4 ms·
Thanks for sharing and contributing in a positive way to this post, and the overall story. Beats all the other grumps down below complaining about how this has
by timjahn 14y ago
Thanks for sharing and contributing in a positive way to this post, and the overall story.
Beats all the other grumps down below complaining about how this has nothing to do with hacking or technology.
I think the grumps should start thinking about where they'd want the cab driver to drive them during those two hours.
- begemot 14y agoAs long as we are dictating what other people should be thinking about here is a quote from the late great James Baldwin I think you should mull over. 'Sentimentality, the ostentatious parading of excessive and spurious emotion, is the mark of dishonesty, the inability to feel...the mask of cruelty'
- SiVal 14y agoFunny, I consider the ostentatious parading of excessive and spurious pseudo-sophistication as a mark of dishonesty, the inability to feel...the mask of cruelty.
- alecco 14y agoWhat an interesting writer. I've never heard of him before. Thanks! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Baldwin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Baldwin
- kragen 14y agoSorry, I could have told you about him.
- FreakLegion 14y agoYour use of Baldwin here begs the question[1]. We can all agree that "the ostentatious parading of excessive and spurious emotion" is bad. It's bad by definition, as indicated by "excessive" and "spurious" (and "ostentatious," to a lesser degree). What we can't all agree on are absolute standards for excessiveness, spuriousness, or ostentatiousness. So what Baldwin wrote is irrelevant unless you first show how the article is an example of excessive and spurious emotion. Otherwise, you're simply saying "It's bad because it's bad. Q.E.D." 1. The quote itself is not intrinsically question-begging.