![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pasitheahttp://www.viruscomix.com/page500.html
There's a couple of people in my f-list that I think will find interest in that and they'll agree with it, but I'm not really sure that I do. I guess it depends on how you interpret the meaning of the last line and the conditions placed on the definitions.
Though FWIW, if I start placing conditions on the definitions, then the message is probably correct in a purely semantic sense and I can understand that interpretation, but I do think it's a technicality and that at the root, they are not 'right' but using terms that are too vague and casting a loose net to make their point.
One could make the counter argument that I am biased. I could not disagree with that assessment, but I would also point out that being biased doesn't make one inherently wrong. It just means to take their interpretations with a grain of salt.
From my perspective, 'normal' is like 'quality'. You know it when you see it.
There's a couple of people in my f-list that I think will find interest in that and they'll agree with it, but I'm not really sure that I do. I guess it depends on how you interpret the meaning of the last line and the conditions placed on the definitions.
Though FWIW, if I start placing conditions on the definitions, then the message is probably correct in a purely semantic sense and I can understand that interpretation, but I do think it's a technicality and that at the root, they are not 'right' but using terms that are too vague and casting a loose net to make their point.
One could make the counter argument that I am biased. I could not disagree with that assessment, but I would also point out that being biased doesn't make one inherently wrong. It just means to take their interpretations with a grain of salt.
From my perspective, 'normal' is like 'quality'. You know it when you see it.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-12 06:29 am (UTC)"Has struggled to create a personal theory of mind and spirit, has structured their personal and public lives to match their discoveries, and is often singled out for ridicule or demonization for it"
and
"Is semantically naive about the subjectiveness of their value system, and therefore takes society as an objective good and does not question their gut reactions against people displaying transgressive behaviors, ultimately becoming an enforcer of the status quo themselves... but likes to eat paper."
The comic's sweet and all, but it's toooo facile. Ultimately, it reeks of "you are not a unique and special snowflake" or "quit whining, we've all been shot." Being eccentric or subcultural is by no way proof of resistance to conformity, but that doesn't mean that conformity doesn't exist.
Let's face it, some people operate on their primate social dominance programming more than others. Some people are more driven by novelty-seeking behavior than others. There's no clear, absolute division between the two -- but it still makes a real difference.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-13 06:14 pm (UTC)http://www.viruscomix.com/page449.html