Comments on: Take the time. Life is short – George Carlin

By: marion

marion — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 15:17:18 +0000

These are mostly the words of HH the Dalai Lama, a poem called “the paradox of our age”:
We have bigger houses but smaller families;
More conveniences, but less time;
We have more degrees, but less sense;
More knowledge, but less judgment;

More experts, but more problems;
More medicines, but less healthiness;
We’ve been all the way to the moon and back,
but have trouble crossing the street to meet the new neighbour.

We build more computers to hold more information to produce more copies than ever but have less communication.
We have become long on quantity, but short on quality.
These are times of fast foods but slow digestion;

Tall men but short character;
Steep profits but shallow relationships.
It’s a time when there is much in the window, but nothing in the room…

By: Ollie

Ollie — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 22:14:23 +0000

I have the view that depression is a disease which comes from total identification with one’s thoughts and emotions and have found teachings like that of Eckhart Tolle to help me recover. What do you think?

By: John

John — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:15:18 +0000

Thank you Dr Moorehead for setting the record straight about the original title and origin of this article.

By: Beat Your Depression | Time management and stress and depression

Beat Your Depression | Time management and stress and depression — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:41:00 +0000

[...] a follow on from the post entitled ” Take the time – Life is short” I thought about how it would be beneficial to mull over how we often tend to think that we [...]

By: DB3

DB3 — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:19:53 +0000

Dr. Bob Moorehead of Seattle’s Overlake Christian Church wrote this. It is named “The Paradox of our Age”. It was in “Words Aptly Spoken” published in 1995.

By: Johnny

Johnny — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:37:11 +0000

I agree with petunia and Diplomat about the value of the source of the article or quote.

It seems somewhat irrevelent and is usually only added as a matter of courtesy, or possibly to prevent being accused of plagiarism. The content is most important and on this occasion it was certainly thought provoking irrespective of who may have originally penned it.

To much emphasis on minor details has been known to lead to bouts of depression.

By: Diplomat

Diplomat — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 00:35:53 +0000

Who wrote it and/or whether the poem is a collection of nuggets isn’t as important as what it contains. Very poignant indeed.

By: petunia

petunia — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 00:28:39 +0000

Who gives a shit? It’s a nice read anyways. Why does everyone have to “need to know where it came from and who wrote it?”

By: papa soji

papa soji — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:27:02 +0000

As has been pointed out, nothing wrong with the ideas, but I think someone has collected and rephrased all of these “warm fuzzies,” so there is no single person that could be credited with the authorship of these things. The fact that it wasn’t done by Carlin is obvious, there’s not a single explitive in the 28 lines attributed to him.

By: James

James — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 11:42:26 +0000

“Isn’t it amazing that George Carlin – comedian of the 70’s and 80’s – could write something so very eloquent…and so very appropriate.”

As it turns out, via the expert detective work by Ray and Matt, George Carlin did not write this piece of writing. Having said that I feel that there are quite a few good points within it. I personally would not be ashamed to have written such material.

I also love the attitude shown by John for admitting his mistake, albeit unintentional. What we should realize is that the content is still mostly very good.