REFLECTION- class 29th July
As the human population grows, multiplying faster than bacteria, airs about human strength and omnipresence plagues a human’s mind. People now believe that they are unstoppable. They teach to the newer generation that no mammal in the world is as clever as they are and thus they have the right to exterminate anything that is below them or tag things as worthy, useless etc. But what really baffles me is how can they think that when they know nothing of world beyond the walls of their body. A human’s perception depends on what he or she can see, hear and feel. What if everything they have the illusion of knowing was wrong? What if they were the only soul in the world and everything else was just a fictional story from their imagination? Perception depends on the individual; no man has ever gone into the soul of a cat or a dog thus how can they conclude that they are better than the animals! There is so much that humans cannot phantom. For example dogs and cats can hear frequencies much higher than the range of humans and elephants hear and speak at such low frequencies that man cannot even hear them. In our limited vision and hearing abilities, is it right to even try and find differences between humans and animals. The truth is that we don’t even know what other species can do beyond just what we think thus with our limited knowledge we cannot term ourselves as superior
Friday, August 14, 2009
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Jean de Florette
Knowledge at work- July 7th'09
Jean de Florette is a French film based on the book. It has a simple plot of a greedy uncle (Papet) and nephew (Ugolin) in their own hopes and dreams of selling the flower ‘Carnation’ destroying someone else’s life. The plot is really simple yet your emotion is really played with in the movie. Jean de Florette, who ends up inheriting a property which Papet and Ugolin were eyeing and even committed murder for, moves in with his family. The knowledge issue dealt with here is basically the war between emotion and reason. Here emotion wins. He is of a jovial nature and is very happy to be there. He has wonderful plans for the future but there is one problem, there is no known water source close to him. The only one he knows is really far and no rain falls on his land. He is desperate for water and in the end dies leaving his child and wife alone with only memories of how happy life was when Jean was alive. Papet and Ugolin pretend to be very sad at the happenings but they knew all the while about a spring running in the land. In fact they were the ones who sealed the spring so as limit the water for Jean and his family and thus forcing him to sell the property.
The film in short highlights the evil in man and shows to what extent people can fall for money. Ugolin throughout the film is very friendly to the trusting Jean but he only has a motive behind that friendship. Moving this to a larger picture this movie becomes a perfect example of how reason ends up being blocked when emotion takes over. For Ugolin and Papet their ambition and greed clouded their reason. These acted as stronger emotions and dominated over the emotion of compassion. In the real world we see this happening all the time. People in order to get ahead are forever stepping over each other. When one watches the movie and sees Jean’s struggle, one feels it is over exaggerated but when I think about it, farmers are going through this all the time. In India itself farmers are committing suicide because of the lack of water and help given. Hence I really do not think that the writer of the film was missing out on points. Everything was covered from the way emotions ran, spiritual beliefs held and societal pressures that Jean had to face because of Papet. I do think that the writer is being a little too biased to Jean because yes it shows his brave determination but it also shows him irresponsible towards his family. Also the movie is supposed to show Ugolin very apologetic about what he has done which happens in the book yet the movie does not really show that which makes it a little unauthentic. We also have to keep in mind that it is a commercial movie hence a lot of scenes have been changed to suit the modern viewer and because of this the gist of that era (right after the first world war) has not been captured really well. Because of this we as a viewer do not get to see the side of Ugolin and Papet who have suffered under the war and thus just want money and a new life of leisure. Their side, even if one does not agree with, has been explained in the book but not in the movie where they are made to look like the really bad villains. Here I think the script writer of the movie has taken the stereotype that ‘all murderers are bad’ and used it to appeal to the modern viewer.
At the end of the day though whatever it may be, what Ugolin and Papet did by being driven by their greed was wrong. It is really important to understand this because on this earth we have brother killing their own brother, son killing his own father and friends turning against each other all for money. Right now money is being given so much importance that the planet we live on is being abused to a limit that she cannot take. We as humans need to understand that money is not everything and implement corrections in our daily lifestyle or every story in the world is going to end like Jean Florette’s!
Jean de Florette is a French film based on the book. It has a simple plot of a greedy uncle (Papet) and nephew (Ugolin) in their own hopes and dreams of selling the flower ‘Carnation’ destroying someone else’s life. The plot is really simple yet your emotion is really played with in the movie. Jean de Florette, who ends up inheriting a property which Papet and Ugolin were eyeing and even committed murder for, moves in with his family. The knowledge issue dealt with here is basically the war between emotion and reason. Here emotion wins. He is of a jovial nature and is very happy to be there. He has wonderful plans for the future but there is one problem, there is no known water source close to him. The only one he knows is really far and no rain falls on his land. He is desperate for water and in the end dies leaving his child and wife alone with only memories of how happy life was when Jean was alive. Papet and Ugolin pretend to be very sad at the happenings but they knew all the while about a spring running in the land. In fact they were the ones who sealed the spring so as limit the water for Jean and his family and thus forcing him to sell the property.
The film in short highlights the evil in man and shows to what extent people can fall for money. Ugolin throughout the film is very friendly to the trusting Jean but he only has a motive behind that friendship. Moving this to a larger picture this movie becomes a perfect example of how reason ends up being blocked when emotion takes over. For Ugolin and Papet their ambition and greed clouded their reason. These acted as stronger emotions and dominated over the emotion of compassion. In the real world we see this happening all the time. People in order to get ahead are forever stepping over each other. When one watches the movie and sees Jean’s struggle, one feels it is over exaggerated but when I think about it, farmers are going through this all the time. In India itself farmers are committing suicide because of the lack of water and help given. Hence I really do not think that the writer of the film was missing out on points. Everything was covered from the way emotions ran, spiritual beliefs held and societal pressures that Jean had to face because of Papet. I do think that the writer is being a little too biased to Jean because yes it shows his brave determination but it also shows him irresponsible towards his family. Also the movie is supposed to show Ugolin very apologetic about what he has done which happens in the book yet the movie does not really show that which makes it a little unauthentic. We also have to keep in mind that it is a commercial movie hence a lot of scenes have been changed to suit the modern viewer and because of this the gist of that era (right after the first world war) has not been captured really well. Because of this we as a viewer do not get to see the side of Ugolin and Papet who have suffered under the war and thus just want money and a new life of leisure. Their side, even if one does not agree with, has been explained in the book but not in the movie where they are made to look like the really bad villains. Here I think the script writer of the movie has taken the stereotype that ‘all murderers are bad’ and used it to appeal to the modern viewer.
At the end of the day though whatever it may be, what Ugolin and Papet did by being driven by their greed was wrong. It is really important to understand this because on this earth we have brother killing their own brother, son killing his own father and friends turning against each other all for money. Right now money is being given so much importance that the planet we live on is being abused to a limit that she cannot take. We as humans need to understand that money is not everything and implement corrections in our daily lifestyle or every story in the world is going to end like Jean Florette’s!
Science- Has it become too extreme for mankind’s good?
Reflections-22nd July'09
Science as most people would agree has been a boon to mankind. The discoveries of the machines and newer technology have made life so full leisure that now the newer generation cannot imagine life without it. We all can lazily get up from bed not do anything but switch on a couple of switches and we get hot water for our bath, ready- made tea or coffee, breakfast from the microwave. Etc. We now only have to dial a few numbers and we are instantaneously connected to someone living in USA. Compare this to writing a letter, sending it and then waiting for the reply as it was done in the olden days; a cell phone( even with all its network problem at times is so convenient).
Yet now that we have everything why do we need to want even more? The earth is now cramped with the number of electronic gadgets, industries and other technological machines. Science has conquered the world and now it wants to capture the universe which can never be possible whatever the scientists do. Now the boundaries need to be set as in the scientists quest of a science world our natural resources, wildlife and trees are being destroyed. The more science grows, virtual terrorism has begun to grow too. For all practical purposes, international boundaries have been eliminated in cyber-space. The growth of information technology and almost universal access to computers have enabled hackers and would-be terrorists to attack information systems and critical infrastructures worldwide. In fact in the recent 26/11 attacks in the Mumbai, blackberry messengers were being used for communication. Science has reached to a point that it is destroying all that is beautiful and really needs to be stopped.
Science as most people would agree has been a boon to mankind. The discoveries of the machines and newer technology have made life so full leisure that now the newer generation cannot imagine life without it. We all can lazily get up from bed not do anything but switch on a couple of switches and we get hot water for our bath, ready- made tea or coffee, breakfast from the microwave. Etc. We now only have to dial a few numbers and we are instantaneously connected to someone living in USA. Compare this to writing a letter, sending it and then waiting for the reply as it was done in the olden days; a cell phone( even with all its network problem at times is so convenient).
Yet now that we have everything why do we need to want even more? The earth is now cramped with the number of electronic gadgets, industries and other technological machines. Science has conquered the world and now it wants to capture the universe which can never be possible whatever the scientists do. Now the boundaries need to be set as in the scientists quest of a science world our natural resources, wildlife and trees are being destroyed. The more science grows, virtual terrorism has begun to grow too. For all practical purposes, international boundaries have been eliminated in cyber-space. The growth of information technology and almost universal access to computers have enabled hackers and would-be terrorists to attack information systems and critical infrastructures worldwide. In fact in the recent 26/11 attacks in the Mumbai, blackberry messengers were being used for communication. Science has reached to a point that it is destroying all that is beautiful and really needs to be stopped.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
"The Reckoning."
"PAN-GERMAN: 'MONSTROUS, I CALL IT. WHY, IT'S FULLY A QUARTER OF WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE MADE THEM PAY, IF WE'D WON.'"
This cartoon is about the Treaty of Versailles of 28 June 1919, at the end of World War I published in the British Magazine Punch right after the terms were announced. The knowledge issue of this cartoon is the double standards of the German. Britain had been badly weakened by the First World War. Her economy was in a ruin and hence the main mood after the war was very anti- German. The British people wanted Germany to be punished for her sins. The cartoon since British has been obviously written in a British point of view and thus becomes a biased and misleading. The cartoon shows a German man holding a newspaper that has just announced the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. The Pan- German looks shocked and outraged by face yet it is not the £6600 reparation fee the Germans have to pay. After the terms of the treaty were announced the instant reaction in Germany was one of anger. The terms of the treaty with the reparations also stated that Germany was to lose all its overseas colonies, a lot of its own land (making 13% of her population a part of another country who perhaps was anti- German), 16% of her coalfields and half of her iron and steel industry. Worst of all was the clause that blamed them for starting the entire war. The artist of the cartoon is one of the many who initially believed that Germany was crying more than she ought to have. As the statement below states, he believes that Germany would have made Britain and France pay 4 times the amount in case she had won the war thus signifying the cruel nature of the Germans. The German portrayed in the cartoon is also pretty fat showing that Germany had still enough money to feed her people. This however the artist has really taken this fact for granted. The truth as shown many photographs were that women, children and men were starving and living on the street. The aftermath of the treaty included Hyperinflation (1923) where money became worthless paper. The artist is more driven via his emotion of anger against the Germans that reason to see how harsh the treaty really was. Hence this knowledge issue is really important as it signifies how emotion can blind people from seeing clearly. The results of the treaty on Germany were terrible and its’ harshness ended up being a cause for the Second World War. It is important to understand this inorder to learn from the mistake that was committed and hence avoid future wars.
"PAN-GERMAN: 'MONSTROUS, I CALL IT. WHY, IT'S FULLY A QUARTER OF WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE MADE THEM PAY, IF WE'D WON.'"
This cartoon is about the Treaty of Versailles of 28 June 1919, at the end of World War I published in the British Magazine Punch right after the terms were announced. The knowledge issue of this cartoon is the double standards of the German. Britain had been badly weakened by the First World War. Her economy was in a ruin and hence the main mood after the war was very anti- German. The British people wanted Germany to be punished for her sins. The cartoon since British has been obviously written in a British point of view and thus becomes a biased and misleading. The cartoon shows a German man holding a newspaper that has just announced the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. The Pan- German looks shocked and outraged by face yet it is not the £6600 reparation fee the Germans have to pay. After the terms of the treaty were announced the instant reaction in Germany was one of anger. The terms of the treaty with the reparations also stated that Germany was to lose all its overseas colonies, a lot of its own land (making 13% of her population a part of another country who perhaps was anti- German), 16% of her coalfields and half of her iron and steel industry. Worst of all was the clause that blamed them for starting the entire war. The artist of the cartoon is one of the many who initially believed that Germany was crying more than she ought to have. As the statement below states, he believes that Germany would have made Britain and France pay 4 times the amount in case she had won the war thus signifying the cruel nature of the Germans. The German portrayed in the cartoon is also pretty fat showing that Germany had still enough money to feed her people. This however the artist has really taken this fact for granted. The truth as shown many photographs were that women, children and men were starving and living on the street. The aftermath of the treaty included Hyperinflation (1923) where money became worthless paper. The artist is more driven via his emotion of anger against the Germans that reason to see how harsh the treaty really was. Hence this knowledge issue is really important as it signifies how emotion can blind people from seeing clearly. The results of the treaty on Germany were terrible and its’ harshness ended up being a cause for the Second World War. It is important to understand this inorder to learn from the mistake that was committed and hence avoid future wars.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
http://www.time-loops.net/nostradamus/Introduction1.htm
The prophecies of Nostradamus and the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center- Hoax or not!
The first 911 hoax was circulating by email within hours of the WTC attack. It said:
In the City of God there will be a great thunder,
two brothers torn apart by Chaos,
while the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb.
The third big war will begin when the big city is burning"
- Nostradamus 1654
Since Nostradamus died in 1566, it's rather unlikely he wrote this passage in 1654. The quatrain is not to be found in his published work. It isn't a question of whether or not it accurately predicts anything, he simply didn't write it.
In generally What bothers me about the hype around the predictions is the lack of self-criticism of the readers and followers. The renewed interest seems to be purely based only on the contents of the prophecies.
People reject or accept the prophecies of Nostradamus based on how they feel it relates to real events. What I don't understand however, is how people can accept the idea that someone from the 16th century could have been able to know our future, and the possible consequences that such a feat would have. Because some of the predictions might have become reality, many people seem to have accepted his work as something with value. The methods and techniques used, although not understood, are accepted as legitimate and genuine without any further questioning.
The public opinion about the work of Nostradamus appears to be divided in two camps: the believers and the non-believers. The first group bases their confidence on the 'eerie' coincidence of some main events which took place during the last centuries with some of the predictions in the quatrains. The none-believers revere to the complexity of the writing and feel that you can always match a quatrain with an existing event if you want to.
One of the main questions is whether Nostradamus was a charlatan, a gifted and talented cheat or was he really able to do something that no one has been able to repeat or explain.
If he was a cheat, then he was truly gifted and talented. He kept millions of people puzzled for many centuries and that is not a small feat.
Imagine creating prophetic quatrains with no more knowledge about the future than just the fact that 'history repeats it self', lots of fantasy and imagination and the desire of people to believe in true prophecy. By writing the way he did, believers can interpret the quatrains in many ways, allowing them to encounter and see in them wathever they look for.
NOSTRADAMUS AND THE GENUINITY OF HIS PROPHECIES
The title of this article is more a question which the writer answers throughout the article. The article’s is structurally divided into two parts. One is where the writer clears the air about irrational and emotionally driven rumours and the second is where he tries to prove how Nostradamus in total was a very clever cheat. The knowledge issue the article focuses on is the genuinely of Nostradamus’ predictions. Through the hoax after the September 11 attacks in New York the writer shows how when people are emotionally driven and reason is forced into the back seat people tend to believe a lot of things. They take the ambiguities in the writings of Nostradamus and make it mean sense to their brains. If they were being backed by reason then their brain would work in making them understand the prediction. This in TOK terms comes under fallacious reasoning where one plays on the ambiguities of language known as ‘Equivocation’ in TOK terms, manipulates it and presents it as if the other person is saying it. The writer through this understanding highlights how the gullible people believe this to be true without even questioning. He does say that people are divided in two groups, the believers and the non-believers and he does question again whether Nostradamus could be true, yet he is clearly biased for Nostradamus’ writings being a hoax and clearly states that it is impossible for a man to know the future. He also does not present proof for his belief. There are no scientific or historic facts. He just states his view point and deems it as obvious. His last paragraph ‘Imagine creating prophetic quatrains with no more knowledge about the future than just the fact that 'history repeats itself', lots of fantasy and imagination and the desire of people to believe in true prophecy’ is no more concrete as is the proof that Nostradamus’ prophesies are true. It is very hypothetical and the question that really comes to my mind is how does he know that Nostradamus had no knowledge of the future? He commits the reasoning fallacy of ‘circular reasoning’ as he believes it to be false and thus proves it as false by citing that it is false. Yet apart from this his argument about the emotional manipulation of the writings more than the actual sense flows logically. However to add his bias and thus the tone he uses is very convincing and makes the readers mood match his own.
Despite it there is a lot of logic in what he is saying. We humans in crisis immediately tend to switch off our reason and think emotionally. I truly believe that the writer’s argument is true because if I extrapolate it further myself, I see how language is manipulated by people. As shown in the movie Kuddha Ke Liye we are shown how the Mullah uses the ambiguities in language to manipulate innocent men into terrorism in the name of God. They use emotion and language to their advantage. This is parallel to what Nostradamus does as well. Thus people should care and be well informed about this trickery as it is one of man’s greatest flaws!
The prophecies of Nostradamus and the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center- Hoax or not!
The first 911 hoax was circulating by email within hours of the WTC attack. It said:
In the City of God there will be a great thunder,
two brothers torn apart by Chaos,
while the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb.
The third big war will begin when the big city is burning"
- Nostradamus 1654
Since Nostradamus died in 1566, it's rather unlikely he wrote this passage in 1654. The quatrain is not to be found in his published work. It isn't a question of whether or not it accurately predicts anything, he simply didn't write it.
In generally What bothers me about the hype around the predictions is the lack of self-criticism of the readers and followers. The renewed interest seems to be purely based only on the contents of the prophecies.
People reject or accept the prophecies of Nostradamus based on how they feel it relates to real events. What I don't understand however, is how people can accept the idea that someone from the 16th century could have been able to know our future, and the possible consequences that such a feat would have. Because some of the predictions might have become reality, many people seem to have accepted his work as something with value. The methods and techniques used, although not understood, are accepted as legitimate and genuine without any further questioning.
The public opinion about the work of Nostradamus appears to be divided in two camps: the believers and the non-believers. The first group bases their confidence on the 'eerie' coincidence of some main events which took place during the last centuries with some of the predictions in the quatrains. The none-believers revere to the complexity of the writing and feel that you can always match a quatrain with an existing event if you want to.
One of the main questions is whether Nostradamus was a charlatan, a gifted and talented cheat or was he really able to do something that no one has been able to repeat or explain.
If he was a cheat, then he was truly gifted and talented. He kept millions of people puzzled for many centuries and that is not a small feat.
Imagine creating prophetic quatrains with no more knowledge about the future than just the fact that 'history repeats it self', lots of fantasy and imagination and the desire of people to believe in true prophecy. By writing the way he did, believers can interpret the quatrains in many ways, allowing them to encounter and see in them wathever they look for.
NOSTRADAMUS AND THE GENUINITY OF HIS PROPHECIES
The title of this article is more a question which the writer answers throughout the article. The article’s is structurally divided into two parts. One is where the writer clears the air about irrational and emotionally driven rumours and the second is where he tries to prove how Nostradamus in total was a very clever cheat. The knowledge issue the article focuses on is the genuinely of Nostradamus’ predictions. Through the hoax after the September 11 attacks in New York the writer shows how when people are emotionally driven and reason is forced into the back seat people tend to believe a lot of things. They take the ambiguities in the writings of Nostradamus and make it mean sense to their brains. If they were being backed by reason then their brain would work in making them understand the prediction. This in TOK terms comes under fallacious reasoning where one plays on the ambiguities of language known as ‘Equivocation’ in TOK terms, manipulates it and presents it as if the other person is saying it. The writer through this understanding highlights how the gullible people believe this to be true without even questioning. He does say that people are divided in two groups, the believers and the non-believers and he does question again whether Nostradamus could be true, yet he is clearly biased for Nostradamus’ writings being a hoax and clearly states that it is impossible for a man to know the future. He also does not present proof for his belief. There are no scientific or historic facts. He just states his view point and deems it as obvious. His last paragraph ‘Imagine creating prophetic quatrains with no more knowledge about the future than just the fact that 'history repeats itself', lots of fantasy and imagination and the desire of people to believe in true prophecy’ is no more concrete as is the proof that Nostradamus’ prophesies are true. It is very hypothetical and the question that really comes to my mind is how does he know that Nostradamus had no knowledge of the future? He commits the reasoning fallacy of ‘circular reasoning’ as he believes it to be false and thus proves it as false by citing that it is false. Yet apart from this his argument about the emotional manipulation of the writings more than the actual sense flows logically. However to add his bias and thus the tone he uses is very convincing and makes the readers mood match his own.
Despite it there is a lot of logic in what he is saying. We humans in crisis immediately tend to switch off our reason and think emotionally. I truly believe that the writer’s argument is true because if I extrapolate it further myself, I see how language is manipulated by people. As shown in the movie Kuddha Ke Liye we are shown how the Mullah uses the ambiguities in language to manipulate innocent men into terrorism in the name of God. They use emotion and language to their advantage. This is parallel to what Nostradamus does as well. Thus people should care and be well informed about this trickery as it is one of man’s greatest flaws!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
