James Rigby

Tunbridge Wells, United Kingdom

Someone is shy

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

Comments & conversations

Noface
James Rigby
Posted over 3 years ago
Why is it so hard for people to establish true intimacy with each other, when it is so very rewarding?
There are several reasons: 1. The unwillingnes to place oneself at risk. Intimacy necessarily involves trusting the other party. If this trust is broken it could be devastating, so why take such a risk? 2. The fact that people are expecting to find "the one"! The one who is perfect in every way for them. People may be reluctant to establish intimacy with someone who is not "the one". Of course, there is no such person - and people who are only content with perfection in their partner (and in other areas of life) will ultimately lead unfulfilled lives. 3. Some people, in some cultures, feel they are being disloyal to their family if they establish intimacy with someone else. This is my personal experience based on 46 years on the planet.,
Noface
James Rigby
Posted over 3 years ago
Let's start a system in which we have school/college in every city/state/country must adopt this model.
Should this only apply to elderly people who have no family? If there are family members, it is the responsibility of the family to care for the elderly, not the government (or students being forced to do so by the government). Many people in many western countries have forgotten that it's a moral duty to care for the elderly family members. It is this that need to be fixed, rather than imposing duties on others.
Noface
James Rigby
Posted over 3 years ago
A solution for the workers
If I understand correctly, it's suggested that companies given government bailouts are required to give 30% of their shareholdings to their workers. My challenge is that it is not the government providing the bailout - it is the taxpayers. So the true situation is that the entire taxpayer population gives money to a failing company, and then that failing company is restructured so that the employees own a minority shareholding. It seem the deal is not a good one for the taxpayer. I suggest that a better solution is to let the company fail and then the workers and management can buy it from the administrators. They will be able to get private finance if it is a good company. This is capitalism - good companies thrive, bad ones fail. Interfering by government bailouts creates moral hazard and is bad for everyone.
Noface
James Rigby
Posted over 3 years ago
Why do we worship people (athletes, actors, musicians, etc)?
The last 10 years have been very worrying in terms of "celebrity" worship - at least here in the UK and I believe there is similar in the US too. We have people who are famous for being famous, or for sleeping with someone famous, or for getting naked in the newspapers. There is no merit, no value, no worth, and no talent - other than a talent for self-publicity. And many young people see these faux-celebrities as role models. There is an entire generation who read trashy celebrity magazines instead of Scientific American, The Economist, and New Scientist. It's not good. At all.
Noface
James Rigby
Posted over 3 years ago
The Facebook culture makes us expect that everything should be customized: coffee, music and soon education will follow this trend
The ideas of mass customization go back to at least the 70s - but it's only modern manufacturing techniques and information flows that have enabled it. Right now, I can sit at my laptop, design a unique pair of Nike trainers, have my bank pay Nike's bank for them, and have the trainers (manufactured in the far east probably) delivered to my door in a couple of weeks. Facebook, twitter, youtube and other social media enables mass disintermediation. Manufacturers can deal directly with the end customer; politicians can talk directly to voters without having to go through the filter (and challenge) of traditional media; insurance companies can go direct to market without needing brokers in the middle; there are internet sites putting investors in touch with borrowers - bypassing the banks; the list is endless. I think you are absolutely right that disintermediation is a key theme in our society - and it's happening slowly abd organically without anyone really noticing. In 2040 we will look back on 2000-2020 and realise that those were the decades where the middle men disappeared and enabled the consumer to be served directly by the producer in 7 billion unique ways.
Noface
James Rigby
Posted over 3 years ago
I WANT TO MAKE INTERVIEW WITH PERSON WHO HAS BEEN BORN BETWEEN 1960 - 1980
1965 - London, UK 1 - Just me and my two parents (3). 2 - Father was a telecommnications engineer, mother didn't work. 3 - In my view there was much more rebellion. But then we had proper punk. 4 - Didn't go abroad until I was 14, and that was a day trip with my school. Didn't go on first overeas holiday until I was 15. Prior to that we probably had a proper vacation only every 3 years. 5 - Attended a boys school - so hard to know about gender differences - although I doubt the girl's school did woodwork, metalwork and rugby. 6. Everybody went to school. Most important subject was, and still is, maths. 7. Most married between 25 and 30 (I was 28). Wedding cost c $20,000 including honeymoon. Costs split between me and the bride's parents. Interested to know the reason you want to know these things.
Noface
James Rigby
Posted over 3 years ago
How can one develop a frame work of mindset which could help out in making choices easy or would make the same in less time.
Several studies have shown that the length of time people spend deliberating their choices has no major effect on the correctness of the choice eventually made. In fact, if people think about their choices for too long, the number of choices they have available generally decreases. Evolution has blessed us with instincts - and it's often best to follow these rather than attempt some kind of logic model.
Noface
James Rigby
Posted over 3 years ago
It's not a question of "why people don't believe in God" but rather, "Why do you care whether they do believe or not..." ? What's it to you?
There are reasons on both sides of the debate for why people dislike the other side. For the atheists, they see theists as interfering in their lives. Theists may be teaching in schools and telling children that god is a fact (this has happened to my child). Also, religious people may use their vote to restrict freedoms of others in areas such as Sunday trading and abortion. For the theists, I'm guessing they don't like atheists for several reasons. Atheists may demand that creationism and intelligent design are confined to religious lessons, and not science lessons. Atheists may support abortion (which theists see as murder). Also, theists may see atheism as a threat to their religion and their life model. The only thing that is certain is that unless some God pokes his/her head through the clouds and makes themselves known to everyone, the debate will never be closed and people on both sides will always argue.