View Single Post
Old November 7th 08, 03:33 PM posted to alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent,rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,alt.mountain-bike
external usenet poster
Posts: 3,754
Default The Dilemma of Tom Sherman

On Nov 6, 1:06*pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message

On Nov 4, 3:12 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:

"JimmyMac" wrote in message

On Nov 1, 5:38 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:

"JimmyMac" wrote in message

If being a member of society is about sharing culture and
hermits do not participate in and/or share in communal culture,
preferring an insular lifestyle of solitude, they consciously reject
the very society that they allegedly are part of, but you just fail to
comprehend what is a very elementary concept.

Wow! Are you sure you ever took any courses in sociology or
For God's sakes, if you are even sharing a language you are basically
sharing everything. Hermits share culture just as much if not more than
those who are active socially. If that were not true, how the hell would
even be able to communicate with one another.

I understand you quite well and you me. That is because we share a
Are you sadly incapable of formulating a reasonable, defensible

premise? OK. .. since you are obviously struggling with what is an
elementary concept, allow me to take one last cut at this. Sharing
language and/or a common culture are not definitive factors which
determine whether one is a member of society.

Actually, those are the definitive factors. Everything else can be quite
minor and even irrelevant.

A Turk, a Japanese, a

Swahilli, an Eskimo and an Egyptian speak vastly different languages
and are from vastly different cultures, but they are still members of
society ... that is unless they happen to choose the insular,
reclusive, cloistered lifestyle of the hermit.

They are members of a particular society but not of society in general
does not exist. They are also members of a particular culture, but not of
culture in general which again does not exist.

By choice, a hermit is

NOT a member of society!!! Enough said in the matter.

You obviously have no conception of the sociological meaning of these
Back to Soc 101 for you!
You obviously have no conception of the sociological meaning of the

term hermit. *Back to Soc 101 for you. *If everyone in your
mythological concept of society were hermits, how would there possibly
be a society. *You have to be one of the most stubbornly illogical
person I have ever encountered ... unwilling to concede a single point
no matter how wrongheaded you happen to be.

I am always delighted to be proven wrong as that means I can learn something
new. But you have got an awful long ways to go to find me wrong about

It is impossible to become a human being without being immersed in a
society. You will not even have language unless you belong to a society.
Without language you are not a human being. You are just another primate
animal. Read some histories of "wild boys" (children totally isolated from
birth without any human contact) if you can find any. They are very rare
cases, almost nonexistent.

A hermit is as much a member of society as the most social butterfly.

I am familiar with various instances of humans raised in isolation,
but that is much to do about nothing (more about this irrelevance

As for the rest ... UTTER CRAP it is! First, you cannot be proved
wrong because you are unwilling to admit when you are wrong.
Consequently, by your own logic, you have apparently learned nothing
in quite a long time. FACT ... by etymological derivation, be it
French (société) or Latin (societas, from sociusu), the very
definition of the word hermit stands in contradiction of your
contention that a hermit is a member of society. A hermit is one who
has deliberately and consciously has withdrawn from social contact and
society as a whole. Now, granted (unlike a human raised in
isolation) you were once were immersed in society and learned a
language, but by conscious choice have now since chosen to reject
society and live the secluded live of a recluse disenfranchised from
society. The only significant difference between a human raised in
isolation and a hermit is that a hermit was not reared in isolation
and chose isolation later in life, voluntarily severing his or her
ties with society.. In fact a hermit is less a social animal than a
primate in the wild. Sorry Ed, but you are what you are ... a hermit
and you are what you are .... wrongheaded about this no matter what
spin you put on it. Enough said.


Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota


Home - Home - Home - Home - Home