Anniversary Post - re-read this essay from a year ago. “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.”
Excellent post with so much in it, thank you very much. If I may I will make a few comments:
1. Progressive - this is a neutral term taken up by those who wish to be self-righteous. I am trying to complete a post on it but it is clear the word is far from positive and mainly negative. One can progress into a swamp which is what has been happening of late.
2. Fact checkers - they should be fat chequers for the fat cheques they get fro printing lies and misinformation.
3. Ferguson - a very nasty piece of work. He was brought up in Llanidloes, Wales. I found an amusing anagram in the word Llanidloes. It is a pretty little town, a pity he came from there.
4. Medics and scientists - they have been on the wrong path for many years much due to evolutionary theory, the justification for so much evil and the big pharma toxic agenda.
Anyway, very well done. I approve of lateral thinkers, I have always been one myself as long as I remember.
“A word means just what I choose it to mean” is the game everybody plays. We flood our children with it from their first interactions, threatening “don’t do this, behave, good kids don’t say this” but never explaining what and why. Full-scale comedy starts when we enter the puberty phase. We never use the proper names for various activities, interactions or body parts, we refuse to talk about it - leaving our dearest kids in an abyss which may only be amended by street, peer or online education, which is everything but education.
The language we use is so telling. We refer to “private parts”, as if the rest was a public property. Later on, when we see our kid’s first clumsy attempts at physical closeness, we attack them for it - even though they only use “public parts”. And we love the phrase “you know what, right?” You know why.
The most comic, absurd or tragic is the fact that we actively avoid talking about what is literally everybody’s experience. Physical intimacy and the body itself are the strongest taboo there is. It is the essence of life, and the impulse which can destroy your kid’s life when not understood, but we always escape from it and deny its role and significance. Is it because we choose to NOT use words which mean what we don’t want to experience? Are we really enjoying this mindset from 1500 years back now, 2024, when we are so proud of how advanced and civilized we are? Maybe we are not advanced or civilized at all, but we only choose to use such words to cover up the ugliest parts of our minds which in fact rule over us?
Bonus:
“First do no harm”… “Second and following do whatever you want.”
Arguably, first do no harm is about the first principle one should have before proceeding, not merely the first step in a process, but I take your point! Language is naturally flexible and we play with words all of the time. However, if words only mean what we wanted, we could not communicate which is the point of language! So it would mean 'no language' I suppose! Thanks for a great comment!
We do not have the complete picture of the “First do not harm”. The second part is missing. Why this noble statement? It has not come into existence out of the blue.
Some stories report that doctors in the ancient times were only paid when their patients were healthy. When people got ill, the doctor was paying them. This would explain the origin of this statement. Do not harm them because you will pay for it, literally.
Or, possibly… “they will avenge your patient”? Or (modern versions) “because we don’t have enough money for lawyers” or “nobody would want to hire you”?
I thought I was reading an excerpt from Matthias Desmet's "The Psychology of Totalitarianism." So much of what you say coincides with Desmet's work. And each of you, being independent sources, reinforce the words of the other. A major difference is that he didn't use Humpty Dumpty to reinforce his argument (more's the pity!). Still, even a year later, you have an excellent indictment of the mass formation...
What an interesting and thoughtful remark, thank you. I have been reading his work as it happens, but not for a while. It just goes to show how we reach for certain fables to point out our concerns.
Excellent post with so much in it, thank you very much. If I may I will make a few comments:
1. Progressive - this is a neutral term taken up by those who wish to be self-righteous. I am trying to complete a post on it but it is clear the word is far from positive and mainly negative. One can progress into a swamp which is what has been happening of late.
2. Fact checkers - they should be fat chequers for the fat cheques they get fro printing lies and misinformation.
https://alphaandomegacloud.wordpress.com/2021/08/28/bbc-fact-check/
3. Ferguson - a very nasty piece of work. He was brought up in Llanidloes, Wales. I found an amusing anagram in the word Llanidloes. It is a pretty little town, a pity he came from there.
https://alphaandomegacloud.wordpress.com/2022/07/02/neil-ferguson-how-did-his-covid-19-statistics-fool-the-world/
4. Medics and scientists - they have been on the wrong path for many years much due to evolutionary theory, the justification for so much evil and the big pharma toxic agenda.
Anyway, very well done. I approve of lateral thinkers, I have always been one myself as long as I remember.
Thanks for a great comment! Dw i'n siarad tipyn bach o Gymraeg!
“A word means just what I choose it to mean” is the game everybody plays. We flood our children with it from their first interactions, threatening “don’t do this, behave, good kids don’t say this” but never explaining what and why. Full-scale comedy starts when we enter the puberty phase. We never use the proper names for various activities, interactions or body parts, we refuse to talk about it - leaving our dearest kids in an abyss which may only be amended by street, peer or online education, which is everything but education.
The language we use is so telling. We refer to “private parts”, as if the rest was a public property. Later on, when we see our kid’s first clumsy attempts at physical closeness, we attack them for it - even though they only use “public parts”. And we love the phrase “you know what, right?” You know why.
The most comic, absurd or tragic is the fact that we actively avoid talking about what is literally everybody’s experience. Physical intimacy and the body itself are the strongest taboo there is. It is the essence of life, and the impulse which can destroy your kid’s life when not understood, but we always escape from it and deny its role and significance. Is it because we choose to NOT use words which mean what we don’t want to experience? Are we really enjoying this mindset from 1500 years back now, 2024, when we are so proud of how advanced and civilized we are? Maybe we are not advanced or civilized at all, but we only choose to use such words to cover up the ugliest parts of our minds which in fact rule over us?
Bonus:
“First do no harm”… “Second and following do whatever you want.”
Arguably, first do no harm is about the first principle one should have before proceeding, not merely the first step in a process, but I take your point! Language is naturally flexible and we play with words all of the time. However, if words only mean what we wanted, we could not communicate which is the point of language! So it would mean 'no language' I suppose! Thanks for a great comment!
We do not have the complete picture of the “First do not harm”. The second part is missing. Why this noble statement? It has not come into existence out of the blue.
Some stories report that doctors in the ancient times were only paid when their patients were healthy. When people got ill, the doctor was paying them. This would explain the origin of this statement. Do not harm them because you will pay for it, literally.
Or, possibly… “they will avenge your patient”? Or (modern versions) “because we don’t have enough money for lawyers” or “nobody would want to hire you”?
Just curious :-)
I thought I was reading an excerpt from Matthias Desmet's "The Psychology of Totalitarianism." So much of what you say coincides with Desmet's work. And each of you, being independent sources, reinforce the words of the other. A major difference is that he didn't use Humpty Dumpty to reinforce his argument (more's the pity!). Still, even a year later, you have an excellent indictment of the mass formation...
What an interesting and thoughtful remark, thank you. I have been reading his work as it happens, but not for a while. It just goes to show how we reach for certain fables to point out our concerns.