Added: 4 years ago
From: StevenErnest
Views: 3,016
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (47)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I'm a bit of both, unfortunately

  • @sellout89 Aw, that can be good, actually, if you can manage to balance the two. ^_^

  • Im definitely a sea urchin!

  • Steve:

    Allan Watts was one of my all-time favorites. When I first read "The Book..." I was spellbound. Along with Krishnamurti, Watts was a master of producing these "Aha!" moments. If that makes sense. I was unaware of the nexus between Watts and Gumby, but I have always had an affinity for the clay character. I had a beloved cat named Gumby. You seem to have a sense of humor very similar to Allan. I very much enjoy your videos.

    Respectfully, Jeff Brownlee

  • U R COOL.

  • My first thought about these dialectic personalities is Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek. Mr. Spock = Prickly, Dr. McCoy = Gooey.

  • Ha, ha, that's a great observation!

    It's been said that they are the two sides of Capt. Kirk, who is the man of action (ego) -- Spock is the logical/rational mind (super-ego), and McCoy is the feeling emotion side (id).

    This dialectic probably shows up in a lot of places.

  • I'm half gooey, and half prickly.

  • Which half is which? ^_^

  • The gooey side of me is my theism, and my trippy sense of humore, and the prickly part of me is how I'm skepticle.

  • i've got a semi right now

  • No kidding!

  • @BrokenChair88 Okay, that makes a lot of sense. :-)

  • @StevenErnest Pretty much everything I said three years ago made a lot of sense. Not so much anymore however...

    Actually come to think of it, I think that generally, gooeyness sorta drowns out the pricklyness. Y'know, like if you're someone like me who's half gooey, half prickley, the gooeyness just sorta overgooes the prickle. *Sigh* I'd explain further if I were good at explaining my thoughts, but three years of thinking too hard made that not so easy anymore. Oh well.

  • Steve-

    Are you a gooey person or a prickly person. I'm a gooey person of the creative nature. I love your videos. Ain't youtube great? We can find so much to enjoy and to stimulate our mind on youtube and the internet. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and videos.

    Liz

  • I'm mostly goeey, with some prickly bits here and there. ^_^ I'm glad you like my vids! Yes, YouTube is wonderful, there are some really, really smart people on here.

    I also chat with some of them live on Stickam, now and then.

  • How I see it;

    Philosophy of the Prickles = Scientific Atomism

    Philosophy of the Goo = Mystical Holism

  • Three things here...

    1. You could say that once people got sick of Goo and Prickly.. They had to find a 3rd option.. As to what that option is I dont know, However ill go with Eclecticisem as a possibility. Not to prickly, not to gooey.. Just smooth. =D

    2. No one said anything about this vid in 4 months. I could not let that slide.

    3. Doc Strange in the back ground. Ernest you get a extra bow. /bow

    ^.^

    P.s. Idk how I missed this vid.

  • 1. I like that, "just smooth..." I suppose the ideal would be an equal balance of both.

    2. Thanks for not letting it slide beyond four months, yikes!

    Vids are like messages in a bottle... floating on the sea of the internet, hopefully finding their way to an appreciative audience.

    3. By the Hoary Hosts of Hoggoth, I'm glad you saw the good Dr. Strange. I recently acquired a semi-rare action figure... doll... no, Action Figure... jeez.

    Thanks for your cool comment, I appreciate it!^_^

  • There is 10 billion categorizations in my opinion ;)

  • Well, yes, as everyone is unique, you could say technically that there are 6 billion kinds (that's the current world population.) And maybe throw in some Dolphins, chimpanzees, dogs, etc. ^_^

  • i think the gooey people are the creative rare ones and the prickly people are those humans with no souls just going along with the crowd

  • I don't believe in categorizing people, but in general I agree that gooey people are creative. But I look at the prickly people as the more logical type, engineers, planners, scientists -- you need both kinds! It is dangerous to de-humanize some group of people as having "no soul."

  • yeah, maybe that was a little low. i just feel that folllowers most of the time end up doing more damage than good to the world cause they end up doing stupid shit for the wrong people.

  • Would you be prickly or gooey to come up with the idea of there being these types of people :D

    Nice video. I acknowledge that this is the major reason for philosophical debate.

  • Well, I'm gooey on the inside, and prickly on the outside -- we probably have to be a little of both to perceive them.

    Yes, I really do think that these are two major philosophical viewpoints, or worldviews!

  • holy shit you're hot as.

  • I know I am! But hot as what?

  • Hi StevenErnest, thanks for publishing this, The Book is one of the essential books of my life. I'd like to recite a fundamental phrase of Watts on that book:

    ''Irrevocable commitment to any religion is not only intellectual suicide, it is also possitive unfaith because it closes the mind to any new vision of the world. Faith is, above all, open--ness, an act of trust in the unknown''

    Alan Watts

    The Book, On the taboo against knowing who you are

  • Sebastiamer, Yes, that's a fantastic Watts quote!

  • Oh boy.

  • ? Really?

  • I don't care for Watts' negative use of the words 'prickley & gooey.' Moreover, I feel that I'm a combination of the two, but I will look into it a little more at the library. Btw, Steven, there is an excellent educational site on the web called 'The Teaching Company.' It is a combination of lecture & outline, which can easily be downloaded. They have an array of highly qualified university professors,teaching the following: philosophy, science, math, history, psychology & religion.

  • I don't think he was being too negative regarding each trait, but more in how each looks at the other. He was definitely implying that a balance between the two is best -- just as you said you feel that you're a combination.

    I appreciate your thoughful comment, and I will look into The Teaching Company. It sounds great!

  • I hate classifying things too much, so I think I'm gooey, I am fascinated with grey shades (the obvious is obvious... Im always attracted to mystery). I beleive that hope is the mother of endurance, therefore I'm gooey, but I need some obvious answers too, so certianty!!! some times grey chades can be frustrating, specially in a novel settings. So I become prickly.

  • If you insist, I could come up with a good description but I think Amazon can do a better job than me. I shouldn't take you too long to find it on amazon.

    Charles Taylor: "The Malaise of Modernity" or "Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity"

    Gilles Lipovetsky: "Hypermodern times"

  • QuarksRStrng: Thanks a lot, I'll look them up!

  • Ha! Nature or nurture or no I?

  • OK, Steven, the world wants to know: Do you see yourself as prickly or gooey???

  • Scoutie: Hmmm, methinks I'll keep the world guessing for a bit. Though I bet you have an idea. ^_^

    But seriously, folks: Obviously I'm a perfect balance of the two. 0_0

    A role model for today's youth, as well as my peers. Note: Irony intended! ^_^

  • BTW, yes Steven, I think I could predict your GPR: goo/prick ratio ;-)

  • Scoutie, P.S. I found that Watts excerpt thanks to you -- I was looking for that squiggly/grid thing of his, and ran into Prickle Goo quote, serendipity.

  • Geeze, Ernest. Your post wasn't 'announced' to me via Email. Just thought I'd CHECK to see if you'd posted to me. You having this problem, too? Funny, MetaBob mentioned this Watts' book in his latest vid--and now you! (I haven't read this one.)

  • BTW, I tend to have the most issues with Fundamentalist Goos and Fundamentalist Pricks ;-D

  • That's a good one, scoutie.

  • Scoutie: I've been getting email notices of all posts as far as I can tell. I'll have to check MetaBob's video re Watts book!

  • Steven - Meta recommends the book in his latest 'Ask Me Anything' vid. (Hmmm - the Email response thing, who knows.)

  • Scoutie: Yep, just got this comment-notice, ^_^ They sometimes go astray into the YTube ether. I usually try to check my posts in case anyone has responded.

    I'll check Mr. Meta's vid, but he's done a lot of answers.

  • [just watched strangeholm's video] If there must be only 2 types of people, you have to pick a freakin' generality; where no shades of grey are possible. Like... living or dead.

    Sociologists came up with a lot of great ideas about "how do people define themselves in society".

  • I suggest: "Charles Taylor" or "Gilles Lipovetsky"

    Both are easily found on: amazone . com

    (Damn YouTube and its "no URL" stupid rule... you can't even refer people to intelligent books...).

  • Quarks, could you give the book titles, and just a line of what they're about?

  • You know me, I read those in French but, sure! Why not.

  • For C.Taylor (philosopher praised by sociologists), I read "Grandeur et misère de la modernité" (English title: The Malaise of Modernity) but, by looking on Amazon, I would also suggest "Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity".

  • For G.Lipovetsky, I read "Le temps hypermoderne" (English title: Hypermodern Times).

  • I look at it as a psychological exercise. Not to pigeonhole people into one category. Of course people are shades of gray -- or all the colors of the spectrum... some veering into the ultraviolet. ^_^

  • What about ghosts, zombies, people in comas, unborn babies, and republicans? ahhh... shades of gray.

  • 2 kinds, living or dead:

    Ghosts - Living

    Zombies - Living

    People in comas - Living

    Unborn babies - Living

    Republicans - Read: Zombies

    See? Easy : ))

  • all of your answers are debatable, except republicans.... in which case I feel you are 100% accurate....

  • Every time I define others- I contradict myself.

  • And it's the same when others define you.

  • Every time I define myself- I lies.

  • You lie to others, or to yourself? ^_^

  • Well- first me then you- & that's no lie!*~*

  • I'm prickly on the surface, but gooey at the core, like one of those chocolates that you avoid in the box!

    You're gooey and delicious, StevenErnest.

  • Lol, mmmmm chocolate...Yum.

    You get avoided? Maybe you only think you do.

    And thanks! ^_^

  • I pick to be ummm Prickles - but I don't like Pickles (they taste gross)! Maybe Im Prickly on the outside but deep inside I'm gooey or maybe Im gooey on the outside but deep inside Im prickly - or maybe...

  • Ha! Prickles -- not Pickles, ;p Although you are kinda a Gurkin, J/K. I also think you have a good balance of the two traits! ^_^

  • I love it! I wonder where I fit in. Up to the viewer! Thanks for the response Steven! Food for thought indeed... I'll be dreaming of prickles and goo tonight.

  • Thanks! Offhand I'd say your ratio is about 50/50: prickly on the inside, or rational, with a gooey presentation, irrational side. A good balance! ^_^

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more