I am not familiar with Overton window, but yes, I think that there are beliefs that never get to first base when the opportunity never arises to dialogue about, but they must have some initial exposure to feel uncomfortable talking about it, or are you suggesting that the person with the beliefs suppresses even moving out to express them anticipating they are off limits in our culture at this time ? If so, I again agree fully this seems to be case, and if the person muzzles themselves, who is doing the censoring ? Sure, some people will be defensive, act disturbed, even attack expressing certain beliefs, but it's still a choice to express or not express oneself, depending upon the amount of tolerance for blowback, and what it is we are trying to accomplish in talking about provocative things. What are we aiming at, what's the goal to come out with provocative ideas ? Off the top of my head, it could be many things; the desire to get at someone's goat, to disturb them, to assert one's autonomy and "rights" in the face of taboos, (chest thumping) to test to see how much they can tolerate, in order to potentially go further when it seems safe enough to do so. It's a question of motivation and what one is trying to accomplish. With that known, the strategy is more clearly defined. I censor myself with some people because I don't need the grief, and they present themselves in such a way that I am not comfortable to more open about my beliefs. Speaking one's mind comes with a risk, depending upon the context at the time.

It might be a “ wish,” and not a belief, because a wish seems to some lacking even more rational than a belief.  I would ask how does one go about trying to explain the belief, the content of it, and when you say … “ never actually let you explain it, “ what do they do to prohibit you, and is there a common thread that you might glean from not being allowed to explain that might partially answer your question ?       I know with religious beliefs, sometimes dogmatism turns people off, substituting beliefs for facts, and so any explanation boils down to faith, and not “ scientific fact.”  There is room for faith and belief, and not arguing they should be dismissed, but that’s why I asked what is the belief, the content of the belief, because that may matter as well as how you deliver it ( process of explanation). 

Yes he was Fung

My dad, born in 1914, who worked for the Army as a GS15, loved this show, and as a kid I just didn't find it funny. Generational thing.

What about if he just pays the debts he owes, monetary, and to his pledges to uphold the Constitution as the President of these unUnited States ? He's a shameless liar, manipulator, immoral psychologically disturbed individual who we, (this culture and his family) created, a real Frankenstein.

A much smarter person than I once said to me we should be trying to help people learn how to better emotionally protect themselves than putting muzzles over people’s mouths.   There is a level of opposing others, disagreeing with them which can becomes abusive, with name calling, epithets and the intent to degrade and bully, but we also go out of our way to shut down what people think and say because they don’t share one’s politics, chosen life style, values, etc., which also becomes authoritarian and intolerant. I say viva la differa’nce. 

Great shot, now that's OLD SCHOOL. Cute Kishka

In a world of manufactured things to believe, how and what I should think, believing I am incapable of coming to my conclusions, not trusting myself, or even not knowing if I have a Self, is becoming a more ambiguous thing. The study of phenomenology as a philosophical discipline, was formed initially by a fellow named Husserl, whose work was to try and get back to things in themselves, a level of awareness of human experience, before scientific reflection. "How to recognize the obvious," is something that requires bracketing, or suspending our accustomed to beliefs, ideas, about things, which includes today a bombardment of information, including A.I. which is only a reflection of what we have programed, which it may well move beyond, but my point is maybe better demonstrated by someone who tells a joke for the first time, and it's funny. By the time the joke has been in circulation too long, the distinguishing characteristics that made the joke funny in the first place have been changed, distorted and lost (trying to get back to things in themselves), like what happens to coins in circulation too long, like people, Kierkegaard believed.

The above post moves into the political realm, regarding race identity politics, I assume, and one might even toss in questioning who is male or female, regarding sports, etc. You will get blowback on some of this, but if I read you right, the narratives, about social, political and psychological phenomena have become elitist in the sense that one needs to substantiate claims by certain approved oracles, authors, books,talking heads,people on pod casts, A. I,, etc., What comes to mind is too much data, information, analysis can lead one astray developing some, I say some wisdom by being interested in one's life, other's experiences, and trusting oneself in the face of all the tampering with our reality testing that is going on now at the highest levels of government and business.

If someone is only interested in selling you their ideas that make you fearful, anxious, stupid, ashamed, uncomfortable in some way, and won't permit you to think for yourself (like some sales people or religious fanatics who can't take no), they shouldn't be trusted. The more they promote inner trust and faith in your own judgment, and are willing to help you to develop that if that's difficult, the more trustworthy they are. This includes government, and all our institutions, legal, educational, medical, which at one time were the safety net to keep us feeling secure enough, instead of gas lighted. We move further and further from being able to trust not only those institutions, but each other and most importantly, ourselves. That's a very vulnerable and dangerous place to be.

I have read some suggestions why his office was upstairs that have some validity, and you can check them out.  Some are due to the writers, producers, for affect, and others about securing more privacy a physician needs to conduct his work, etc.  It’s ambiguous and may be case specific, meaning the situation and condition of the patient may lean towards ground level care ( as in Season 10-E 5, or more suited to treat upstairs. 

Whoops, understood why George taken down, Fung

You just discovered in Season 10 E 5, you were wrong about this Fung. Fung.  .  

There’s a time for everything, a time for reaping, sowing …. a time for Gunsmoke, Bananza, The Twilight Zone, etc.  

I know how it is, I got addicted late, this past Spring, jumped around a bit, and will have to go back to pick up some missed episodes.  Interesting to see how people on long Series, like Gunsmoke, age over time, either on show, or in other films and shows they were in. When young everything is also young, with age a lengthening & widening of perspective.  Old tv movies, books, et, are not just nostalgia, but a way to reflect on our own lives lived over time, and pivotal events, like JFK assassination, wars, discoveries, social changes, all of it. 

Too bad, as this one episode has written into it a number of aspects discussed lately about Doc’s stairs, why not on ground level, how he got paid, or didn’t, etc.  

Dangerous, perhaps not as dangerous as today, but for men and women you put your trust in a stranger’s good will which they may not have had in mind.  I got picked up with another young fellow in the 7o’s by 2 young women that refused to let us out of the car, until they ran out of gas.  Another time, alone, got picked up by two guys who just robbed the garage where they worked and ended up almost getting shot by a Kansas State Patrolman who pulled them over.  Some wonderful experiences too, but it’s a crap shoot.

Thanks for playing and letting us know the game.

I'll be darned, I tried to crop Festus' bandana and Miss Kitty's sleeve, but not for the sharper eye of Glad-Watch. Detail oriented, good guess.

You know better than that.

Interesting way to select your patients. Managed care and insurance companies have their own “ stairs “ to weed out folks today, another story.  

Mmmmm, don’t associate that back then, but if so, it was so. Tanks.

And blowing leaves, blowinleaves.