Why there are so many different languages for humans? Scientific American says, the way we eat can actually alter jaw anatomy. And the consequences can alter the way we speak. Our upper and lower teeth aligned to form a flat line, the top ones resting directly on the bottom set. Tooth wear brought about by chewing hard foods, such as un-milled grains or seeds, the reduced challenge of consuming soft foods such as porridge and cheese, and other personal preferences in food could have been the culprits.
Tuesday, March 19, 2019
Thursday, March 14, 2019
Brainwashing
We humans like to 'waste' time, for the reasons discussed in my book, 'The Unsure Male. I also propose there, the best way to waste time is to be busy with something irrational. Brainwashing oneself, as well as others, is one of the ways we adopt for this. Naturally those who have more brains, do this more often.
And we constantly do this with our newborns. But each one of us is certain that one is not brainwashed. Yes, one can recognize easily when someone else is being brainwashed. Why?
I think the answer is this. All those who feel that they are not of the brainwashed lot are those who has been brainwashed twice; once, when they are brainwashed, and again when they are made to believe that they are not brainwashed. In fact, that is why, all people react in a similar manner, whether in third world societies or in the progressed ones. People continue to behave irrationally, in the former countries, with no conviction, and in the latter, with proud proclamations of independent thought and judgement.
Sunday, March 10, 2019
Thursday, March 7, 2019
Book Review: How to Analyse People
How to Analyse People on Sight, by Elsie Lincoln Benedict and Ralph Paine Benedict. Well, this book is about a subject on earth, in which every individual is most interested — the one, oneself. It begins by saying, Most of us are much more interesting than what the world thinks, we are. But the most interesting side of ourselves remain hidden away. And we seldom get a peep into what actually, we are.
The book, in fact divides human personality into five types. The Alimentive Type or The Enjoyer, The Thoracic Type or The Thriller, The Muscular Type or The Worker, The Osseous Type or The Stayer, and The Cerebral Type or The Thinker. The book then describes the constitution of each type, how they differ from all others, the chief distinguishing marks, etc. Just as the progress humans made so far is a story of our success in taming the environment, our future growth shall be mainly determined by our success in understanding ourselves, it posits.
Truly, the book comes up with a lot of helpful hints to put this into practice. 'A fat man seldom dislikes anybody very hard or for very long, holds few grudges, and is rarely, a theorist.' 'Though progressive, unselfish, and highly civilized, impracticality, dreaminess, physical frailty and his tendency to plan without doing, are the traits which stand in the way of his success, as far as the Cerebral Type go.'
A chapter about the suitability of each type as marriage partner to all the other types adds further value to this book. Maturity, Affection, Manly or Womanly nature, the readiness to Accommodate, and many other issues that are relevant for social exchange are discussed here.
A very interesting discussion, indeed.
Monday, March 4, 2019
How is Society Possible?
'How is Society Possible?' by Georg Simmel (American Journal of Sociology, vol. 16, 1910-11) is an essay that pontificates on a topic dear to me. Humans, it says, see the other person not simply as an individual, but as colleague or comrade or fellow partisan, or other epithets chosen for the moment. If so, what made human society possible?
Society exposes an individual into a conflicting situation. One, where one is just a part of a whole, and two, where one is a closed organic whole. Which could lead one to two logically antithetical determinations - being produced by, and contained in, society, and moving around its own center. Hence, society is a structure of unlike elements. Some kind of valuation process, of persons, of performances, of positions, is always present, which essentially is preventing any sort of equality of persons, in composition, in life-contents, and in fortunes. Notwithstanding this, the book says, society becomes "possible" only through the reciprocal determination of the individuals, the significance of the individual and that for the totality of the other individuals.
The book echoes many of my questions, some of which I am trying to address through my books. I wish, the book, rather than dealing with those issues in the abstract, came out with definite reasons and clear answers.
In any case, I felt very happy. Right or wrong, my books, not only address this question, but also come up with a reason, why it should be so!
Society exposes an individual into a conflicting situation. One, where one is just a part of a whole, and two, where one is a closed organic whole. Which could lead one to two logically antithetical determinations - being produced by, and contained in, society, and moving around its own center. Hence, society is a structure of unlike elements. Some kind of valuation process, of persons, of performances, of positions, is always present, which essentially is preventing any sort of equality of persons, in composition, in life-contents, and in fortunes. Notwithstanding this, the book says, society becomes "possible" only through the reciprocal determination of the individuals, the significance of the individual and that for the totality of the other individuals.
The book echoes many of my questions, some of which I am trying to address through my books. I wish, the book, rather than dealing with those issues in the abstract, came out with definite reasons and clear answers.
In any case, I felt very happy. Right or wrong, my books, not only address this question, but also come up with a reason, why it should be so!
Saturday, March 2, 2019
About Language, Again
THE THEORY AND STRUCTURE OF LANGUAGE
Erasmus Darwin, grandfather of Charles Darwin, correctly, as I am inclined to say, defines words as abbreviations of other modes of expression. (I think other modes truly reflect whatever one has in mind. One only needs to pay attention here, to get the real meaning, for example, of what, one is being told) And that the first aim of language was to communicate our thoughts, and the second, to exchange it. Thus there are two categories of words, those, which were necessary to express our thoughts, and those that are abbreviations of those words, the rearrangement of which, is the process that goes on when we think. That can cause words to suggest more than one idea. A theory for language needs to be analyzed thus.
His book, The Temple Of Nature, then goes on to examine each individual component of a language, like nouns, pronouns, adjectives, conjunctions, and prepositions, noting the way it might have eased the expression of thought. And arrives at a conclusion - the great variety of changes of termination in all languages consists therefore of abbreviations of existing words used, rather than additional words.
The book deviates from the common idea we entertain about languages - that it is a means for expression. The idea proposed here - that it is for mainly meant for communicating our thoughts, is closer to mine - that language is primarily for enabling us to think, and then only, for communicating it.
Erasmus Darwin, grandfather of Charles Darwin, correctly, as I am inclined to say, defines words as abbreviations of other modes of expression. (I think other modes truly reflect whatever one has in mind. One only needs to pay attention here, to get the real meaning, for example, of what, one is being told) And that the first aim of language was to communicate our thoughts, and the second, to exchange it. Thus there are two categories of words, those, which were necessary to express our thoughts, and those that are abbreviations of those words, the rearrangement of which, is the process that goes on when we think. That can cause words to suggest more than one idea. A theory for language needs to be analyzed thus.
His book, The Temple Of Nature, then goes on to examine each individual component of a language, like nouns, pronouns, adjectives, conjunctions, and prepositions, noting the way it might have eased the expression of thought. And arrives at a conclusion - the great variety of changes of termination in all languages consists therefore of abbreviations of existing words used, rather than additional words.
The book deviates from the common idea we entertain about languages - that it is a means for expression. The idea proposed here - that it is for mainly meant for communicating our thoughts, is closer to mine - that language is primarily for enabling us to think, and then only, for communicating it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)