WHEELER

I was a Shabbas goy for two and half years at the Kol Ami in Tampa Bay Florida. I was also on the construction crew that built it. For those of you who accuse me of various things, I worked seven days a week. You may call Rabbi Wasser and confirm it. I also attended every service and prayed right along with it. A scout is reverent and I enjoyed immensely their services; they had a lively, yet solemn, and manly service, not the wimpy chants that accompanied the Catholic Church I attended. I bought my own prayer books and my own skull cap. The Bat Mitzvah is only in Liberal and Conservative Judiasm. The Orthodox Jews do not. Socialism (Equality) has made inroads everywhere. Feminism is Marxist doctrine. Those who follow Marxism have feminism. What can I say. These two movements have sought to compromise with feminism. It doesn't make it right though. Just like the Boy Scouts are compromising with feminism doesn't make it right either. If they really understood male pyschology and sociology, there would be no women in the BSA.

Creation is an historical event. It did happen. Creation does not dismiss dinosaurs and the fossil record. All life came from God though. We have the same DNA as animals because God created them all. Philosophy, which is a science, proves the story of Creation. You disregard the inerrancy of the Scriptures, you disregard the God who made the scriptures. Life begats life. All living things came from a direct creation of God. Speciation did not make apes into humans Sorry. We are made up of 75 % water, and the rest is carbon, nitrogen and other elements. Is water alive? Is carbon or nitrogen alive? If we are just dead material, where is the seat of life then? The latin word for soul is "anima". It is where we get the word "animal". It is also the verb "to animate". That is what a soul does. It is "self-movement". We are nothing but dead material that is "animated". No biology book has a definition of life. They can't explain it. Life is metaphysical object; it is spiritual. Science can not answer what life is they can only label the seven characteristics of life. They are growth,rReproduction, the taking in of nutrients and the expelling of wastes, movement, etc. The plant soul has the powers of growth, reproduction, and the taking of nutrients and the expelling of wastes. The animal soul has all the powers of the plant soul plus one more, movement. The human soul has all the powers of the animal soul plus one more, and that is reasoning. God created the earth and the heavens and then thru the epochs on earth created the forms and implanted soul. Souls are what life is. The soul is the seat of life. God is life. Not only is God the prime mover in that he created matter and then sent it into change, he is the prime mover that sent life into the world. God is the prime mover in the physical as well as the metaphysical (spiritual). Animal souls did not produce a human soul. For you to be a Catholic and think so, you need to re read St. Thomas Aquanis. Potentiality, my dear man, Potentiality. Animals souls do not have the "potentiality" or otherwise, reasoning would be inherent in animals right now. After, 50,000 years of evolution, we still can't talk philisophy with dogs.

(This message has been edited by WHEELER)

There is a misconception that cheerful is "to be fun" and that one can not be cheerful when doing serious work. The people who held to be most gravitas of the Greeks were the Spartans. Herodotus recounts an event at the beginning of the battle at Thermopylae. "Before battle was joined, they say that someone from Trachis warned him how many Persians there were by saying that when they fired their bows, they hid the sun with the mass of arrows. "Dianeces (a Spartiate), so the story goes, was so dismissive of the Persian numbers that he calmly replied, 'All to the good my friend from Trachis. If the Persians hide the sun, we shall fight in the shade." 300 Spartans and their allies stopped over 500,000 Persians at Thermopylae. And all the Spartans at the pass died to a man defending it in obedience to their orders. Greatly outnumbered, against fantastic odds, Dianeces shows the cheerful composure exhibited by the Spartans whatever they were doing, even unto death.

Plato in the Laws says that Atheism is a malady. Atheists had no place in his community. (Laws 908c) Anaxagoras proved thru logic that there is a God. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle continued his line of thought. It says in Scripture, "only a fool says in his heart that there is no god." And that "the heavens and earth declare the wisdom of God". Atheism really manifests itself in the philosophy of Nihilism. Atheists are Nihilists and therefore materialists. Nietzche is the propounder of this and helped the rise of national socialism. Plato says that those who do not believe, are "incontinence in pleasure and pain and are in possession of a vigorous memory and a keen intellect." and these people give rise to "dictators, demogogues," etc. Hitler, Mussolini, Lenin, Trosky, Mao Tsedung, Stalin, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh were all atheists.

Philosophy proves the creation story true? No man has seen quarks but they are there. No man can see atoms but they are there and the very name atom comes from the Greek thinkers, WHO THRU LOGIC, saw that things are made up of smaller units. Look how philosophy of the Greeks came up with atoms. Not exact but the concept of them. If the mind is intelligent, isn't it intelligent enough to communicate with us? To Firstpusk, Truth does not contradict truth. Scriptural truth is in harmony with physical truth. Both were created thru the Logos of God. God is wiser than me, I will believe God.

A definition of Effeminacy, I did the research and presented it. You have all learned. How valuable is that? This education you will never learn at any of the universities or colleges. The philosophy department at Berea College would not let me into the department. Even with my transcripts from Rome, NO go. Conservative websites are now noticing a trend in many colleges and universities that discriminate against them by giving lower grades than their peers and other things. Is there discrimination out there yes. Is obscurantism wide spread? Sure is. Did you not learn what virtue was? how valuable was that? Free information. Now you can give a correct and rewarding definition to the boys? Just like Socrates before me, sent to sting awake. Didn't I say we needed a more scientific approach with more knowledge of a science of manhood? "On my honor I will do my Best" What Best? To stay ignorant? Is the attitude here on this website the same attitude that the U.S. Military has? One doesn't win on the battlefield with mediocrity. The Marines win because they are the Best. Is that the attitude of the BSA? Do we want to be the best or slime like the rest?

Palios Xristos!

To evmori Do you desire opinion or knowledge? Do you want to remain ignorant? I can pull up the same things from Socrates. Aristotle Virtues and Vices, Vol 285, pg 499 "To profligacy belongs choosing harmful and base pleasures and enjoyments, and thinking that the happiest people are those who pass their lives in pleasures of that kind, and being fond of laughter and mockery and jokes and levity in words and deeds. "Profligacy is accompanied by disorder, shamelessness, irregularity, luxury, slackness, carelessness, negligence, remissness.

To Mr. White: "Do not confuse experience or knowledge with wisdom." Is this the truth? Socrates in the Republic: "Then knowledge and opinion having distinct powers have also distinct spheres or subject matters? reply: That is certain Socrates: Being is the sphere or subject-matter of knowledge and knowledge is to know the nature of being? reply: Yes Socrates: And opinion is to have an opinion? reply: Yes Socrates: And do we know what we opine? or is the subject-matter of opinion the same as the subject-matter of knowledge? reply: Nay, that has been already disproven; if difference in faculty implies difference in the sphere or subject-matter, and if, as we were saying, opinion and knowledge are DISTINCT FACULTIES, then the sphere of knowledge and of opinion cannot be the same. paraphrased it reads "Opinion differs from knowledge because the ONE ERRS and THE OTHER IS UNERRING." Plato's Republic, Jowett translation, Vintage Books, sec 477-478, or pages 209-210. Aristotle's Virtues and Vices, Loeb Classical edition Vol 285, pg 493 "...SAGACITY, TO HAVE EXPERT KNOWLEDGE OF ALL THINGS THAT ARE USEFULL. MEMORY, AND EXPERIENCE AND ACUTENESS ARE EACH OF THEM EITHER A CONSEQUENCE OR A CONCOMITANT OF WISDOM; OR SOME OF THEM AS IT WERE SUBSIDARY CAUSES OF WISDOM, AS FOR INSTANCE EXPERIENCE AND MEMORY.....

To NJCubScouter Aristotle disproves evolution in the Metaphysics, one way; and I can using the rest of his philosophy prove other points as well. Yes to both questions.

I did not descend from an ape nor did I descend from a common ancestor that produced apes and man. I am a creation of God. God made a form from the mud, and BREATHED into it spirit. All men are reproductions of this first man. We have differentiated into races but we are all created. Human reasoning can not know this; only divine revelation, 'revealed' it to us. Modern day understanding of evolution is that we descended from animals. And those animals from the sea. Wrong. God made every primary form breathed life into it and from there every specific form differentiated. Life begats life. Only something living can produce something living. Dead material can not produce living material. All life is organization. Organization comes about thru intelligence. Every life form has been planned and executed. God is a potter. This is the key though, if we are created by God then we belong to Him. If we evolutionized, then we are our own God. That is why the THEORY of evolution is the basis of every socialism. Socialism is the rebellion from God.

I have never been married nor do I have any children. To the question do I refuse to be gainfully employed: Book of Sirach: 3:24 "Many are decieved by their own vain opinion." 38:24 "The wisdom of a learned man cometh by opportunity of leisure: and he that hath little business shall become wise." 31:9 "A man that hath travellled knoweth many things: and he that hath much experience will declare wisdom. He that hath no experience knoweth little: but he that hath travelled is full of prudence. When I travelled, I saw many things; and I understand mroe that I can express. I often times in danger of death: yet I was delivered because of these things." 38.27 to 39.4 "So every carpenter and workmaster, that laboreth night and day: and they that cut and grave seals and are diligent to make great variety, and give themselves to counterfeit imagery, and watch to finish a work... "The smith...setteth his mind to finish his work, and watcheth to polish it perfectly... "So doeth the potter sitting at his work...and everyone is wise in his work... "(v32) Without these cannot a city be inhabited: and they shall not swell where they will, nor go up and down: they shall not be sought for in public counsel, not sit high in the congreation: they shall not sit on the judges seat, not understand the sentence of judgement: they cannot declare justice and judgement; and they shall not be found where parables are spoken . "But they will maintain the state of the world, and [all] their desire is in the work of their craft. 39.1 "But he that giveth his mind to the law of the most High, and is occupied in the meditation thereof, will seek out the wisdom of ALL THE ANCIENTS, and be occupied in prophecies. HE WILL KEEP THE SAYINGS OF RENOWNED MEN: and where subtil parables are, he will be there also. He will seek out the secrets of grave sentences, and be conversant in dark parables.

To Mr. White: This is a response to the post "The training of boys to Men": Sorry I don't see your point. I have never looked at Scouting as training boys to be men. Even as a Scout Leader in Baden Powell's back yard we looked at Scouting as: The mental, Physical and spiritual development of the young person to become a worthwhile member of Society. This was posted by Eamonn. Obviously, this is just plain hypocrisy on your behalf Mr. White. This proves my point and not yours. Here is a scoutmaster that has been involved continously and what does he say: have never looked at Scouting as training boys to be men. Even as a Scout Leader in Baden Powell's back yard Then, I posted the extract from the l948 manual. Proved him that he has a misconception. So, Mr. White, your contention does not hold water. With the post, "To be a Man" has taught something to somebody. Eamonn has learned something now.

From France, I moved back into Switzerland. I returned to the Canton of Ticino, to the village of Loco in Valle Osernone. This was the Swiss Alps. Valle Osernone had no valley floor, it was a river between two huge mountain ranges. A single road ran on the high right side of the valley. The houses and roofs were all made out of field stone without mortar. Though much of the valley was covered in forests, some of it was terraced by stone walls. Valle Osernone was known as Robber Valley or the Valley of Starvation. The main staple through the 1800s, believe it or not, was corn. The terraced land was of dual purpose. Much hay was grown and stone pillars that stood 6ft or higher held up poles of grape vines. I looked up a farmer that I knew from the year before and began working for him. He lived on the opposite side of the village of Loco; on the other side of the valley. It was a three mile walk to his house from the village; down one side, over the river, and half way up again. He and his wife and two children lived on a small farm with four cows, a goat and a small vegetable garden. The only road was in Loco. I spent that summer working for him and I learned a lot from him. We cut hay with a scythe four hours in the morning in the village in Loco, a lot of it under grape arbors. In the afternoon, we would spread out the hay or go out to previously cut hay and turn it over. After the hay was dry, about four days time, we would pack it in round rope nets; roll it up the adjoining terrace and heave it up onto our backs. It took whole afternoons sometimes, to carry 9-16 rolls of dried baled hay to the teleferico. (He had a small cable system from the village to his farm.) I would lay down in the box and traverse 800 ft above the valley floor to the farm. Next, he would send the hay over. Once the hay was hauled over, I would roll the bales into the upper part of the barn, unravel the net, spread out the hay and tamp it down by walking on it for a good 20 minutes. One particular afternoon, we came to a field of what-I-thought was dried hay. I said, Lets pick it up. And his reply was, Its not right. My jaw hit the ground. (I heard this expression in the Marine Corps. We were constantly harangued to do things right because our lives on the battlefield depended on this.) I was stunned to hear this answer. I asked him what did he mean. He said, It has got to be just right: if the hay was not dry enough, when it got to the barn it would start to rot and this rot would spread ruining all the rest. Without a car, no money (for he was very poor) and probably 3-6 ft of snow, where would he get new hay? If the hay was left out too long, the sun would cook out all the nutrients, the cows would grow weak and sick and the secondary cause would be that his children, drinking the milk, would not get the nutrients that they needed. I would be facing death in the middle of January, he said, Everything has got to be just right. This was the meaning and the importance of Aristotles golden mean. It was also the importance of the Delpic oracle saying, Nothing in Excess. This man was smarter than any nuclear scientist. Life or Death rested on this modality of Righteousness. His life depended on doing every thing right like the soldiers job depended on doing every thing right on the battlefield. The difference between doing something right or wrong, was the difference between life or death. This lesson brought home the stark reality of Nature. There is no second chance with Nature. She will kill you in a heartbeat. It is the wise and prudent man that beats her to the punch.

To Firstpusk I understand differentiation. I read about the alleles in Scientific America. I understand how species get developed. When people speak of evolution, they mean land animals crawled out of the sea. And sea animals mysteriously formed out the mud of the earth and the bottom of some lagoon? Nothing you said in your first post said where life came from. Where did the first species come from? Where did the first cell come from? I understand that one can make 50,000 different species of bacteria from a single bacteria form. But after 50,000 changes, the bacteria is still a SINGLE cell life form. It didn't change into a two cell living organism. So how do you suppose, one cell grew into a mamoth whale?

there is no way of determining either of these mens religious beliefs because they are dead, When one looks at nature, one sees order. Order presupposes Intelligence. Intelligence exists in something. That something is mind. This is credited to the pre-socratic Philosopher Anaxagoras. The pre-socratic philosophers were trying to find the "arche" of reality; some said earth, others water, still others fire, some said aire. But Aristotle credits Anaxagoras with the right answer. Socrates was accused of impiety. Socrates was a monotheist. In his trial, Socrates mentions Anaxagoras and his writings. Socrates downplayed the gods of myth. Anaxagoras, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were all monotheists. Aristotle said that God is not only pure mind and spirit but also the prime mover from whence all change comes from. They had no concept of ex-nihilo but this God did order the universe.

While you like to take pot shots at me... Mary was listening to Jesus and Martha was taking care of the hospitality. Martha walked up to Jesus and said, Tell her to help me for I am very busy. Jesus said, Martha Martha, you are very concerned with many things; one thing is needful. Mary has chosen the good portion, which shall not be taken away from her." I choose the good portion.

We have learned how to destroy the world many times over and built the means to do it, yet we haven't. What keeps us from doing it? We have learned to survive our own destructive bad habits. That is a truth that keeps us in balance. The ancients did not need to worry about such a truth, unless it was an interesting idea to ponder. This quote that "The ancients did not need to worry about such truth." As the saying goes there is nothing new under the sun. The ancients did have an ideal of total destruction. Both of the Flood stories in the Bible and in the Gilgamesh Epic of Babylon. Sodom and Gomorrah is another historical footnote. The Assyrians practiced total warfare and destruction. The Roman's destruction of Carthage and Jerusalem. The Romans even salted the earth so it would remain unusable. The Romans after capturing the two cities levelled both places just like a nuclear weapon could do. The Athenians captured Melos and killed all the males. In l832, the Turks captured an island city, the name escapes me right now, and put all to death, all 18,000 inhabitants. Total destruction did exist in old times. Men were just afraid then as they are today with nuclear threat. We have just grown more effecient and greater scale. There is nothing new under the sun.

Being Cheerful is not the same as being fun. Being cheerful, is about having a cheerful attitude whether one is at a campfire or scrubbing the patrol's pans in cold creek water. Are we confusing the terms here? Cannot one have a cheerful attitude when one is doing his duty? Are we climatizing boys to expect that if it ain't fun, I'm not participating in it. This concept of "having fun" is not the same as "being cheerful".

"but they don't need to be serious now. They need to be allowed to be children." This quote is by Laurie who voted down the post "To be a man". These exact same words were spoken to me eight years ago by a college professor at Berea College. Let me count the ways for you: While in Saudi Arabia, though after the war, I caught nine people sleeping on post. When in construction, I had to deal with lots many young men who couldn't do work or shied away, because they sought fun. I got a lot of work out of men that were 30 years and older. At the college we were at, more women applied for the gardening/landscaping, mowing jobs than men. The men tried their hardest to find the easist jobs. When, at the college, we held a public forum about the college and what was happening there, the whole audience except for two men were women. I looked out the window, a band was playing and all the men were down there for it....partying. When, at college, the senate hearings of Waco were going on TV, I watched alone yet downstairs, four men were watching WWF. At most of the government meetings I attend, more women show up than men. Some men never grow up and their whole life is about playing the games of a child because that is where the fun is. When fun is the medium, their whole outlook in life is about doing this over and over again. When a man has a serious outlook, he participates in serious things. When a man has an "I want to be amused outlook", then that is what he searches for. I am out there in the real world, I had to put up with this. Observe. This was a dangerous trait I learned in the Boy Scouts when I had to learn how to track and how to identify plant species in the old way. It trained my mind to observe. The other culture that loved to hunt was the Spartans. It was a technique to train the mind to observe. One learns to observe very well this way. Observation is a key to manhood. Why no participation in the serious things of life but wrapped up in the trivialties of life?

Would you please notice the ranking on this post? This post has received a 100% thumbs down. Four people have voted this way. I can understand my other posts receiving 100% disapproval but not this one. I am shocked by this. One may disagree with my conclusion at the bottom but how can anybody disagree with the information in the text? Is there a discrepancy out there to the mission and the fundamentals of Boy Scouting? Are we unsure of what we are doing?

Wheeler, there are many philosophies. "Philosophy" indeed exists, but it is a discipline, a means of arriving at answers, not an answer itself. And what you are talking about is really religion (which I realize some consider a type of philosophy) and specifically YOUR religion. Religion, by itself, can prove or disprove nothing, it is a matter of faith, belief and opinion. Science, on the other hand, deals with facts. Philosophy is not a Religion. Philosophy deals with facts. Was Aristotle or Plato Christians? What religion did they practice? Yet with using Aristotelian philosophy I can completely refute evolution theory. It has nothing to do with religion. Socrates is a man. All men die. Socrates will die. This is a fact. This is knowledge. But I arrived at this through a sylogism. A syllogism is a part of Logic and logic a part of philosophy. Is the sylogism a religion? Is logic a religion? Is common sense a religion? Does physical science answer the question What is love? Does love exist if it can't be proved scientifically? Can you measure justice? Can you weigh courage? If from what I gather that you are implying is that they don't exist? Love, Courage, justice, mental thought, are all metaphysical. Physical science does not deal with the metaphysical. Philosophy does. Oh and by the way, before you quote Aristotle's scientific "proofs," do you also believe that the Sun goes around the Earth? That is what Aristotle believed. Aristotle and those other guys you like to quote, Plato and Socrates, were pretty smart guys, and some of the things they said can still assist us, but they didn't know everything. It is funny that the whole time his works were lost to the Western world, nobody ever duplicated his work. Copercunicus and Newton jumped off with their reading of Aristotle. Aristotle wasn't perfect but a lot of what he said is still good for today. Truth is timeless.

George Bush is AWOL! What about the Constitution? George Bush has shown total disregard for the Constitution. He campaigned on being the "Educational President". Yet, the Constitution does not delegate this job to the federal government. Education is not the purview of the federal government. Both Bill Clinton and George Bush took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States yet neither does. Words have no meaning and laws have no meaning. What is an oath? Empty words. In all of his education at Yale, George Bush never learned that this is a Republic. He uses the word democracy. What is his Yale degree in history worth, not the paper it is printed on. An oath is only as good as the man behind it. Law is only good as the man behind it. When I say politics and its effect in the Boy Scout program, do we have any concept of "The rule of Law". A scout is Trustworthy yet neither Bill Clinton nor George Bush can do this. In America today, there is no rule of law. There is no standard. Original intent vs Living Constitution. Original intent of the Boy Scouts vs a living progressive idea of the Boy Scouts. Culture defines Politics.

Well, when four people vote thumbs down on the post, "To be Man' which is 3/4 of an extractfrom an old field manual, something is wrong, don't you think? I think we have people unsure of the concept and its importance. I think that I can address this part. Isn't the Boy Scouts about manhood? Isn't virtue about being a man? Then how can not my posts further the knowledge toward this goal? Now, I am participating in the Boy Scout movement from a computer. Is that okay? My poverty prevents my travel but I can by my posting be of some value to others who do participate in meetings and in the formation of policy and the strengthening of the Boy Scout Mission by giving you information you may not have and may very well help the cause. As Socrates says information should be free of charge. I think that I can safely say that none of you have ever heard the word "effeminate" but this word was common knowledge in Victorian England. I think that I can safely say that none have heard the saying "The good comes through the hard", but this saying was common knowledge in Victorian England. Don't suppose that the milieu we live in America is the same milieu that created the Baden Powell and the Boy Scout program. Now I do want to be involved and that is why I am posting because the Boy Scout program is the best there is.