The full title of the above painting by the Serbian artist Uroš Predić is "Happy Brothers, Their Poor Mother!" It shows three intoxicated youths walking through their village whilst their mother shouts her disapproval from the distance. The painting is said to have been inspired by a frequent sight in Predić's home village—that of drunken youths returning from the pub at dawn. Predić painted the composition hoping it would persuade the villagers to change their ways. He was disappointed that it not only failed to decrease the incidence of drunkenness in the village, but was well received by the villagers themselves, who were happy merely to have been depicted.
Mar 24, 2023·edited Mar 24, 2023Liked by Harrison Koehli
🤩 Reached the end without ever encountering the dreaded paywall that has a [questionable] habit of blocking the wider horizon for logocratic content. Deep insights sure merit to be reclassified as Class II property 😊
Harrison - somebody "liked" a comment of mine elsewhere and turns out they subscribe to your "stack" here, so I figured why not - I'll check it out. Then I figured, hmmmm, I need to read this, but I'm curious what the commentors are saying.....and when there weren't any comments I figured, I'd post one mainly just to say....hello.
What is the probability we all would happen to be posting here presently?
Now, Harrison I sort of promise I won't be a trouble maker and I wont post needlessly and I might not ever post again, but seriously, what is the probability you, Sonja, and I would just happen to be here at this moment in time to share ideas?
~
(Edit) - OK, what the hell I looked much more closely at the painting and I don't think that is three brothers but I do think they hired a bagpipe blowing musician while they reveled in the muddy road with stumps already chopped down. I'm just gonna say the fella first of the three did not look like a brother to me...and I can't deny the piece of fabric hanging down the mother was sort of beating in disdain truly looked like an arm sleeve on from one of the brothers and I don't think this is a coincidence either.
Sorry to be a stickler and I'm gonna work my way through this whole article, but it is stated in the article as follows:
~
"In alignment with many religious perspectives (particularly Catholic Social Teaching), Lobaczewski does not see property as an end in itself, observing that this notion is relatively new to humanity."
~
ok, but what is the basis of claiming this is "relatively new to humanity"......I mean I beg to differ on that...but maybe I need to read the rest more closely, so I reckon I'll do that before I post again, but my sentiment is that the notion of "property" runs deep and it is an end in itself in the minds of most and it is in my mind so that informs my sentiment.
~
OK, I'll read it all again, but I appreciate this presentation of thought, but I think "property" the concept of it, is both individual and collective, and on an individual level, I think it basically has always been this way, so that is why I can't just ascribe that the notion of property as an end in itself is somehow "new" to humanity. I think it is actually what makes humans humans.......nothing wrong with the concept of property, but it takes good communication to establish boundaries. Regardless, you got yours and I got mine....so to speak.
"Grandin highlights the need to understand that there are different thinking styles: verbal thinkers, “object visualizers,” and “visual spatial pattern thinkers.” "
~
Like everything else it is helpful sometimes to have categories, but I don't consider these "thinking styles" mutually exclusive and in fact I think most folks have all three. So, I don't get the desire to break things down into discrete categories when we all ought know there is a spectrum to it all. I mean who is somebody who thinks they can categorize thinking? I think that is a fair question.
The full title of the above painting by the Serbian artist Uroš Predić is "Happy Brothers, Their Poor Mother!" It shows three intoxicated youths walking through their village whilst their mother shouts her disapproval from the distance. The painting is said to have been inspired by a frequent sight in Predić's home village—that of drunken youths returning from the pub at dawn. Predić painted the composition hoping it would persuade the villagers to change their ways. He was disappointed that it not only failed to decrease the incidence of drunkenness in the village, but was well received by the villagers themselves, who were happy merely to have been depicted.
🤩 Reached the end without ever encountering the dreaded paywall that has a [questionable] habit of blocking the wider horizon for logocratic content. Deep insights sure merit to be reclassified as Class II property 😊
Harrison - somebody "liked" a comment of mine elsewhere and turns out they subscribe to your "stack" here, so I figured why not - I'll check it out. Then I figured, hmmmm, I need to read this, but I'm curious what the commentors are saying.....and when there weren't any comments I figured, I'd post one mainly just to say....hello.
Hello from Buffalo_Ken
Warm Regards,
Ken
What is the probability we all would happen to be posting here presently?
Now, Harrison I sort of promise I won't be a trouble maker and I wont post needlessly and I might not ever post again, but seriously, what is the probability you, Sonja, and I would just happen to be here at this moment in time to share ideas?
~
(Edit) - OK, what the hell I looked much more closely at the painting and I don't think that is three brothers but I do think they hired a bagpipe blowing musician while they reveled in the muddy road with stumps already chopped down. I'm just gonna say the fella first of the three did not look like a brother to me...and I can't deny the piece of fabric hanging down the mother was sort of beating in disdain truly looked like an arm sleeve on from one of the brothers and I don't think this is a coincidence either.
~
See you later.....
BK
Sorry to be a stickler and I'm gonna work my way through this whole article, but it is stated in the article as follows:
~
"In alignment with many religious perspectives (particularly Catholic Social Teaching), Lobaczewski does not see property as an end in itself, observing that this notion is relatively new to humanity."
~
ok, but what is the basis of claiming this is "relatively new to humanity"......I mean I beg to differ on that...but maybe I need to read the rest more closely, so I reckon I'll do that before I post again, but my sentiment is that the notion of "property" runs deep and it is an end in itself in the minds of most and it is in my mind so that informs my sentiment.
~
OK, I'll read it all again, but I appreciate this presentation of thought, but I think "property" the concept of it, is both individual and collective, and on an individual level, I think it basically has always been this way, so that is why I can't just ascribe that the notion of property as an end in itself is somehow "new" to humanity. I think it is actually what makes humans humans.......nothing wrong with the concept of property, but it takes good communication to establish boundaries. Regardless, you got yours and I got mine....so to speak.
~
BK
Per the text above:
~
"Grandin highlights the need to understand that there are different thinking styles: verbal thinkers, “object visualizers,” and “visual spatial pattern thinkers.” "
~
Like everything else it is helpful sometimes to have categories, but I don't consider these "thinking styles" mutually exclusive and in fact I think most folks have all three. So, I don't get the desire to break things down into discrete categories when we all ought know there is a spectrum to it all. I mean who is somebody who thinks they can categorize thinking? I think that is a fair question.
~
BK