FERRET-SEARCH Archives

Searchable FML archives

FERRET-SEARCH@LISTSERV.FERRETMAILINGLIST.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
William Killian - Zen and the Art of Ferrets <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 08:53:59 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (64 lines)
>From:    Stephanie Daniels <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Terminology
 
Penile sheath would work.  The penis itself is covered by that "button".
When neutered nothing there is affected - just the testes that would
normally be located under the tail.  Urine does "come out" there in males.
 
>From:    Edward Lipinski Ferrets NorthWest FNW <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Bobbie C (Ruprecht Kirche) jumps in with both feet out flushes a
>         torrent of . . . well?
>I fail to understand why the Sorcerer of Erudition, when presented with  the
>Socrotean method of questioning jumps to the erronous conclusion that the
>questions are in fact "factual," when in reality they are simple questions
>and not "fixed in concrete" assertions.
 
Your questions were not simple questions as they were leading questions
that followed a path.  Definitely an erroneous path but they were directed
questions that anticipated certain answers.  In most cases the anticipated
answers were wrong so the next question was awkward.  Its also normally
called "Socratic" not "Socrotean".
 
>And while you're at it, maybe you could touch on the relationship between
>primitiveness and the hunting/killing instinct of both ferrets.
 
Ferrets are fairly advacned killers - if taught.  Fairly useless as killers
much of the time if not taught.  So instinctually they are not advanced
hunters I'd venture to say.  You did mean to ask how primitive or advanced
they were in that trait right?  Hunting animals are not necessarily more
advanced nor more primitive than non-hunting animals in other traits.
 
>Now this brings up an interesting aspect that has not come into my ken
>heretofore: are there differing degrees of domestication?
 
No.  There is wild.  There is domestic.  Simple boolean.  No and yes.
Black and white.
 
Though Bob C and myself have been saying this for LONG time in response to
your posts.
 
You still don't get it.  Dometication has nothing to do with any particular
traits other than being bred under man's control instead of "natural
selection".  Some folks breed dogs to be fierce and nasty fighters or guard
dogs and that doesn't make them any more or less domestic.
 
>Edward Lipinski, who maintains:  domesticATED=DEAD.  (So Sorry buddy)
 
Some folks really have no idea about language.  If you wish to have
conversations with people you have to accept the norms for langauge usage
or you will get absolutely nowhere.
 
Dead means no longer alive.  Domestication has nothing to do with the state
of being alive or dead.  There is no compromising on this - Edward, you are
wrong.  Seldom are issues in this list quite so simply black and white but
in this case you are flat out wrong.  Accept the normal meanings of English
words or continue to be considered willfully ignorant on certain topics.
 
-bill
--
bill and diane killian
zen and the art of ferrets
http://www.zenferret.com/
mailto:[log in to unmask]
[Posted in FML issue 2748]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2