UKC

I made the point on a now-dead thread that professional sport (alone) achieves nothing of any real consequence. Evidently it has the capacity to motivate, inspire and uplift others etc so that was perhaps a bit harsh. I meant from the point of view of the individual sportsperson. Is there not a real risk that you wake up in your mid-thirties and realise you've producing nothing of any real consequence? Just an entirely transient and self-indulgent series of experiences.

"jafor" made the observation that he'd been inspired by Ellen MacArthur. I agree. I have been too - succeeding against all odds etc. Amazing woman.

BUT - perhaps in support of my theory about the total futility of it all, last year Ellen packed in being a pro-sports woman and launched the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, a charity set up to inspire people to re-think, re-design and build a sustainable future.

So the question is - will today's generation of "livin the dream" pro climbers wake up in their mid-thirties and realise they've p#ssed their lives up the wall?

Interestingly, Ellen's charity does the following:

"The Foundation believes that the end of the era of cheap fossil fuels and key materials, coupled with rising population and anxieties around water resources, food production and harmful wastes, demonstrates a need for rethinking our model of production and consumption, not merely patching it up. It aims to offer a framework for creativity and innovation through the idea of a 'circular economy'."

It sounds like she and I might get along...

In reply to McBendy:

Ellen has a two minute spot on French TV every night. When I say she does, it's more that her image is used to present various examples of energy saving. Some, frankly are laughable, but most are good examples of what anyone could do if they wanted to. I'm not sure if they have more impact by using her or not. Perhaps they do in France as she's quite a hero here. Now I'm not sure about pro climbers - or indeed whether she'd get on with or not. Why have you got such a downer on pro climbers, by the way?

In reply to McBendy:

Yes, but it helps to pass the time.

In reply to McBendy:

From what i've read by her and heard her say, it's not that she doesn't like sailing, but has decided that getting involved with helping to reshape how we live in a more sustainable way is more important,I heard her on the BBC World Service saying that turning her back on competative sailing is one of the hardest things she's done.

I head her saying on another programe something about how when she was a child the world seemed like it had infiniate resouces and there was enough for everybody, and her foundation is a way of trying to make that the case again, in changing how people live so there is enough resouces for things, from them being reused.

There's a carpet factory in Holland which essentially leases it's carpets to companies, and when they've got worn it takes them back and recycles the plastic polymer in them and makes new carpet, and the boss of B+Q has apparently said that in 20 years they'll probably just be renting things out to people instead of selling them.

I agree, she's a very inspiring person, i've read her books and been inspired, any patchiness in the writing is made up for with enthusiam I thought, a nice seeming person with a go for it attitude.

Cheers
Tim

In reply to McBendy:


Hah

In reply to McBendy: So hold on, someone has dedicated a significant portion of their life to becoming a successful sportsman in an event they love and has used this success so move into other things she's passionate about.

This is your argument against people choosing to dedicate themselves to becoming successful at a sport that they love?

In reply to Lemony:

It's not an argument at all. I'm asking whether being a pro-sports person seems like the most important thing in the world while you're doing it, but leaves you with a massive "Oh God" moment when you stop (or are injured etc). i.e. whether it is inherently pointless, in terms of actual individual fulfillment. Does it really matter if you jumped the highest, sailed the fastest etc? Really?

In reply to McBendy:

Of course not. The whole of human existance is futile. As is resistance. You will be assimilated...

This is a stupid thread.

In reply to DaveHK:

I remember talking about finding meaning in life with one of my brothers a few years ago.

I guess if it inspires other people it could be said to not be futile to be a sports person, and it's not if it's meaningfull to the sports people themselves, in the end you have to find your own meaning.

I saw about a french immigrant worker on TV once who was inspired by watching the film Rocky, and the part with him running up some steps in America in Washington(?), and every so often he'd fly over to America and run up the same steps as in the film if he needed to reinspire himself, and it helped him to get on track.

Human life is both meaningless and meaningfull at the same time I suppose.

Cheers
Tim

In reply to DaveHK:

Is it? If their activities are futile, then why are they held in such high regard?

In reply to McBendy:

Not for the activity but for the commitment, skill and determination it takes to get to the top.

Are these qualities futile?

In reply to McBendy:

I suppose if being a professional sportsperson is an ultimately futile act, then so is being an artist (in the widest sense - whether that's writing, music, art, dance, etc).

In reply to Timmd:

Philadelphia

youtube.com/watch?v=NubH5BDOaD8&

and every so often he'd fly over to America and run up the same steps as in the film if he needed to reinspire himself, and it helped him to get on track.
How could you not be inspired by that??!!!

In reply to McBendy:

I think you should stop worrying about what other people are doing with their lives, and concentrate on what you are doing with yours.

I think you have issues!

In reply to Paul035:

I don't know, somebody trying hard to achieve thier goals I suppose. Each to thier own I guess.

Cheers
Tim

In reply to Timmd:

er... he's agreeing with you.

In reply to McBendy: there is no spoon

In reply to Tall Clare:

"All art is quite useless".
I suppose it depends on where the observer is standing. I find most sport (except for cricket) utterly pointless. The column inches and time spent discussing the minutiae of another football game is, to me, utterly futile. And by extension the people who do it.
That said I enjoy most forms of art, which could be considered pretty pointless. After all it doesn't really achieve anything more than triggering an emotion.
I suppose sport, and other performances, are emphemeral and fleeting and in the grand scheme of things useless.
Take this thought too far and you'll get depressed! <slopes off to look at his art books>

In reply to Tall Clare:

You're right, I missread his post and didn't see the not.

Cheers
Tim

In reply to Paul035:

I missread your post, i'm listening to Down The Line on Radio4 which is by the same people who wrote The Fast Show, and it's quite funny. ()

I wouldn't want to kill the thread by going off topic though, but it was funny I think.

Cheers
Tim

In reply to Adam Lincoln:

its a valid question he's posing, and in fairly non-inflammatory language on this thread. the lemming asks this sort of thing all the time

maybe its you who has the issues...?

In reply to McBendy:

Nothin futile in living seriously.

Regards

D

In reply to Dauphin:

"living seriously"...?

cheers
gregor

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

What's not to understand? Living consciously and in disciplined pursuit of a goal. Modern life makes this difficult for so many of us. I can't understand why anyone would consider it futile.

Regards

D

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Was more what he had to say on the thread that got locked. This will be my last post on this website any way. (Bar for sale items) too many people like bendy about now a days. Too many have nothing better to say than bitch about someones achievements. Life is too short.

In reply to Dauphin:

fair enough, just wanted to know what you meant by it

i tend to agree with you

Ben was posing the question, what happens when you acheive the goal? what then. it may be that for some people the goal is more of a way of life that can live with them throughout their life, and perhaps has a spiritual element to it (not necessarily religiou).

I think there are some people however, especially where it is a goal that can be achieved (or not) quite early in life ,that struggle to adapt to life afterwards- plenty of pro sportsmen who go off the rails at the end of their careers.

so i think (on this thread anyway) he is asking a valid question. perhaps his inflammatory rhetoric on the other thread hasnt helped it be taken seriously though

In reply to Adam Lincoln:

why rise to the bait though? why does it matter what he thinks to you?

i used to get annoyed by some of the posters on this site, until i realised that was pretty pointless. let them type what they want, just ignore them if they are saying stuff that seems to set out to get a reaction,

cheers
gregor

In reply to McBendy: has Ellen MacArthur said that her life till now has been p#ssed up the wall and she's been re-born to save the world ???

I doubt it, more likely she has had great experiences through sport which has given her a high profile which she is now using in the next step of her life to help others.

Would she be able to do what she is today with out the experiences she has gained, and the profile she has built?

Far from P#ssing her life away she has grown as a committed athlete and transferred her skills to her professional life after sport. Which is what a lot of professional sports people do.

Why exactly do you think you would get on?????

In reply to McBendy: there are so many jobs in life which are more futile, it really depends on your definition of futile is.

you talk about producing something of consequence but what is something of consequence?

I think it depends on the individual and what they make of their life after, there are some sports people who seem to just turn into a disaster when their main focus is taken away, a problem of being such a focused driven person when that focus is taken away. Ive seen a few of the older boys pounding the lecture circut living of their stories and sometimes question how happy they actually are.

I dont think its because what they did lacked consequence though, i think its because some sportspeople fail to adapt to life after sport. sport has a great role in life, it can unite people, it can inspire people, its a chance to be the best at somehting on a world level and thats not to be sniffed at.

I personally would rather be able to stand and say 'i climbed the hardest trad route in the world' than 'i made my company the most money' but really its all about what you perceive to be important. if climbing is just a side hobby to you then maybe you dont understand how important it can be to some people

In reply to McBendy: '' professional sport (alone) achieves nothing of any real consequence. Evidently it has the capacity to motivate, inspire and uplift others etc''

If being a pro athlete has no consequence then I dont think inspiring others to start the path you just 'won' gives it a meaning.

Searching to find a sustainable future for mankind is not going to cure her of this particular ailment either.

I always thought that the only way to give your life any meaning is to express how it feels to be you, through some form of art. If that expression comes through climbing or an oil painting its totally valid. Its what we live for! Trying to be the best at anything will probably not give you what you were looking for. Surely?

In reply to McBendy:

"Friendship is unnecessary, like philosophy, like art... It has no survival value; rather it is one of those things that give value to survival."

In reply to McBendy:
The first question which you will ask and which I must try to answer is this,

"What is the use of climbing Mount Everest?"

and my answer must at once be,

"It is no use."

There is not the slightest prospect of any gain whatsoever. Oh, we may learn a little about the behavior of the human body at high altitudes, and possibly medical men may turn our observation to some account for the purposes of aviation.

But otherwise nothing will come of it.

We shall not bring back a single bit of gold or silver, not a gem, nor any coal or iron. We shall not find a single foot of earth that can be planted with crops to raise food. It's no use.

So, if you cannot understand that there is something in man which responds to the challenge of this mountain and goes out to meet it, that the struggle is the struggle of life itself upward and forever upward, then you won't see why we go.

What we get from this adventure is just sheer joy. And joy is, after all, the end of life. We do not live to eat and make money. We eat and make money to be able to enjoy life. That is what life means and what life is for.

(George Leigh Mallory, 1922)

In reply to anonymouse:

But you're missing the point... Bender despises anyone who enjoys themselves.

In reply to jon:
oh.

Is this 'bender' a real person, or the robot outta Futurama?

In reply to jon:

No. Not at all. You don't understand me at all. And despise is the wrong word anyway.

Everyone will have their own value system, naturally. I agree that all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy etc, but all play and no work makes you an empty and unfulfilled parasite with no value to society.

Personally I can't see how people who just live 'for the moment' can feel in any way contented. Neither can I understand people who do a pointless capitalist money-making cog-turning kind of job. Life has to have some purpose - it has to be directed at contributing something of consequence to society. Otherwise, what's the f'ing point. Sorry - I don't accept that life is just for living, having fun etc etc. If everyone had that value set we'd be in a right mess. There's plenty of room for friendship and fun as part of a balance (anyone who actually knows me will tell you that I'm hardly Mr Serious by the way!). If people are part of the society and play by the social rules, pay their taxes etc then fair enough. But just taking and/or just playing? Sorry - that's too Thatcher for me.

What I really seriously resent are people who take from society without giving ANYTHING to society. Whether it's investment bankers, freeloaders, bookkeepers, tax-evaders etc. They are basically just parastites. A majority of people are in jobs that actually mean something - acheive something - provide something of value to society. Whether it's services or needed goods. Fair play to them - they can have all the fun they like (so long as they're not harming others by driving a big climate-change-causing pickup truck).

But there is a big sub-set. People who contribute a bit, but not much, and then take more than their share - the "oh yes, I recyle" types that drive Range Rover Sports and fly everywhere. People who work in manufacturing but who dry-tool at Millstone. You know the types. People who fundementally don't know the difference between need and want. People with some sort of misguided sense of their 'rights', when they don't know how f'ing lucky they are. People who heleski. People who think that spending thousands pounds on handbag is okay, because they earnt it. People who eat cod. People who make a living out of encouraging people to fly over and walk around on the glaciers before they melt. That sort of person.

Where professional sport comes into this I'm not so sure. From the outside, I think there's great value. I feel inspired reading about fast repeats of death-on-a-stick E12's and watching Southampton climb into the heady heights of League 1. But for the sportspeople themselves? This I'm less clear on. How can you derive any kind of meaningful fulfillment from something that is, in essence, utterly pointless? As an evening and weekend activity it's the world to me, but if it was everything I ever acheived? I think I'd feel pretty empty. Because there is always faster, harder, longer, no matter how good you get.

In reply to McBendy:

Oh for f*ck's sake.

You sound hysterical.

Problem with piety is that there's always someone out there holier than *thou*.

In reply to Tall Clare:


Very good. I like that.

In reply to McBendy:

Ever thought of joining a monastery? Lifes short and terrible for most people on the planet. Me, I just like to get my rocks off whenever and wherever. Sanctimonious piffle.

D

In reply to McBendy:

I agree with every word you say. The best post I've seen on UKC for a very long time.

In reply to McBendy:

Mrs Ridge keeps telling me that..

In reply to McBendy:

If it wasn't for the rather obvious sneaky references to pick-ups, heliskiing and 'people who make a living out of encouraging people to fly over and walk around on glaciers before they melt' (a lot of my clients use the train), I'd agree with Gordon. But honestly Ben, you do come across a bit hair-shirt wearing, birch twig self flagellating...

In reply to McBendy:

"will today's generation of "livin the dream" pro climbers wake up in their mid-thirties and realise they've p#ssed their lives up the wall?"

It really depends on their outlook on life and where their priorities lie. For instance if we look at the question from a Hedonist perspective.

"Hedonism is a school of thought which argues that pleasure is the only intrinsic good" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonism

I presume that professional climbers actually enjoy climbing and get pleasure from it.

So if a professional climber happens to have a Hedonist outlook to life surely they will wake up in there mid-thirties and realise.. that they have managed to spend their best years doing something which brings them pleasure. Therefore allowing them their one and only intrinsic value.

Is that futile?

"incapable of producing any result, pointless"
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/futile

No, it's the opposite. The result is giving them meaning in life.

Obviously there are different ways of thinking so it would be interesting to hear what you consider something of real consequence to be? As this seems to be important for you.

Also life expectancy is a lot higher than mid thirties so even if you have achieved absolutely nothing there is still a lot of time left to do something.

In reply to Jiduvah:

Well, that's a good question. What people perceive as important will depend on their value set. I guess a good barometer of this is to ask yourself, what has all of the effort that I have put into my life so far achieved? If the answer to that question contains repeated mentions of the words 'me' and 'I' and no mention of any other beneficiaries (people, wildlife, science etc), then I suspect it's been an intrinsically selfish effort. If you can't identify any beneficiaries other than the shareholders of the company that you work for and your immediate family then likewise.

For example "I have trained hard and got my PB down to 4:23" = that's nice dear. "I have earned lots of money by pretending to climb the hardest trad route in the world" = jolly good. "I got promoted to Chief Hedge Fund Manager for Oilcorp, bought a new Porche Cayenne and took the kids to Disneyland" = seriously, you're just a fart in the wind.

Whereas "I've been researching a cure for liver disease, caring for the elderly, teaching young children mathematics or championing sustainable living" = of consequence.


I 100% agree. And for some people (Ellen MacArthur for example?) this is exactly what happens. An awakening that there is more to life than JUST frivolous personal goals. If you're bright enough and can make the switch then great. But I suspect that many sportspeople either go off the rails (e.g. Gazza, although he was never really on them), or just spend the rest of their lives living off memories. If there's one thing more pointless than devoting all of your time to being good at something pointless then it's spending all of your time going around telling people that you used to be good at something pointless! What an empty shell of a life.

Now - let me contradict myself. Steve M, Neil G, Dave M all coach. Perhaps it's just because they need the money, but at least by doing that they are giving something to someone else - not just a beacon to follow. Someone like Joe Simpson is perhaps just that beacon, but what a beacon. If that is the motivation that gets some kid out to Dumbarton rock at the evenings and weekends instead of robbing grannies to pay for smack then it's time well spent. So fair play.

It's the mummy's-boy work-shy layabout self-indulgent types that I find it harder to fathom. Those whose primary concern seems to be being 'rad dudes' 'bigging themselves up' and 'livin the dream'. What would their obituary read? Mr X - increased sales for Red Bull/[insert money-making corporation here], climbed/surfed/snow-boarded slightly better/cooler/higher than some other people, looked good in aviators. Sounds like OBE material to me...

In reply to McBendy:

You're spot on, McB. Thrilled to see you expressing it this well.

In reply to McBendy:


Whereas to me that's a great achievement.



Also a great achievement. Why place your personal values upon the achievements of others? Are you really in a position to judge? I know I'm not!

In reply to McBendy:

Sounds like old fashioned class envy. Move to west London, you'll love it there.

Regard

D

In reply to Tall Clare:
I don't necessarily agree with him, but he did write a rather well-thought out, cogent, rational argument--how do you get "hysterical" out of that?

In reply to McBendy:


Good post.

I was going to lectures about sustainability and environmental engineering and being taught by people who people who were the godparents of the UK renewables industry in the mid-1970s. Much of it wasn't news to me even then.

As a result, the following things really p155 me off.
- UK energy consumption is no different now from what it was back in the 1970s.
- A car is now something weighing 2 tonnes instead of 800kg.
- We should have routine 100mpg for cars and 25mpg for trucks by now.
- Switching off the light, getting the bus, walking, cycling: nobody seems to quite get it.
- Civil servants and the management of the renewables sector standing around in hotel conference centres talking about talking about talking about doing something, at £300+ per day. Ever wonder where your taxes went?
- Why can't I have chicken from Nairn instead of Thailand?
- If somebody doesn't get their act together soon we'll have to build more coal-fired power stations.

In reply to Dauphin:


The first place the lights are going off when th foreign gas is switched off.

In reply to McBendy:

Do what thy manhood bids thee do, from none but self expect applause; He noblest lives and noblest dies who makes and keeps his self-made laws.

Sir Richard Francis Burton

In reply to bouldery bits:


I'm not, no. History is what 'judges'.

God, at the pearly gates: "So, what did you do with your life?"

Your hero: "Oh, I made some rich people richer and helped big corporations to extract and waste the planet's natural resources, bankroll a corrupt election campaign, finance blood diamonds in Africa, flog capitalist guff that no-one actually needs etc. Oh, and when I wasn't gambling with other people's money to help oil the wheels of capitalism I was feathering my own nest, flying around the world and blowing thousands of pounds on new cars and expensive gadgets to try and prove to my neighbours how ####ing happy and successful I was."

God: "NEXT!"

Is that photo of you topless one that you're particularly proud of?

In reply to Dauphin:

I might be controversial on here, but I'm not often aggressive towards people, but seriously Dauphin, #### right off! Don't bring 'class' into this, whatever that might be. And don't suggest 'envy', when it's the total ####ing opposite of what I'm expressing!

It's hard to be envious of anyone in this messed up world. But if I'm envious of anything or anyone it most certainly has nothing to do with material goods, status, or the fact that they're "livin the dream!"

In reply to McBendy:

He seemed to have touched a nerve there.

In reply to alicia:

Easily - it was the 'whipping self up into a froth of righteous indignation by grasping at stereotypes' bit.

In reply to McBendy:

With you all the way, McB! Gosh, it could almost be me speaking in my younger and more outspoken days.

In reply to Tall Clare:

Oh yes, of course, everyone is hugely individual. Stereotypes are way wide of the mark. There is no such thing as conformism and group delusion. That all fits perfectly with the reality of recreational consumerism and three-almost-inseparable-party-politics with manifestos based around schools, jobs, crime, hospitals, tax while we all collectively drive (I would say walk, but let's be realistic) headlong into a MASSIVE man-made disaster.

In reply to Tall Clare:

And that bit, from the post you were replying to, would specifically include the lines...?? Sorry, I just don't see "whipping self up" (he doesn't get more and more emotional over the course of the post), "righteous" (are you saying that no-one can ever say they think something's bad without being too righteous?) or "stereotypes" (where did you see stereotypes?) anywhere in the post you replied to. I'll give you indignation, but I'm not sure what that has to do with hysterical.

Anyway, it's his problem, not mine; I just thought your comment was quite unfair and baseless.

In reply to McBendy:

The big stumbling block you seem to be encountering in both this and your previous guise is that a lot of people aren't taking what you say seriously. Yes, there's no doubt that there's sense in it, but your swipes that take in pretty much everyone (except yourself, I presume) only serve to alienate people rather than winning them over.

In reply to alicia:

we'll have to agree to differ.

In reply to McBendy:

Not just sportspeople, i mean some people find their high profile careers just like end and find roles as special ambassadors to the middle east.

In reply to McBendy:

Have you read Myth of Sisyphus

In reply to Tall Clare:

It's not me against the world. Actually, there are now LOTS of people who get it, who care and who are making changes. Lots of people on here, too. Big respect to all of them.

Regarding winning people over. In person I'm much more diplomatic and either say nothing at all or give people a gentle and friendly nudge in a more sustainable direction. This is where I come to let the steam come out of my ears!

In reply to McBendy:

btw the rich live, the poor exist

In reply to McBendy:

Lots of people on here also care, but they have to make compromises, they need to earn a living, they need to klive and they have no control over Chinese power generation policies.

I think you come across as a Wesleyan and much as the intention is good, the message is waaaay to judgemental and lacking in empathy to others' situations.

In reply to McBendy:


You make some really interesting arguments. I do feel you've moved away from your thread title though. I agree about not having a high regard to people who are only out for themselves, but this is more about their character than the job they do. Are you really just unhappy with people in life who are all about themselves, a category which some professional sportspeople may come into?

Many sportspeople provide inspiration and motivation to millions of others. Think of a Jamacian sprinter, many professional footballers, basketball players in USA, I was going to provide a list but there is no need. I think the lives of these people are definitely worthwhile, have meaning and substance.

they just so happen to be quite enjoyable lifestyles at the same time I would imagine.

In reply to John Rushby:

I haven't, but I've just read a Wikipedia synopsis which I'm sure is nearly as good as the real thing.

Based on the no-doubt highly-accurate Wikipedia entry I'm not sure that Camus describes a character who gets the futility of it all but who still cares about doing the right thing with regard to the ephemeral society. It's a pretty futile kind of martyrdom, but better than "livin the dream".

In reply to McBendy:

I think it really depends on the person... everybody in life wants different things. As long as one follows their 'heart' and stays close to their 'internal values', I think you are less likely to have a mid-life wake up call from realising you've been following the wrong path.

I think we're all inter-connected in many ways and even the 'bad' or 'selfish' behaviours that we may perceive in others serve a purpose in our own lives... even if it is to use them simply as a negative example to remind us what we do not want to become ourselves.

As Howard Thurman once said... "Ask yourself what makes you come alive. And then go and do that. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive"... so I think, follow what you want, the world will not progress further without the self-actualisation of individuals.

In reply to Paul035:

You're right about thread drift, Paul. Someone accused me of hating people who like having fun and it kind of wandered.

Totally agree about the value of sport from the outside. I just wonder about from the inside. Imagine that you left school at 16, dedicated your life to coming 4th three years in a row in the European athletics championships, then got a knee injury aged 34, and retired. Then what? All that effort to 'be the best', which you never were, and then a life of coaching other kids on the same futile path?

In reply to mlt:


I quite like that, although you are in some ways dignifying the existence of Hitler!

In reply to McBendy:

"I guess a good barometer of this is to ask yourself, what has all of the effort that I have put into my life so far achieved? If the answer to that question contains repeated mentions of the words 'me' and 'I' and no mention of any other beneficiaries (people, wildlife, science etc), then I suspect it's been an intrinsically selfish effort."

But you did conceded yourself that there are other beneficiaries -

"Evidently it has the capacity to motivate, inspire and uplift others etc"

Does it matter if there goal was to have beneficiaries or they just happen to appear?

"It's the mummy's-boy work-shy layabout self-indulgent types that I find it harder to fathom. Those whose primary concern seems to be being 'rad dudes' 'bigging themselves up' and 'livin the dream'."

Who are you referring to? In my experience to be a professional sports person you need to be committed, driven, focused, amongst other qualities and work hard for years and years. Maybe I am wrong but I can't imagine how you would become a professional sportsman with the attitude you describe. But I don't know many professional sports people so I could be wrong.

In reply to McBendy:

But what about people whose best years artistically are behind them, for instance? Or what about all those people who *can't* be the likes of Joss Naylor but who get a lot out of coaching others? I can see where you're coming from in this regard but I think that you're confusing 'being *the* best' with 'being *your* best'.

In reply to Jiduvah:
>

I would guess that this bit relates to McBendy's comments on a certain well-known young climber's website on a thread that was archived (pulled?) yesterday.

In reply to Tall Clare: Ah ok. I just read his blog relating to the thread. I love the pictures he posted. Pretty funny

http://jamespearsonclimbing.blogspot.com

In reply to Jiduvah:

Ha!

In reply to McBendy:

Its the journey, you myopic sanctimonous bigot.

Regards

D

In reply to Dauphin:

Not quite sure where you got 'bigot' from. I don't like selfish people. Does that make me bigoted?

Best not to trade insults. I've seen your profile pic.

In reply to McBendy:

Sorry, I missed the baby oil for you.

D

In reply to McBendy:

1 to 10, children. Slowly.

In reply to McBendy:

Jealousy and class issues. Often brings out the ####s in all of us.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

And let me guess what happened once those young and outspoken days had ended.
Did you go and live on a sustainable collective? Did you cure cancer? What did you DO Gordon? If you didn't ADD to society you better kill yourself now - because otherwise you aren't as good as McBendy here!

In reply to McBendy: so here is a question,

who makes the least impact on this world ?

The climbing bum who lives only for climbing. Has a simple life earning only the money he needs, eats less than he needs (must be light for that 9B) and lives in the back of his van which he never really drives because the 9B project will anyway take 2 years.. He has no house, no big tv, no belongings outside of his van. He's not giving much to this world, but is also taking very little from it.

Or

The Career environmentalist. He earns more than he needs, lives in a house bigger than he needs, drives a car at the weekends cause everyone needs a life too, and goes on holidays abroad each year because thats ok because its off set... after work he alienates the very people he tries to engage with during the day because ever one needs to let of steam.

In reply to nicg:

In terms of negative impacts, you have a very good point. In terms of net impact, surely that all depends on how effective the career environmentalist is at modifying other people's behaviour?

You're wrong about my lifestyle, by the way. But your point is still a valid one. A lot of people that my wife works with (also a career environmentalist) are just like you describe, and it drives her mad!

In reply to McBendy:
Your wife is better than everyone else too!? Must be a hard life being so pious.

In reply to Tdubs:

Not everyone, no. Most people, yes. Most people are insular self-serving little ####s who look no further than the needs of themselves and their own circle of family and friends. In so much as she sees beyond that, yes - she's a lot better than most. It's one of the many reasons why I married her, in fact.

In reply to Tall Clare:

If you want to take a really negative point of view then all human skills are no greater than those of animals just trying to survive, except with more angst!

In reply to McBendy: well if all people lived a life like that of the climber bum described then the impact on the earth would be sustainable, therefore there would be no need for career environmentalists as there would be no one to convince..

The other point being I'm sure your salary is more than you truly need to survive (i.e money left after basic food and accommodation) and your house is bigger than you need to survive, i.e I guess you have living space etc. You have admitted in the past that you drive to climb at weekends and take overseas holidays. All of which is fine by me, but I'm sure has a bigger impact than living in van eating half a baguette a week.

Main thing I have to ask is how many people at work do you get your message to a day? and why during your free time do you waste the opportunity to engage in a positive way with a site that has many hundreds of users online at any one time.

I'm sure Gandi didn't get home after a long day at office and say to the misses I'm of to p#ss off as many people as I can with my message as I need to let of some steam...

some jobs are 9 to 5, if your serious about yours then it should not be

In reply to McBendy: thing is mate, as most people have said on here, your views have value but your pushing them to extremes and it makes them sound ridicuolous. you said yourself higher up that life had to contain balance.

well life in general has to contain balance, by that i mean not all humans can be environmentalists, not all humans can be doctors. unless you suggest reverting to some form of primitive and exceedingly idealistic position then not all of us can have what you call 'meaningful jobs'. part of the beauty of soceity though is that we can afford through sponsorship to support our particularly talented members of soceity to push the boundaries of human possibility which would never had been able before. this can be in terms of the phds we sponser, the people we send to space or even our p[rofessional sportspeople.

professional sportspeople are far from lazy, they are the most driven and focused people i know, their life is obsession and they give up a lot for a chance to be the best at something, a chance to try something new. like the rest of us they are a mixed bag, some of them will intelligently use their sporting acheivements to build on something later and some will just fall apart when its all gone. so many great sports people go on to promote the environment, cancer research or sport in schools and thats a good thing.

sport keeps kids away from other less desirable things, its well proven that interaction with sport builds discipline for other activities. if having sports people who set goals and role models to aim for incourages sport then its a good thing - even if its cynical commercial sponsorship creating it.

your viewpoint is in my opinion a little too narrow and idealistic.

In reply to Tdubs:

What did I do? I wrote books (with lots of photographs) about it, two of which sold in huge numbers. The point about anything creative is that you do actually give something to the world, and leave something behind you that people appreciate. There has been no experience more satisfying to me than to have a complete stranger coming up to me and 'thank' me for my books (as has happened on a number of occasions).

My view is that really the only point in life, is to do something creative, that adds something positive, something of lasting value, to the world, however small. And of course climbing can be that if you are an exceptionally gifted pioneer (the likes of Herford, Kirkus, Brown, Livesey, Fawcett and Dawes, for example)

Value added.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth: have you actually read the posts youve been agreeing with?????????

In reply to Tdubs:

PS You seem very angry and ungenerous (and old frankly) for someone who is only 21 years old. I'd say: chill out a bit, and listen to other people's views and arguments. It's one of the things that makes life interesting. You don't have to agree with everything, but there's a hell of a difference between an intelligent argument/discussion and an angry conflict of opinions.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

If he's angry Gordon, it's because the person he's angry with is a 31 year old who's even angrier with everyone.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
I listened to his argument. It sucked and it was rude to everyone. I was telling him to do one. You were literally the only person who agreed, and judging by your post above you don't seem to have understood what he was saying. By his rules, you have taken from the world. Niche books = little real value and lots of dead trees.

In reply to tradattack:

Yes, I've just read everything he's said again, and don't disagree with a single word of it.

PS. The Myth of Sisyphus is just such a load of nonsense, frankly, because it is just such a false view of the world, both at the level of human life and evolution as a whole. It is a very accurate picture, sadly, of the lives of millions of unfortunate people who can only live at a subsistence level. But as an overall picture it is false. The whole of civilisation and the evolution of culture and science is a denial of it.

In reply to Tdubs:
PS I was very drunk as well - sorry for being rude!

In reply to jon:

I don't see anything angry in 'McBendy's' posts at all.

Unfortunately I have to get to work now (late already)

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


what Bendy said: 'JUST frivolous personal goals' - 'How can you derive any kind of meaningful fulfillment from something that is, in essence, utterly pointless?'

doesnt sound like you agree

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


really??????????

In reply to tradattack:
>

>what Bendy said: 'JUST frivolous personal goals' - 'How can you derive any kind of meaningful fulfillment from something that is, in essence, utterly pointless?'

The distinction here is between internal and external value/fulfillment. I've said throughout that I see the value in sport for others (for 'us'). But in terms of fulfillment to the individual, that's where I'm not so sure. Obviously if the link can me made, reasonably directly, to the legacy that you're leaving... which is why I suspect that many to sportspeople set up charities, do charity work, coach etc - either during or after their professional careers. Because, going back to my OP, from the perspective of the individual the persuit of frivolous personal goals is effectively meaningless.

In reply to Tdubs:

Eh? Have you read/looked at Gordon's books? It's hard to imagine a more compelling window into the importance of our open spaces, clear air, the natural world etc. People conserve because they love. Or at least they are less likely to willfully damage things that they love. There is always death by a thousand cuts (or should that be cods?).

And I'm sure that they're printed on paper from sustainably managed sources.

Enjoy:
http://www.gordonstainforth.co.uk/eyehill/EHtext.pdf
http://www.gordonstainforth.co.uk/eyehill/LLtext.pdf

In reply to McBendy: i have no issue with Gordon's books. its more that your earlier post would appear to damn anything which you do not see as directly and explicitly having great meaning, being a doctor or some such.

a professional climber whos work will encourage more to go outside a climbe and become part of a community obsessed with the conservation of climbing areas and the ourdoors is frivilous and self centered wheras someone who writes about it or photographs it is to be praised. your not being consistent in your argument.

In reply to McBendy: its all personal and perspective based, you are very much imposing your own perspective onto others and suggesting that they would feel 'empty and meaningless'. being the best at something you love is a great achievement, if you get a rare opportunity to pursue such a goal then i think you should go for it.

ultimately human nature is to be self interested, even environmentalists and human rights activists are to a greater degree self interested in their own obsessions often losing a balanced perspective on the rest of the world.

what each person needs to be personally fulfilled is different for everyone. for yourself protection of the environment is a crucial life goal, for others it can be sport.

In reply to McBendy:
Yeah I've seen them. They're beautiful. I personally think things like that have immense value. But you can't say beautiful books that inspire are valuable and being the first woman to sail single handedly around the world isn't. They're both incredible things.

What about literature? That's a big love of mine. It doesn't have any real purpose. It isn't functional. It's just pleasure. But you can't say it doesn't have any value because it doesn't always change society (some does, most doesn't). Take The Old Man and the Sea by Hemingway. It's not even that big a book, doesn't change society, doesn't achieve anything except total reading pleasure. But he rightly got the Nobel prize for it. And blew his brains out because he could never surpass it (my opinion). It was that good.
For somebody else, an inspiring sporting achievement can be this transcendental. There will be people who watched Usain Bolt run his world record 100m who will have been taken to a different place by it. He is the fastest man in the world. That has real value. His life will have been sacrifice and sacrifice to run the same distance millions of times over to get there. That doesn't contribute to society. Don't belittle it.

I think you're changing your argument though to defend the only person who has supported you on here (misguidedly, I believe). Seems to me there is no point in existence if you do not do the things you love. Don't belittle those who are wired differently to you, whose outlook is different, by saying they might as well not exist. Now, I have to go outside and chainsaw some trees, I hope that upsets you.

Sorry if I've been full on. I can't stand people who judge and dismiss other peoples entire lives. I'm sure you're not a cock, but I disagree with you on this so much it is shocking.

In reply to Tdubs: good post.

In reply to Tdubs and tradattack:

ARRRGGGGHHHHHHHH! You're not listening! I'm not saying that the activity has no value to other people. And if there is a connection between the person doing the inspiring thing and the people being inspired then, for the individual, it is more than an empty life. My point is that if it is a lone furrow that you are ploughing, you must surely have a big empty hole in your life where purpose should be.

What is so hard to understand about that?

In reply to McBendy: youve contradicted yourself in one post let alone the entire thread.

your definition of purpose appears to be solely linked to 'value' for other people, you accept that climnbing has value for other people yet your still arguing that it has no purpose or value?

Also your writing suggests that whats more important is that the individual feels that they create value for other people than the actualy value they create which is a wonderfully egocentric perspective.

As i said in my post above what other people think of as purpose or acheivement is not always the same as yours and to damn otherpeoples lives and acheivements because they dont coincide with yours is shockingly narrow minded.

In reply to tradattack:

From where I am it just seems like McBendy is wanting people to have a social conscience.

He might be picking examples which contradict each other in places, but the overall gist of what he's on about seems to be about just trying to be 'good', or living ethically to me.

Cheers
Tim

In reply to Timmd: but in the context of the thread that suggests that a professional climber is not good or ethical.

i agree with a lot of what he says if not how he says it, im arguing the main point that professional climbing is not a totally meaningless existence.

In reply to tradattack:

Fair point, i'm not too sure I agree that professional sport is futile either, or that it's meaningless to be a professional climber.

Cheers
Tim

In reply to McBendy:

As PBC OBE would say

"The universe is billions and billions and billions and billions of years old"

so every f*cking thing is futile.

even Owls.

In reply to Timmd:

Someone could get a few t shirts made up for him "Get ethical or die tryin'"

In reply to Michael Woods:

I kind of wish more people thought like him to do with being socially responsible or ethical, i'm just not really sure I agree it's futile to do something you love for a living, which might inspire other people in free time away from working, which is of value in itself I think.

Cheers
Tim

In reply to Timmd: theres nothing wrong with his point of view, its the fiery overblown rhetoric he uses and over the top examples which actually do more damage to his cause than good.

unfortunately its the same with so many people passionate about a cause. they tend to get carried away and obsessed and angry with the rest of the world making their point of view sound ridiculous when its often grounded in solid reasoning.

In reply to Michael Woods:

With what is of value or helpfull being subjective, that is.

Tim

In reply to tradattack:

I'm about ready to give up here!

Doing nothing but climbing, for one's self, is not 'bad', and it has value to OTHER people. It is selfish, however, if that's all you do. Not bad, but selfish. It has the potential, for the individual, to FEEL like a meaningless existence. If you can see, feel and absorb some of that meaning that it has for other people (through direct contact, feedback, or just a strong imagination) then for the individual sportsperson it isn't necessarily an empty existence. If you cannot get that feedback then it would leave you feeling empty and like you'd wasted all of your time.

I can't find a better way of describing my 'question' than the following:

Suppose you were alone on a desert island and you had been all of your life. You had food and water to meet your basic needs. Would you spend years of your life there trying to jump just that bit higher, run just that bit faster etc? I argue you wouldn't - you'd settle back into doing the things that you enjoyed at a level that was enjoyable, whilst also trying to acheive something of purpose, to give some meaning to your life - whether it be making a treehouse, carving model boats or making shell necklaces.

Now, suppose you were a professional sportsperson that washed up on a similar uninhabited desert island. You had no prospect of escape. Would you carry on trying to jump higher, run faster etc? Almost certainly not - what would be the point - it would be futile.

Now suppose that you aren't on the desert island. What stops it being futile? Hence - my point about the need for some connection with the beneficiary. Something that is inherently pointless can only be properly fulfilling if there is some connection with the beneficiary, however indirect that beneficiary. That's what I'm postulating... And if you cannot get that feeling - that connection - then you end up disillusioned, giving it up, and starting a charity...

In reply to Timmd:
i'm just not really sure I agree it's futile to do something you love for a living, which might inspire other people in free time away from working, which is of value in itself I think.

Timmd - I agree with you!

See my last post. I can't explain it any better than that.

In reply to McBendy: to be honest mate i really dont understand your argument. it keeps changing although your nlanguage has calmed down.

desert island metaphor doesnt work at all. if i was personally stuck on a dessert island and there was some rock there, hell yes i would be climbing it and trying to climb the hardest line on it! how is carving a model boat or making a string necklace giving your life purpose or meaning?

i dont get your last point about the connection with the benificiary? what does that mean?

i think the basic confusion here is over what you consider to have purpose or meaning. Purpose can be so many things to different people! To some people having climbed the hardest route in the world is purpose and meaning.

In reply to McBendy:

What if the reverse were true - where someone had occupied a role which has "value" such as say a teacher and had gone into professional sport at a later age.

I am thinking of Dee Caffari - she did the reverse of Ellen. I also suspect ellen has tired of the sanctions and the cost of what is a high pressured sport and it's very execution is utterly lonely. After a while it is just a job.

Living the dream is what wage drones dream about when not programming, faffing with spreadsheets or cleaning the bogs at Manchester Airport. People just want to feel there is a reason they get up and push that boulder. It might be professional sport, it might be becoming a career environmentalist or it might mean clearing up someone else's shit for £5 an hour in order to give your kids a better life and the opportunities you did not have.

In fact, there seems an awfully middle class rather smug concit to thread.

In reply to John Rushby: I agree.

In reply to McBendy:

Are there any boulders on your desert island?

In reply to McBendy: take a look at this video
vimeo.com/14074949
not quite the same thing but similar

In reply to McBendy:

It would, it's true, be difficult to be an investment banker in such a situation. But isn't this person the perfect definition of someone who takes without giving anything back?

In reply to Rob Exile Ward: In reply to John Rushby: Just to expand a bit - this thread is a perfect exposition of the middle class imperative to feel superior to everyone - the proles (just interested in beer and skittles) - and the rich - money, how crass!

An honest day's work for an honest day's pay, a good family life, some awareness of our place in the wider scheme of things... That's OK in my book, and not without merit.There's a lot more who do that than cure cancer.

In reply to McBendy:

errr.. there are so many assumptions about values here I don't even know where to start. suffice to say I don't understand what qualifies us to judge someone else (That jesus bloke, God know's him, said something to that effect...)


relevant because?
Although thanks for noticing!

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

i don't think thats what Ben was saying at all.

not even sure he know's exactly what he's saying- i think he's developing the argument as he goes- but i expect he'd entirely agree with your honest day's work etc line- i dont think he was suggesting you have to cure cancer or win a nobel prize in something useful to have a life with merit

i think he was suggesting people who live a life entirely based on the pursuit of goals that enrich their life, but not anyone elses' around them, might find they hit a crisis at some point where they wonder what they've been doing with all that time, and whether they should have done something more useful.

i suspect for some people that its true, for some its not, and don;t really see what the fuss is about.

cheers
gregor

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

That's a diplomatic way of putting it.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

I've been thinking about his desert island analogy, and thinking that in actual fact it's very likely that someone would, after they'd satisfied the 'lower' things on their hierarchy of needs (shelter, warmth, food etc) start trying to do the things that fall into the self-actualisation category, like bouldering on a rock or hurdling over branches or whatever. We tend to try to improve at the things we do that give us pleasure rather than doing them just the same all the time - for instance, climbing: I'm sure Ben has and will continue to have a desire to improve his grade, but in the grand scheme of things what does it bring to the world? Similarly, if my writing or photography were at the same level they were fifteen years ago I'd be disappointed.

As we're way off the original point anyway, a book recommendation for Ben (if you haven't already read it): Flow, by Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi. Explains why we do some of the less apparently 'useful' and more self-actualising things that we do, including climbing.

In reply to McBendy: ok so back on topic then,how about this guy.

'At the core of Patagonia is its founder, Yvon Chouinard, a man who is saving the world one fleece jacket at a time. A legendary climber, surfer, entrepreneur, environmentalist, and philanthropist, he is justly famous for success on his own terms.'

Climbing bum in 20's, founded Chouinard Equipment in his 30's, founded patagonia in his 40's with a focus on the environment.

Step one purely selfish.

Step two no use to the good of the world but good for other climbers.

step three good fro climbers and shows that big brands can work with the environment.

Step two and Three would not have happened without step one

In reply to nicg:

I think we're getting to the meat of this of this now! Agree with what you say. Why did he go from step one to step two to step thr... This is what I'm trying to say.

The persuit of person goals, challenges etc is very rewarding (I agree Tall Clare - it's a big part of what makes life satisfying). I suspect that in their youth many people are motivated by this. But as 'our' awareness of the world around us, our legacy, our impact and our motality increase I suspect we increasingly want to 'make a difference'. My feeling is that ALONE, persuing invidual personal goals (for most people?) is not enough. It leaves you insufficiently satisfied with your 'purpose' in life.

Hence - Ellen MacArthur, Yvon Chouinard etc.

In reply to McBendy:

I disagree. I think that 'purpose' isn't the same for everyone. For instance, a buddhist monk might have a huge degree of self-actualisation/feel an enormous sense of 'purpose' but what they're doing isn't necessarily of benefit to anyone else. Mondrian, on reaching whiteness in his images, might have felt that he'd peaked in his pursuit of his life's purpose, but does that help anyone else?

Please read Czitsenmihalyi's book, and Maslow on self-actualisation. I think you'd find them interesting.

In reply to McBendy: The thing is you are still imposing your world view onto others. Rightly or wrongly not all become more 'aware' of the world around them and for many the want to 'make a differrence' never gets past a mild feeling of guilt on red nose day or a trip to visit an orphanage in africa once in a while.

Also making a difference does not have to be on a global scale it can be part and parcel of your daily life, a million small gestures can add up to a huge difference. take tim emmet for example - hes always insanely jolly (possibly annoyingly jolly) insanely psyched and insanely firendly. he takes time for everyone and if down the wall or at the crag he will help you out. he makes a differnce to people, if only for a second. you can make a difference to your friends and family around you - giving a friend a lift doing your mums shopping etc. mnaking a difference doesnt have to be the massive grand world changing thing you think it does. its possible to live your life and make a difference all the time. there are so many peole like it, postman that do the same round for 60 years and touch the lives of the 10 grannies on their round that remember them.

you can lead a life focused on climbing and make a difference around it. a lot of pro climbers talk about giving back to the climbing community which supports them.

youve made a black and white distinction that being a pro climber means being entirely self interested and that having value means saving the world. theres many many shades of grey in between and where we are each comfortable standing is personal choice

In reply to McBendy:

Wasn't it Pliny the Younger who talked of the need to leave a legacy, some mark by which others can know that one has existed in the world?

In reply to Tall Clare: i had a conversation about legacies with someone the other day, cant decide if interest in ones own legacy is thoroughly vain and selfinterested or whether understanding the impact of your legacy is part of a greater good. sorry not very well explained.

Our general conclusion was that it depends on the individuals motivation. Legacy for legacies sake is vain and meaningless, legacy as a by product as byproduct of a life well lived - c'est bon

In reply to tradattack:

Interesting - I know we can't all be Carnegie, leaving libraries scattered about the place, and there are dubious merits to some of the 'legacies' left in the form of grand buildings built on the back of the slave trade, for instance.

In reply to tradattack:
My plan is to leave a legacy of mystery and lies.

I will, for example, have it arranged so that at my funeral about twenty burly men in sunglasses and high quality suits (earpieces perhaps?) stand quietly at the back, and my headstone has something cryptic inscribed that my family did not agree to. I would also like there to be some kind of odd imagery knocking about the place, the odd freemason sign that kind of thing.
I'd also have some pictures photoshopped together of me in places that I definitely haven't been to, looking like I have business there ("I didn't know he'd been to China?") etc.

Imagine three generations down the line "Yeah, we're not sure but we think your great grandfather was a spy, or involved in some secret organizations". Hah.

In reply to Tdubs:

My grandfather *was* a spy. I think he might also have been responsible for Robert Maxwell coming into the UK. Oops.

In reply to Tdubs: haha. please do that! genius.

In reply to Tall Clare:
That's what you think...

That is pretty cool. You were wondering what job to get in another thread - there you go. It's in your blood, now you just need twenty different passports and a repertoire of one-liners and terrible puns and you're good to go.

In reply to tradattack:

Not entirely sure you understand the difference between legacy and fame. You can leave a massive legacy without anyone ever having heard of you.

In reply to McBendy:

His last sentence expresses exactly that.

In reply to McBendy:
Yeeeees...... The world as we experience it is not anything like your tropical island, so with external environment changes purmeaning will change to. ie you wouldnt try and jump high in an island, but you wouldnt build a tree house when you live in NYC! Sport or whatever is we all live for is just your tree house in the real world. We are all giving our life our own take on 'meaning'.
Its an interesting topic but I dont think you have thought your argument through. I think its more like ''your insane if you get out of bed in the morning''.
I pick insanity!

In reply to M.Taylor:
note 'purmeaning should have read 'the' meaning. damn it.

In reply to McBendy:

Its not an individual thang. Writers and psychologists have for centuries documented the change in focus from 'me' to 'us'/'them' that occur with AGE.


Regards

D

In reply to Tdubs:

My sister says she would like to be buried at an odd angle, wrapped in a duvet, and with various random items placed around her, so that in years to come when archiologists dig her up, they'll be mightily confused (and so probably say it was 'ritual purposes'!)

I've always been slightly worried about her...

In reply to owlart:
Oh now body disposal is a good one for planning something nuts.

I've told a lot of friends about my idea and I really hope somebody makes it happen. Basically, imagine the scene.

You're on a beach, its nearly sunset, theres an orchestra playing something really full on.
Unexpectedly you see a trebuchet wheeled in behind you, and further down the beach they release a lion who has been starved and filled with kerosene (somehow).
In the trebuchet is my corpse, and the music is really climaxing.
Just as the sun is setting the sea ablaze with orange as it drops off the horizon, my corpse is set on fire and launched over the assembled peoples heads at the lion, and as the kettle drums smash and the french horns blast, the hungry explosive lion leaps and my flaming corpse meets it in the air and I go out with a bang and take the king of the jungle with me.

And then there'd be cupcakes.

In reply to Tdubs: your ever so slightly mental. in a good way though.

In reply to tradattack:
You don't want to know the one my friend came up with. Basically it involved letting him get "ripe", a swimming pool, octogenarians and the cage from a wrestling tournament. But thanks.

In reply to Tdubs: sounds like a rather complex form of munging so no we probably shouldnt go there.

In reply to McBendy:
>


I understand with what your saying and for the most part disagree, but what is really irritating me is how you seem to be able to talk for the person! how do you know they will feeling meaningless and empty?

In reply to McBendy:

As other people have said, the bottom line is that life itself is pointless, so arguing that climbing (or any other sport) is pointless is a bit silly... what else is there in life apart from enjoyment?

In reply to Boar of Badenoch:


That question has been clearly answered many times, e.g. T. S. Elliot :

"Birth, copulation and death
That's all the facts, when you get down to brass tacks,
Just birth, copulation and death"

Or if you prefer a slightly older answer :

"Life's but a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying .....



Nothing!"