Judging books by covers

iBrian

iBrian

Peace, Love and Unity
Veteran Member
Messages
6,572
Reaction score
85
Points
48
Location
Scotland
Found this elsewhere - very good reading:


Here's a brilliant example of why you should never judge a book by it's cover.

Question 1:
If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had 8 kids already,
three who were deaf, two who were blind, one mentally retarded,
and she had syphilis, would you recommend that she have an abortion?


Read the next question before looking at the answer for this one.


Question 2:
It is time to elect a new world leader, and only your vote counts.


Here are the facts about the three leading candidates.

Candidate A
Associates with crooked politicians, and consults with
astrologists.
He's had two Mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10
martinis a day.


Candidate B
He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium
in college and drinks a quart of whiskey every evening.


Candidate C
He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke,
drinks an occasional beer and never cheated on his wife.
Which of these candidates would be your choice?


Decide first, no peeking, then scroll down for the answer.




















Candidate A is Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Candidate B is Winston Churchill.
Candidate C is Adolph Hitler.

And, by the way, the answer to the abortion question:
If you said yes, you just killed Beethoven.
 
I knew there was a reason why I generally don't trust those clean-cut, straight-arrow, always-wear-a-tie types too much.:)


Seriously, I think you make a good point here, Brian. It isn't the best policy to judge someone by the appearance they present to the public, or by what they've done earlier in their lives. Nor by the length of their hair, how many piercings they have, or how many tattoos.

In a very old children's book, "The Little Prince", is one of my favorite lines: "That which is essential, is invisible to the eye." I just never have understood why, especially in American culture, people are judged solely by their mode of dress, how much they weigh, how they wear their hair. Some of the most intelligent, competent people I know do not conform to any sort of "dress for success" model. But this extends to the non-physical as well, the "character question", if you will. Some people - and I know some of them - are very good at hiding their real character behind a facade of honest respectability. They've never cheated on their spouse, they've never done drugs, they've never even had a parking ticket. But when it comes right down to it, they'd sell out their own grandmother if they thought there was some profit in it for them.
 
Originally posted by I, Brian
Here's a brilliant example of why you should never judge a book by it's cover.

Question 1:
If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had 8 kids already,
three who were deaf, two who were blind, one mentally retarded,
and she had syphilis, would you recommend that she have an abortion?

And, by the way, the answer to the abortion question:
If you said yes, you just killed Beethoven.
Click to expand...

I remember that question from when I took a class in high school called Justice and You (this was back in 1982, when I was a senior.)

Originally posted by I, Brian
Question 2:
It is time to elect a new world leader, and only your vote counts.


Here are the facts about the three leading candidates.

Candidate A
Associates with crooked politicians, and consults with
astrologists.
He's had two Mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10
martinis a day.


Candidate B
He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium
in college and drinks a quart of whiskey every evening.


Candidate C
He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke,
drinks an occasional beer and never cheated on his wife.
Which of these candidates would be your choice?

Candidate A is Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Candidate B is Winston Churchill.
Candidate C is Adolph Hitler.
Click to expand...

I remember this one from a different class (I don't recall which of my clooege classes it was, but there was a huge argument over it, almost came to blows.)

Originally posted by littlemissattitude
Seriously, I think you make a good point here, Brian. It isn't the best policy to judge someone by the appearance they present to the public, or by what they've done earlier in their lives. Nor by the length of their hair, how many piercings they have, or how many tattoos.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I can add a couple of other physical attributes: facial hair and physical stature.

I have a problem with facial hair (to the point that people ask me if I'm a guy or a girl.) Heck, I've been asked by police for some ID to prove that I can go into a ladies' public bathroom more than once (I think the last time was #10.)

Concerning stature, this one professor I met in my last ethnic studies class is a slight gent, about 5' 2" or 5' 3" (he might even be 5' 4", but I'm not sure) and structurally somewhat effeminate, yet he's quite masculine otherwise with a wiry strength instead of the stereotypical Russian/ex-Soviet Union build (he's also somewhat :cool:.) Another person I know is also quite effeminate, but she's in the process of MTF transgenderization, and she's almost deadly with her strength.


Phyllis Sidhe_Uaine
 
nice questions im sure ive seen something simular before .

but

To judge or at least percieve someone or something before or without first hand knowledge is important to people.It makes us feel familiar or understanding in things were not sure about or dont understand .
Russia had in parts laws to draw and quater people for non payment of taxes up untill 1986 and the laws of a country are one way we percieve that place without visiting it , not many western people would visit russia in the good old days .
the sick mother to us in the west seems unreal and maybe a little unstable but if this lady was living in tibet and lifting stones from a rocky field was a daily task then a blind ,dumb, retard will still lifft stones and increese the percentage of life for all , it all depends on our interpretation or perception .
 
Question 1: I knew from the start where this was going lol, I still would have said yes... I never cared for the music of Beethoven.

Question 2: I would of picked Hitler when it didn't name them... I would of picked him if it had named him... In his fine health and normal mental state he was the best war tactican and an awesome leader....
 
and was he in "fine health and normal mental state" when he came up with the idea about killing all the jews in the world?

i suggest you read richard grunberger's "a social history of the third reich" if you think hitler was a good leader or manager. the guy was a thug from the beginning, surrounded by corrupt thugs. the place was a mess and the army's efficiency was not his doing.

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
bananabrain said:
and was he in "fine health and normal mental state" when he came up with the idea about killing all the jews in the world?

i suggest you read richard grunberger's "a social history of the third reich" if you think hitler was a good leader or manager. the guy was a thug from the beginning, surrounded by corrupt thugs. the place was a mess and the army's efficiency was not his doing.

b'shalom

bananabrain
Click to expand...

Yes... because a mere thug could become on of the largest conquers of land in history.... I am not saying I agreeing with exterminating jews. I am just stating he was an excellent leader when his mental condition was fine..

His "team" the officers were made up from really mtovated and organised memebers such as Hess... He carried the Nazi's. The name behind the leader. But yeah I ain't saying "go Nazi's go!! white power SIEG HEIL!!! and all that lol... I am just reconising his skills.
 
Well, I think it's clear Hitler didn't rule Germany through blind luck. :)

But I think there's a difference in recognising what a leader is aiming for, and carries out.
 
If people read and write books, yet books do NOT read or write people, then who compares people with dead tree pulp? Is there a single person in the world that is read like a book? A book is fully written and can be fully read, while a person is neither. So this saying is completely wrong.

If the first 999 pages of a long book are a sin not worthy of the dead tree they were printed on... will the 1000th page be seeking repentance and the reader's forgiveness?
 
I am just stating he was an excellent leader when his mental condition was fine..
Click to expand...

i would question whether his mental condition was ever fine. so would i question yours if you thought otherwise. that's why i suggest that you read that book. don't take my word for it.

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
bananabrain said:
i would question whether his mental condition was ever fine. so would i question yours if you thought otherwise. that's why i suggest that you read that book. don't take my word for it.

b'shalom

bananabrain
Click to expand...


Banana read many books on Hiter and the nazi's when I was a teen. You can question my mental condition, but I shall stand by my first statement... Hitler was of sound mind to begin with. After the treaty of Versailles, Germany became a poor country.... people were mighty p'd.... Hitler rose... And he rose their morale.. And they followed him... True they would have backed whoever had stood up and said he would improve their land and so on... But not anyone could of got as far as he did... And his down fall? The critical status of his mental and physical health.... Started making mistakes and so forth... Sure as nutty as a fruit loop by then end and by many of his actions... but not to begin with...
 
so basically, he was a good leader because he got everyone all pulling together and found a useful group of scapegoats? you don't think his anti-semitism was a "mistake"? because it certainly dates back to before he was a "nutty as a fruit loop". have you actually read "mein kampf"? because i have. and based on that, he was batshit crazy from the start.

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
yes, I agree with 17th angel here... okay, towards the end Hitler was a wee bit mad, which I blame his doctor for, but before that, as a statesman, he did a lot of good for the germans (so long as they weren't jews, of course), and that's really all a nation wants from its leaders, he managed to rise from being a struggling poor artist in a slum to be one of the greatest statesmen the world has ever seen, and he did this in much the same way as every other leader does, by working the crowd, by subterfuge and drastic tactics, and, the holocaust aside, he was a pretty good PM... I know that will enrage many ppl here, but, such is life...

I dont think his his antisemitism wasn't a mistake, as being anti- towards any "outgroup" is a popular tactic of most leaders, and is why we have different political parties...

...as George Orwell pointed out in 1984- war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength... if ppl pull together to fight an external enemy, then within ur group there is peace... if u give ppl flags to wave and rules to follow, they feel free, and if u don't know that these jews are being herded onto trucks like cattle and taken away to be gassed u can convince urself that they are being repatriated somewhere sunny...

ppl die every day, in wars, and personally I fail to see what the difference is in killing jews or palestinians or Iraqis or small children...
 
the difference in a small word called "intent". if you can't see the difference between murder committed with genocidal intent - plannned, announced and celebrated as part of official policy - and officially regretted loss of life which comes about at least partly as a result of tactical use of non-combatants, is documented by the media and punished both internally and externally then you're really not understanding anything about what genocide is.

holocaust aside, he was a pretty good PM.
Click to expand...
think about what you're saying here! i mean, really. this is the "they made the trains run on time" argument.

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
trains are important, though...

oh, and I almost forgot... didnt he come up with that great slogan- work shall set u free..?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top