|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_medium_is_the_message
the things we can understand is limited by the language we speak. we can only understand the concepts we have words for. take note of the next time you have a conversation with someone who is multilingual. ask them to translate several words for you. there will be words that don't translate literally. why? there are ideas/concepts in other cultures that the american culture doesn't have, therefore doesn't have a word for. how do we talk about something we don't have the words for?
another example can be found in the book Amusing Ourselves to Death. imagine having a conversation in smoke signals. it would be difficult to talk about the meaning of life in this medium wouldn't it.
how do we understand things we can't relate to, haven't experienced, aware of, or have no words for? imagine me trying to describe a color you've never seen. our appreciation for food defined by the types of food we're only aware of. our concept of who a loved one is defined by the people we love and how we love them, the people that love us and how they love us.
i just watched the first half of Good Will Hunting last weekend. the scene with Robin Williams and Matt Damon in the park when they meet for the second time inspired this post. the bit where he says you think you can know me by just one painting.
update (10/29/09)
There's a term for "not having a word for something". It's called a lexical gap, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexical_gap. Another example I can think of is describing a vision to a blind person or a sound to a deaf person. Taken from This American Life #389 Frenemies. The example given in the program is the word for a child who loses its parents is an orphan. There isn't a word currently for a parent(s) that loses its child.
| | |
| Somewhen, the western women became the measuring stick for beauty. This is evident with so many asian, hispanic, black women lightening the color of their hair. What is the allure of lighter hair? Wearing abercrombie and what ever other "brand name". It's called "brand name" because you've been branded with their logo to show everyone which ranch to find you on. On that note, you have every right to call said person a cow. There was also that time when blue contacts were in. Straight hair is so popular as well. Now asian women are getting surgery to widen the eyes. Who told you what ugly was and that you were it? Who told you if the eyes are the window to the soul, then you need to draw your blinds? They must have told you that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and yours is hard to get to. Don't let them get to you so easily. Keep those eyes shut and keep that beauty away from the vultures. Make em work to get to know you. Make em look long and hard. Don't let someone else's insecurity influence your perception of yourself.
Props to miss Bonnibel for chopping off all her hair. Cutting the threads connecting her to a world of appearance. Consider the time spent a day thinking about hair, tending to hair, worrying about hair, talking about hair, washing, drying, waiting for a haircut, etc? How much money is spent on shampoo, conditioner, gel, hairspray, straightening iron, blow drier, curling iron, curlers, hair band, hair pins, bleach, dye, haircuts, etc. imagine that time and money used towards a hobby, a book, or conversation with a loved one over a meal. Face it. It's all going to fall out any way. Think of it as an investment with no returns. What distinguishes the rich from the poor? The former knows how to save/invest. In this case, we talking about richness in character and quality of life. word.
And while you're at it, check out this tune http://youtube.com/watch?v=mOjwRQPg8R4 | | |
| As we look to find ways to reduce the amount of waste that goes into landfills, there's ways to utilize what does go to the land fill. http://www.powerscorecard.org/tech_detail.cfm?resource_id=5.
One of the harms of corporate animal farming is the large amounts of animal poo that's generated, which becomes a biohazard to the animals that live in it and the environment when it becomes run off and gets into lakes/streams. This would definitely be cool to see happen here: http://news.thomasnet.com/companystory/510071.
Remember when we'd joke about bottling farts? Let's bring that back! I'm gonna build a mini-methane utilizing power plant in my house. Today's sbd's are tomorrow's electricity.
| | |
| intellectual war strategists have been responsible for the most horrendous crimes than the serial killer. here's why:
intellectual war strategist:
- uses homo-sapiens greatest natural gift, the mind, and what a mind the intellectual has. can utilizes other people and technologies in strategy.
- sane. can kill without feeling guilt/remorse because intellectual never comes face-to-face with the victim. also known as cowardice.
- death reaching hundreds of thousands.
- intellectual's face does not appear in media and thus is not associated to the crime and is does not receives general public's disapproval and disdain. may even be considered a hero.
- actions not considered a crime by general public but "necessary for the greater good"
serial killer:
- may or may not be intelligent. independent. limited resources relative to the war strategist.
- insane. can not feel guilt/remorse. considered mentally ill.
- deaths reaching into double digits. . .maybe.
- face is seen in media and receives general public's disapproval and disdain.
- actions are described as inhuman, barbaric, etc.
Unfortunately, all we see in the news are individuals who've performed relative atrocities. Take Columbine and Virginia Tech for example. Both Columbine and Virginia Tech were covered extensively and the individuals responsible examined under the microscope. This level of coverage isn't applied to those in power when it really is needed. True patriotism doesn't blindly support the actions of the those in power but should scrutinize and inquire about them to make sure crimes aren't committed or accountability is held if crimes do occur.
Columbine and Virgina Tech pale in comparison to the complexity and level of devastation possible by the intellectual. Take the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. These were chosen because the surrounding hills and mountain would focus the blast, maximizing the destruction of the explosion. Tens of thousands died upon impact and tens of thousands more from the radiation.
This idea of the intellectual being more dangerous is used in numerous movies and shows. Take the elite class of people in the show "Heroes" who take it upon themselves to control bad people with power for the greater good, but end up blowing up new york. For you anime watchers, the Alchemists/homonculi in "Full Metal Alchemist" who infiltrate the state military and use the people of ishval to create the philosopher's stone . The reason for these intellectuals give to justify their actions is to create a better world because people don't know any better.
Hitler tried to make the world a better place by creating the perfect people and getting ride of the bad. The current presidency was making the world a better place by taking going after Al Qaeda, Saddam, and those weapons of mass destruction. To quote Chris Black,"~30,000 American soldiers and ~100,000 Iraqi civilians have died in this war. It's almost like Bush said to the Al Qaeda, you think you know how to kill civilians? I'll show you." We've pretty much killed more to justify our losses. Arm, leg, and kidney for an eye i think is what the bible says, at least the one Bush reads. What has this war accomplished?
| | |
| " A kid walks into so-and-so school with a gun. Tonight we'll talk about where the school went wrong." I heard this on the radio the other day. It's absurd to think it's the school's fault. If you wait till the kid gets to the door to see if the kid's got a gun, you're too late. Whatever happened to individual responsibility?? if the kid brought the gun to school, then the kid messed up, not the school's. The questions to be asked are how did the kid get a hold of a gun? is it dad's? they buy it at the local wal-mart? also, why did the kid want to bring the gun to school? to bust a cap in a kid's ass? to finally get the bully off the kids back? for that cheating bf/gf? gang initiation? there's so many reasons why and ways how a kid could get hold of a gun. to put ALL the responsibilty on the school is to say the school should address all possible causes. Does the school have authority to affect policy concerning gun control? to police the streets? no. and that's why it's absurd to put say the school went wrong.
Sure, the school could install metal detectors and search every kid because you can't assume anything. What does that say about the school? It's a place where your safety is more of a priority than learning. Maslow's heirarchy of needs anyone? I'd like to be in a board meeting of a wealthy school district and suggest to them that we need to install metal detectors and higher security to search every child for weapons for our kid's safety because we just don't know. To which the board would reply, no. Then i would say, "why, do you not thin that our children's safety is imp't? are you saying you don't mind kids, or even strangers marching into our school to shoot our kids?" Then, if the board is real eloquent, they'll say something like "this isn't the ghetto" or "our school isn't a prison". Precisely.
How the radio worded the story is more of a concern to me. ". . .where the school went wrong". It influences how the listners/viewers think. The news draws their att'n away from the kid and gets the listener/viewer to think about the school. The long term harm of this is that it creates a society where we stop being concerned for people's well being and assume everyone could be potentially dangerous. This resorts to quick fixes that doesn't address the root causes and creates additional problems. | | |
|
