, or learn to swim.

Did you ever get a look at it?

Not clear what you are responding to with yeeeegh, my faq or another "simplification", my interpretation of UPB or UPB itself. If my interpretation is off and you understand UPB, please help me fix it. If you want to argue against UPB, maybe start a different thread? FOr me at least, this thread is about what is UPB, how to explain it. I am not sure enough that I understand what it is for me to either argue for or against it.

<p>I've taken a shot at a UPB FAQ http://brimpossible.blogspot.com/2013/01/upb-faq.html. Please comment if you have a question that should be included or can expand or correct an answer.</p>

I have no wise words, just sympathy. Hmm, maybe this will help. I've just begun reading a book title "Mindset" by a psychologist teaching at Columbia, unusual name, Dweck I think? Her main point seems to be that people who believe they can improve their skills, get smarter, improve their lives, can. Those who don't, can't. It's one of those rare situations where believing something can make it true. (sounds so mystical.) Anyhow, much sympathy, and good luck!