DragonMaci Posted March 23, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2007 Can you explain further what you mean by "not attached to them"? I mean they are their own entity. In that sense they have no attachment. The existance as entities is not attached to their parents. Many children are very emotionally attached to the parents through the duration of their lives and are proud to be associated to them by their family name because they share many of the same values and virtues. With the odd exception I disagree with all my family members and their values. Prometheus98876 is the only family member that I agree with an more things than not. I especially disagree with my the Bunces, especially my father. My mother's side, the Beggs (another bad name as it implies begging) are better, but not by much, with the exception of Prometheus98876. My mother is better than Most Beggs but she still has some errors that need fising. I have to go with some of the others who seem to think this is "much ado about nothing". It may be a big deal to you, in which change your name accordingly. But I don't see any rational reason to be concerned with other people and their names. They are free to keep or change their names as needed. Did you miss where I said the cost of changing my name ($20) is not a worthwhile investment. Besides I can't afford to right now. I have no problem with other people's names in the way you imply. What I have a problem with is my three names and the naming process. Here is how you pronounce "Bunce" I listened and that is very close. Take out the American accent and it is right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RationalBiker Posted March 23, 2007 Report Share Posted March 23, 2007 What I have a problem with is my three names and the naming process. Okay, fair enough. I can't help you with the former and the latter doesn't bother me. With that I'll excuse myself from your thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogito Posted March 24, 2007 Report Share Posted March 24, 2007 Ok DragonMaci... Imagine that today you are a proud new parent. A cute baby boy is wriggling around in the blankets in front of you. What will you name him, and why? Try the same exercise for a girl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted March 24, 2007 Report Share Posted March 24, 2007 What is wrong with say calling a kid John if you highly value John Galt? It is not original, but why should ones name neccesairly be original. Avoiding being unoriginal for no good reason makes no sense, and is not individualism... Ok, so indeed, explain to us a "proper" system of naming kids, that avoids "tribalism" or whatever else you might think is wrong with the way most people do it...I am thinking you might struggle here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted March 24, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2007 What is wrong with say calling a kid John if you highly value John Galt? It is not original, but why should ones name neccesairly be original. Avoiding being unoriginal for no good reason makes no sense, and is not individualism... I never said it had to original. It is OK to give a child an unoriginal name like Johm, just not to name a child after someone else. It is like saying the child is that person or the same as that person. That defies reality. No one is someone else or the same. Ok, so indeed, explain to us a "proper" system of naming kids, that avoids "tribalism" or whatever else you might think is wrong with the way most people do it...I am thinking you might struggle here... Actually, no struggle. I easily came up with an alternative. Give the child a last and middle name the way most parents give first names, i.e., uncopied of anyone's name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted March 24, 2007 Report Share Posted March 24, 2007 I never said it had to original. It is OK to give a child an unoriginal name like Johm, just not to name a child after someone else. It is like saying the child is that person or the same as that person. That defies reality. No one is someone else or the same. Actually, no struggle. I easily came up with an alternative. Give the child a last and middle name the way most parents give first names, i.e., uncopied of anyone's name. It doesnt defy reality if you call somone John, say after John Galt, if you call him John because say you like the name, and want to say pay tribute to the ideas Galt represents. Its only defying reality if you actually think the kid IS THE SAME PERSON which I think you will find few parents do.. And I am failing to see why your system is so much better than the current system though, as I think unless ones last name is maybe say Bunce (its not the best I know, personally I wouldnt bother changing, its not quite bad enough in my mind)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted March 24, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2007 It doesnt defy reality if you call somone John, say after John Galt, if you call him John because say you like the name, and want to say pay tribute to the ideas Galt represents. Its only defying reality if you actually think the kid IS THE SAME PERSON which I think you will find few parents do.. And I am failing to see why your system is so much better than the current system though, as I think unless ones last name is maybe say Bunce (its not the best I know, personally I wouldnt bother changing, its not quite bad enough in my mind)... If you like then name then, yes. But if you do it because you like the person, then no. Giving the name of someone to your child because you like them implies belief they are that person or the same as that person. Such a belief would defy reality. Well, I, too don't think Bunce is bad enough to bother changing, though it is mildly bad. However, I have seen some names that I would change if they were mine. I have seen names that I really don't like. I just think it is a greater tribute to/respect for individuality not to name any of a person's three names are not given from someone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted March 24, 2007 Report Share Posted March 24, 2007 If you like then name then, yes. But if you do it because you like the person, then no. Giving the name of someone to your child because you like them implies belief they are that person or the same as that person. Such a belief would defy reality. Well, I, too don't think Bunce is bad enough to bother changing, though it is mildly bad. However, I have seen some names that I would change if they were mine. I have seen names that I really don't like. I just think it is a greater tribute to/respect for individuality not to name any of a person's three names are not given from someone else. It might implyh that to YOU...but I do not see why it does so...care to explain this rather strange beleif? Yeah, maybe if you had been...hmm..lets say Bob Bunce...thats a terrible combination if you ask me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted March 24, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2007 It might implyh that to YOU...but I do not see why it does so...care to explain this rather strange beleif? Yeah, maybe if you had been...hmm..lets say Bob Bunce...thats a terrible combination if you ask me. Give me a little time to think about how to word it, OK? On a side note, there are some people I wouldn't want to be named after even if I did support being named after others. Such as Peter Keating and James Taggart. I don't think it is that is a bad enough combination to warrant a name change. But the above examples are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted March 24, 2007 Report Share Posted March 24, 2007 Give me a little time to think about how to word it, OK? On a side note, there are some people I wouldn't want to be named after even if I did support being named after others. Such as Peter Keating and James Taggart. I don't think it is that is a bad enough combination to warrant a name change. But the above examples are. Ok...I am thinking you might not be so sure yourself, or that you do not know how to word your reasons, the latter is quite implied in this thread particulary. Yeah, if my name was Peter Keating, and I would change it, or if weasJames Taggart...or Wesley Mouch (Mouch being a terrible sounding last name anyway). Mind you, if it was the second name, I could more easily just change my first name to something other than James... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted March 24, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2007 Ok...I am thinking you might not be so sure yourself, or that you do not know how to word your reasons, the latter is quite implied in this thread particulary. Yeah, if my name was Peter Keating, and I would change it, or if weasJames Taggart...or Wesley Mouch (Mouch being a terrible sounding last name anyway). Mind you, if it was the second name, I could more easily just change my first name to something other than James... Yes, Mouch is an ugly sounding name. Also, as was pointed out in another thread here, it sounds like "mooch". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted March 29, 2007 Report Share Posted March 29, 2007 So Kane, do you have the answer yet? Because I am still a little curious to know your ''reasoning" on this.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogito Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Ok DragonMaci... Imagine that today you are a proud new parent. A cute baby boy is wriggling around in the blankets in front of you. What will you name him, and why? Try the same exercise for a girl Yeah, what he said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 I assume you realize that you just quoted yourself..and that "he" is you. By the way has anyone reading this thread actually been named after someone else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted March 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 So Kane, do you have the answer yet? Because I am still a little curious to know your ''reasoning" on this.. What was I answering again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 If you look up earlier in the forum you can find out...I did and I beleive you are telling us why you think that naming someone else implies someone thinks there kid is someone else, or something like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted March 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 If you look up earlier in the forum you can find out...I did and I beleive you are telling us why you think that naming someone else implies someone thinks there kid is someone else, or something like that. Because they are acting like the child is that person when it isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 No, sorry that does not explain it. If someone gives their child a name after someone else they are usually demonstrating how much they value that person, as their kid has to have some name, and in this case they consider that the name of that other person means somethhing to them, because some other persson with that name means somethiing to them, meaning they associate certain values with that name. How can you leap to the assumption that they are acting like they think the child IS that person? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CmdrBretz Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 My family has an informal tradition of naming, my father was named for his grandfather and I for mine. My grandfather was Arthur George Bretz, my father Gary Edward Bretz, and I am Derrick Arthur Bretz. If and when I have a son, I will more than likely use Gary as my son's middle name because of the love and appreciation I have for my father. He is a great man. I can only hope to be as good a father to my children. It would be recognition of the value I have for him to name my son after him. No name defines who a person is and I challenge anyone to prove it does? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 My family has an informal tradition of naming, my father was named for his grandfather and I for mine. My grandfather was Arthur George Bretz, my father Gary Edward Bretz, and I am Derrick Arthur Bretz. If and when I have a son, I will more than likely use Gary as my son's middle name because of the love and appreciation I have for my father. He is a great man. I can only hope to be as good a father to my children. It would be recognition of the value I have for him to name my son after him. No name defines who a person is and I challenge anyone to prove it does? Those are the sorts of valid reasons for naming a baby after someone you know and admire (including family members in many or maybe even most cases). Naming a baby after someone you do not admire might be a silly idea, or maybe giving someone a name after someone else if it is say Bananabunch, but I think that was established. Dont tell me Kane, you think people think a name in some way defines a person? No I dont think so, most people are fully aware that a name and someones identity are seperate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'kian Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 My family follows the Jewsih tradition of naming children after a deceased relative. I see nothing wrong with it, but I think the relative would have been more honored if they did so while he was still alive. An unlce and aunt had the notion of giving their kids middle names after the street corner where they met for their first date. Fortunately they dropped it, which saved one of my cousins from being named Hegel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted March 31, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2007 My family has an informal tradition of naming, my father was named for his grandfather and I for mine. My grandfather was Arthur George Bretz, my father Gary Edward Bretz, and I am Derrick Arthur Bretz. If and when I have a son, I will more than likely use Gary as my son's middle name because of the love and appreciation I have for my father. He is a great man. I can only hope to be as good a father to my children. It would be recognition of the value I have for him to name my son after him. That sort of tradition is a part of my complaint, just like the informal ones of my mother's family and of my father's family. Since I have only 1 person in my family I respect (cousin) and 1 I semi-respect (mother) I will not be doing it. Those are the sorts of valid reasons for naming a baby after someone you know and admire (including family members in many or maybe even most cases). I don't think it is valid. It is never something I will ever do. And certainly doing it because it is tradition is poor. At least personal reasons give some semi-validation to it. Naming a baby after someone you do not admire might be a silly idea, or maybe giving someone a name after someone else if it is say Bananabunch, but I think that was established. Yes we did cover it and yes it is silly. Dont tell me Kane, you think people think a name in some way defines a person? No I dont think so, most people are fully aware that a name and someones identity are seperate. Of course I don't. It does say something about what they want the person to be. My family follows the Jewsih tradition of naming children after a deceased relative. I see nothing wrong with it, but I think the relative would have been more honored if they did so while he was still alive. It better be out of respect, else it is mere tradition, in which case their is not even the semi-validity of respect for the name's origin. An unlce and aunt had the notion of giving their kids middle names after the street corner where they met for their first date. Fortunately they dropped it, which saved one of my cousins from being named Hegel. Now there is a bad reason for a name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted March 31, 2007 Report Share Posted March 31, 2007 No, still havent answered the question yet... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted March 31, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2007 No, still havent answered the question yet... Actually, I did, it just wasn't to your satisfaction. Just because it isn't to your satisfaction doesn't mean I didn't answer it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted March 31, 2007 Report Share Posted March 31, 2007 Actually, I did, it just wasn't to your satisfaction. Just because it isn't to your satisfaction doesn't mean I didn't answer it. Quote where you answered the question then... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.