|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 | ||||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Okay kids playtime is over.
Go look up the word and come back when you've gotten enough information to come to your own opinion.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Frank Tougas Inner circle Minneapolis, MN 1712 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-12-07 19:59, Jonathan Townsend wrote:...Pottery shards with names written. Ostracism would be effective if it wern't for the fact that the "upper eshelon" of magicdom is a fairly incestuous bunch that spends a great deal of time telling one another how good they are, and how lucky we are they will occasionally associate with the masses (that would be us). I call them the Magic Mafia. Attatched to them is a group of wannabes who feel that by close association they too will one day be welcomed into that society. They are but misguided toadies and will never be fully accepted into what is essentially a closed society, who use exclusion as a means of maintaining power not a way to enforce ethics. Boycotts may be the best chance we have, but as long as there are those who will take the bargain route, or want something bad enough to justify a rip off, or through lack of knowledge not even notice they have rewarded a copycat. We haven't the numbers necessary to make it work effectively except in rare circumstances. SAM and IBM are not unions, we don't have that lock step mentality. We are closer to the guilds fostered by various art and crafts organizations and we all know how financially able guilds have made the average artist. Think church mouse. Even the MDA (Magic Dealers Association) is a paper tiger. Ask the poor guy who invented Professor's Nightmare. Seizure of property is patently illegal. Ethics is essentially a matter of personal integrity. I believe that was what Jon was hinting at in my work with kids. Basics of right and wrong, affected greatly by how were you raised, what was modeled for you, and what were the immediate and long term consequences of an action. Ethical people will act ethically. Unethical people simply don't care. Our only defense is to model proper behavior and hope others will follow. For good or bad we are on the honor system and that my friends will always depend on our honor not on a system. Frank Tougas
Frank Tougas The Twin Cities Most "Kid Experienced" Children's Performer :"Creating Positive Memories...One Smile at a Time"
|
|||||||||
Parson Smith Inner circle 1937 Posts |
OK Jonathan,
As I am sitting at the church at 3:40 am... 4:40 your time, waiting for some pipes to thaw, I decided to play a bit. I looked up ethics in Webster's and this is what I found. 1 plural but singular or plural in construction : the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation 2 a : a set of moral principles or values b : a theory or system of moral values <the present-day materialistic ethic> c plural but singular or plural in construction : the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group <professional ethics> d : a guiding philosophy Now, if the majority knows good from bad and decides to do bad, there is little that can be done about it... as examples… slavery and bigotry. Of course, if they have no understanding, then are we not called to be teachers? I really think that the definition that we are discussing (at least the one that I am discussing) is... “the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group <professional ethics>” Here is where the problem arises. The AMA, the various Bar Associations, regional and national religious organizations all have rules with "teeth." In magic, when someone acts unethically, what can be done? Therefore, the old axiom, "You can't legislate morals." proves to be true. We live in an era where both the buyer and the seller must beware. I do not, however, see any kind of wholesale action that can take place to protect the unprotected. I am making an effort, through humor, satire and straight writings to affect change. The only way that this can happen is through a form of marketing that is taken just as seriously as those who attempt to market for financial and personal gain. I cannot insist that everyone must share my code of ethics. I can, however, make my philosophy so appealing to some that they will share my point of view. For me, this has more value than scrounging for nickels and dimes. Good morning. Peace, Parson
Here kitty, kitty,kitty.
+++a posse ad esse+++ |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
It helps to start by finding the roots or origins of the word in question.
Today's word is "Ethos". A few seconds use of Google can get you some nice findings on that topic. Amazing how an idea and set of social customs that are still with us today and two thousand plus years old can be ignored by folks. Such is a quick way to also check for denial. Elsewhere I mentioned another good test for denial, the breaking of cause-effect linkages. When effect gets lost in a study of cause, or more generally the there is a loss of momentum (flux-action-matter) in a system, something must be hiding. What something? You tell me.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Parson Smith Inner circle 1937 Posts |
Good morning again Jonathan,
I took your advice and Googled, “ethos.” (I love fishing in the Google ocean.) My second hit found a quote that I found to be quite interesting,” Aristotle claimed that one needs to appear both knowledgeable about one's subject and benevolent." It is my contention that knowledge alone does not fill the requirement of being ethical. Benevolence in its truest forms (to those who love to correct, yes I meant forms and not form) is a necessary ingredient. Benevolence, of course, is “doing good.” This covers both your argument as well as mine. It is certainly not ethical, or benevolent to steal someone else’s property. This is true, whether it be from direct theft or by deception. Again, I fully understand your side of the debate and I agree with you. The other side is, in my opinion, a greater threat to our craft. That is the pretense, by some, of being superior. They use this mental, manipulative tool to sell inferior products. Also, they derive a sense of esteem that is based predominantly on propaganda. I suppose that what I am saying is (if we go back to the fishing metaphor) that it is more fun and productive to go after the barracuda than it is to fish for sunfish. Peace, Parson
Here kitty, kitty,kitty.
+++a posse ad esse+++ |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
But Parson, what is the good? Aristotle starts his book with that question.
To appear benevolent is not the same as achieving results which others would consider benevolent. Nor is there any objective test for benevolence. One of the fundamental tenets of NLP is that we act from our best intention and from the best of our knowledge to make the best choices we can for the time and place. Moral relativism rears its head and demands we seek consensus or an outside arbiter of "good intent". What we have for ethos, and its expression in language, ethics, is the average rule of thumb set of habits and social paterns for good living in a city-state or community. A guide. The expressions "what would your neighbor do" and "if you were in their shoes, what would see as just" are most generally applicable here. I ask you, what would you like your neighbor to do, and if you were in their shoes, what would you see as just? Your answers are your own. They also seem to serve as good signposts toward what we probably agree upon as "the good". As to sunfish and barracuda... they have their place in nature. Do you want them in our makets? If not, why buy from them, sell to them, socialize with them?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Parson Smith Inner circle 1937 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-12-08 12:34, Jonathan Townsend wrote: Quote:
On 2005-12-08 12:34, Jonathan Townsend wrote: This seems to me to be the root of the problem. I really don't want to get into religion here. (And I am not quoting this to espouse religion.) But Paul of Tarsus aka Saul of Tarsus wrote… and I paraphrase, “I do that which I would not and I don’t do those things which I would.” When the newest “perfect” levitation hits the market, I want to know if it is one that would be usable by me. Since it was “invented” by one of the “giants of magic” and endorsed by the other “giants of magic,” my lust for knowledge overtakes my good judgment and memory and I spend $70 on an unworkable idea. Then, I dare not go up against these giants, lest I be swamped with criticism by the important people and their minions. Like it are not, in this country, we are swayed by good advertising AND celebrity. The perception of the masses is that if individuals go against the common belief of the majority, then there must be something wrong with that person Since the person recognizes that he/she is dependent on the admiration of people to get the shows and bookings that he/she wants, then it becomes important not to rock the proverbial boat. So, for those with the notion, “Once burned, twice shy,” when Peter Popov wants to sell his latest prayer blanket that he guarantees to cure cancer, then the skeptics will share notes to see if it really works before spending the $19.95 love offering. The same is true in magic. There are some people that I completely trust. There are others that I would hesitate sending money to. So I will ask a friend who got suckered by Popov, “Does this thing really work?” To which my friend replies, “Well, it is a solar powered hot water bottle with a handkerchief tied to it." Surely in all of this dealing there are enough ethical breeches to go around. But who, I ask, is the real threat, the greater evil, the biggest thief? I suppose we all have to decide for ourselves. I have made my choice. Peace, Parson
Here kitty, kitty,kitty.
+++a posse ad esse+++ |
|||||||||
coupcoupdaddy Inner circle 2466 Posts |
This is an incredibly rich, worthwhile and certainly complex thread. My twin brother used to have chronic anxiety over his poor DL--he'd have nightmares about WAM burning a giant magic wand in his yard.
foreign correspondent, z and lt
inner being worker |
|||||||||
George Ledo Magic Café Columnist SF Bay Area 3042 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-12-08 14:13, Parson Smith wrote: Right on the button, Parson... but isn't it funny that even though these two statements are totally accurate in our current society, they still contradict each other? We are swayed by good advertising, by the "better mousetrap" approach. But the better mousetraps (the really better mousetraps) always get presented in such a way as to go against the grain. I remember the ads for the original Macintosh: a computer for the rest of us. Car ads nowadays are doing the same thing: never mind that -- look at this. Political campaigns? Don't get me started. Our celebrities? Ha! We love to see them go against the grain; that's what makes them celebrities. They're not like us. We can live our fantasy lives by watching them. Somebody (a lot of somebodies) spends enough on tabloids and celebrity mags to keep them in business. Going against the common belief of the majority can make you a creative genius ("It'll never fly, Wilbur," "You can't put a glass pyramid in front of the Louvre," "Whaddayamean a steam engine?") if your idea catches on and is perceived as "good." As somebody said years ago during a sales seminar, "If you're not the lead dog, the view never changes."
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here" |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Magic Jail (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |