|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 25, 2022 20:27:33 GMT
So the place that started all this knee taking USA aren't even taking the knee, how come the place it happened don't feel they have to continue to take the knee, the USA team must be scratching their heads wondering why England is still taking the knee when it happened in America, the England team should be BOOOOOOOOOED. You are entitled to paint the worst possible picture, you are also entitled to your opinion, as too is the English football team. Is the England football team entitled to an opinion. Each individual is so entitled but as a team are they so entitled and what happens if there is disagreement as regards that opinion. Is a player excluded because he is not with the 'team' opinion, even if he is the best player. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 25, 2022 20:41:12 GMT
You are entitled to paint the worst possible picture, you are also entitled to your opinion, as too is the English football team. Is the England football team entitled to an opinion. Each individual is so entitled but as a team are they so entitled and what happens if there is disagreement as regards that opinion. Is a player excluded because he is not with the 'team' opinion, even if he is the best player. You are not dealing with an authoritarian dictatorship. If any player was against taking the knee then he would not and could not be forced to do it. Although it seems highly unlikely that any player in a team of ethnically mixed players would not want to take the knee in support of anti-racism. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 25, 2022 20:43:53 GMT
I was born Male, I identify as male. But according to Sainsbury's deluxe sticky toffee pudding I'm actually a family of four.    |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Nov 25, 2022 21:03:35 GMT
Woke is the England squad who are the only ones taking the knee. Not even the US team are taking the knee. The Virtue signaling UK, we are a fuckin laughing stock world wide. Maybe political activism is more their thing considering the turgid football they've just produced. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 25, 2022 21:04:33 GMT
A blank sheet yes, in terms of learning the dangers in the environment it happens to grow up in. Born being wary of danger, a fact that can make almost instantaneous hormonal changes as with all animals, is its best survival tool. Feelings can influence and sometimes control thoughts and actions. I think that is broadly what I said however I would qualify it as regards personality and that in many respects is genetic design influenced by nurture of course. Some studies as regards twins separated at birth suggest that things like a depressive personality are inborn as opposed to learnt when such twins were raised in completely different environments. So you have a unique design of one's own as regards genes and nurture will affect how that grows but the genetic pressures to behave in certain ways will always be there which is why I referred to berserk families as even Vikings knew that inherited traits were important. It is recognised that people are genetically different with amongst other things the potential to be violent or non-violent. The deciding factor is the environment they are raised in. IMO a reasonable example is shown in dogs. Some dogs can be treated as mean as hell but they will withdraw within themselves, and attack no one. A pit bull will attack is such circumstances, nevertheless there are many owners who have pit-bulls that are as friendly as any dog. The answer is that 1. Not all DNA is the same. 2. It is known that people have hormones at different strengths. EG. One individual might have a strong adrenalin hormone but a weak happy hormone like Dopamine. While some might have these the other way around. These are delivered by DNA but once delivered they are left to the effects of the experiences of the individual. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 25, 2022 21:09:17 GMT
Is the England football team entitled to an opinion. Each individual is so entitled but as a team are they so entitled and what happens if there is disagreement as regards that opinion. Is a player excluded because he is not with the 'team' opinion, even if he is the best player. You are not dealing with an authoritarian dictatorship. If any player was against taking the knee then he would not and could not be forced to do it. Although it seems highly unlikely that any player in a team of ethnically mixed players would not want to take the knee in support of anti-racism. What if he did not believe that that gesture was just anti-racism, which it sems to be as it now seems to be inclusivity which is an expansion on anti-racism and much more tenuous to define. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 25, 2022 21:10:57 GMT
You are not dealing with an authoritarian dictatorship. If any player was against taking the knee then he would not and could not be forced to do it. Although it seems highly unlikely that any player in a team of ethnically mixed players would not want to take the knee in support of anti-racism. What if he did not believe that that gesture was just anti-racism, which it sems to be as it now seems to be inclusivity which is an expansion on anti-racism and much more tenuous to define. delete wrong post. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 25, 2022 21:12:14 GMT
I think that is broadly what I said however I would qualify it as regards personality and that in many respects is genetic design influenced by nurture of course. Some studies as regards twins separated at birth suggest that things like a depressive personality are inborn as opposed to learnt when such twins were raised in completely different environments. So you have a unique design of one's own as regards genes and nurture will affect how that grows but the genetic pressures to behave in certain ways will always be there which is why I referred to berserk families as even Vikings knew that inherited traits were important. It is recognised that people are genetically different with amongst other things the potential to be violent or non-violent. The deciding factor is the environment they are raised in. IMO a reasonable example is shown in dogs. Some dogs can be treated as mean as hell but they will withdraw within themselves, and attack no one. A pit bull will attack is such circumstances, nevertheless there are many owners who have pit-bulls that are as friendly as any dog. The answer is that 1. Not all DNA is the same. 2. It is known that people have hormones at different strengths. EG. One individual might have a strong adrenalin hormone but a weak happy hormone like Dopamine. While some might have these the other way around. These are delivered by DNA but once delivered they are left to the effects of the experiences of the individual. Then we broadly agree. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 25, 2022 21:20:32 GMT
You are not dealing with an authoritarian dictatorship. If any player was against taking the knee then he would not and could not be forced to do it. Although it seems highly unlikely that any player in a team of ethnically mixed players would not want to take the knee in support of anti-racism. What if he did not believe that that gesture was just anti-racism, which it sems to be as it now seems to be inclusivity which is an expansion on anti-racism and much more tenuous to define. I'm not sure of what you are alluding to. But as to the English team. ---- Speaking about the decision, Southgate said: ‘We’ve discussed taking the knee and we feel we should. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 25, 2022 21:54:13 GMT
What if he did not believe that that gesture was just anti-racism, which it sems to be as it now seems to be inclusivity which is an expansion on anti-racism and much more tenuous to define. I'm not sure of what you are alluding to. But as to the English team. ---- Speaking about the decision, Southgate said: ‘We’ve discussed taking the knee and we feel we should.He also said 'It is what we stand for as a team, and we have done for a long period of time. We believe it is a strong statement that will go around the world, for young people in particular to see inclusivity is very important.' So it is not just anti-racism. It is expanding as a political (philosophical) mindset of 'inclusivity. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 25, 2022 21:56:20 GMT
Woke is the England squad who are the only ones taking the knee. Not even the US team are taking the knee. The Virtue signaling UK, we are a fuckin laughing stock world wide. Maybe political activism is more their thing considering the turgid football they've just produced. Yes indeed - I noticed the rather barbed comment from the guy on ITV when Rashford came on, he regained his place in the team when he started concentrating on his football. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 26, 2022 9:10:16 GMT
I'm not sure of what you are alluding to. But as to the English team. ---- Speaking about the decision, Southgate said: ‘We’ve discussed taking the knee and we feel we should.He also said 'It is what we stand for as a team, and we have done for a long period of time. We believe it is a strong statement that will go around the world, for young people in particular to see inclusivity is very important.' So it is not just anti-racism. It is expanding as a political (philosophical) mindset of 'inclusivity. Inclusivity is the opposite of racism. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 26, 2022 9:12:05 GMT
Maybe political activism is more their thing considering the turgid football they've just produced. Yes indeed - I noticed the rather barbed comment from the guy on ITV when Rashford came on, he regained his place in the team when he started concentrating on his football. Perhaps just a just a statement of fact, open to biased insinuation. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 26, 2022 9:13:07 GMT
It is recognised that people are genetically different with amongst other things the potential to be violent or non-violent. The deciding factor is the environment they are raised in. IMO a reasonable example is shown in dogs. Some dogs can be treated as mean as hell but they will withdraw within themselves, and attack no one. A pit bull will attack is such circumstances, nevertheless there are many owners who have pit-bulls that are as friendly as any dog. The answer is that 1. Not all DNA is the same. 2. It is known that people have hormones at different strengths. EG. One individual might have a strong adrenalin hormone but a weak happy hormone like Dopamine. While some might have these the other way around. These are delivered by DNA but once delivered they are left to the effects of the experiences of the individual. Then we broadly agree. Probably so. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 26, 2022 9:38:25 GMT
He also said 'It is what we stand for as a team, and we have done for a long period of time. We believe it is a strong statement that will go around the world, for young people in particular to see inclusivity is very important.' So it is not just anti-racism. It is expanding as a political (philosophical) mindset of 'inclusivity. Inclusivity is the opposite of racism. Not necessarily so. Inclusivity implies that all are included, how and in what way are the obvious questions that are always inadequately answered. Racism implies that people are selected or rejected based on the colour of their skin. Inclusivity means that people are included on the basis of any particular characteristic including the colour of their skin so therefore, whether it is intended or not, a degree of selection has to be operated which is in effect racism. Inclusivity is a rather ambiguous word with no clear message as to what it wants. |
|
