Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I’m sure it was recently something other than “A very real
figment of your imagination,” but I don’t remember what.
It’s about workers digging up road and putting in pipes.
Bump.
PSA: The CR is not updated from around 7 in the evening until around
10, if I’m not mistaken (or unless it’s changed from how it used to be).
Thank you for posting this.
The main page shows all threads. The Decaffeinated page (and
all other category pages) only show threads in that category.
“V’hameivin yavin” literally means “and the one who understands
will understand.” The phrase is used to indicate that something
is not being said outright, but those who are meant to get the
message will know what is intended.
No. 😉
RebYidd23’s subtitle used to be
“Not what I meant I meant and you know it!”
HaMeivin IV Yavin IV.
any recommendations of good board games a couple can play?Yes, definitely. But first, please answer these questions.
How much is too much for you to spend?
How long is too long a game for you?
What would you consider too complicated/thinky for you?
(Would you rather fight, compete for more points, or work together?)
(Would you prefer one that can also be played by more than 2 people?)
(Meno, the quotation from Rabbi Twerski’s book ended
at “Their reply was,
What else is there?“)In elementary school, we had a workbook with black and white photos on the opening pages. To the left there was a photo of a brain with a caption “This is your brain” and to the right a photo of a fried egg in a pan, sunny side up with the caption “This is your brain on drugs.”
That ad was originally on television, and followed those 2 lines with “Any questions?” There was also a longer version involving a frying pan being used to smash up a kitchen.
Yes, I meant you (and [angel of the north] is sufficient).
I wonder if only people who see this thread will get it.
Can you tell me where that halacha is in the Mishna Berurah, then?
Try Chapter 75. This is only talking about what you can’t see when praying.
It doesn’t say anything about a chiyuv for women there, Abba_S
(which is what Lilmod Ulelamaid said she knows to be in the M”B).
The outdoors environment here on Hosvdvgskxckfc is just fine for
walking around barefoot. (Also, Trump isn’t our President-elect.)
All kidding aside, my intention was that fashion is certainly a
factor in people’s footwear choices (not that it is the only one).
(Can you think of a parallel? It’s pretty obvious.)
I don’t think the frum world thinks their kids are at risk of using drugs (and therefore doesn’t see the need to educate them on the subject).
Isn't the tailbone the "etzem luz," a seed of resurrection?According to at least some opinions, it’s the bone at the top of the neck.
It’s not the fact that they are taking the medication but the fact that they NEED the medication in the first place.
lilmod, how would you know he isn’t taking medication that he needs?
You can only know he’s taking meds because (or, rather, if) he discloses that.
So? (Why does that make it any less an issue?)
(It’s up now.)
See this recent thread:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/zman-magazine-announcement
My 2nd-to-last post seems to have gotten stuck in limbo…
I wonder if somehow the whole "makpid on looks" might be a subconscious attraction to a bochur's/bochurah's mother/father. Though that would mean more than a physical 10.I don’t think we in the CR believe in that sort of Freudian psychology.
The last 2 lines of my previous post were not the actual
explanation of that section. I apologize for the error.
(I should’ve realized that the latter part of a statement shouldn’t be
able to stand alone, with the first part merely referring to it…)
[D]ata revealed no [gender] differences in the associations between participants’ romantic interest in real-life potential partners (met during and outside of speed dating) and the attractiveness and earning prospects of those partners.
That is: When they looked at whether interest in someone after meeting them matched up with the looks and earning potential of the people in question (that is, did people who were more attractive and/or had higher-earning-ability get more interest from the people they met), they did not find that either gender tended to be more interested in those individuals than the other gender . (In other words, they did not find a greater correlation between the interest of the studied men in the women they had met and the attractiveness of those women than they found
between the interest of the studied women in the men they had met
and the attractiveness of those men.)
(I took out what I assumed you found an issue, mods – I don’t see
why you’d leave up what I was responding to with it, though…)
The point was that “interpersonal attraction… is distinct from
perceptions of physical attractiveness,” but that doesn’t mean the
latter plays no part in the former (by the way, the concept of
“interpersonal attraction” includes what makes us want to be friends with people as well). Whether someone – of either gender – is good-looking will usually affect our attitude toward them not only as a potential spouse, but in general (leading to results such as making more money and fewer jury convictions for minor crimes).
The other quotation could use some clarification.
(I’m doing it backwards because it’s easier that way.)
Furthermore, participants’ ideal preferences, assessed before the speed-dating event, failed to predict what inspired their actual desire at the event.
That is: What people said they were looking for (in terms of
looks and earning potential) didn’t match up with the people
in whom they were interested after actually meeting them.
“[D]ata revealed no [gender] differences in…
That is: The above phenomenon was not found more among the men
or the women in the study – they were equal in this matter.
Okay, maybe anybody can play Dominion. I stand by the others.
Me: I think I can go Yserbius one better. (And even if I couldn’t, more games have come out since his post.) One of these days, b”n…
POSTED 1 YEAR AGO
I still haven’t done it… Is anyone interested in this subject?
Can you tell me where that halacha is in the Mishna Berurah, then?
popa_bar_abba’s was changed to “can’t stop tweeting” from
“Incorrigible; eccentric; somewhere between mean and average; sometimes only a bit over the top; arbitrarily engaged in cynicism.”
Hence our traditional way of handling things? 🙂
I meant to ask if she could explain it.
After about 4 minutes of research, I have determined that the source of confusion here is in the term “Immaculate Conception” (notice the capitalization).
The term doesn’t refer to a general phenomenon, rather a specific event. The belief is that both Mary and Yoshke were conceived without a father, but the term “Immaculate Conception” refers specifically to the conception of Yoshke
I feel funny discussing Christian theology, but immaculate conception has nothing to do with being “born without a father” that is a separate belief.
Immaculate Conception refers to the Conception of MARY not yoshke. (Though many Christians misunderstand this too)
No reason to do to much googling. Wikipedia imagines well.
OK according to Wikepedia Immaculate Conception refers to the Conception of MARY and Virgin Birth refers to yoshke. I am sorry for using the wrong term for JC
okay, I looked it up in Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary. You are right – it refers to M & not to JC. That was major news to me! (I was going to write “chiddush”, but that didn’t seem like the appropriate word to use). And here, I was always thought I was educated.
…
I’m also not sure what the difference is – it sounds to me like immaculate conception and virgin birth mean the same thing – they just use one to refer to one and the other to refer to the other.
The only difference is that Christians refer the birth of Miriam the mother as the Immaculate Conception while they call the birth of JC the son to be the Virgin Birth. Both of them didn’t have fathers.
Abba, that was my impression. So it’s really a technical/semantics issue and does not change anything you said. It was certainly no different than someone making a spelling or grammatical error – both of which are very common in the CR.
“4 minutes of research,” “according to Wikipedia,” “Webster’s
Unabridged Dictionary…” And you all, except Ubiquitin, still
think they believe Yoshke’s mother didn’t have a father either.
To quote Wikipedia, “the Catholic Church teaches that Mary was conceived by normal biological means,” in other words, from a man.
The term means that the Christian theological concept of “original sin”
did not apply to her – from conception, she was kept “immaculate” of it.
I employ a user name because the Bar Examining Committee of our state prefers attorneys not post on social media using real names, so they may not be accused of offering legal advice to non-clients.
What’s the problem with offering legal advice to non-clients?
(Is it that non-clients cannot make malpractice claims?)
Do you think that Facebook and The Forwards Website is a proof that Charlie Hall is his real name?
The existence of Charlie Hall, the person, is presumed fact –
he has been mentioned in reputable newspapers, IIRC.
The CR Charlie Hall actually being the same Charlie Hall is not a
certainty, but given their consistency, it’s a reasonable assumption.
edited
Any idea why, Shopping?
Of course she knows why, she wrote it
Moderators give them to you.
Not on my planet, Abba_S.
lightbrite: I brought up the TM mitzvah because to me that’s a super yiras shamayim.
Violating taharas hamishpacha is actually a very serious sin,
one that bears the penalty of kareis, being spiritually cut off,
for both participants. It’s not hard to see why someone
might be more careful about it than they are about tznius.
If tznius being so important is something that I contest, then
perhaps it is because it’s a huge issue for me (which it is).
If you find something difficult to do, that would of course
give you motivation not to believe in its importance…
(That’s the probable explanation for me and flossing, anyway.)
lilmod ulelamaid: Isn’t that a tremendous Chilul Hashem, that she is walking around blatantly disobeying an explicit halacha in the Shulchan Aruch for all to see?
Actually, there’s no tznius section of the Shuchan Aruch – rather,
the requirements of tznius are derived from the halachos about
not saying divrei kedusha in the presence of ervah.
Abba_S: Likewise someone who works has a lot to lose in a divorce and so is less likely to divorce and if there is one will give a get in fear of financial penalties, while a learner has no incentive to stay in the marriage or give a get as it’s all his wife’s money.
A. Do we now choose who to marry based on how hard it would be to get a divorce out of them, and/or how statistically likely they are, given their potential finances, to divorce you?
B. Wouldn’t he want to keep that money?
C. To get remarried (for more money?), he’d need to give a get.)
D. Divorce is not known as a positive experience.
Is that not incentive enough?
Also if someone has their priorities right, then I would think that whether or not they consider someone attractive will involve the person’s personality and middos as much as her looks. Okay, I realize that I am a girl so it’s different. But I do know boys like that, so it’s clearly possible for a boy to be that way.
Also, usually when boys are makpid on looks, they are davka into thinness. This comes from society and is not something natural or objective.
I was trying to find something about the latter, and Google put
up a quotation from Wikipedia relevant to this whole discussion:
“Interpersonal attraction, the process, is distinct from perceptions of physical attractiveness, which involves views of what is and is not considered beautiful or attractive.”
Also, there’s a study (P. W. Eastwick and E.J. Finkel, ’08) which found that
“[D]ata revealed no [gender] differences in the associations between participants’ romantic interest in real-life potential partners (met during and outside of speed dating) and the attractiveness and earning prospects of those partners. Furthermore, participants’ ideal preferences, assessed before the speed-dating event, failed to predict what inspired their actual desire at the event. Results are discussed within the context of R. E. Nisbett and T. D. Wilson’s (1977) seminal article*: Even regarding such a consequential aspect of mental life as romantic-partner preferences, people may lack introspective awareness of what influences their judgments and behavior.
So it seems that most if not all people, both male and female,
are that way, and may be even if they don’t think they are.
(If you’re interested in the exact details of the study, though,
you’ll have to pay the APA 11.95 for the privilege of reading it.)
*I looked it up. It sounds interesting, too:
Nisbett, Richard, & Wilson, Timothy. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231-259.
Although people can usually produce an explanation for their behavior, that explanation may not be accurate because people do not have direct introspective access to many (if not most) of their mental processes. “Telling more than we can know” refers to a potential problem with using self-report methods to study mental processes: Participants may be telling the experimenter more than they could be expected to know about themselves. Nisbett and Wilson review several studies that provide evidence supporting this claim. The basic methodology in these studies is to experimentally manipulate the cause of a participant’s behavior, ask the participant to explain their behavior, and find that the participant produces an explanation that does not involve the experimental manipulation.
This article is considered a classic in social psychology and foreshadowed contemporary research on automatic processing.
All except poor Vita.
(Clinton has by now given a concession speech, mw13.)
That’s what Google does for {[language] word for [something]}.
As for Star Wars… Watto you mean he’s an anti-Semitic stereotype?
It’s not like he’s a cap-wearing, big-nosed, cheating businessman with
a bad accent and… oy gevalt!
… we have merited President Donald Trump to the White House where he belongs.
Do you really think Trump belongs in the White House (independently
of your wish to see him defeat Hillary Clinton in this election)?
Good one, M! 🙂
I heard a story about a boy who went out with a girl and told his Rosh Yeshiva that he didn’t want to go out again because she wasn’t pretty. His Rosh Yeshiva told him that he’s a “kofer” because Chazal say that all bnos Yisrael are pretty.
Chazal also tell us that it is forbidden for a man to marry a
woman before seeing her, “??? ???? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ????.”
Perhaps you should write a song about your freeze spray.