|
Sphere (1998)
IMDB rating: 5.50
Plot: 1000 feet below the ocean, navy divers discover an object half-a-mile long. A crack team of scientists are deployed to the site in Deepsea Habitats. What they find boggles the mind as they discover a perfect metal sphere. What is the secret behind the sphere? Will they survive the mysterious ‘manifestations’? Who or what is creating these? They may never live to find out.
|
find and download movie here Sphere in iPod/iPhone quaity
Directors: Levinson Barry
Actors: Jackson Samuel L.,Hoffman Dustin,Stone Sharon,Latifah Queen,Schreiber Liev,Coyote Peter,Marga Gomez,Horror,Sci-Fi,Thriller,
Vocabulary test: Liberalism vs Conservatism?
I am always looking to promote understanding among everyone so to that end I will post the DICTIONARY definitions of Liberalism and Conservatism as they relate to politics. Then I will post several hypothetical situations and ask that you guys look at each and decide what the "liberal" thing to do would be, and what the "conservative" thing to do would be based on those dictionary definitions only. Please don’t use your personal opinion as to what they mean. I got the definitions from dictionary.com
——————————————-
Liberalism: a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.
Conservatism(2 definitions): The inclination, especially in politics, to maintain the existing or traditional order.
A political philosophy or attitude emphasizing respect for traditional institutions, distrust of government activism, and opposition to sudden change in the established order.
———————————————–
Now take a look at these situations and please give me what you think the liberal thing to do would be, vs what you think the conservative action would be.
1. Your country is a colony of another country and it taxes you without allowing you to have representatives within its government. The choice comes up whether to attempt to secede from that country through revolution, or stay under the country’s governance as it is. What would either side do?
2. You are a legislator and a bill is proposed that would create an agency to explore a brand new path of scientific research and technology that has never been done before in the history of mankind, and there’s no guarantee that it will be successful… but if it is successful your nation will gain huge amounts of prestige and it has the chance to usher in a new age in technological breakthrough. What is each side’s vote according to the definitions posted?
3. (last one I promise.) You operate a plant that manufactures a luxury consumer good and have the chance to be the first plant owner to adopt a radical brand new method of manufacturing that would drastically reduce costs to the point where your goods are now affordable to most people in the country at the expense of forgoing the traditional manufacturing process. Which action would each side take?
Thanks all and have fun with the questions :). Bonus points if anyone guesses what real life scenarios I was referring to with these hypotheticals.
Hey Skeptical Snowman! That can certainly be a valid point. My assertion is that the words have their meaning the same way that the number 3 is the number 3. Would you care to elaborate on what you mean by that point? I’d be happy to agree with you, or have the chance to rebut what you’re saying.
Hey, a couple more good answers. Good work to both kpk, and jdman 13. Let me say this, I did not necessarily intend to "promote" liberalism. In fact, that was an excellent point about the unions who would indeed oppose such a move.
Also jdman, some good points there. I think you are getting at exactly what the first answerer was trying to say. Here’s the real trick here and what I was trying to get at. Just because one can come up with glaring examples where being "liberal" or "conservative" is correct like I just did. The real challenge is to look at the situation and take the correct action whether it is liberal or conservative. You can not simply decide "I’m conservative and that guy is liberal, so I disagree with whatever he says" or vice versa.
Hey, a couple more good answers. Good work to both kpk, and jdman 13. Let me say this, I did not necessarily intend to "promote" liberalism. In fact, that was an excellent point about the unions who would indeed oppose such a move.
Also jdman, some good points there. I think you are getting at exactly what the first answerer was trying to say. Here’s the real trick here and what I was trying to get at. Just because one can come up with glaring examples where being "liberal" or "conservative" is correct like I just did. The real challenge is to look at the situation and take the correct action whether it is liberal or conservative. You can not simply decide "I’m conservative and that guy is liberal, so I disagree with whatever he says" or vice versa.
damn glitches making me double post.
So what if then for the scenarios, you learned the following?
1. The mother country is only taxing you a small fraction of the GDP that your earning?
2. How about if the agency is actually the "Agency to test experimental drugs on humans" Agency?
3. How about if the new method of manufacturing was to use slaves to build the products because it would drastically reduce labor costs?
Being deliberately vague(even if I was refering to the American Rev, NASA, and Henry Ford) forces people to think… "wait maybe this isn’t a good idea to assume being liberal or conservative is correct"
You can’t simply describe Liberalism or Conservatism by just the dictionary definition. There’s much more weight to it than that.
Skeptical Snowman | Feb 05, 2010
Libs would support all three. The American Revolution, NASA, Henry Ford ?
hiztreebuff | Feb 05, 2010
Neither really applies to #3 because it is purely a business decision for the managers of the business to weigh the options and decide on. Political leanings shouldn’t play a role.
The irony in all of this is how you are obviously trying to focus on Liberalism as promoting advancement and yet in #3 you would find Unions strongly against the proposed changes. Yet Liberal groups tend to strongly support Unions and Unions consistently vote that side of the fence.
Also ironic is that it is Liberal groups that are so strongly in support of more and more government programs. Yet the reality is that the more dependent you become on some group other than yourself, the more individual freedom you lose.
That’s exactly what’s going on right now. The voice of Liberals today do not actually represent true Liberalism. Conservatives are a bit trickier. There are some that don’t represent real Conservatism,, but I think most do want to maintain the status quo but that’s not quite that simple. The status quo is intended to be the original design of the US with strong focus on individual freedom and an economic system in which it’s the individuals and businesses who decide how to run themselves. So while they do practice the conservative ideal of maintaining tradition, that tradition IS to allow freedom and limited government involvement.
What’s really interesting is how only something like 15% of the US population considers themselves Liberal. A much higher percentage consider themselves Conservative, but an even higher percentage consider themselves Moderate. So how did we end up with a president and Congress that is extremely Liberal leaning?
kpk02 | Feb 05, 2010
Your text book definitions are not modern day conservatives and liberals, also liberals should be changed to progressives. Having said that,,just going by the text book questions……
1. Liberals would secede while conservatives would fear change. Conservatives would look at ALL the possible outcomes of seceding and weigh their options. They would be afraid of making things worse by letting people they don’t know start their new country verses people they already know are bad, lesser of two evils. Meanwhile the liberals would blindly jump for change and not give a moments notice to the possible bad outcomes. Anyone who spoke out against their idea would be blasted as uneducated for not believing in THEIR blind ideas.
2.Liberals would be all for it, going by text book definition, even though funding for this agency could bankrupt us with absolutely nothing to show for it in the end. Conservatives would again, weigh out the pros and cons of it and be leary of spending more money on possible wasteful things.
3. Same on the last one.
Dude, the last two were hard, just going by definition, conservatives don’t want anything and don’t want anything to change but that is not true in modern day conservatism. Nothing for the liberalism definition is what a modern day liberal believes.
jdman13 | Feb 05, 2010
Titanic or Freddy Kruger(1st movie)?
jonasluvr42 | Feb 06, 2010
Calvin | Feb 05, 2010
Tracy Gregory