Raiford Gardiner

Hastings, New Zealand

Someone is shy

Raiford hasn't completed a profile. Should we look for some other people?

Comments & conversations

134471
Raiford Gardiner
Posted over 3 years ago
Sexism a product of reproductive misunderstanding
"Mitochondrial DNA is irrelevant insofar as our personal attributes are concerned, unless it goes wrong. Mitochondria are the descendants of once-free-swimming bacteria, which joined with another ancient single-celled organisms to form the eukaryotes, of which we, and plants, and fungi, are all just a part. They act, as Prof Turnbull said, as little batteries in our cells; but they don't interact with "our" DNA, they reproduce independently within our cells, providing energy with their waste products. "A baby born using this procedure will have the characteristics of its mother and father; it will have DNA from a third person, but mitochondrial DNA only affects how the battery works, not who we are. Changing the battery does not change the computer," says Prof Turnbull. "The development of everything that makes us us, our brains, our hair colour etc, is in the nuclear DNA." It appears that mtDNA is metaphorically like tonsils, no known use but a real pain when they go wrong. Overall not a strong argument for any theory of sexual value. Biologically ascribing social variables is always fraught with danger, partly because of the enormous scope and complexity of our biology so far as we know it, but more so because of the even greater portion that we don't. Your presumption that we exaggerate difference between the sexes culturally is just an opinion, possibly influenced by your interest in feminism, but the assertion that we need to attribute different value to each sex based on some reproductive philosophy is, well, something of a curiosity.
134471
Raiford Gardiner
Posted over 3 years ago
Sebastian Wernicke: 1000 TEDTalks, 6 words
"All the happyness is already here." Maybe happiness minus unhappiness equals zero? "Old people worry kids don't mind." Kids worry, old folk don't mind. "fascinating things to make you wonder" wondrous things are fascinating of course. The issue with condensation is that it removes the fascinating and replaces it with reminders, hints and hopes, or even nasty little inklings as Murakami would have it. As you can see the transposed six word condensations are as right as they are wrong, there is no necessity for them to be accurate or anything at all other than a REMINDER. Reminders need wit or character or some such stimulant. So, far from being glib and trivialising anything, Sebastian has highlighted an extremely useful characteristic with his ironic, even self deprecating use of statistics and financial value. Very funny, and clearly his audience caught on too. Thanks Sebastian
134471
Raiford Gardiner
Posted over 3 years ago
What, to you, are basic human rights?
Nick, I'm pretty sure that the universe has a great number of higher powers that hold us all and everything else in their sway, powers like gravity, electromagnetic radiation of various types or frequencies have enormous influence on our solar system and our planet, climate, geography and so much more. These powers and the way they behave are probably responsible for man's invention of anthropomorphised gods, the ignorance, lack of reason and fear of which then generated religions, at a guess. And curiously, according to one of the latest TED talks, morality may be caused by a molecule called oxytocin, in any case, both morality and privilege exist to the extent that we have words for them and a generally agreed definition for each, regardless of how or why each is abused. Rights, though having both a word and a definition, are hard to find. Without qualifying prefixes a right is an absolute. With prefixes they turn (from being greedy demands like the right to freedom or liberty, or subsidies, respect or the dole etc) into the privilege of relative freedom or liberty that living in a civilised society may bring. It is far better to use the word privilege simply because it is well established as a relative condition, and that is the condition of every aspect of our lives except conception and death. There is no perfection and extremely few absolutes to be found in the course of our lives. It is well to face up to it and as Laurens suggests: “It may be more interesting to focus on minimal conditions that have to be in place in order for "human rights" to arise.” I disagree with his use of “human rights”. Any qualified absolute is a nonsense but the word “right” is used without any regard for the responsibilities or earned respect that so generally accompanies privilege. The minimal conditions would need to include the development of far more respect for the responsibilities that come with the privilege of living in a civilised society.
134471
Raiford Gardiner
Posted over 3 years ago
What, to you, are basic human rights?
You are discussing “rights” as absolutes that one receives at birth from who knows where. You get them and keep them without ever having to earn them and are entitled to them until you die. You don’t have to be good, do right, or do anything, you just have them, by right. Clearly that is nonsense. Those so called rights never reach some people, others have them stripped from them overnight, millions suffer breaches of these so called rights every day. There is no “right” that you can’t lose by dint of circumstance, war, mischance, crime, mistakes, poverty, or any number of other reasons. What we are talking about are privileges. Privileges that civilised societies can deliver by some degree of general agreement within society. Privilege is never able to conferred equally, but if conferred generally it can be delivered at acceptable or at least predetermined or affordable level. Privileges always carry responsibilities and for the most part privileges have to be constantly earned to be maintained. Those responsibilities are as important as the privileges themselves and more so than a quick set of general “rights” patched together couple of hundred years ago. The US Bill of Rights was an inspiring document for it’s time and in the prevailing circumstances but the lack of precision and consequent lack of clarity has become a real problem. Rights exist in the same land as equality, I believe it’s called dreamland.