|
 register your domain and get noticed on the net instantly & announce your presence on the cyber space.
<
Untitled 2
News or propaganda?
It is a fine line traversed with care and
great diligence not to cross by news people and the media to retain news “News”,
and propaganda what is. Even with care and all the effort paid to be and make
the news objective, deep held partisan feelings often creep up often to render
it more of a partisan propaganda than it is a news only to be rescued by a
corroborative second and more reports. However divergent or opposing an
interpretation of the news event, the events objective reality is maintained by
a second and more corroborative accounts. The new as it serves both the
newsmaker and news consumer it is imperative on both the news maker and the news
consumer to impose a culture of objectivity and diversity of an interpretation
by demanding from and giving to multiplicity of sources. A news media and report
that claims exclusivity of a source and a newsmaker that only tells its story to
an exclusive media out let and news reporter has their relationship made not as
a newsmaker and reporter rather as an organ and a subservient and the reports
questionable if not dismissible. I am prompted to jot this note by a
relationship I found increasingly disturbing and may be worth examining in light
of what is going on around the world. It was not long time ago that Algezira was
proclaimed a phenomenon particularly in the Arab world rightfully so; It was
believed it is going to give and it has given voice to the great descent that
existed in the region and group of people who might have been misunderstood or
even might have been mistreated. Often time and again due to in experience or
too lopsided partisan allegiances they have turned themselves in to the mouse
piece of the Arab underground and out of mainstream, by being the exclusive
media outlet for the region’s outcasts and having the exclusive privilege of
access to the group. It is widely known and understood that the news media and
news reporters have the oath of profession to guard the privacy and security of
their sources against a government or any other power that might jeopardize
their safety. This is so for the purpose and sake of news’s objectivity, which
serves both the newsmaker and consumer. Instead of making this global
journalistic culture it’s imperative Algezira seems to have opted for a lesser
partisan allegiance, which makes me skeptical or even dismissive of their report
a feel many serious people would do likewise and have done.
Comments and suggestions are well come as
long as they are civil and are not obscene.
cybernat@cybernatian.biz
Plagued By the Answers:
Often times we get caught with greater and
more questions in our efforts to answer questions of a sort or another or simply
open up a door for an avalanche of questions to follow. Since it has always been
the way of nature and our examination of it and part of our growth and
development, our answers to anything and everything has always been partial and
incomplete at least or totally wrong leaving us with the next set of efforts and
trials to correct, to refine and to complete what we have done, began and are
doing. Thus in my efforts or any one’s great trials and endeavors I take no
offense, bur great pride and gratitude for having gone as far as they and I
went. It is though incumbent upon me I thought, that I ask the next set of
questions as I am entertained by a set of answers from those who had invested
their time and energy in to answering and uncovering, the mysteries of our world
and everything around us and in us. It is with these line of thought that I
approach and ask of the questions that are to follow as I read Dr. Lawrence M.
Krauss’s answers to Scientific American magazine of August issue. I shall make
it clear and so vividly from the outset that no claim of authority on the
subject matter is made on my side, but just a lay man’s puzzlement by some of
his answers. As interesting, thought provoking, and entertaining most of his
answers and conjectures were to the questions raised, he, I though, was not
short of making some over simplified statements some that begged explanations
and plagued my mind in particular in the search for answers in the jungles of
theories and ideas. In his statement about string and loop quantum gravity
theories “ Both this theories are based on the idea that you can’t go down to
zero in a point particle, and that’s one way to get rid of mathematical
infinities.” It seems to me the concepts of zero is incompatible with reality of
material existence it is rather the essence of it than the reality which is none
existence (the existence of none existence if you may wish to call it) that by
definition is a reality beyond reach in time and in distance again which calls
for the reality of infinity and asymptotes. This are not scapegoats as the Dr.
seems to suggest, but realities that can’t be done away with both in mathematics
and physics even it Cripps in other none scientific field as one wishes to make
use of them. It is not the concept of, the existence and the none existence of
zero and infinity, I wanted to discuss here, rather the suggestion that they are
made scapegoats for an explanation and none explanation of a theory that seemed
to me a little off line and somewhat un scientific and make my puzzlement even
more. I have read a number of articles and news exposes recently and it has even
become fashionable to talk about layered Universe I myself I was one who had
fallen for that theory early on. It is the increased number of paradigms that we
find matter in that seems to justify the concept of multiple Universe in a
lopsided logic that undermine the concept that the Universe as we know it and as
defined has left nothing that is not it, on it and in it. It was as we know it,
an all-encompassing entity, I wondered what we will be calling the set of all
the parallel universes, and if matters existence in multiplicity of paradigms
will warrant the multiplicity of universes? I for one have rescinded my earlier
held thought about the parallel Universes. As much as I applauded his stance on
religion in public schools but in his second part of his answer he goes on to
say that he opposes them being thought as science. He does not stop there but
goes on to define the difference between what is science and what is not; it is
with that part of his explanation that I really get a plague, a plague he may
help get rid of. “In science we prove things by empirical methods, and we toss
out things that have been disproved as wrong. Period. This how we make
progress.” I am afraid that statement does not fairly speak either about science
or none science. Science or none what is conclusively proved wrong is always
tossed out be it science or none, as to the method of proof either science or
none science are relegated to empirical methods that is why I think we had the
discussion about spring theory and loop quantum gravity theories. Mathematical
and common logic are as much a part of scientific methods as they are a methods
of none scientific fields. There were, are and there will always be times where
science could not do all its works by empirical methods and none science fields
have as well been, are and will to some extent borrow upon empirical methods of
solving their problems dispelling the popular them the knowledge and methods of
science are totally different and totally incompatible. Human knowledge in its
totality is compounded serving ultimately the same purpose; and generated and
accumulated science in the per suet of none scientific endeavors and none
scientific knowledge in the per suet of none science, opposed in methodology and
approach, yet both in the greater service of human fulfillment. With due respect
to Dr. Krauss opinion, it is rather clear it seems and feels that neither
science nor none science has the monopoly of the truth, not thus far and not in
the foreseeable future; if that has been true that one has the total monopoly of
the truth, we wouldn’t be having all the controversies and struggles for
hegemony, notwithstanding the fact that the truth about the ultimate and the
most fundamental still in contest, it would have been, I thought, ill advised to
have come up with the criticism of none creationist’s philanthropy of helping
creationist education like that of Bill and Melinda Gates, for it would give an
impression of not only of prioritizing of one’s own ways and beliefs, it as well
came across as none academic by not putting the search for the truth the
priority. The truth about everything as with everyone and everywhere, we
individually or as a group do and are capable of knowing only part of the whole
and partial truth. Last if we open our ears, eyes and mind, evolution becomes 7
days of creation stretched to 7 billion years of evolution, and creation becomes
7billion years of evolution compressed to 7 days of creation, all but from the
elements of earth.
Comments and suggestions are well come as
long as they are civil and are not obscene.
Cybernat@cybernatian.biz
BIZZAR
It unbelievably bizarre to find oneself in
the mist o organized gangsters in the name Christianity Islam or Judaism
Hinduism Atheisms right here in the USA today and as we stand. I mean no offense
to all the “isms” in whose names are great works done every minute, every
second, day, month and year, but it is about those who have surpassed their
limitations in an utter disregard for the individual liberty, individual rights
and privacy. It is even more bizarre to seek police protection, cry for help and
all you get is a verbal equivalent of no less than the abuses you suffer under
the some organized group of tugs. I suppose it is the duty and a responsibility
that the public entrusted to them and a privilege they vowed to honor when they
became police officers to see to it that no crime occurs anywhere, to any one
and at any time. I find it troubling to find out that the police would turn to
be not only dismissive, but also outright hostile to one's reporting of a
criminal act. To many people's surprise I am not only tired off reporting acts
of unbelievable proportion of criminality I am left between the choices of
turning a vigilante and a refugee. As much as both choices seem crazy, it is
rather intentionally made to make it feel that both are choices of a crazy
person. When one's jaws are broken with ultrasound gun one can’t cry foul or
else ones cry would be called a wolf's cry. When one's eyes are poked with laser
guns one can’t cry lesser it shall be called a wolf's cry, when ones ears are
deafened with sonic boom one can’t cry sonic sound for one will have no evidence
to prove it for all those are the privileged secret knowledge of the miracle
makers. When your house is wired and everything you do and say is scrutinized,
for merely speaking your mind and cry about it, you are merely crying wolf for
there is no such thing as wired house for no apparent reason and without court
order. When your heart is blown by ultrasound gun and your rear end is poked
with sonic sound and ultrasound and lesser guns for apparently not revealed or
known reason to you and tell the police and the FBI and you are told there are
no such weapons that you need to see your psychiatrist, then you will be
reminded of how far and how much you are privileged and allowed to go .For
everyone else there is what is called plausible deniability except you, and you
know your limitations and if not you are made to know it. Unless of course you
are associated with one or another of the known organized. Often will you know
that Individuality and individual rights is a tasty sugar pill that will
dissolve and dilute in the organized practical world of even of the Great USA as
much as it ought have been sanctified and enshrined by the great constitution.
These stupidity or quasi stupidity of the super intelligent as they portray
themselves, is giving me the heart burn and the remedy seems to be found only in
the naiveté of the stupid and I have become the worshiper of the wisdom of
stupidity than the stupidity of the "wise.” Even with choice of no choice, I
have imposed on myself the viciousness and relentless killing instinct of the
stupidity of the wise seems to sharpen its teeth and enlarge its bite. It is
like a winner cow that will not stop its per suit of its victim till it is
absolutely sure of its never return may be because it is not so sure of its win
the next time around or simply it fights so rarely that it has no confidence
that it will ever win again. Funny enough every time is the first time for it
and acts no differently. Enlightenment should have the confidence I thought to
win over ignorance and maintain its win, but my experience tells me otherwise
and it is very unfortunate. One will have no better thing to do than admitting
to a defeat to buy peace I thought, O! How foolish and naïve I have been in not
knowing that there can be nothing more that engenders ignorance than
enlightenment itself with the arrogant belligerence that ensues along with it.
May be it was not to test any of it or enter in to a contest at all that might
have guaranteed the peace, but if it could only be possible to buy or somehow
possible to get or get to yester. The enlightenment that fails to liberate the
other is not free itself thus I willfully and consciously embrace the wisdom and
liberty of ignorance than the tyrannical self-righteousness of enlightenment. If
it is a choice, that too is a choice and I demand it be respected.
Comments and suggestions are well come as
long as they are civil and are not obscene.
cybernat@cybernatian.biz
Literary flares
If anything history witnesses to the fact
that when time is segmented in to centuries, decades, years, months and weeks it
is often tagged with descriptive adjective that is particularly expository of
the most notable accomplishments of the period in question. Often a phrase or
word either crepes up from obscurity or a new one is coined to particularly fit
and describe in audacious and vivid forms what is to be highlighted of the time
segment. “Literary flares” was one phrase that one phrase that was at the tip of
every person notable at many television notable syndicated shows in tribute may
be to some literary candle that burn itself to give some illumination to the
literary penumbra that we have come to cress-cross in our daily written and
spoken language. I would have cared much if the truth about the subject matter
was as glittery as the celebrated literary masterpiece produced, yet I have come
out to celebrate the beauty of the language and rectify the truth to mach it,
for it is often the elegance and refined beauty of the language that is a turn
on to search for the truth than it is the contrary. The truth shall set you
free, yet a beautiful literature is an enticement to walk the long walk in the
trails of jungles of the written world in the search for the truth. To stretch
the imaginations of the readers and take them to the stretched horizons of his
work may be in order from any of the literary candles, yet if their light
surpasses them it should understood that they wouldn’t have traveled at the
speed of the light they helped to generate but others after them will walk the
illuminated path. It has been that way since the times, Homer, Socrates and the
rest of them all notables of the past and present, many has walked the path they
help illuminate to get to the truth and untruth of their literary masterpieces,
even to get to the untruth it took an enticement of a literary beauty. However
far from the truth and however unrealistic an event and a reality it was, that
generated such a response, it has generated an admiration and an acknowledgement
of mastery of a language and capability of producing a respectable literary work
in the very opposition and rejection that put the word “literary flares” in the
mouth and on tip of the tongue of everyone who rose to speak about it. It may
not have been science but thanks it sure is an art and as such it has achieved
what so many could only dream, it has generated a criticism and an
acknowledgement.
Comments and suggestions are well come as
long as they are civil and are not obscene.
cybernat@cybernatian.biz
Whose definition of what?
In the grand relativistic world of ours,
everything is what it is relative to a reference point, condition and time; as
such everything is in a dynamic state of change of its relative reference
according to its own newly acquired relative position. If there exists any
permanence it is the permanence of change itself against all drag and resistance
that often works to resist change in any form, content and direction. Grand
moments of human experience create grand fixation in the memories of great
number of people that it remains the grand reference point regardless of the
great strides made and great relativistic positional changes, because a grand
moment held with great esteem for a long time tends to becomes a tradition and a
culture than a rational principled position. A culture and a tradition is to be
followed, adhered to and practiced by the generations of the offspring’s of the
initial practitioners of the belief and experience of the grandiose moment. Some
of us care to reason out and rationalize the meaning, symbolisms, essence and
content of the observance and the practice and participate in love and in
reverence to what it is and it stand for while an equal part of us careless for
what it really is and for what it stands for, but do it any way for that is how
it has been done by generations before us and we belong to that tradition and
class of people. As traditions are fixated in our calendar, they get fixated in
our biological clocks and get programmed In to our genetic makeup, after all
what is in our genes is what is in the environment we are exposed to for a
considerable time. I wonder though if what is programmed in our genes is always
the rational thing with all the genetic engineering that goes on in the great
labs of this nation and many others to remedy the runaway genes in us and the
rest us living things. In restraining myself not to go amok, I shall limit
myself to tradition not science otherwise I would have accomplished nothing, but
grab and let it go off everything there is to grab that would have me as very
untraditional. Traditions are stronger than reason and rational they persist
even when the rational and conventional wisdom dictates otherwise because they
tend to be part of once identity, a birthmark of a sort that can’t be washed
away. Often for going against it or break away there is a price and a debt to be
paid in kind and other forms that the gravitational pull keeps one in orbit. It
is in adherence to tradition and cycles of recurrence some traditionalists and
some not so traditionalists flock to a city to dethrone and enthrone, to condemn
and adulate, if nothing else by their intent and wish what has been, what is and
what is to come in a self assured boisterousness and confident audacity. Even in
the absence of refreshments, the very presence of those who have gone the path
and made success stories and those that are to follow in their footsteps and the
exchanges of the formers experience with the aspirations of the latter is so
intoxicating that most are elated to point of hysteria with emotional out
pouring of love and commitment to a cause and a course of action to maintain the
tradition and take it even to the next generation and the generation after. It
would be more than safe to conclude that by in large the participants are
following in the footsteps of their adoring parents and they in turn intend to
pass the tradition and the truth as defined by the tradition to their adorable
little ones, as that is what every tradition calls for. Will the little once
leave the tradition when they grow up to take the banner? Only with a debt and a
price to pay!!! For a distance, and me I have observed and continue to observe
the spectacle from afar from where and when one could see its beauty and its
shortcomings UN obscured by emotions of belonging. Even if I wanted to belong I
could hardly crack the glass ceiling with 5 ft 6” height in a place where 6ft 8”
and 9”s roam. Some and most of the answers to the questions I started out have
been answered and I seem to have found by whose definition of what the world
revolves counterclockwise and clockwise. It seems to spin as they spin it and it
sure spun counterclockwise last night and only the truth remained stationary and
in its original and permanent position. I have come to realize that politics is
about the make belief, the masterful illusion, and the beauty of delivery than
the dry narration of numerical, historical, statistical, political, and
diplomatic or any fact anything to do with politics. I have seen some meander
around all the afore mentioned facts with smoothness of a tone, beauty of
linguistic art and mastery of oratory without bumping in to any curve of
resistance or opposition to sheepishly lead the flock to the point and
destination they have long determined they ought go. As all is readied and
prepared to enhance the make belief and illusion of the master illusionist in an
effort to shift the truth to a point and position of desired co-ordinate, so it
will and it might have “ as the way you look at the truth changes so will the
truth.“ So by their definition of what who and where we have been conned by some
as it ought to have been and we remained unmoved by others in spite of their
hard tried efforts.
In a great tradition unheard in most
countries the world over the acceptance and the reverence to the verdict of the
ballot box was exhibited by the willingness of the vanquished to secede claims
and endorse the winner and the winner’s willingness to accommodate the
legitimate concerns raised and reiterated by those who lost. This American
tradition to let the winner take all and accommodate and inculcate the issues of
all the rivals and opponents on one side of the great divide have maintained
above anything else the dual party system to the abetment of the formation of
ineffective coalition governments that often break before their term is up. It
is not, I feel, to be far from the truth to assume and assert that the dual
party system and the stability and effectiveness in governance stems from the
flexibility and malleability instilled in the two party system to be susceptible
and embrace a wide range and spectrum of variant socio economic outlooks and
interests un heard of anywhere else in the world. This attests to the fact that
whether we move west ward or east ward whether we rotate clockwise or anti
clockwise to get to a point established in a spherical universe there are but
two and only two opposed ways and the 3rd and forth or any other
could not at least be the shortest paths and indeed we live in and on a
spherical universe. The acceptance of the trophy of winning and cessation of it
at a defeat with humility and knowledge of the availability and chance of a next
time around makes both a defeat and a win so much of a sweet and sour event. In
general and in conclusion these are the lessons I learned and these are the
lessons I teach about this quadrennial event of the great American tradition.
cybernat@cybernatian.biz
What went wrong? &Where are we headed?
Since the beginning the formation of the
modern national state and for some and for other since the beginning human
social activity and social division of labor, nations and national states have
been building and forming social institutions and mechanisms by which they
co-ordinate, plan and execute their inter and intra national activities and
interests that transcended generations and consecutive political governments
that were and are subservient to varied ideological outlooks and forms in formal
and informal ways. Partly or in most cases by far the biggest problem that
plagues some of the most problem nations in the world seems to steam from the
fact that at one point or another all and every remnants of their past social
and political institutions have been destroyed by either a political turmoil
social upheaval or foreign intervention and occupation. In any modern or
semi-modern society however crude there are semblances and real differences
between the government at any time and the rest of the social institutions and
the bureaucracy the latter being subservient to the former. This relationship
has been proved time and again by many governments that come and went on the
scenes of political arenas of many of both the advanced worlds and developing
countries. The institutions of social governance, political rule and social
security and welfare are not things that could be manufactured with a
specification, custom or otherwise they are rather works of years of deliberate
design and evolutionary and incremental growth. Overwhelmingly today and in the
yester years the difference with those countries and nation states that were
spared of such disastrous destruction and the rest in managing and moving their
society forward is and was as clear as a day and night. It would be rather
foolish to assume that there is no real or minimal separation of purpose and
duty between government and the national institutions of governance and social
welfare in any modern and semi-modern nation or nation state and guide an attack
or support with something equally punitive, destructive or helpful and
supporting of both will have severed a country or nation from itself and the
rest of the world. In every nation and nation state the national bureaucracy is
both malleable to those who come to power and a grinding and refining machine to
them as well that anyone who comes to power as much as he changes it will have
been changed and refined at the end. In that it becomes the essence and measure
of a nation and the best and the worst face of it. Within these duality lies
from the national Ethos, culture, belief, know how, and the binding identity.
These of coarse are not things that could be gained or shaped overnight or over
decades, but are built over millennia and are custodians of all that is national
and of a nation. It shall be born in mind that often all of them or part of them
as they often is forced to serve political masters in manners and forms
incompatible to all or some of the ideals of their formation and existence. Even
when they are mastered and managed top to bottom by those who are at odds with
the interest to whom they are endowed to serve they remain indispensable for
they are the treads that hold the nation as an entity or the set will crumble to
the elements, and often did we witness that. In the examination of the Iraq the
much talked about winning the war and losing the peace might have its roots in
the inability to have distinguished between the long standing institutions of
state government and the government and the party that governed the country. The
Iraqi state machine was the same state machine that served the kings and queens
if there were any, that predated the Bazz party and its chieftain Saddam Hussein
and it would have served who ever came to power after him with some fine tuning
and some weeding of none malleable elements form amongst its ranks and files.
There are ample examples that that malleability is in abundance among many of
the state machines and institutions that were under brutal dictators in spite of
the very hard efforts of the dictators to have shaped and filled its ranks with
petit images of himself or themselves. That being one grand opportunity lost to
have weeded out from the top down and maintain a working state machine
subservient to the new masters, it did not take long I feel to realize that
members of the past state had the knowhow, wisdom and skill that was passed on
down from generations before them that is important enough to be recalled in for
duty in an effort to sew the past to the future. After all, all the efforts of
the present are nothing more than an effort to bringing the past and the future
to the present and live it. Every human stride forward to me is a stride to the
past and to the future, to the beginning and to the end, a dual directed journey
of a sort learning history, making history.
Note
These are as usual comments and
observations of a layman subject to criticism, correction and rejection by those
who are learned and non-alike.
cybernat@cybernatian.biz
Morality,
Mortality, Self Regeneration, Self Replication, Cloning and Embryonic stem cell
research:-
sep7,2002
It has more than any time in our written and spoken history we are
directly confronted with real equivalencies and none equivalencies in none
equivalencies of trends principles and practices in our effort to remedy the
ills and short comings that has necessitated the very acts, practices forms and
entities that we hold so sacred and intend to protect with our deer life to save
our soul and our life. The struggle here is a struggle to preserve continuity.
What is held in high esteem and regard no matter how and in how many ways and
terms said, is nothing more than continuity itself? The Irony is that continuity
has never been a product or even maintained by continuity but rather
discontinuity. It has always been perpetrated by the mere fact and realty of
discontinuity. It was the inability to do away with terminality that imposed on
us and everything else the sacred act and ability to initiate. It is it seems
that rather this convergence of termination and initiation are causes for the
big bang in our thought and in what we are accustomed to and have lived with the
entire known human and any other living forms. A truth that have shaped and
perpetrated our entire universe of living beings seems under treat by this
unlikely convergence of what has otherwise been and believed to be always
divergent a process. It is the confusion that has emerged and is emerging out to
the ability to prolong a life indefinitely and recycling of what is,
independently of the changing conditions and the always forward moving dreadful
time on the one hand and the need of course renew the genetic pool by the
combination and recombination of what is at hand and of what is to be; to cope
with the changing times and conditions on the second hand: and yet still the
need to curb and limit the total number as to sufficiently allocate the ever
dwindling resources on the third front. These are the balances that cry to be
kept and that seems to be offset. Every living not limited to humans have thus
far reproduced and regenerated itself to cop up with changing times and
conditions and resources available to it. The essence of life to any living
being is and always been the continuation of its survival and ever survival in
its present form or in different, yet the guarantee of its survival has been the
ever driving engine. Morality is nothing more than the justification for the
survival and ever survival of human being and other species as they are and as
they will come to be. It is the convergence of how they have known to preserve
their survival and how they will continue this tradition, obligation and duty
that are at X roads as we discuss cloning stem cell research and morality. None
of the afore mentioned process and acquired knowledge have negated in their
intent rather are all attempts to better serve or compliment what have been long
ever true of human, animal and plant reproduction and regeneration except that
some have only equated self duplication to self regeneration or self
reproduction. It is important to note that the equivalencies are rather
discrepancies and big ones too. Self-duplication is too linear to be equated to
self-reproduction. In parallel it has been a while now since the merits and
demerits of stem cell research has been on the minds of many and most who tried
in the past and present to make sense and justification of the ethics of medical
and other scientific advances. The issue of stem cell research has been
revolving wrongly or rightly around the time of the beginning of life than the
beginning the human being. If we were to discuss the beginning of life it is to
take us and everything else a long way and an unreachable distance too. Yet for
our practical, and if we even wish theoretical purposes life exists in descript
forms and time segments. Thus I feel it is rather appropriate to discus when did
a human become a human being than discus when did a human being’s life began and
start an endless journey of a sort. A human being became human when he break
away from his ancestral primate and assumed the rudimentary functions of a
modern human being according to the evolutionist theory and a human being became
in to existence when Adam was first made by God. What is important here is not
whether the first human was made of an already existent living creature or
whether he was made out of clay for both can’t escape the fact that they
ultimately are earthen organic and inorganic materials, but what made him human
and different from every other living thing and animal. It is my firm belief
that resolving this issue helps pave the way for resolving the dilemma whether
stem cells are humans and whether stem cells should enjoy the legal protection
of the state and whether doctors should be burdened with the moral dilemma of
experimenting with stem cells. It seems rather clear that a human being is so
because he has specialized organs the work in coordination with each other, a
brain as a coordinating organ and above all a mind, a cognitive ability, a
feeling and an emotion that comes about from a joint and combined function and
interaction of these specialized organs and parts. Until such time that the stem
cells divide and form the specialized functions and coordinate their function to
create an emotional and cognitive ability they remain to me would be humans, but
till then just life forms deserving of may be the protection of any and all life
forms, but not of humans. After all that cord that bind us to life forms is
endlessly long if we were in pursuit, it will take us to the egg, the sperm and
the proteins and compounds that led to their formation and the food eaten etc.
etc. each stage with its own descript form and content in its life. It is
therefore important to take in to account the time it assumed its form and
content to the time it loses its form and content by virtue of growth,
association, assimilation, integration disintegration and decay, it was not what
is before then and it will not be what it is after.
CONNECTING THE DOTS.
It is time again to take a note draw some conclusions and ask
questions of what we have heard, seen and witnessed of our political leadership
from the right isle as we have done when it was time for the political world and
Universe rotated counterclockwise and to the left some time back collectively
and individually. We have been presented with choices and the differences of the
choices and what brought them about with such mastery of oratory and principled
content delivery to the point almost where it made our choices as difficult and
hard whether to revolve clockwise or counterclockwise with party of the left or
the right, for there was no ill intent on either side as we were able to learn
from many distinguished speakers of the week time and again as to what our final
product ought be, but differences only in the production methodology. Though we
know that both GM and Ford produce cars, one produces Lincolns and the other
Cadillac’s, it is a choice we can live with and be proud that we have, We more
than any time in the past were able to see the fundamental contrasts of the
methodologies and beliefs of getting to a point and place in time for a better
end product with a more efficient and expedient ways. We were able to witness
the motives and intentions of the other party not questioned, but its beliefs
and the methodology it employees in its attempt to attain our well being a
common objective deeply held at heart. Politics have been refined, fine tuned
and polished to clearly reflect the choices and the differences between the
choices not empirically as it was customary, but as a formulated unified theory
that encompass every venue of political life according to which every stride
forward, sideways and back has to be measured against and conformed to. It has
been made more than ever that we can hold the theory and the formula and insert
the variables and write our elected officials right and wrong on everything one
of their move every step of the way from election day to convention day, for
they have given us the rules they play by not where they stand on what and when.
Suffice it to say that there were and there will be special circumstances that
override the formula and the theory, as exceptions and aberrations are part of
nature that we all are tolerant of limited deviance from the norm in the
interest of accommodation and greater common good. That politics was not the
same classical Darwinian game of survival of the fittest in the acknowledgment
of the not only of the importance of the opposite, but the intertwining
entanglements them for the viability one for the other and the overall intricate
thread that bind the different elements of this entity and many others near and
far by destiny, essence and purpose. That there is no island of ill or righteous
intent anywhere that will remain un affected or without effect on others by its
mere reality of existence, actions and deeds, that the age of reason and
rational has put a damper on the harsh reality of evolutionary and revolutionary
Darwinism by way of human ingenuity discovery and environmental consciousness
both to alter it and preserve it. We were able to determine and learn, Yes, like
then now again we were conned and spun to the right and clockwise out of which
we have become real stable and symmetrical and say we are indeed standing on our
two feet, unmovable and unshakable without our intent and consent. As we are
standing on our two feet on issues of war and peace prosperity and freedom both
our left and right feet have been hurting over the war in Iraqi the necessity
and legitimacy of it at all. As much as we have heard from able and
knowledgeable people of the justifications and the counter agreements that
ensue, we wondered if all the questions were asked and if all the explanations
were given, it could have been asked and it could also have been answered, but
since our knowledge is limited as to what has been and hasn’t been asked and
answered, we would ask one rhetorical question and conclude this note. Knowing
that the Iraqi has been in a state of war since the Gulf war and bombs were
falling in the streets of Baghdad periodically in response to the ongoing
defiance of the inhibitions and sanctions imposed on the then dictator, would
there be and should there be any doubt at all that in the world of, “the enemy
of my enemy is my friend” and “the friend of my enemy is my enemy” that enemy
you are at war with, will not broadly smile at the offensive the other enemy and
would not want to coordinate his efforts with the new friend in action ? Would
it have been prudent to disengage from the battle at hand and go on a sporadic
chase of the emergent enemy? Or finish up with the job at hand in co-ordination
with the new? Or perhaps it would have been better wait till we have seen the
inevitable marriage of the two known enemies consummate and act? We have no
answers, but question, and question we ask, so we did and we will; only hopping
that we will find the answers somewhere in the archives, soon in some one’s work
or in the long run .
The most stable structure
Created by Ayele Teklemariam
9/16/2004
. It only dawned on me very recently that every landscape is very
much shrouded with secrecy and clandestine activities even when the outcome and
the process has nothing to do with national interests or safety of the public
but personal, social, political, economic or academic even, spiritual
fulfillments. I wonder if this world has become a place of secret societies
where one have to exchange secret bows and oath in the alleyways, conference
halls, hotels rec-room, boardrooms and dark corners in the name of art, science,
academics, commerce, politics religion and culture contrary to the open,
transparent and democratic approaches to all the named and others that are so
often proudly claimed and wanted to be the Global character traits. It is given
that undue secrecy is a prescription to the corrosion of confidence, destruction
of public trust and the unleashment of untold sacrifice of individual
sacrificial lambs that won’t cleanse national sins or enhance democracy. We
might agree with the intents of actions, yet all the good intents in the world
could hardly do to tidy the untidiness left along the path to the finish line
only to get back in an effort of rectification and re adjustment some time
latter. Two steps forward and three back or may be three forward and two back if
a little tidier path had been tried in the first place. It is after all the path
that is not the destination that is not the point rather the segment that is of
contention, for at the point even all paradigms converge to a total singularity
to make any difference. In this spherical universe we can disperse in as many
directions to get ultimately at a pre determined point, yet the paths of our
travel as different, as various in degrees of difficulties, directions and
distance lengths. Though we have often agree on the formulas of quantification
and qualification of the different paths for the sake of choice and decision, we
often come up with different sets of values for the variables and our own
individual constants relative to our individual positions to justify our
individual preferences. Thus it becomes very important to seek and find an
absolute reference point instead of our individual relative positions, though
that itself an object of contention and consternation, very much less varied
that it helps form larger chunks out of the individuals, sets out of individual
elements and grand sets out smaller sub sets, like the pyramids and cones that
disperse down wards and build up wards, from the single to the many and from the
many to the single, in a bi-directional flow of material, ideas and deeds,
forming a truly representative democracy and transparent one, Centralized and
democratic, and democratic and centralized. If in any case, it is centralized
and not democratic, it forms no cone or pyramid and therefore it is fragile. If
it is democratic and not centralized, it forms no cone or pyramid therefore not
stable again. Particularly the obsession with the pyramid both in the ancients
and relative recent past ancestors could have been both in the stability of the
structure and the symbolism it gave to centralism and democracy. From many to
one and from one too many, from the infinitely small and simple (infinite
singularity & simplicity) to the infinitely large and complex. (Infinite
complexity and multiplicity) and vice versa. From the appearance out of
smallness of nowhere to the disappearance in to the vastness of everywhere such
is the tip and such is the base of a pyramid, a diamond and a cone, unshakeable
and un moveable, That is very much in line with the emergence growth and final
disintegration of the universal matter as observed in the four common and other
paradigms, may be this synchrony has by enlarge to do with stability realized by
these structures or may it is simply what mimics nature as it emerged and as it
will self destruct. I leave it to any and everyone’s imagination and intuition
to figure out and see how the same structure have been very much applied in
politics, sports, economics, business and money other organizations and
institutions to create stability and strength, centralism and democracy.
“The shortest path to the heart is through the stomach”.
By
Ayele
Teklemariam
9/17/2004
Many have tried to approach it through the head and often had
little or no success; unlike many it was too late a realization for me, but a
realization important enough to take a note and a notice nonetheless. I was
naïve enough not to have known that the energy that drives both the head and the
heart has to be first and foremost fed in to the stomach and off course the
lubricants that oil the joints for a smooth movement as a byproduct wouldn’t
have come from any other source. One might as well call it the gateway to the
heart, mind and body. Thus over the years what has gone in through the stomach
has swayed thoughts changed minds and smoothened movements and even made friends
out of enemies and enemies out of friends. The rich and the rich, the poor and
the poor, the rich and the poor often dined and wined literally and figuratively
together to find compromise and accommodation and smoothen the tensions between
and amongst them. What coronation was a coronation without a lavish party, what
wedding was a wedding party that does not culminate in an extravagance of drinks
and eatery, what party is and was a party of social, political or religious
significance that did not and does not satisfy the human appetite for drinks and
delicatessen to bring about happiness, jubilation harmony and celebration all at
once by the power of the consumption through the stomach. As it is often a
culmination of an upward movement in the social ladder, a change of status in an
individuals or group political, social, economic or religious standing or an
accomplishment of significance that instigates a party as an occasion to assert
and get the acknowledgement from the others and smoothen the relationship there
off, that could have been roughened on the path to the climax, by reaching to
the heart and mind of each other through the stomach. It has always been and it
still remains the most direct path to the minds of many and all. If there
remains to exist causes to accomplish and celebrate parties would be inevitable,
and at parties while dining and winning the plasticity of the arms would change
in to flexibility and the rigidity of the mind changes to elasticity and could
stretch beyond what it normally reaches. What is discussed over dinner or lunch
makes it to the heart and mind while what is discussed in the office or
conference room often remains at the ears unless it is of particular importance
and significance not to the narrator but to the audience. May be somebody wise
have said it long ago and the ‘shortest path to the heart is through the stomach
“May be then the heart will pump it to the head whatever it is that has to get
there. To be candid enough about it, formally and informally, overtly and
covertly, with intent and without intent, deliberately and inadvertently that
has been how business is done over centuries and that is and remains how for a
foreseeable future. Call me a late bloomer, I just got the realization if it
could do me any good and hope it serves as a lesson to some who needed an early
awakening.
© Cybernatian Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
ON THE LANGUAGE INSTICT
BY
Ayele Teklemariam
Page 1 9/13/2004
“Finally since language is the product of a well engineered biological instinct,
we shall see that it is not the nutty barrel of monkeys that
entertainer-columnists make it out to be." (I) I looked at languages and
communications between human beings and it rather seemed that language emerged
out of the need to give and take from the other. As the number of the items and
the number of the individuals that needed to take and give increases and the
paths the items to be given and taken increases, there arose the need to
sophisticate the language in manners and ways to transverse the same distance
and through the same intricate paths. As evolutionarily as evolution itself at
each stage and at every encounter consciously and rationally coined and agreed
on. As such it seems rather a conscious act than it is a biological instinct.
The ability to generate a sound of frequencies, pitches, wavelengths and
amplitudes of the known ranges, sings and gestures and the need to communicate
may be smart biological engineering, but language itself is a conscious effort
of the use of these capabilities.” The conception of language as a kind of
instinct was first articulated in 1871 by Darwin himself. In THE DESCENT OF MAN
he had to contend with language because of its confinement to humans seemed to
present a challenge to his theory". (II) It is rather the reference to the
confinement of language to humans that throw me a little off balance and made me
look at the issue from a different angle. It would be rather a bit naive it
seems that other animals do not communicate African killer bees when touched
spreading the new and run to kill with hurray specific to a war cry and dispatch
in a kamikaze army of fighters. Or the Hyenas cry of summons for a mill upon
finding a Caracas of a kill. Or the love songs of different birds and insects
and flies, have no language may be a little farfetched May be rudimentary yet
language enough with its own rules and specificity of usage as grammar is to us
to communicate an event, a need from and a need to dependent on the level of
social and mental development relative to that of ours (humans). “As no child
has an instinctive tendency to brew, bake or write. More over no philologist now
supposes that any language has been deliberately invented" (III) It is important
to bear in mind that our eyes may have been exposed to light days after we were
born at about seven days, but were we exposed to sound after or before we were
born? Could we have been hearing sound and particularly conversations of our
mothers and any and every one that she had conversed with after our ears and all
our bodily audio mechanism were formed? Is it possible that our ears got exposed
to audio sound and audio conversation ahead of videos communication? We might
have been susceptible to audio sound than we are of visible light even while we
were in our mother’s wombs. Having said that would it be then possible that
children are more inclined to verbalize more efficiently than may show the
"instinctive” tendency to cook or bake and brew, for they are visually acquired
learning processes and skills. Lastly what we rule out as instinctive may not be
as instinctive as we believe it to be. It was a day after I had jotted down this
note that I met a PhD. from Ghana on the bus home from an outing who teaches
English in one of the US high schools and ask him how he was able to teach as a
foreigner with such a heavy wall cracking accent children their own native
language, The answer was not so complicated to him as it sounded to me. He
simply told me it is the rules of the language that I teach, without the rules
they might communicate, but they might as well communicate with a sign which
would have been inept to explain and cognize the cultural, social, economic and
technical sophistication of the past, present and the future. The implications
are clear that I need no further explanations. Though the distinction between
what is instinctive and rational or conscious is yet for me not clearly defined
and demarcated, every trained body tends to execute what he or she is trained to
do as instinctively as instinctive response can be, while others that are not so
trained will have to think and think twice before acting on the same issue, act,
or an activity. Are instinctive responses that need no rationalization because
their truth has been established in the mind of the actor that rationalizing
would be unimportant and the response is clear and uncompromisingly
predetermined while a conscious responses is pretty dynamic, flexible and
variable dependent? A conscious act that is repeated and repeated over many a
times becomes an act that is acted on without being thought about as though it
is ingrained in the genes of the actor. After all what is ingrained in our genes
are repetitious resistive and adaptive acts forced upon them, you and us by the
needs and demands of our surrounding or environment. If I do not get carried
away from the question I wanted to ask when do we begin to react and be
stimulated by sound? Would that have something to do for children’s instinctive
tendency to “deliberately create language”? Verbalize prior to visualize.
"Therefore a language cannot be a repertoire of responses: the brain must
contain a recipe of program that can build an unlimited set of sentences out of
a finite list of words.” (IV) If I may say that seems suggestive that language
is learned and gradually developed out of the needs to and from than it is a
deliberate invention devoid of need. While deliberate invention predates need
and use, language does not seem to predate use and need but to fulfill it. There
does not seem that there is a chicken and egg argument here, but an A to B
straight-line relationship. “And Chomsky’s arguments about the nature of the
language faculty are based on technical analyses of word and sentence structure,
often couched in abstruse formalisms.” (V) Language is a result of a need to
give and take to the other, self, and from as such it is a result of a constant
negotiation and agreement which has to be kept and observed, and to that end it
has to be told and retold, read and re-read to generations. It is to me this
repetitious propagation of the agreements reached and the negotiations conducted
that what Chomsky referred to as abstruse formalist couching. If that is he
wouldn’t have been far from the truth I see in my untrained layman’s views.” The
great majority of sentences were grammatical, especially in working class
speech, with higher percentage of grammatical sentences in working-class speech.
The higher percentage of ungrammatical sentences was found in the proceedings of
learned academic conferences.” (VI) The acknowledgement of the existence of a
language difference between those that are learned and not so considered among
the elite may be in order considering the sentences made about Plato walking
Among Macedonian herdsmen as far as language is concerned. “There are Stone Age
societies, but there is no such thing as Stone Age language. When it comes to
linguistic form, Plato walks with the Macedonian swineherd, Confucius with the
headhunter savages of Assam.” Thou it is clear from the outset that language
carries a badge of class distinction the psychology that contributed to the
grammatical discrepancy between the workingman and the academic will not pass
without grabbing a due attention and beg for an explanation. Technicality and
logicality, adherence and experiment, instinct and rational, seem to be in
conflict at or at least at odds here than it is enlightenment and ignorance or
wealth and poverty that are on opposing sides of the presumed or real issue. The
working man is engaged in a rigorous repetitive work in his day-to-day activity,
for him mistakes are costly that could throw him in to the darkness that he is
not prepared to deal with, his sphere and peripheral vision may be is limited to
the known and long been established, contrary to the academic who is in constant
search and who is an adventurer in the wilderness of the unknown in search of
answers and new findings, whose sphere is not limited to what is known and
established, and is often in constant touch with new and the unknown and yet to
be established. He is not more technical, but logical, and grammar is not
logical than it is technical, it is by enlarge to be learned than it is to be
deduced or rationalized. Is it any wonder then that our work and the environment
we find ourselves in manifests itself in many ways including in our grammatical
usage. “Necessity being the mother of invention, language could have been
invented by resourceful people a number of times long ago; ----- Universal
grammar would simply reflect the Universal limitations on human information
processing. All languages words for “water” and “foot” because all people need
to refer to water and feet. No language has word a million syllables long for no
person would have the time to say it.” (VII) It is the word and the essence of
invention of a language that is of importance and may be worth the energy and
discussion time here. It is rather a similar and like the ongoing discussion
between evolution and creation, natural language seems to evolve over time in
response to the human development and the division of labor that the complexity
and enormity of human development brought about. It might have been helped and
enhanced by the deep need to complain, but complaints would have done much in a
society devoid of division of labor, in which case the complainer and the
complaint addressee would be the same. Division of labor did not only help
develop language it indeed helped develop languages with in languages, sub
cultures within cultures, like the technical terminologies of the medical doctor
to the engineer, the pharmacist to the lawyer and other variances the
convergence of languages in divergence of technical languages as specializations
continue to divide and subdivide disciplines in to sub-disciplines in direct
proportion to our growth in number and still making every one of equally
important in the lives of others and others in our lives The point here is to
note that as our journey forward in the universe in our forward developmental
path the path seems to narrow like a light that projects forward and in for the
depth we gain we give in width. Unlike the inventions language need coinage and
convention and agreement, often inventions are real objective existences that
need no conventional agreement but introduction of its reality and convincing of
its reality, its naming may be conventional, but its reality an alterable fact
that makes the naming a language and the creation an invention. Excuse me if I
am wrong, but I see a clear dichotomy between the two. As much as language as a
creation of human ingenuity as Esperanto and computer languages are unlike them
it evolved over time that enables it to shape and reshape instantaneously in
response to dynamic needs of society and propagate generating acceptance
contrary to the invented languages which are total packages all at once. “The
crux of the argument is that complex language is universal, because children
actually invent it, generation after generation –not because they are taught,
not because they are generally smart, not because it is useful to them, just
because they can’t help it.” (VIII) If there is anything at all they can’t help
is, that they have to express all and everything, any every new idea and new
relation that comes about in their time as it feels, sounds and looks relative
to their time. As they progress forward in time they are often and always are
expected to come head on with ever emerging new social relationships, human
discoveries and natural emergences often in the back alleys by the lower end of
society and in the institutions of higher learning, research and
experimentations on the higher end of the social spectrum and come up with new
linguistic expressions for them. It is more than anything the emergence of new
reality and the need to express and exchange this new reality that literally
engenders the rejuvenation of language. If there is anything innate here is the
universal human urge to express and exchange any and every new thing, both for
the purposes of self-fulfillment and acknowledgement through the thrilling
medium of language. “Bickerton notes that if the grammar of Creole is largely
the product of the minds of children, unadulterated by complex language input
from their parents, it should provide a particularly clear window on the innate
grammatical machinery of the brain.” (IX). One thing that shouts out for a
notice seems that linguistic complexity arises out of the need to express
complex relationships and complex realities, yet deep in the human psyche rests
the effort to simplify the complex and economize time and energy that more than
anything seems the reason for any language not having a million syllable word as
described earlier. “Extraordinary acts of creation by children do not require
the extra ordinary circumstances of deafness or plantation babbles the same kind
of linguistic genius is involved every time a child learns his or her mother
tongue.” (X). I wondered why it is often “Mom” or “Dad”, “Ma” or “Pa” that are
the first words that a child learns and are often the most common of any word in
any human language and may be more. It is more than likely it is the result of
the first encounter, interaction and first exchanges with unparalleled linearity
and simplicity. The child’s world of learning starts with such simplicity and
linearity that the learning effort seems and may be is simpler, but as the child
grows and enters in to a complex relationships and the need for him/her and from
him/her to express and understand more complex scenarios arise and grow, he/she
would have already grown out of his/her childhood that the attributes will no
more hold true for him/her, that I feel there may be an over emphasis in the
ability to learn and under emphasis in the complexity of what is being learned.
It is as though our ability to learn has never gotten up to speed with our
relationships and exposure that needed to cognized, rationalized, understood,
committed to memory and expressed. We grow but we do not seem to grow faster or
nearly as fast as the our individual universe we find ourselves in and as we age
the enormity of the universe that encompass us seems to grow exponentially that
our progress pales in comparison. ”By the age of three and half or earlier
children use the –s agreement suffix in more than ninety percent of the
sentences that require it, and virtually never use it in the sentences that
forbid it. This mastery is part of their grammar explosion, a period of several
months in the third year of life during which children suddenly begin to speak
in fluent, sentences, respecting most of the fine points of their community’s
spoken language. For example, a pre-schooled with a pseudonym Sarah, whose
parents had only a high school education can be seen obeying the English
agreement rule unless though it is in complex sentences
like……………………………………………Just as interestingly, Sarah could not have been imitating
her parents, memorizing verbs with –s’ pre-attached. Sarah sometimes uttered
word forms she could not possibly have heard it from her parents.” (XI). Like
all machines it is fundamentally important to be reminded and not forget the
fact that the human body is an input-process-output machine, though a biological
machine, and among parts of the human body the brain is by for vividly adherent
to this truth. The brain may be thinking, cognitive and re-cognitive organ, yet
could only act on what is fed in to it through the five sense organs and more if
there are any. This truth is also asserted by the mere fact that Sarah did not
speak in any other languages that are not within the environmental constraints
of hers, but her community’s language. It might have been farfetched that Sarah
could not have mimicked anyone else, but here parents during her three and half
years of life and nine months prior as though she and her parents lived in total
seclusion. It is rather clear that Little Sarah has always been immersed in a
sea of words, phrases and sentences right from the moment of her inception to
the day she spoke that first word and the rest of her grammatical sentences of
her last at the dawn her life in the far future. Often adherence and respect for
the law entails through formal and informal ways learning and knowing the law
like every lay man like myself who had not been to Harvard or Yale law school,
but to the greatest university of all, living in legal environment and among law
abiding people. It seems to me respect for the law and living by it presupposes
knowledge of the law. Little Sara might have not received formal training of the
grammatical rules, but have lived it however brief to know what it is like and
how it ought to be respected. If there is any difference between someone who
speaks the language within the grammatically acceptable range without having to
receive a formal training is the length of exposure to the language. The
conclusion that she could not have been imitating her parents or the speakers of
the community is as puzzling to me as to why she did not speak in tongue, and if
she did we wouldn’t have called it a speech, or grammatical any way. It is a
puzzle like Langston Hues church experience. “She must, then, have created these
forms herself, using an unconscious version of the English agreement rule. The
very concept of imitation is suspect to begin with (if children are general
imitators, why don’t they imitate their parents’ habit of sitting quietly in
airplanes?). There are laws that are learned and others that are followed as a
course of nature for they are hard written in to our body. Some that are
mimicked and others that are rationalized and followed, never mind, that their
parents were not as hyper as they are when they were at the age, may be they are
not mimicking the current behavior of their parents, but they could be mimicking
their parent’s whole life and they are just beginning. As they are hyper now as
their parents were then, they would definitely calm and act if not exactly as
them but as close when they get to their present parents age. As to the hyper
activity of the children now there are other biological factors at work more
than mimicking and not of their parents that makes them clearly and
distinctively defining of their age, like stimulating growth, burning energy,
availability of space, flexibility of body etc. As much as children are like
their parents I admit they are not photocopies of their parents nor do I say
they are parrot like mimickers, but learners and learning is not as we all agree
mimicking. It has a growth and developmental factor in it. They might be
slightly or completely differently than their parents, yet, I see no doubt that
their basis remain learning and learning from their parents and most of all from
their environment, whether or not, they are consciously thought by their
parents, which will be to their advantage tremendously believe if they are, they
have proved over and again that they will learn from their environment no matter
what. Broca’s aphasia syndrome a handicap rather that was described non-handicap
and given credit in ways where credit is not due seemed to me sympathy may be no
less than an insult to the injury that those patients suffer from. It is a Mr.
Ford who had suffered a stroke the subject of the study and described as
“Gardner notes” He was alert, attentive, and fully aware of what he was and why
he was there. Intellectual functions not closely tied to language, such as
knowledge of right and left, ability to draw with left (unpracticed) hand, to
calculate, read maps, set clocks make construction or carry out commands, were
all preserved. His intelligence quotient in none verbal areas was in the high
average range” Indeed, the dialog shows that Mr. Ford, like many Broca’s
aphasics, showed an acute understanding of his handicap.” (XII) There are indeed
a number of intellectual handicaps that Mr. Ford and his Broca’s aphasic
collogues suffer from as described, from analytical skills to verbal
communication impairments, yet Mr. Ford and his likes are as is stated acquire
and posses a great deal of raw empirical data besides being able to in ways and
manners that are similar to instinctive responses that may not tax greatly on
their analytical mind. How it is then this acquisition of raw empirical data and
instinctive responses did not tax on their intelligence quotient? Or is it even
possible to conceive intellect without analytical mind devoid of coherent
verbalization or speech? If so how different could we be from the rest of our
down line relatives? Or perhaps incoherence does not undermine the very essence
of integrity, viability and predictability, which are attributes of intelligence
as opposed to amorphism and randomness. It is rather eye catching to read the
comments about the grammatical fluency of the children with William’s syndrome
and not think about the causes of our diversity as humans and living species. It
is rather in our deficiencies as much as our special gifts that our diversity
rests its cause. I find it hard that grammatical fluency not attributed to
intellectual depth and width than simple construction of very common words in a
repetitive common everyday acts.” Your parents need not bathe you in language
withal to function in society, the skills to keep house and home together or a
particularly firm grip on reality. Indeed you can posses all these advantages
and still not be a competent language user, if you lack just the right genes or
the right bit s of brain. (XIII)” It is the assertion that not all of us lack
those right genes or in their right combination for some of the needed skills
and abilities, but some few classified as handicapped that do underscores the
fact that we all are not equally proficient in all fields for the same reason.
While the severity of our deficiency puts us in categories under average,
average and over average, it seems worth noting the specific and relativistic
nature of any and all handicap under consideration. It would be unfair it seems
to pass this opportunity without amplifying the fact that in its uneven
distribution in the universal space matter and life has in it to compensate
where it is missing, that there is not an all out idiot nor an all out smart for
a reason and by a cause. For and by reason of dynamism for and by division of
labor by diversity for total interdependence so we are un even, evenly gifted
and un equal equally talented. XIV”—a concept is unimaginable and therefore
nameless; at the end of the second, a concept is nameless and therefore
unimaginable. Is thought dependent on words? Do people think literally think in
English, Cherokee, Kivunjo, or, by 2050 Newspeak?” A concept is so named because
a reality of interacting material entities and a relationship between and among
them is conceived and cognized. The interacting entities and the relationship
they establish may not be verbalized or given names yet if conceived and
cognized they therefore are represented in space and time in a condition and it
seems they are imagined and they are named concepts and concepts are named
therefore are imaginable and represented. At the end thinking may seem possible
without words but not without representation of some sort or another. Mr. Joe
dog often communicates to his master what his intents and needs are by some
action and gestures and even sounds and Mr. Joe does likewise, can we here
imagine the concept of Dog and man communication? And give it a name or we can’t
imagine it and can’t name it? If anything at all we can only entertain the
thought of nonexistence in nonexistence not the existence none existence, thus
we cannot imagine what we cannot represent and we cannot represent what we can’t
imagine. It is rather the need to communicate that will necessitate the naming
of the entities and the relationships imagined in an already existing language
than the conceptualization and thinking it. XIV “The insult relies on the fact
that a sentence is the smallest thing that can be either true or false: a single
word cannot be either. A sentence, then, must express some kind of meaning that
does not clearly reside in its nouns and verbs but that embraces the entire
combination and turns it into proposition that can be true or false. Take, for
example, the optimistic sentence The Red Sox will win the World Series. The word
will do not apply to the Red Sox alone, nor to the World Series alone nor to
winning alone. It applies to a whole concept, The Red Sox winning the World
Series. That concept is timeless and therefore truth less. There are two
fundamental seeming flows in the statement quoted above. The fact that a single
word is either true or false and the parallels timeless to truth-less-ness are
worth some expletory examinations To me a word and any word represents a reality
that is, was or an assumed and agreed on will be fact. Therefore that that was.
That is and will be cannot be anything but the truth. Even that that will be
remains till such time it is and proven otherwise. The fact that The Red Sox’s
winning of the World Series for one sounds and feels somewhat prop estrous for
that concept came to existence only after the inception at most or formation of
the Red Sox at least and not only the timeless claim baseless but one end
bounded that as it is the equation of timeless to truth less is a denial of the
existence of an absolute truth. That that defies the change in time or a change
that happens at the speed of change of time, and the ultimate speed at which
time changes is at the speed of light. A change that exceeds the speed of light
therefore ceases to exist and cannot be conceptualized. XV “The workings of
syntax are important for another reason. Grammar offers a clear refutation of
the empiricist doctrine that there is nothing in the mind that was not in first
in the senses. Traces, cases, X-bars, and the other paraphernalia of syntax are
colorless, odorless, and tasteless, but they or something like them, must be a
part of our subconscious mental life.” It was early in the discussion of that I
tried to establish the fact that the human mind is a biological input, process
output machine, and the empiricist view seems to conform to that not without a
reason, but rather for a profound reason. It would be rather important to
acknowledge and recognize all that which was in the senses dowels in the senses
for long enough time to be cognized, yet its realty cannot be denied. Our
conscious mind recognizes events and happening that last at least 1/10 of a
second on the fastest cognitive sense of ours our eye, anything faster than that
threshold simply slips our conscious cognitive mind the first time, and may be
the second and the third time. As enough time passes a chunk of the information
would have been accumulated in our mind that the source and path seemed to be
unknown. It seems it is these pieces of information that are happening at the
speeds below and above the normal threshold of our senses cognitive power that
we are awash with, which are by our senses and through our senses, in parallel
with the empiricism refuted in this article, that are often relegated to the
subconscious. Our subconscious mind’s life is more than likely a life of
instantaneous happenings much faster than our conscious minds’ life. Our
subconscious mind has to accumulate a number of instantaneous pieces of
information before it manifests it as a conscious “objective “reality. The
subconscious mind is material reality happening at speeds above and below the
threshold of the senses cognitive ability. As sometimes referred to as the Sixth
sense, that doesn’t see yet sees, that doesn’t hear yet hears, that doesn’t
smell yet smells, that doesn’t taste yet tastes and that doesn’t feel yet feels
in summation it is subconscious yet it is conscious and it is by the senses and
through the senses, if it isn’t I am afraid there isn’t. XVI “The details of
syntax have figured prominently in the history of psychology, because they are
case where complexity in the mind is not caused by learning; learning is caused
by complexity in the mind. That was real news.” In spite of the strong assertion
that complexity of the mind preceded learning, I wondered what it would be like
to have a complex mind that did not come about by learning and a learning that
did not result in a complex mind. To me as a layman learning appeals to me as a
process of untangling the naturally entangled, easing what is otherwise hard and
difficult to understand, discovering the unknown and simplifying what is
otherwise complex. But learning has never been the key to simplicity rather to
more complexity. Simplifying complexity does not lead to simplicity but greater
complexity of the mind. Thus complexity of the mind stayed somewhat ahead of
learning and learning get locked up in a catch up game with its own effect on
the mind, and that is why learning was, is, and will be a ceaseless open ended
endeavor. (To be continued...) Bibliography I= the language instinct page 6 pa1
Vi= --------------------------page19par1 Vii=-----------------------page19 par3
Viii------------------------page20 par2 Ix------------------------page 23 par3
X--------------------------page28 par2 Xi--------------------page33par2&3
Xii-------------------page 37par 1 Xiii------------------page43 par2
XIV…………………..page110 par2 XV……………………page117 para 3 XVI…………..page 118 para 3
|
