|
Would you prefer to be living in blind happiness but ignorant of the truth, or live with knowledge of the truth but be unhappy because of it?
------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... http://www.animfactory.com/animation...ing_lg_clr.gif A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! |
"Ignorance is bliss."- Cypher (Now spelt correctly!) from the Matrix.
I AGREE! ------------------ http://www.ukpokemonsites.20m.com/images/djg_banner.jpg <A HREF="http://www.ukpokemonsites.20m.com" TARGET=_blank> Visit Now</A> or Starstryke will Stryke U! [This message has been edited by DJG (edited 05-18-2001).] |
With all knowledge, I might be unhappy but I could help so many people and this would make me happy anyway, so I'll go for knowledge. If they're mutually exclusive, give me knowledge anyway
------------------ In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is pimp |
I would have to say the truth on this one.
------------------ http://publish.hometown.aol.com/tobb...ady_avalon.gif Seeker of Truth |
Bliss -v- misery.....hmmmm, tough one. Call me shallow, but I think I'll go with the bliss http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif
------------------ Regards http://homepages.compuserve.de/ComtessaM/img/anr.gif Mouse [This message has been edited by Mouse (edited 05-17-2001).] |
I think this is the question that led to the fall of man (if you believe the Bible). Adam and Eve were in the garden, ignorant and blissful. When they partook of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, their "eyes were opened." Which brings us to another question, does knowledge do away with innocence?
------------------ O_H_F http://publish.hometown.aol.com/tobb...ages/reeka.jpg |
Give me the Truth any day. Truth, no matter how unpalatable it may seem, is always better than a lie, and may be rewoven into a happier pattern for the future.
http://www.wizardrealm.com/images/saz1.gif |
ill take truth. knowledge is power, is my motto for life. i dont care if im miserable as long as i have a fair source and share of knowledge. knowledge may do away with much of innocence, but idiocy is the downfall of the human race and all other races.
|
Quote:
History repeats itself then. I want truth and my name is Adam |
Well, I know this will sound like a cop-out, but it depends on what you mean by truth. One person's truth is not necessarily the same as another person's. For example, to you, a hamburger might be the the yummiest thing in creation. Truth for you. But to a vegetarian...?
And knowledge or ignorance of WHAT? Would you want to know if you had inoperable cancer, or remain in ignorance? Some people will make one choice, some the other. Ok. Nothing profound there. But the same principle, I think, applies in even profound matters. It is what works FOR YOU that matters. That is your truth. ------------------ Smile! Life is too short for bitching! http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...s/EEhearts.gif Fljotsdale |
I guess I'd have to take sad knowledge, reluctantly. Bliss is nice, but ignorance can be harmful both to yourself and others.
|
I would choose knowledge, then I could change the world to make the truth be good and blissfull as well.
|
Quote:
I could not have said it better myself! Thanks Saz! Hugs! Moni ------------------ http://members.aol.com/lasttrueprincess/images/ltp4.gif |
I always say that ignorance is no excuse, it is a explanation, and I´m hungry for knowledge and thus i have to say that I prefer to know and be unhappy for it than ignorant of the truth.. But thats just me http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...es/biggrin.gif
------------------ http://wolfgir.najk.net/name.gif WOLF WINS EVERY FIGHT BUT ONE, AND IN THAT ONE, HE DIES |
I'd have to say knowledge of truth.
Yorick, GREAT poll!!! ------------------ Melusine, Archbabe of the Order of the Holy Flame and the Laughing Hyenas, & Official Entertainer Elf of the BG2 Bar http://www.angelfire.com/anime2/memnoch/mel1.gif Your voice is ambrosia |
Ignorants makes life easy, it is far more easy to accept what we want to accept than to face the truth. But this has caulsed more of the worlds ill than anything else.
So I'll take truth any day. |
I want the knowledge, and the capability to forget when I need it !
No kidding, I had a quite bad personal year, years ago, and amazingly, I have managed to keep almost no memory of it, as if it had been 'blank' to me. ------------------ http://fc1ddq.free.fr/stan2.gif :ninja: The world is my oyster ! And now I have the knives to open it ... |
Quote:
OK Fjlotsdale, let's move past postmodernism for a moment http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...s/rolleyes.gif and hypothesise about say: an affair in a marriage, an incurable disease, the knowledge of nuclear weapons, the knowledge of the matrix, the knowledge of how others really percieve you or that you are adopted etc etc etc. Assuming reality is actually a substancial entity - there is absolute truth and falsehood. Someones percieved truth may in actual fact be based on a fallacy. (As in the case of a woman growing up believing her grandmother to be her Mum, and her Mum her sister.) The person may never know it is indeed false, but THEIR "truth" is actually a lie. What you are saying is precisely what I'm asking. Would you prefer to live in happy "ignorance", believing YOUR truth, or become aware of the absolute truth in a circumstance, that alters your mental perspective from happy to sad. http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif Of course some will make one choice and some the opposite, we are all different. Knowledge often comes through a negative circumstance. "Deep" personalities have often experienced the depths of despair. The negatives thus bring a positive - knowledge. The point is, would you prefer never to have experienced that aspect of life? Sometimes I am glad of everything I've endured because of who I am and how even the crap has shaped me. Other times it gets all to much and I wish that certain situations hadn't eventuated. In this case the one person can choose both, depending on their state of mind (which is why I hate personality tests). The paradox is that for someone who cherishes knowledge, a deep somewhat sombre happiness and satisfaction can result from knowing a painful truth about a situation. In this case happiness itself broadens in definition does it not? http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif Thanks Melusine BTW http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif and thanks all who have contributed thus far. ------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... http://www.animfactory.com/animation...ing_lg_clr.gif A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! [This message has been edited by Yorick (edited 05-18-2001).] |
At first I wanted go with the ignorance. I usually end up learning stuff I don't want to know, and have to go tell someone else. (Someone who doesn't want to know either.) Then I realized that I can explain things better then some people, and make them easier to deal with. I myself had been emotionally hardened and rarely (If ever) smile. (My freinds give me a lot of crap about that.)So I'd end up taking the truth as always.
------------------ Burn to a crisp! Redblueflare (Call me Red!) http://train.missouri.org/~prestons/.../flamedrag.gif [This message has been edited by Redblueflare (edited 05-18-2001).] |
Truth. Even though it hurts sometimes. http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...miles/wink.gif
------------------ http://www.angelfire.com/anime2/memnoch/genwalk.gif http://www.angelfire.com/anime2/memnoch/memname.GIF |
Quote:
I never did that. Avoided it like the plague. Must be in the air I breath, lol! http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...miles/wink.gif As for the points you raise: yes. I see what you are saying, and part of me agrees with you - but another part keeps saying 'hang on a minute, it ain't necessarily so!' Ok, the mother/grandmother bit etc, is valid - but so is the bit about the hamburger/vegetarian. And anyway, who is to say that there IS any Absolute Truth? Scientists are currently trying hard to construct a theory of 'everything' that will reconcile contradictory 'facts' about the universe. They think that if they come up with a theory that works they will have solved the mystery of the origin of the universe. Believers in a god think they already know the answer, and that science is wasting its time. Both are going for the jackpot of Absolute Truth - and it is highly unlikely that they will have the same conclusion. But to each of them THEIR truth is/will be Absolute. And who will be right? Will either of them be proved right in the long run? Or will a little green alien arrive from the depths of space with its own version and who should we believe then? We CANNOT presently define truth in anything other than limited, partial ways based on our own experience. Truth is largely subjective rather than objective. Even in science and Religion! IMHO! http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...es/biggrin.gif Life experience is a case in point. Like yourself and many others, I have endured a lot and it has inevitably coloured my outlook. Someone without such unpleasantness in their life will see the world with very different eyes, even when viewing the same things we do. Which viewpoint is true? BOTH are! Would I change my life experience? Well, it has made me who I am, and helped me to understand others. But, yes, I would change it if I could so that my children could have grown up in a happy, secure family. They would not now be so beset by lack of confidence etc.. But that's life. ------------------ Smile! Life is too short for bitching! http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...s/EEhearts.gif Fljotsdale [This message has been edited by Fljotsdale (edited 05-18-2001).] |
Quote:
------------------ Nid yw'r hoff o lyfr yn fyr o gyfaill. |
Fjlotsdale, I'm not talking about absolute truth regarding religion, although it may consequencially apply to that, I'm talking about the theoretical possibility of absolute truth as a concept. Certainly there are cases where what is "truth" is subjective, but at the end of the day, a rock either exists or it does not. We may well merely only percieve it to be so, and it may just be a mental projection of mine for all I know, but in that case it still exists - as a mental projection. Whether it exists as a physical manifestation is also something that is either true or not - regardless on how anyone percieves it. The truth may be hidden, but is at some point absolute whether or not someone percieves it.
I found an unusual situation when I first did interviews. It was said in magazine articles that I was from Gosford (just above Sydney). Another said I was from Perth (Western Australia). To anyone that read those articles (and cared) I come from Gosford. If that was the limit of any record of my life, "Yorick" came from Gosford, so that becomes the percieved truth in any record left to posterity. The absolute truth was something totally different. I'm not talking in purely theological terms, though this does have theological consequences. The theological ponderings are as a result of the exploration of the concept of absolute truth - not the other way round. The result is that either the universes creator awareness exists as a separate enity from the universe, or it does not. Of course there are other theories, but in purely focussing on this one "he" either exists or not. "He" cannot both exist and not exist at the same time. How could you explain that? If "he" exists purely as a construct of peoples minds then he is not existing in the sense to which I am referring. We will not ultimately know the absolute truth in this regard, but it is there. ------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... http://www.animfactory.com/animation...ing_lg_clr.gif A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! [This message has been edited by Yorick (edited 05-18-2001).] |
Truth in all things!
------------------ http://www.123imagehost.com/images/b...arrissig02.gif "the memories of a man in his old age, are deeds of a man in his prime" |
Most definitely truth! How can you know how to proceed in a relationship, or situation without knowing all you can about it? And saving someone from the truth often ends up with more hurt than if you'd been upfront in the first place.
You can not run from the truth, for it will eventually find you. Best to face it in one fell swoop and get the pain and confusion out of the way. OR start enjoying the happiness sooner... not ALL truth is BAD truth. http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...es/biggrin.gif (All of this is only my opinion on what I believe, and how I want to be treated.) ------------------ http://www.paulbunyan.net/mnssc/f65L.gif Sometimes I think I understand everything, then I regain consciousness. Happy Member of Fast Fourward. |
ONLY TRUTH brings the knowledge to change all things!
------------------ Sir Taliesin If they take my gun can I still use my Claymore? |
The truth every time! Times of bliss make me nervous, if they last too long!!!!1
Traute |
Great topic!
I agree with Yorick. I am not talking about truth in a religious sense (I am not religious) but I do believe that there is such a thing as objective truth. Then there are different interpretations of that objective truth which are subjective. It is not necessary to think that you will ever find that objective truth, either by science or religion, but that doesn't mean that it isn't truth. To believe there is no objective truth and that therefore everything is entirely subjective is postmodernist. And I am definitely not a postmodernist! Yorick, you have posed a very interesting conundrum here. In one thread, 'Ethics' you ask if it would be right to tell someone that they are being cheated on. This post gets only a few answers which are mostly 'no'. In this thread, you ask a more general question which is really posing the dilemma from a different angle - would you rather know if you were being cheated on (or dying etc. etc.) and the vast majority say 'yes'. So it is not the knowing that is to be avoided, but the telling? The dilemma is not for the person gaining unpleasant information, but the person imparting it. The person imparting the bad news has ultimate control over the other person's happiness, and makes that decision for the potential recipient, often based on their feelings about the telling, rather than the receiving. Were it the other way round, they would no doubt want to be told. However, in a real situation, the messenger often gets shot. Is it the sentence 'your wife is cheating on you' which causes pain, or the cheating itself? The person in pain often realises later that they have been angry at the wrong person when they yelled at the messenger. If I were in a situation where I knew someone was being cheated on, I would probably not tell the person directly, even knowing that ignorance is rarely bliss - it is usually just postponing unhappiness. Perhaps I would speak to the cheater, to try and convince why they should own up. Or perhaps I would take my friend out to a place where he/she can see the evidence for themselves, but without making it too obvious. Because sometimes it is better to learn something for yourself rather than be told. ------------------ http://www.gldb.com/wayno/epona2.gif Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. Epona of The Laughing Hyenas |
Quote:
------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... http://www.animfactory.com/animation...ing_lg_clr.gif A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! |
Yorick?
I wasn't being specially 'religious' either http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif. And I don't think I'm postmodernist! http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...les/crying.gif Reality is reality is reality. But reality (truth) CAN be validly different for everyone. Take another 'for instance' a very small one - a leaf is a leaf: but what colour is it? Green, yes. But the green you see is not the green I see, because the colour we perceive depends on the individual retinas in our eyes. But your green is true to you and mine to me. It CANNOT be Absolute! It HAS to be a subjective truth. And truth in many, many things in this existence is purely subjective. OK. There has to be objective truth, too. If your wife is cheating on you, that is not subjective, it is objective. (What you do about it depends on subjective feelings!) But ABSOLUTE TRUTH is something else again. The term (to me, anyway) implies the coming together of all things, objective and subjective, into one complete, unified WHOLE that cannot again be split into it's component parts. Let's go back to the leaf: if we could see it AS IT ACTUALLY IS, that would be the Absolute Truth about the colour of that leaf. Likewise, if we could know everthing about this universe, that would be the Absolute Truth about that, too. But we can't even know the Absolute Truth about the colour of the leaf, can we? If we could KNOW the ABSOLUTE TRUTH about EVERYTHING - why, then, we would either become the creator, or the universe would vanish, or existence would be pointless... http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...les/ponder.gif I'm getting out of my depth here! http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...iles/cwm34.gif ------------------ Smile! Life is too short for bitching! http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...s/EEhearts.gif Fljotsdale |
Quote:
Take soundwaves. Our ears only hear between certain frequencies. Dogs hear higher (faster) frequencies than humans. There are also subsonic frequencies below what we can hear. We know they are there because we feel them or observe the effects on say a building. We can't purely rely on the applicable human sense to ascertain absolute or objective truth because there are limitations. This is one example of how something is beyond our comprehension. We will never know what the dog whistle sounds like. Regarding colour, I'm of the opinion that we see colours the same, but I don't know if this can be proved. The way light and colour works though, as in all colours being white, and absense of colour being black, seems to me to indicate consistency of interpretation. As I said, I'm not sure if this can be proved though. What I find interesting is that colours change under differing lights. Under yellow stage lighting for example, a yellow lead becomes white, and a white lead becomes yellow. Love it. ------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... http://www.animfactory.com/animation...ing_lg_clr.gif A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! |
Good answer Yorick.
The comment you made about different colour lighting reminded me of the time I worked in a tannery. My job was to do dye matching - we had a computer and a machine that measured what wavelengths of light were reflected back by samples of dyed leather. The readings given were always consistent, although it was possible that I saw 'olive green' in a completely different way to the person in the next office. We used to supply various department stores with dye matches, and we had to have fluorescent tubes for each store - because the dye match would look slightly different under each type of lighting, as the available wavelengths were different in each store, making the colours look different. However, those colours still gave the same readings when tested. ------------------ http://www.gldb.com/wayno/epona2.gif Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. Epona of The Laughing Hyenas |
Fjlotsdale, I'm not sure about your statement re. knowledge of absolute truth of everything = becoming the creator/universe ceasing to exixt.
I don't believe it is possible in this lifetime to know absolute truth about everything. If it is indeed possible it will be in another form of existance. That knowledge wouldn't necessarily mean becoming the creator. It would just be like being let in on a very big secret, or opening your eyes after being blindfolded all your life, or hearing music for the first time, or being born! Think how long it takes us to come to terms with the laws of the earth after being sheltered, breathing liquid in the womb. We then have to breath air, fight gravity, percieve light/shapes and human maniplulations of sound waves etc. It takes years. No reason to presume if the knowledge of absolute truth came to us in say an afterlife that a similar pattern wouldn't be possible. ------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... http://www.animfactory.com/animation...ing_lg_clr.gif A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! |
Quote:
Thanks Epona, http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif I believe Dolphins can ascertain the colour of a visually obscured object using their sonar - sending soundwaves and analysing the returning waves. ------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... http://www.animfactory.com/animation...ing_lg_clr.gif A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! [This message has been edited by Yorick (edited 05-19-2001).] |
Regarding colour perception: yes, it is proved we all see colours differently. Something to do with the differing amount of cones in the retina (I think it is the cones, but it might be the rods!) of each individual. I learnt it a long time ago, when I was studying to be a nurse. There must be even better info on it now.
I see the point of your birth example, and you may well be right - but my tiny brain just finds the profundity of knowing so much utterly mind-boggling. I cannot do more than dream of the thought of the concept... http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...miles/wink.gif To KNOW would be godlike... Hence my comments! ------------------ Smile! Life is too short for bitching http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...s/EEhearts.gif Fljotsdale |
Quote:
(BTW I've heard we have less receptors of "blue" in our eyes.) Most of those who I've discussed with agree that it can't be proved either way but agree that it's an interesting hypothesis. I'd like to think that we share the experience though. ------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... http://www.animfactory.com/animation...ing_lg_clr.gif A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! [This message has been edited by Yorick (edited 05-19-2001).] |
Regarding colour vision: I found this:-
<>1. What is color? Color is that characteristic of a visible object or light source by which an observer may distinguish differences between two structure-free fields of the same size and shape, such as may be caused by differences in the spectral composition of the light concerned in the observation. In other words, color is that perception by which we can tell two objects apart, when they have otherwise similar attributes of shape, size, texture, etc. OK, that's the textbook answer. This is admittedly unsatisfying, because color is an inherently subjective experience. Color only exists in our minds, and putting a scientific definition together of no easy task. The usual definition, given above, is really a circular argument. It amounts to: "Color is that attribute of an object leftover when you eliminate all attributes except color." So, if an two objects look different, but have the same size, shape, texture, etc., then the way you are telling them apart is their color. <>2. How do we see in color? In the retina of our eye are photoreceptors that are sensitive to light. When light is absorbed by the photoreceptors, the light energy is converted into electrical and chemical signals that the neurons in our eye and brain process. There are two kinds of photoreceptors in the retina: rods and cones. Rods mediate vision at lower levels of illumination. Cones mediate vision at higher levels of illumination. There are three types of cones with each type differentially sensitive to a different region of the visible spectrum. They are known as the Short-wavelength sensitive cones, the Middle-wavelength sensitive cones and the Long-wavelength sensitive cones. Sometimes they are referred to as R-, G-, and B-cones but these are misnomers based on the colors in the spectrum. For example, very short wavelength light can uniquely stimulate the S-cones but the sensation associated with this light stimulation has a reddish and bluish component. Fundamentally our color vision derives from comparisons between the amount of light being absorbed by each cone type. Our visual system compares the outputs of the cone types to process color. In addition, color appearance is influenced by the ratios of cone excitations in surrounding regions and by the overall levels of cone excitation caused by the prevailing illumination. These comparisons occur at different stages of processing that start in the retina and continue to the cerebral cortex of the brain. This is me http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif Notice he said 'colour is a subjective experience'. In another article I found, it said that the proportion of the different types of cones affected colour as well, but I can't find the right bit of the right article to post it here - I have skimmed through quite a lot of 'em in the past few minutes! If you want to run a search yourself, I keyed in 'human color vision variations'.http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif Added later: Anyway, that is why if person A puts 2 colours together - say purple and green - he will see them as a terrific combination, while person B says 'Yeuch!' It is not 'cos A has poor taste, it is 'cos he sees them differently than B. http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif ------------------ Smile! Life is too short for bitching http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...s/EEhearts.gif Fljotsdale [This message has been edited by Fljotsdale (edited 05-19-2001).] [This message has been edited by Fljotsdale (edited 05-19-2001).] [This message has been edited by Fljotsdale (edited 05-19-2001).] |
For the sake of contervesy; Ignorant Bliss!
------------------ http://www.photostogo.com/store/GetT...5679&VOLID=569 My hopes lie dashed, Crushed from high above, My dreams lie shattered, my heart broken, A casulty on a battlefield called love. |
Quote:
The fact that we inherit certain genes from our parents/ancestors would indicate we'd recieve similar patterns of interpretations of colour. Just as it can't be proved that we all see the same colour, it certainly can't be provedthat we don't. We all have different sized ears, yet we hear soundwaves similarly enough to communicate intention adequately. Our voiceboxes are all different sizes, and cranium shape influences variants in tonal colour, yet our vocal projections sound similar to each other compared to say a cow or a sparrow. Differences in eye receptors mean that blue eyed persons are more sensitive to bright lights. I don't accept that it follows that one sees "green" where another sees "red". We are dealing with light falling through an atmosphere and dispersing. Just as soundwaves exist that we don't hear, so I'd presume that though our perception of colour is subjective, there is an absolute in regard to what shades of the spectrum are absorbed and what shades are reflected. I don't limit my definitions of things to that which the human can experience. Sound to me is not the human reception of soundwaves, it is the frequencies of disturbances in the air, that exist whether we recieve them or not. Colour is the particular spectrumal reflection of light an object radiates, not merely our reception of it. That's my take on it. ------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... http://www.animfactory.com/animation...ing_lg_clr.gif A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! |
I don't object to tha Absolute of ACTUAL colour, Yorick - only to PERCIEVED colour. Whilst your argument regarding association influencing the like/dislike of colour is correct, it does NOT follow that colour preception is the same by everyone. A LOT depends on the proportion of the 3 types of cones in the eye. And whilst it is true that humans, on average, have the about the same number as other humans, they do vary. A colour-blind person, for example will be very short on certain receptors, either red or blue, usually. And such people genuinely DO see (for example) both red and green as the same colour.
My son-in-law is red/green colour blind. That is anatomy. I have trouble with NAMING yellow and pink. I am not colour-blind at all, but as a child I used to confuse the colour of the flowers 'primrose' and 'rose'. I knew rose was a shade of pink, therefore 'primroses must be pink'. But primroses are naturally yellow. Hence my confusion. That is an example of association. But even SMALL variation in the quantity and distribution of the receptors in the retina will make one person see a colour combination as pleasant or unpleasant, regardless of association. It is a matter of anatomy, not just association. http://www.tgeweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif Fljotsdale [This message has been edited by Fljotsdale (edited 05-20-2001).] [This message has been edited by Fljotsdale (edited 05-20-2001).] |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:46 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved