Semantics, Relativity & Reality
Jonathan Troop
the replacement of the word "language" for the far more ambiguous term
"semantics". I do not believe in semantics. Saying that a "thing" can
be interpreted "semantically" is saying that it can be simply described
in some form or manner. This is so obvious that I believe it does not
need a descriptive word, and more so, does not need to be brought into
discussion in a forum that is not about the meaning per se, but about the
reason that meanings are interpreted because of Form. This is not an
Umberto Eco lecture. He may create his own realities and thousands of
Italians flock to his classes every year to hear him blather on about
semantic theory, but I refuse to accept its existence. We are not a
group devoted to this and do not accept it as a proper mode of discourse.
This is the last that will be written on the subject.
The Theory of Relativity was used as an example by this author in an
earlier discourse. To clarify: Einstein has been accepted, if not
deified, by the modern and post-modern worlds as one of the great
thinkers of the 20th century. In so doing, his theories, unproved, are
now rarely questioned by the general public. IT is the opinion of the
General Public that the theory of Relativity is gospel and should be
treated accordingly. E=MC2 is a mantra by which young students are
baptized into the world of scientific theory and is one of the greatest
examples of syntactic tactics ever propogated in the history of man.
In an earlier post, I was questioned for discussing how fictional truths
have become factual truths. I believe this needs reponse because it is
at the heart of Tactical Syntax theory where this basic truth exists. It
is not a world of "Physical Reality" we live in. Au contraire, we live
in an electronic wasteland of bits and bytes where television has become
the false idol God asked us not to worship and the internet serves as the
bible for free thinking agnostics and hard core Born Again Christians
side by side. We do not seek "Physical Reality" anymore in any other
form than sex and food. This is the basic goal of our physical lives.
This is not, however, what I spoke of earlier. Our "Truth" is in what we
see on TV and read in books and on informantional systems such as this.
We can now create truth at hundredfold times the speed that it took Mary
Shelley to convince the general public that there was a mad doctor in
Austria making men out of spare parts. I need only go to a newsgroup
such as alt.tv.startrek and say I work at Paramount and that there is
anotjer movie on the way and it will be instant truth. Not meaningful
truth, but instant truth as some eager fan will believe it and spread it
to all his friends that he has an "inside track" at Paramount and has
heard this gospel. His friends will spread it until it becomes
anticipated and people are lining up outside theaters waiting for a movie
that might very well not be shown. This may be an extreme example, but
it is only exterme to prove a point. Andy Rooney need only bring up
theory in his spot, and people in law offices will discuss it until it
becomes a strong personal conviction to them. We believe that God
created the Earth in seven days because the Bible says so, but the Bible
also says that God did it differently. There are two creation stories
derived out of two far more ancient religions and yet for some reason,
the preachers on sunday mornings only mention the one, and so it is the
Biblical Truth. The story of Noah's Ark is repeated in every great
religious text. It is a world truth. We are here to create Truth and
define reality. We will do so through deliberate structuring of
meaningless language.
Lazarus
Acolyte to the Altar of Syntactic Truth
Aaron Nielsen
dtr...@netcom.com writes:
> The Theory of Relativity was used as an example by this
author in an
> earlier discourse. To clarify: Einstein has been accepted,
if not
> deified, by the modern and post-modern worlds as one of the
great
> thinkers of the 20th century. In so doing, his theories,
unproved, are
> now rarely questioned by the general public. IT is the
opinion of the
> General Public that the theory of Relativity is gospel and
should be
> treated accordingly. E=MC2 is a mantra by which young
students are
> baptized into the world of scientific theory and is one of
the greatest
> examples of syntactic tactics ever propogated in the history
of man.
You seem to be implying that Einstein's theory of general
relativity has not been proven. When, in actuality, it has not
been disproven. Just as Newton's mechanics were a stepping
stone to relativity, Einstein's relativity is yet just another
stepping stone to a more accurate picture of reality. However,
this does not mean that we cannot use relativity (both general
and special) for calculations. They hold as valid for many
different conditions, in the same way the Newton's mechanics
hold as valid for most of the conditions which we experience in
our everyday existence. However, it was Einstein himself who
realized that the work that he had done was not an accurate
picture of reality, and that much more work had to be done.
In my opinion, the actual problem is that the most people would
rather believe that they are stupid rather than go out and
learn things. This seems to be allowed, if not encouraged by
society. As I see it, there seems to be general feeling among
most people in society that having knowledge somehow makes one
an outsider, or that those who enjoy learning things somehow
think they are better than others. What is really needed is a
general attitude change, encouraging everyone to learn as much
as they can, and be able to make objective descions about that
knowledge.
Aaron...
Andrew Derry
>In my opinion, the actual problem is that the most people would
>rather believe that they are stupid rather than go out and
>learn things. This seems to be allowed, if not encouraged by
>society. As I see it, there seems to be general feeling among
>most people in society that having knowledge somehow makes one
>an outsider, or that those who enjoy learning things somehow
>think they are better than others. What is really needed is a
>general attitude change, encouraging everyone to learn as much
>as they can, and be able to make objective descions about that
>knowledge.
I agree with you completely. I am not entirely clear on the meaning
of alt.syntax.tactical, but I get the idea that this may be deviating
slightly from proper subject matter. However, in hopes that I am
incorrect, I shall continue, and assume that the error of my ways will
be pointed out by those reading this that know far more than I do
about what this group consists of.
I agree that a general attitude change is needed, not only by the
general public, but by the government as well. Education should be of
almost utmost priority. Higher education for those that cannot afford
it should be provided (such as myself, as you may have noticed by my
shameless lack of tactical syntax(?)).
Is there a FAQ available for this groupe?
Thank you.
--
Andrew Derry - de...@sfu.ca
Wilf Leblanc
>Is there a FAQ available for this groupe?
Yes.
Lazarus
>Aaron Nielsen <ap...@po.CWRU.edu> writes:
>
>>In my opinion, the actual problem is that the most people would
>>rather believe that they are stupid rather than go out and
>>learn things. This seems to be allowed, if not encouraged by
>>society. As I see it, there seems to be general feeling among
>>most people in society that having knowledge somehow makes one
>>an outsider, or that those who enjoy learning things somehow
>>think they are better than others. What is really needed is a
>>general attitude change, encouraging everyone to learn as much
>>as they can, and be able to make objective descions about that
>>knowledge.
>
educated people in the world. Because of the clogging of our educational
system by people who do not want educations, those of us who deserve
educations<by birthright> are getting a substandard education. We need
all of these people who would rather not learn Shakespeare to go back to
the fields and do the physical labor that those of us who are educated
are too smart to do. We need worker bees!
>I agree with you completely. I am not entirely clear on the meaning
>of alt.syntax.tactical, but I get the idea that this may be deviating
>slightly from proper subject matter. However, in hopes that I am
>incorrect, I shall continue, and assume that the error of my ways will
>be pointed out by those reading this that know far more than I do
>about what this group consists of.
>
>I agree that a general attitude change is needed, not only by the
>general public, but by the government as well. Education should be of
>almost utmost priority. Higher education for those that cannot afford
>it should be provided (such as myself, as you may have noticed by my
>shameless lack of tactical syntax(?)).
Again, I disagree. Is someone with a BA going to settle for a factory
job? When everyone has a masters or a doctorate, who's going to drive the
cabs and build the houses? By over-education of the population, we
create an impacted white collar world. We must now choose to weed out
certain groups of people in the beginning. If they do not pass second
grade, for instance, send them to a reading skills class for the next few
years and then put them to work in the factories. Make educational
advancement a priviledge, not a right.
>
>Is there a FAQ available for this groupe?
Yes.
>
>Thank you.
>
>--
>Andrew Derry - de...@sfu.ca
Lazarus
Aaron Nielsen
dtr...@netcom.com writes:
> From a tactical vantage, this opinion is incorrect. We need
less
> educated people in the world. Because of the clogging of our
educational
> system by people who do not want educations, those of us who
deserve
> educations<by birthright> are getting a substandard
education. We need
> all of these people who would rather not learn Shakespeare to
go back to
> the fields and do the physical labor that those of us who are
educated
> are too smart to do. We need worker bees!
I believe that you are incorrect. The amount of manual labor
that is required in todays world is much less than was required
just a hundred years ago. That is why it is possible to feed
everyone with a dwindling number of farmers. Modern farming
has become as much a science as physical labor. Farmer's need
to be able to understand the new hybrids and chemicals that are
constantly coming out so that they can create the best possible
yield. Even today's factory workers are no longer expected to
be drones. In order to compete, companies are expecting that
their workers be able to come to them with any new ideas that
they might have for improving the job. The "just in time"
philosophy of Demming which proved itself in Japan and now else
where requires that the workers be educated. I am not saying
that everyone needs to have an intricate knowledge of
Shakespeare, but there is a certain level of knowledge that we
all need to have to be able to operate in a technological
world. To say that what we really need is "worker bees" is
incorrect.
> Again, I disagree. Is someone with a BA going to settle for
a factory
> job? When everyone has a masters or a doctorate, who's going
to drive the
> cabs and build the houses? By over-education of the
population, we
> create an impacted white collar world. We must now choose to
weed out
> certain groups of people in the beginning. If they do not
pass second
> grade, for instance, send them to a reading skills class for
the next few
> years and then put them to work in the factories. Make
educational
> advancement a priviledge, not a right.
I dont believe it was ever stated that everyone go out and get
a BA. Like I said previously, the modern world requires that
everyone have a certain basic knowledge related to what they
will be doing in life.
>We must now choose to weed out
> certain groups of people in the beginning.
This seems to be saying that we cull people based on what some
grand scheme dictates they should do for the rest of their
life. You must remember, that it is impossible to find a
career for someone else. Everyone must find their own career,
or they will not be happy. More productivity is achieved when
people do what makes them happy rather than what society
dictates what is good.
Further, many of the problems of today's world are based on
ignorance and lies. The general population must have enough
knowledge to know when they are being lied to. Most wars are
fought by convincing the people that the enemy is some sort of
brutal evil people. War has never been known for channeling
resources toward thing that will benefit the population. Until
everyone is educated to the point that they know enough to
discredit those who spout lies and halftruths, we will alwasy
be living in fear of others who would come and take everything
from us.
Lazarus
of students today who would rather be out playing basketball than be stuck
in a classroom learning information they know they'll never use. Instead of
educating them to be college students, educate them to be manual
laborers. Leave the book learning to those who wish to advance to the
white collar world.
>> Again, I disagree. Is someone with a BA going to settle for
>a factory
>> job? When everyone has a masters or a doctorate, who's going
>to drive the
>> cabs and build the houses? By over-education of the
>population, we
>> create an impacted white collar world. We must now choose to
>weed out
>> certain groups of people in the beginning. If they do not
>pass second
>> grade, for instance, send them to a reading skills class for
>the next few
>> years and then put them to work in the factories. Make
>educational
>> advancement a priviledge, not a right.
>
>I dont believe it was ever stated that everyone go out and get
>a BA. Like I said previously, the modern world requires that
>everyone have a certain basic knowledge related to what they
>will be doing in life.
>
That is the lie of free will. We, at birth, have a small variety of
occupations open to us. What we do is dictated to us. If we rebel
against it, we are labelled as losers and pseudo-rebels and are
considered pariah by our friends and neighbors.
>>We must now choose to weed out
>> certain groups of people in the beginning.
>This seems to be saying that we cull people based on what some
>grand scheme dictates they should do for the rest of their
>life. You must remember, that it is impossible to find a
>career for someone else. Everyone must find their own career,
>or they will not be happy. More productivity is achieved when
>people do what makes them happy rather than what society
>dictates what is good.
>
It is not the responsibility of a republican government to insure
happiness in its citizens. You must live in a pollyanna world if you
think more that 5% of the population of the world is "happy".
Productivity is based of quality of reward. Every citizen has a moral
responsibility to forsake happiness in lieu of a steady income.
>Further, many of the problems of today's world are based on
>ignorance and lies. The general population must have enough
>knowledge to know when they are being lied to. Most wars are
>fought by convincing the people that the enemy is some sort of
>brutal evil people. War has never been known for channeling
>resources toward thing that will benefit the population. Until
>everyone is educated to the point that they know enough to
>discredit those who spout lies and halftruths, we will alwasy
>be living in fear of others who would come and take everything
>from us.
Even the most educated of us know that just because we know that someone
is spouting lies and half-truths at us, it does no good to try and
discredit them. As for War, of course it benefits the population. It
gives the public something to stand for. It serves as a Darwinian
mechanism for weeding out certain elements of the gene pool. It is the
smarter citizen who finds a way not to go to war while the general
infantryman is expendable. It lowers the world population by destroying
a generation of young men<hence, preventing them from creating more piss
poor protoplasm>. It creates new technologies in science and medicine
which eventually help the world. War is necessary in a world that has no
more room to grow.
Lazarus
Aaron Nielsen
> You misunderstand me. It is my contention that there are a
large group
> of students today who would rather be out playing basketball
than be stuck
> in a classroom learning information they know they'll never
use. Instead of
> educating them to be college students, educate them to be
manual
> laborers. Leave the book learning to those who wish to
advance to the
> white collar world.
I never proposed educating all those children to be college
students. However, they must be more than manual laborers.
The future job market demands that every worker be able to
operate increasingly complicated machinery. And, like I said
in my previous post, employers are beginning to demand more
than just brawn out of their employees. It is the employees
who are intrinsically involved in the fabrication process, they
must be able to have the ability to come forward with ways to
improve the process. It is those employees which will be
valued. Employers will demand that society provide workers
capable of fulfilling that demand.
> That is the lie of free will. We, at birth, have a small
variety of
> occupations open to us. What we do is dictated to us. If we
rebel
> against it, we are labelled as losers and pseudo-rebels and
are
> considered pariah by our friends and neighbors.
This is just wrong. There is no one telling us what to do. We
must do what we want to do. No one can tell you what to do.
The greatest people that I have known are those who have
realized that what the rest of the world thinks is completely
irrelavent. One must learn to live for oneself not for some
greater vision of society.
> It is not the responsibility of a republican government to
insure
> happiness in its citizens.
I never said that it was.
> You must live in a pollyanna world if you
> think more that 5% of the population of the world is "happy".
I never said they were.
> Productivity is based of quality of reward. Every citizen
has a moral
> responsibility to forsake happiness in lieu of a steady
income.
No, no one has an obligation to forsake happiness. For what is
life is we are not happy? Nothing but wasted time. We only
get one chance, and we might as well make the best out of it.
Every person has a responsiblity to theirself before anyone
else to find a career which makes them happy, and in which they
can take genuine pride. Be it farmer, assembly line worker, or
astrophysicist. Every person has a larger responsibilty to
theirself before the citizenry. If we forsake personal
happiness for anyone else, life becomes empty and meaningless.
> Even the most educated of us know that just because we know
that someone
> is spouting lies and half-truths at us, it does no good to
try and
> discredit them.
Why? It is because of people like you who believe that nothing
will work that nothing ever gets done. Because there are not
enough educated people, the discrediting cannot work. If
everyone knew that they were being lied to, then there would
not be this problem.
> As for War, of course it benefits the population. It
> gives the public something to stand for. It serves as a
Darwinian
> mechanism for weeding out certain elements of the gene pool.
It is the
> smarter citizen who finds a way not to go to war while the
general
> infantryman is expendable. It lowers the world population by
destroying
> a generation of young men<hence, preventing them from
creating more piss
> poor protoplasm>. It creates new technologies in science and
medicine
> which eventually help the world. War is necessary in a world
that has no
> more room to grow.
In our world, war is no longer a viable option. We have
created weapons which are capable of destroying the entire
world population. We can hope that we are intelligent enough
to never have to use them. Yet, there are those madmen who
will acquire and use them because they have managed to take
over a population through lies and half-truths. Were those
poplulations educated enough to know better, there would not be
such problems. Modern warfare creates no safe havens for the
"intellectual elite" to hide and await a world in which they
can emerge as intellecutal superiors. War is no longer merely
soldier against soldier, it is population against population,
fed by lies and propaganda. Modern warfare endeavors to
eliminate entire populations. Look at Dresden, Hiroshima.
All of your arguments contend that we must remain in our
current paradigm. The current world paradigm pits one man
against another, and creates only misery in its wake. Until
every person can come to recognize that in our increasingly
populus world we are going to have to get along or risk losing
everything, we indeed risk losing everything. We are evolving
towards chaos just as any complex system. If we are not able
to determine where the brink of chaos is, and make adjustments
accrodingly, we will then die in chaos.
When we devalue another human life, we trivialize ourselves
also, because we set the stage for everyone else to devalue us.
There are no supermen who are by some birthright greater than
everyone else.
Aaron...