Re: equipment

[Guest guest]

Any of your local DME's should be able to provide you with the

information............I am thinking primarily of shoe horns, sock aids,

reachers, adaptive utensils, lap buddies, etc that would be common small

items that REALLY can help improve a patient's indep function. Funny,

..........how that is not reimbursable.

Ellen R. Strunk, PT, MS, GCS

2245 Shelterwood Road

Birmingham, AL 35226

fax:

erstrunk@...

[Guest guest]

Dear Mike,

mike dickman wrote:

Milarepa, who left behind him a skull–cup and a cotton cloth,

Patrül Rinpoche, who left much the same plus a copy of the

Bodhisattvacharyavatara... Gandhi left his glasses a dhoti or two,

a writing desk, a spinning wheel and copies of the Bible and Bhagavad

Gita...

Even they require equipment, it seems.

Seems you got that one wrong, Dan.

If I did, I am in some very fast company.

Don't know why, btw, you would find yourself unlikely to quote Plato.

best regards,

Dan Watkins

...

--

We are wiser than we know.

~Ralph Waldo Emerson

My experience is what I agree to attend to.

~

- Whatcha doin today?

- Nothin.

- But ya done nothin yesterday too!.

- Yup,. Didn't finish, though.

There are three classes of men; lovers of wisdom, lovers of honor, and

lovers of gain.

~Plato (never thought i'd be quoting HIM!)

[Guest guest]

Even they require equipment, it seems.*to exist, yes.

Don't know why, btw, you would find yourself unlikely to quote Plato.*I tend to prefer the guys he nicked  most of it from.--

We are wiser than we know.~Ralph Waldo EmersonMy experience is what I agree to attend to.~ - Whatcha doin today?- Nothin.- But ya done nothin yesterday too!.- Yup,. Didn't finish, though.

There are three classes of men; lovers of wisdom, lovers of honor, and lovers of gain.~Plato (never thought i'd be quoting HIM!)

[Guest guest]

Dear Mike,

mike dickman wrote:

Even they require equipment, it seems.

*to exist, yes.

The bible is not necessary to sustain life. It's doubtful that one can

be fully human without stuff.

Don't know why, btw, you would find yourself unlikely to quote

Plato.

*I tend to prefer the guys he nicked most of it from.

From whom did he nick it (and how did he know about them?)?

best regards,

Dan Watkins

--

We are wiser than we know.

~Ralph Waldo Emerson

My experience is what I agree to attend to.

~

- Whatcha doin today?

- Nothin.

- But ya done nothin yesterday too!.

- Yup,. Didn't finish, though.

There are three classes of men; lovers of wisdom, lovers of honor, and

lovers of gain.

~Plato (never thought i'd be quoting HIM!)

[Guest guest]

From whom did he nick it (and how did he know about them?)? *from the guys who came before him, notably (though not only) the Pythagoreans... and then set his own spin on what he had manifestly only partially understood (or he would have desisted). With Plato philo sophia in the West fully became philo logos and philo lexis and it has been stuck there ever since...

-- We are wiser than we know.~Ralph Waldo EmersonMy experience is what I agree to attend to.~ - Whatcha doin today?- Nothin.- But ya done nothin yesterday too!.- Yup,. Didn't finish, though.

There are three classes of men; lovers of wisdom, lovers of honor, and lovers of gain.~Plato (never thought i'd be quoting HIM!)

[Guest guest]

Dan asks of plato ...

From whom did he nick it (and how did he know about them?)?best regards,Dan Watkins>>

Kingsley's Ancient Philosophy, Mystery, and Magic is a good opener.

http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/ClassicalStudies/AncientPhilosophy/?view=usa & ci=9780198150817 & view=usa

And oh, what Euthyphro could tell you! I have Liz's study here, but since it's not published yet, I won't excerpt. But it's that's the stuff of much current study in ancient history and philosophy.

[Guest guest]

Dear Mike,

mike dickman wrote:

>From whom did he nick it (and how did he know about them?)?

*from the guys who came before him, notably (though not only) the

Pythagoreans... and then set his own spin on what he had

manifestly only partially understood (or he would have desisted).

What did he fail to understand?

What do you make of his learning from Socrates? Surely that was key?

best regards,

Dan Watkins

With Plato philo sophia in the West

fully became philo logos and philo lexis and it has

been stuck there ever since...

--

We are wiser than we know.

~Ralph Waldo Emerson

My experience is what I agree to attend to.

~

- Whatcha doin today?

- Nothin.

- But ya done nothin yesterday too!.

- Yup,. Didn't finish, though.

There are three classes of men; lovers of wisdom, lovers of honor, and

lovers of gain.

~Plato (never thought i'd be quoting HIM!)

[Guest guest]

Dear Deborah,

What do you think about the influence of Socrates' teaching on Plato?

best regards,

Dan Watkins

mattingly conner wrote:

Dan asks of plato ...

From whom did he nick it (and how did he know

about them?)?

best regards,

Dan Watkins>>

Kingsley's Ancient Philosophy, Mystery, and

Magic is a good opener.

http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/ClassicalStudies/AncientPhilosophy/?view=usa & ci=9780198150817 & view=usa

And oh, what Euthyphro could tell you! I have

Liz's study here, but since it's not published yet, I won't excerpt.

But it's that's the stuff of much current study in ancient history and

philosophy.

[Guest guest]

You toy with me dan. But since you asked...

>>What do you think about the influence of Socrates' teaching on Plato?I couldn't really say. All we know about Socrates from Plato's dialogues is what Plato says. What he wants us to know. Only two other sources for Socrates. My interest is more NeoPlatonic, another school with influences beyond the rubric "Socrates" (which is sort of like talking about "Homer").

And what do you think about the influence of Socratic thought teaching on Plato?

>>Virtue may require equipment, but on the other hand Socrates, a most virtuous man, lived with just the most very basics (although he did need the city, absolutely) - one cloak, no shoes, winter and summer >>

And, like Wilde, he could drink you under the table. The description you give of him is drawn from the Symposium, and it's meant to liken Socrates to Eros, child of poverty and resource, as differentiate from Alcibiades, glam movie-star brat-pack playboy. But, as Socrates was deemed a philosopher, he would have to have some leisure time. And time is priceless.

you feel:

>> You can't be liberal without money >>

How so? I mean, look at Jesus. And what do you mean by liberal?

[Guest guest]

Dear Deborah,

mattingly conner wrote:

You toy with me dan.

Not at all. To speak of Plato's influences without discussing Socrates

seems remarkable. When I am serious, people think I am joking, and when

I am joking people sometimes think I am serious.

But since you asked...

>>What do you think about the influence of

Socrates' teaching on Plato?

I couldn't really say. All we know about

Socrates from Plato's dialogues is what Plato says. What he wants us to

know.

Well, Plato tells us that he prettied Socrates up, for one thing.

Only two other sources for Socrates. My interest

is more NeoPlatonic, another school with influences beyond the rubric

"Socrates" (which is sort of like talking about "Homer").

Eh... Socrates at least was a real person about whom quite a bit has

been told. Homer - who knows?

And what do you think about the influence of

Socratic thought teaching on Plato?

I think that Socrates was probably the reason that Plato was a

philospher and not simply a gentleman and an intellectual or a scholar.

It seems to be customary in Jungian circles - following Jung,

admittedly - to regard Jesus as the symbol of individuation, but

Socrates fits the bill at least as well imo. A remarkable person who

modeled the philosophic life.

>>Virtue may require equipment, but on the

other hand Socrates, a most virtuous man, lived with just the most very

basics (although he did need the city, absolutely) - one cloak, no

shoes, winter and summer >>

And, like Wilde, he could drink you under

the table. The description you give of him is drawn from the Symposium,

and it's meant to liken Socrates to Eros, child of poverty and

resource, as differentiate from Alcibiades, glam movie-star brat-pack

playboy.

A harsh assessment of Alcibiades who, whatever he was, was not

dissipated. More like Napoleon, perhaps, or a Klingon. If anything,

Plato himself was probably a bit more the playboy type.

But, as Socrates was deemed a philosopher, he

would have to have some leisure time. And time is priceless.

He seems to have been at leisure almost all of the time - an advantage

of needing almost no equipment. I'm not sure Aristotle ever speaks of

him by name.

you feel:

>> You can't be liberal without money

>>

How so? I mean, look at Jesus. And what do you

mean by liberal?

Well, following my other remarks, I meant what Aristotle means -

liberal means giving stuff away, both to those in need and not - so I

suppose it's tautological. I do not think that Jesus was liberal, or

otherwise very virtuous in Aristotle's sense. He seems to have been

rather dreary. I'd rather hang at the symposium than the last supper,

wouldn't you?

best regards,

Dan Watkins

[Guest guest]

dan watkins wrote:

Dear Deborah,

mattingly conner wrote:

You toy with me dan.

Not at all. To speak of Plato's influences without discussing Socrates

seems remarkable. When I am serious, people think I am joking, and when

I am joking people sometimes think I am serious.

But since you asked...

>>What do you think about the influence

of

Socrates' teaching on Plato?

I couldn't really say. All we know about

Socrates from Plato's dialogues is what Plato says. What he wants us to

know.

Well, Plato tells us that he prettied Socrates up, for one thing.

Only two other sources for

Socrates. My interest

is more NeoPlatonic, another school with influences beyond the rubric

"Socrates" (which is sort of like talking about "Homer").

Eh... Socrates at least was a real person about whom quite a bit has

been told. Homer - who knows?

And what do you think about the influence of

Socratic thought teaching on Plato?

I think that Socrates was probably the reason that Plato was a

philospher and not simply a gentleman and an intellectual or a scholar.

It seems to be customary in Jungian circles - following Jung,

admittedly - to regard Jesus as the symbol of individuation, but

Socrates fits the bill at least as well imo. A remarkable person who

modeled the philosophic life.

>>Virtue may require equipment, but on

the

other hand Socrates, a most virtuous man, lived with just the most very

basics (although he did need the city, absolutely) - one cloak, no

shoes, winter and summer >>

And, like Wilde, he could drink you under

the table. The description you give of him is drawn from the Symposium,

and it's meant to liken Socrates to Eros, child of poverty and

resource, as differentiate from Alcibiades, glam movie-star brat-pack

playboy.

A harsh assessment of Alcibiades who, whatever he was, was not

dissipated. More like Napoleon, perhaps, or a Klingon. If anything,

Plato himself was probably a bit more the playboy type.

But, as Socrates was deemed a philosopher, he

would have to have some leisure time. And time is priceless.

He seems to have been at leisure almost all of the time - an advantage

of needing almost no equipment. I'm not sure Aristotle ever speaks of

him by name.

Never mind- he does.

best regards,

DanWatkins

you feel:

>> You can't be liberal without money

>>

How so? I mean, look at Jesus. And what do you

mean by liberal?

Well, following my other remarks, I meant what Aristotle means -

liberal means giving stuff away, both to those in need and not - so I

suppose it's tautological. I do not think that Jesus was liberal, or

otherwise very virtuous in Aristotle's sense. He seems to have been

rather dreary. I'd rather hang at the symposium than the last supper,

wouldn't you?

best regards,

Dan Watkins

[Guest guest]

Dan

(you gadfly you.)

Mr. Homer, indeed. But what we know about Socrates is second hand. That's my point.

I'm a Kingsley convert. What went before with the philosophers is cut off from us. Misinterpreted. Lost. But there still in the dark places of wisdom. Slowly, it returns to us.

But the method, the dance of dialogue, letters. That's what happens in this space. How often things glossed by come back to bite.

And just to be flip -- though I mean it with all my heart:

The modern Socrates: http://www.jungcircle.com/muse/wilde.html

[Guest guest]

Dear Deborah,

mattingly conner wrote:

Dan

(you gadfly you.)

Mr. Homer, indeed. But what we know about

Socrates is second hand. That's my point.

Well, sure. Same with Jung almost, at this point. But second hand, not

forty-third hand. That's pretty good, considering. And if it leads one

to knowledge, then it's all good.

best regards,

Dan Watkins

I'm a Kingsley convert. What went before with the

philosophers is cut off from us. Misinterpreted. Lost. But there still

in the dark places of wisdom. Slowly, it returns to us.

But the method, the dance of dialogue, letters.

That's what happens in this space. How often things glossed by come

back to bite.

And just to be flip -- though I mean it with all

my heart:

The modern Socrates: http://www.jungcircle.com/muse/wilde.html

[Guest guest]

Dan wrote about reading secondhand:

>>Same with Jung almost, at this point. But second hand, not forty-third hand. That's pretty good, considering. And if it leads one to knowledge, then it's all good.I wish I read German-- and a million other languages. Though a good translation can breathe new life and intervening time into a work. But still, getting grounded means being as close to the source as you can.