Till the gang shows up, may I introduce you to my contemplation about liquor, values and probes ...
I'm not very familiar with Whisky as I'm used more to Vodka and Tequila, but as I was told, drinking Whisky is just something total different. Vodka, you know, has something to do with getting in tough with the depth of a heavy infinite soul, so light at the same time, you feel tears running down your cheeks, while Tequila meets easiness and joy, so tragic and finite, you find yourself laughing out loud. Though Vodka and Tequila seduce to excessive fiestas, they give answers to questions, but by vanishing the question. They just de-mask question and answer, as finally irrelevant, but at the top of a grand fiesta, they turn you back to a lonely state mentioning, that your salvation is to be damned to deal with these questions. Now, I was told, and so I'm back to the issue, Whisky is total different to them. Whisky faces the question. Whisky is philosophically. Therefore not dedicated to grand fiestas, but to quiet circles of wisdom seeking men contributing to them, that there is an answer to the questions, but this answer can't be known, but tasted.
Introduced to that, I was looking for a good brand of a Single Malt Scotch Whisky and picked up a Laphroaig Vintage 1976. But as I was told that the Islay Distilleries produce the most strongly flavored whiskies and especially the taste of Laphroaig is recommended to be the very mightiest of them with a medicinal nose and an intense savor of Seaweed and Marine Iodine, hefty smoky and salty and entirely uncompromising and furious dominant in its everlasting back-palate and finish, I decided to stay apart of it and was handled over to a Glendronach of the same age. A Highlander with a huge body and very deep amber and ruby bronze highlights, rich and powerful, of gentle tannins, softly but increasingly mouth warming with great spirit and a long lasting back-palate of burnt nuttiness and an almost chewy finish. Bombardier, exactly at that moment I knew why you are called Highlander. So please, may I procure the honor to open this Malt and share with you the grand spirit of its divine taste.
Concerning the Probes, as you know, I have set on very top to guide my action the vision of a peaceful link between mankind and Ipsolstia. But seeing you acting I realized, that you have set on your very top the wellbeing of the Probes, struggling for the release of Daniel and gaining for the independence of Bette by suggesting to remove the non metal bulb regardless to the reaction of the Ipsos. Your commitment to the vision follows in a second line, after the independence of the probes is guaranteed .That makes me ashamed of myself. So I have to go into the papers and put something above our vision. Something like values.
Yes, I know this issue should be discussed at Probe Discuss, but I think, sometimes informal contemplation off the conference table with a glass of good Whisky can be more helpful. Such a value could be loyalty, especially our loyalty to the probes, as we earned their faith by respecting them as sentient beings. Having that on the very top, means if our vision is going to fail, we have to lead the probes off focus concerning Ipsos and other forces, and to help them in finding new and appealing tasks, whatever and wherever that might be. Having that in mind, we have to ask the Probes at a certain time referring to their free and voluntary will, if they are willing to support our vision, recommending that we won't stay apart, what ever they might decide.
I don't know, if it is wise to ask them all in one, so I think its better to ask them, as they are going to be exposed. At the moment Zachary, Daniel and Enoch and Bette by her bulb are the most exposed ones. Daniel is to be rescued and Zachary is focused and holding up the task. But to keep Enoch at the piquet, I think, is not absolutely necessary, as our loyalty should lead us to hold the risk at the very minimum. Concerning Bette, I would suggest to consult Dr.D, what the risk is to remove the non metal. Concerning the Ipsos, in my opinion, leading Enoch, Bette and Andrew off their focus can be argued, as these Probes want to stay in the background till they know, they are accepted as sentient. However, in the meanwhile Zachary keeps himself at their proposal.
Anyway, that is not my intention here at Messhall, as it really concerns to Probe Discuss, I will carry it over there. No, my intention concerns values. Bombardier, what makes you to put the wellbeing of the probes at the very top. It is not only loyalty. There is something above loyalty. In a model of cognitive structure, I've mentioned at the boards once, the terminal value has been: "to be successful". But there is something else above loyalty and success. What makes a motor racer in a front position to stop to help another motor racer, who is sitting in his burning car. No one would blame him, not to do so and the time to decide to stop is not quite more than a second. Same case, what makes a motor racer, who is leading the world championship, to refuse starting at a race, he feels the safeness is not adequate. It is not the fear of his own safety. It is a protest, meaning staying for something above success and loyalty. There are quite many people having quite much money on stake. So he will not be called a hero, and there is no applause, though it is accepted as something very essential. -- What is that, Highlander ?? Give me the name of it. I feel it on my tongue, but I can't name it. To name it would lead me out of a nutshell. It is very close to reliability, but reliable to what ??
Some days ago, I read about a catholic cardinal, to whom an atheist said, he would not believe in God. The answer of the cardinal had been, that's this is exactly the difference between him and the atheist. He, the cardinal himself, does not know, if he believes. I really appreciated his statement, as it leads him out of dilemma. If he doubtlessly believed, he would be in the situation to spend his life to serve God to get in return a nice place in heaven. But you can't buy a ticket to heaven, not even by dealing that way. The way out is, by not knowing, if he believes, he can't count on that deal and as it becomes obsolete it works. That doesn't mean he is simply speculating. No he is serving something else. But what is it ??
Coming back to the example of the motor racer by stopping his car, by refusing to start he is upgrading the value of his person, he is gaining dignity, as he is giving evidence of something that stays ahead. But what is the name.
Highlander, have you any answer to that ?? Or should I just leave it as a taste at my tongue, like the taste of this Malt, that can't be named either, and meet the core sentence of Laotse again pretending: that the name that can be named is not the name. -- Anyway, do you know, what I like, Highlander ?? That this Glendronach has kept his promise by keeping up the question and also provides an impression of an answer. -- S, as you are more experienced to a taste of a Malt than I am, you maybe have got further on in this question. If so, please let me know.
m.f.g.
X