|
Searching for the safer better life.
No Words------ Only Deeds!
Can hail the enormous contributions that
Tools, yes tools, and skilled people using them have
made in our search for this safer better life. Yes there have been many
successes but the biggest ones happen in spite of us.
Tools Tools and more Tools maybe
thousands of them but which ones and who should we chose to run
them in our search for this safer better life? What are the biggest
impediments that we have to overcome in this search for the better life?
Could we be among them? |
|
Using Scientificscience* in the search for
the safer better life without the need of understanding
science. Can this be done? |
|
|
Yes it could and can be much easier
than using the current process which has a success rate less
than 1 out of 5 by the simplest test*.
To understand the
process recommend for speeding up the search one has to get the lay
of the land of all side of the effort. this is going to be tricky
because we will be using a tool which is not designed for the job.
in the end Nature rules
Most hurtles are built
into the search for safer better life road. They are a permanent
fixtures in and about us
They are simple,
obvious,
but do not respond to the yes or no, black or 'white'
answers
to the Issues ?
To start with,,,,,,
he
biggest
challenge in the search process
starts with our 'wordologists / semanticsist' who at times must feel
jaded while trying to make the Search for a Safer Better
Life more better. Their life is not an easy one but really good ones
maybe really, really good ones will find their way and be able
to decode the messages in this document and maybe just maybe 1 out
of 6 billion will get ths safer better life from the recommended
searching methods.
Even as we read this note most of the time may be spent
worrying about the authors spelling punctuation, grammar than
the content. If one
is working on this premised conundrum rather than the
search itself and it must be done no matter how much
the valuable discoveries are delayed during the search.
Good luck best wishes.
The first, the simplest, the
most important, the biggest challenge, the one causing the
biggest waste of time, yet the hardest to recognize, and the
hardest to guard against , are the tools called definitions.
Yes, Yes, 'Definitions'*.
This is easy to say
---------- but almost impossible to believe or do.
Some
simple examples to help us to keep us focused on the problem
with definitions and accuracy getting into the way of the
search.
1,
A little white
lie", what ever this means? If it is truly white
then it is truly composed of millions and millions of
colors. So instead one should be calling it a little colors lie, which
when blended together make it, or them colors
white.
To get at the truth it is necessary to sort the colors
out testing their honest truth colors, the half truth
colors plus any
mistake and normal color their errors from the sum of colored lies
struggling the get the right
white of the lie so that
it be small enough to be little enough to be a little
white lie.
This jumble of
words, yes words, can pile up, and if we let it, this part of
the project will block the path in the search for a
safer better life, at least it will slow it down. We need a
sorting tool, A word sorting and defining tool from the
wordologist. Presumably they have been trying since the days
of the city of Babel with only margin able success.
By comparison The
scientificscience scientist has tried a different aproach.
Lets get back
to the word white.
There is a analog sorting tool in the spectrum of scientificscience
that might shed some light on the white ,white,
problem. White, white, by natures rules or laws (what ever). is a
rainbow of colors in the color region humans can see but also
spreads on both sides of this rain bow to colors we cannot see.
on the red side we can feel but not see its warmth. On the
blue side we cant see it but can get a sun burn from it. The rest of
the "colors" we don't 'see ,sea, c,' without specials instrument.
From this jumble of
words no matter how one arranges them can one see just a glimmer of
the different worlds we all live in one of just words the other with
the tools words, plus, +, instruments to make physical measurement.
Biggest frustration the world of scientificscience is
that it is a very foreign world to most and we suffer from its
foreignness. But there is hope!
It comes from a few grains of sand, fashioned down
to the form of a prism. In the hands of a specialist
it can show a beautiful rainbow to sort out the truer truths from
the mistakes, the lies, the conjectures and errors about white
light but it needs the highest possible 'accuracy'.
One does not need to know how this happens to make it happen.
It does requires earned trust that it will happen in the
search for a safer better life. The important tool to understand and
use in the world of wordology is the word 'accurate' in
all of the searches for this safer better life.
|
|
Introduction
|
The most important tool needed in the search for the better safer life is
accurate communication especially among those affected by the discoveries in the
search leading to this safer better life.
It may be hard to believe but the word 'accurate' holds the
golden key that opens successful search for that safer better life.
'Accurate' is the flagship word but it has a major man made
hurdle to overcome even if we can get some small help in the search.
The hurdle is that the word 'accurate' first and foremost is a
word. Yes a word. Words have all kinds of human constructed problems
associated with their uniqueness and their suitable accuracy in
communications. Ask a random number of people this simple question, "Is
the word accurate accurate enough to be accurate?" Stand
back and listen. The answers will speak for themselves. This is a
technically legitimate question. Note, one of the potential dangers in
asking it is that one can find oneself trapped going around and around on
this question and lose track of the original goal of searching for a
safer better life simply because of semantics. Semantics, another word to
be reckoned with, where does it stop? How does one even slow down the
circular process?
Going around and around with semantics and getting no where except to
become dizzy, tired and frustrated without finding a safer better life. |
| It sounds
hopeless but it's not. It can be trapping only if you let it. |
The basic fact is language will always reigns no matter how ambivalent,
cumbersome, and arbitrary it may be. No matter what, we still
love it. We work with it. We love our fiction, our texting, our showing
off. Our
mighty constitution uses it. Some of it is even recorded by hand in stone
or
metal. It uses ink or any medium at our disposal - even planes
for sky writing. It's transmitted around the world and into outer space at the speed of
light. It is coded and decoded. It is just plain nifty but dangerous.
why? The meaning of words can change depending on their usage, it is
unregulated and can be and has often been used to distort reality!
The stair case figure of course is a man made illusion in construction and
interpretation. It an example of how one of our most important
senses can be mislead. Our sense of 'sight'. But how many other sense are reporting
to our brain miss leading
information to our brain because of the problem of mis-interpretation
of words describing what our sense are reporting. All of these issues are
cluttering the path to the safer better life and need clearing out.
|
| Another example of getting
trapped. |
on a Möbius strip. See the figure below.
The Mobius strip is real what you see is what you get it has only one side and one edge to it.
It is also symbolic of peoples path to solutions based
on the path one believes that they are taking forming an opinion . When
you travel down the center of the strip you may think you are seeing
both sides of your trip and have a destination but in fact you will always
travel forever the same route in circles only seeing one side with the
same scenery over and over again never anything new. Also you will
beat a track so deep you will never be able to get out of it to the other side. So,
there is a message
somewhere along this journey in a search for a better life. Be careful
about what looks real or who you trust on your journey if you meet them on a Mobius
road
.
Going around and around in a one sided path some times upside down some
times right side up, wearing out a path so deep one cannot see not
out of the trench . Debates and arguments can get trapped in this
wordology syndrome. |
Some humans (people?) believe and forecast that the first and biggest
impediment one faces in the search for a better life is the
lack of suitable accuracy and rigor inherent in a common language.
This forecast angers many in the language business and those who enjoy it
as a hobby especially as a putdown tool. Maybe "enrages" is a more
suitable word than "angers"?
Not convinced that the above is not just idle chet chat.? Read on about the
size and complexity of the gold standard of the English language.
This is not an unsung problem with words in general but there is a tested
solution, for the search for a better safer life which is used, but not
enough to minimize the word problem. It requires little to no effort other
than making your carefully informed opinions known. Effectively
known.
Words in the technical world have to work extra hard at producing even a
semblance of true success than they do in everyday use. This document is
almost a perfect example of trying to get a simple but important messages
engaged to help the search for a .better safer life. But how hard will it
be. to do so? A few examples are given below of the problem with
words followed by a discussion tentative solutions to be tried to help the
search for a safer better life.
First example1
Words have definitions. That can be looked up in dictionaries. As an
example we have looked up the definition of the word accurate to see if we
are using it accurately.
The goal is to show the complexity of dictionary definitions in just the
English language. Notice the number of alternate words used in the
definition
Definition follows
1, Accurate is an adjective
accurate information
CORRECT, precise, exact, right, errorless, error-free, without error,
faultless, perfect, valid, specific, detailed, minute, explicit,
clear-cut, word for word, unambiguous, meticulous, authoritative,
reliable, canonical; Brit. informal spot on, bang on; N. Amer. informal on
the money.
2, an accurate description
FACTUAL, fact-based, literal, correct, faithful, exact, close, true,
truthful, veracious, true to life, telling it like it is, as it really
happened, lifelike, authentic, realistic, fair; convincing, careful,
word-perfect, strict, conscientious, punctilious, painstaking, thorough,
scrupulous, rigorous; informal on the mark, on the beam, on the nail, on
the button; Brit. informal spot on, bang on; rare verisimilar, veristic,
veridical.
-opposite(s): INACCURATE, LOOSE.
3 an accurate shot
WELL AIMED, precise, on target, unerring, deadly, lethal, sure, true, on
the mark, careful, meticulous, painstaking, precision; Brit. informal spot
on, bang on.
Accuracy n. The quality of being accurate and without error:
Definition ends
So how accurate is the word accurate? How many word were used to define
just one word ?Add to the English language all the other languages and you
have a sizable amount data available show to the magnitude of the
problem facing the search for a better safer life!
(Seeing this, knowing this may not be sufficient enough to some who
would suggest we should check that we know what we know to be sure that we
know what we know for sure.) Some might think that the latter
sentence inside the brackets is ===== well just is?!? I f so
you’re on the right track. Read on.>>>>>>>
_________________________________________________________________________________________
2nd Example showing more of the magnitude of the word / language
problem.
Most taught, most discussed, most dynamic, most
manipulative, most flexible, most corruptible, most dangerous, is
our blessed Language . Language
(tool) that is written, spoken,
sung, pictured, worshiped by all of us in the romantic sense.
The common form of language ( tool) has been, at times, more than a little
ambivalent, cumbersome, and arbitrary. Adjectives adverbs can drive the
transportation of your valuable information crazy before it gets to its
destination.
As always there are exceptions. Poets, Comedians and those who write
advertisements love it and might go out of business without it.
However to use the common language as the only tool in
any search one could get trapped into circular augments,
like the little guy below, that is wasting his time burning up energy without getting anything for it but
entertainment, which could get tiresome
emotionally, spiritually, intellectually, philosophically.
| This is a description of the Oxford English Dictionary
copied from wikipedia....According to the publishers, it would
take a single person 120 years to "key in" text to convert it to
machine readable form which consists a total of 59 million words of
the OED second edition, 60 years to proofread it, and 540 megabytes
to store it electronically.[7] As of 30 November 2005, the Oxford
English Dictionary contained approximately 301,100 main entries.
Supplementing the entry headwords, there are 157,000 bold-type
combinations and derivatives; 169,000 italicized-bold phrases and
combinations; 616,500 word-forms in total, including 137,000
pronunciations; 249,300 etymologies; 577,000 cross-references; and
2,412,400 usage quotations. The dictionary's latest, complete print
edition (Second Edition, 1989) was printed in 20 volumes, comprising
291,500 entries in 21,730 pages. The longest entry in the OED2 was
for the verb set, which required 60,000 words to describe some 430
senses. As entries began to be revised for the OED3 in sequence
starting from M, the longest entry became make in 2000, then put in
2007.[8] |
All of this is only for the English language.
Multiply this by all the language all the dialects. One can easily see the
magnitude of the issue.
What about user There is little at the moment that
can be done for the user of language
There is lots of room for the misuse of language. It is the classic double
edge sword capable of hurting the attacker or the attacked,
intentionally or unintentionally. It is dangerous because of its inherent
lack of absolute accuracy. It can and has been impediment, an
obstacle, to the search for the better life.
Unfortunately language with all of its virtues and drawback is close to
the only common tool we share. The most worrisome and least discussed
reality is, almost half of us cannot , casually, grasp the
full content of a written or spoken declaration like that poor
fellow holding up the sign in the image below.
about time for End of arguments about common language as a tool
There is a
tool which has been successfully used in
the search but is often under threat of being slowed down even
stopped for unreasonable times in application by powerful
organizations that feel threatened by its use. They use simple
misleading language arguments of doubt. This troublesome tool, to
some, is called basic scientific research. Its most
magnificent deeds seem to happen by chance and in spite of us
"us the language people." Scientist when communicating with each
using traditional language in the early days of science were compelled by
the language issue to streamline their communication methods or be
ignored misunderstood something no productive scientist can stand
for very long.
There was one more very significant change made by the scientific
community about the same time, one that may have permanently
isolated scientist from the rest of the world for ever!
Since the times of Galileo and his equally pushy colleague
scientist's creditability had grown substantially using instrument
many time more sensitive then native humans senses.
"In spite of us"
Does this phrase symbolize an attitude or
condition that some may have toward science, especially basic
research. Does this attitude slow The search for a better life?
Modern science started not so long ago by a small
group of Italian fellows like the one called Galileo who was a
poorly paid teacher with a small business on the side to make ends
meet . Galileo's business was based on making instruments of war using the
new way of looking at and describing the laws of nature. One instrument he
designed was a combination aiming device for
cannons and a calculator for all sorts of military things. His
competitors, who had connection in high places and were still using old
fashioned but common sense methods which were wrong in designing
their instruments. They were bad mouthing Galileo instruments to push him
out of the market. This was a common approach that is still used today and
it was hurting Galileo business by using simple
common-sense type arguments in their sales approach. The simpler the
better but the wrong-er they got.
Through out Galileo's business life he found,
experimentally, a number of instances where Nature did not follow
our human common-sense arguments. Falling bodies like cannon balls
was one of them. Galileo found more business opportunities
using nature laws instead of using the more traditional common-sense
approach. Another of his military products, a really famous one,
nearly cost Galileo his life, . Someone named this instrument the
"telescope".
More and more scientist began finding many human
common-sense laws were bendable, where as they found Natures
laws fixed, testable, using measurements of Time, Length, and Mass . This
left scientist no other choice but to
abandon their human judges and the juries pronouncements and
to adopt Natures judgments that could be discovered and tested
instrumentally by scientist using precise and accurate measurements
of Time, Length, and Mass.
Instrument and measurements of the laws of nature.
Above is our goddess of scientific measurements. We
borrowed her from the law and justice department. Her hand grasps
the sword for use in the enforce human's laws. Her
balance, a type of scale for comparing things like the plus and
minus of the law.
We added a ruler to her tools to extend instrument inventory
to three. Three are needed by the physical science world. They
include measurements of Time, Length and Mass. Can you
find them? Hint, the balance pans are used in comparing mass's
also they are used to measure and compare time by the swinging
periods of the pendulum . either pan can be used.
TODAY'S LABORATORIES ARE A BIT DIFFERENT THAN IN GALILEO'S
TIME BUT THE RULES OF CONDUCT, HE HELPED PIONEER, ARE VERY MUCH THE
ALIVE. THEY ARE GETTING STRONGER, THROUGH PRACTICE, OVER THE LAST 400
YEARS OF TESTING.
There was one more very significant change made by the scientific
community about the same time, one that may have permanently
isolated scientist from the rest of the world for ever!
The change came about because the spoken and written
languages then and now were and are more than a little ambivalent,
cumbersome, and arbitrary. Adjective adverbs were driving
most scientist crazy. Can you tell us why? Since the times of Galileo and
his equally pushy colleague scientist's creditability had grown
substantially using instrument many time more sensitive then
native humans senses. But and, a bigger but Scientist when
communicating with each other were compelled to streamline their
communication methods or be ignored (something no productive scientist can
stand for very long)
Tower OF Babel The Confusion of Tongues.
All these wonderful transformations had a down side.
Only scientist can get the full meaning and the precise nature of other
scientist work. To the rest of the world it all sound like gibberish
or coded language, consisting of modern day texting, Greek
symbols. Some scientist called all this
mathematics.
One world was divide into two with a steep wall separating
them. One world is where the scientist and their sponsors. work the
other the bulk of the population and the sponsors of business and
government function.
Does this affect our search for a better life ?
The enemy's of science have long since learned not to
question science. so much as to question the ethics of those practicing
it. Why not? Humans are only common-sense guidance creatures that have
learn from experience and their natural sense of sight, sound, touch
etc. Scientist have learned this first hand not to trust even each other
and themselves with out solid physically measure-able proof.
Has this change slowed our search for a better life?
In-creditable Creditability
Scientist are still human aren't they?--
Aren't they?-- Maybe just a little bit? There is little enforcement of law
against it?
If this were true?
Common sense backed up by personal experience (data) kicks in. A
common-sense decision is made. Science is wrong cause scientist are
wrong?
Changing a common-sense position
IS more than just being wrong!! It is a serious loss of
personal pride? This is a very very serious issue for most?
If there is no immediate reason for admitting being wrong chances are---
one might not admit being wrong.
Creditable Creditability
Round one science loses? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
(Lots of business ,professions etc. are treating the word science as a
super adjective to heighten the creditability of their business or
profession. Example have flourished in recent years.
Does this attitudes slow The search for a better
life?
|
It was the early 1600's when Galileo and his telescopes were in the
middle of Nature laws versus religious laws discussions.
The religious enforcement tool of choice, for proving their case,
was burning the perpetrator at the stake, in public, setting
examples to anyone, especially scientist, for not obeying the
religious laws or protocol.--- .
This attitude
sets the tone for the following conversation which may
best be expressed in a
1623 (400 year old) Shakespearian
rhythm which was in vogue at a time when science was coming
alive.
Let the authors set
a Shakespearian stage. The actor below is playing the part of
Galileo presenting the new 1600's point of view of science and
scientist.
With his telescope in the raw, his remarks might have been
opened with the famous dialog
!
Citizens!
Scientists! Teachers of science!
Lend us your ears! Your eyes! Your emotions; and
imagination.
We come to bring the emotions of scientific discoveries.
nearer to you, not to praise them.
The evil that scientists do lives after them,
The good is oft interred with their bones
So let it be with Science.
The search for a better life?
Can we ever be
serviced by science when it is weighed against all
powerful agents often preferring not to take into
account Nature Laws, Laws which are expressed and
studied scientifically with measurements of Time, Length, and Mass,
Laws of Nature not always in synchronization with human
made laws derived from our eternal common-sense
judgment? |
Environment- Human Derived Laws?
Most humans live under what seems to be a tyranny of rules, laws,
regulation and guidelines, so many it appears hopeless to believe
one has any choice in any thing we wish to do or chose to do. It even
seems dangerous to speak out for reason to those who enforce
these laws. In a nut shell we almost have to act as though we do not
have any real say in what is going on here there or anywhere. What
is our recourse but to dig in -- chose our common-sense emotional position
and stand our ground so as not to lose face, lose pride. -- Pride one of
humans strongest held emotion which is an all, powerful
motivator is not taken lightly by any normal human. Pride of self is
all. Is there no hope for change without violent revolution?
Can science help answer these questions?
Humans may have done it to ourselves in letting the creation of
laws for governments and religions where we have left enforcement
in the hands of strangers which may have questionable allegiance to
the original intention of the law. It seems at times we don't
own our lives, our bodies to do with as we are physical governed to
do as long as the brain is legally (electrically) alive. When
the brain is (electrically) dead the body parts remain alive -----
and are commodities?
Since scientist do most the work on how nature works we want to
know how good are scientist at this task. Do we need to be
told or even suggested by complete non science strangers how
much we can trust our scientist?
This, the eternal question; will it or would it, ever be
possible, or should we have the right, to the answer to these questions?
How well are scientist doing the job for us-- or even what or when
can we expect from them?
Comparison Environment Permanency Nature
Laws
Common-sense derived laws in the Common-sense World (CW) Are more
likely to be accepted in any debate with the Scientific World
(SW).
Because. It uses more direct , easier to understand, common
sense laws in their arguments versus sci-techs offer us more convoluted
statically saturated data, short cut formulas, burdened with
obscurity----arguments.
It is very different with Nature. Nature has laws.
Nature enforces its laws. Examples; the force laws of gravity,
electricity, magnetism. These are not about to be changed in any
human generated court.
Scientist have assumed a role of exploring and reporting the laws
of nature. They debate and battle to get them right.
Scientist who knowingly make up, falsify, publish such data,
found through fellow scientist applying this data will be ignored/ fired
by fellow scientist and the sponsor of the work. It is
sure grounds for dismissal with the loss of most any opportunity of any
other job in science. The perpetrator is done, will be sanctioned
by all concerned, hence forth loses all respect by everyone in
and out of
The world of ScientificScience.
Nature and its laws will have it no other way!
Sponsored by Jim & Rhoda Morris's---
Resume
Instrument and measurements of the laws of nature.
Above is our goddess of scientific measurements. We
borrowed her from the law and justice department. Her hand grasps
the sword for use in the enforce human's laws. Her
balance, a type of scale for comparing things like the plus and
minus of the law.
We added a ruler to her tools to extend instrument inventory
to three. Three are needed by the physical science world. They
include measurements of Time, Length and Mass. Can you
find them? Hint, the balance pans are used in comparing mass's
also they are used to measure and compare time by the swinging
periods of the pendulum . either pan can be used.
Below Marie Curie in the background seems to be contemplating the usage of
the laws of nature. In our photo we have a hand balancing a
brass ball the approximate size of a Uranium 235 chunk needed to
make an atom bomb.
Theory and experiments
Perhaps many have taken note that laws for governments, religions, and
sciences are parallel only bearing tiny differences in , methods and
strengths of enforcing them. They all include theory and
experimental data. The experimental data has the final say until
further work expanding its results gives a clearer
understanding of the laws available.
In scientific work studying and discovering new laws of nature
measurements scientist are always pushing for greater precision and
absoluteness accuracy. If they are wrong it can be a
catastrophe on a massive scale. Science is not a game.
There is serious trouble for everyone buried in the words ---
measurements, measurements and measurements.
Nature is absolute. Humans are relative creatures, "maybes"
highlight wishes in their decisions. Thus the cause for
much debate and confusion. between the scientist, scientist and
non-scientist. In the end Natures has its way.
All living things must measure things just to get a place to
exist.. Scientist have made a profession of using highly specialized
instruments measuring the laws of nature relevant to humans beings. .
The range of measurements. Scientist achievements have
broached pure guesses at the size of the visible universe and things
smaller than the parts of atoms they also cover thing between
these extremes.
This document is dedicated toward reducing confusion-- if
possible. If not--- at least provide an environment to raise
ourselves a little bit more above pure rancor in debating basic research
efforts that have profound impact on our search for a better life
This is sum of our challenge for ScientificScience.
|
Click on the picture below See a real disappointed
scientist in action--.
|
Click the picture below to see what a
chunk of U 235 is good for besides bowling--.
|
Is
the above Scientific Science?
or would it be
http://www.Galileotelescope.org/
Scientific Science?
|
Madam Curie shown in one of her more reflective
moments.
Could she be thinking, "My God what have you done with
my
discoveries in scientific science,
make A-bombs? "
Marie died of Leukemia, Einstein a broken heart.
The nominal spherical size of the critical
mass for a 235U
nuclear weapon is about 17.32 cm (6.8") in
diameter, 56 kg[3].
This is not much considering the vast destruction it can wreck and the
many thousands of people it can burn to death. On the other hand
this bowling sized ball can provide thousands of people the comforts
offered by electric power.
|
This is a description of the Oxford English Dictionary copied from
wikipedia....According to the publishers, it would take a single person
120 years to "key in" text to convert it to machine readable form which
consists a total of 59 million words of the OED second edition, 60 years
to proofread it, and 540 megabytes to store it electronically.[7] As of 30
November 2005, the Oxford English Dictionary contained approximately
301,100 main entries. Supplementing the entry headwords, there are 157,000
bold-type combinations and derivatives; 169,000 italicized-bold phrases
and combinations; 616,500 word-forms in total, including 137,000
pronunciations; 249,300 etymologies; 577,000 cross-references; and
2,412,400 usage quotations. The dictionary's latest, complete print
edition (Second Edition, 1989) was printed in 20 volumes, comprising
291,500 entries in 21,730 pages. The longest entry in the OED2 was for the
verb set, which required 60,000 words to describe some 430 senses. As
entries began to be revised for the OED3 in sequence starting from M, the
longest entry became make in 2000, then put in 2007.[8]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Having come this far in the conversation lets poke into this a bit more
with a single super simple example taken from an unimpeachable source.
The reader perhaps remembers the story as told in a widely read and
quoted religious source the Gospel. it is the story of the tower of
Babel. We are told that languages were confused. It clearly identifies
by who, why, and where.
It is true that there are many languages, but, but, and but is it true in
the story how they got that way? Maybe the who that was purported to
have changed everyone's language was wrongly accused.
Some could and do challenge the story, but not the message? The accuracy
of this story would then be questionable? If it is? Then what about all
the of the rest of the stories in the text. Follow the same route.
Wouldn't they be questionable also? Many may have similar trouble with
the illustration covering the Babel story? What about 'all
illustrations' what about them?
Where does it end? It can not if the methods of searching are not improved
and maintained like the little fellow climbing the eternal stair case!
Enough? stop? The point is made? The answers remain divided when Natures
laws seem to be ignored in a judgment. There are lots of example of
other situations that have been explored showing similar conditions.
This one was chosen because in one form or another, in one way or
another, little or a lot, it eventually touches all of us with its
message and its questions about words the things that make up our
languages. Our decisions our lives in our search for the better life.
It is HOPELESS, KAPUT, BROKE, PERIOD.. The little fellow above will
go on forever climbing those stairs until something in natures computer
breaks. Maybe a very serious break for all living creatures.
The common language as a stand alone tool for our
search of a better life?
The common form of language has been, at times, more than a little
ambivalent, cumbersome, and arbitrary. Adjectives adverbs can
drive the transportation of your valuable information crazy before one get
it. As always they're exceptions. Poets, Comedians and
those who write advertisements love it and might go out of
business without it.
It is HOPELESS, KAPUT, BROKE, PERIOD.. The little
fellow below will go on forever until something in natures computer
breaks. Maybe a very serious break for all living creatures? If he does
not work he brought the internet?
Is there any better road to search on for a better life?
Yes, better, faster, and cheaper but it not immune to human
tampering it has to have 27-7 vigilance but it can be the
bestest, fastest way in the Search for that better life!
What else can one do?
Can we help our beloved languages be more accurate
and precise. (there is a difference even between these.). Can one
help out those dear little adjectives, adverbs and other modifiers
using quantitative measurements in numbers, of time, length and mass
where (ever possible)?
We have the good fortune that one of the past
times of dedicated language buffs is helping others with their
grammar, spelling, and punctuation. They struggle with their students and
each other. sometimes if not careful may miss the content of
the documents entirely without them being improved. or grasped. by the
helper Considering the inherent complexity of the language they are
dealing with it is a wonder that they try.
The accuracy of the language is suitable to most,. after
all most have no other choice. At best common sense and experience can
help us in our decision. Following others on the same course can be
reinsuring . One never knows for sure using common sense in making
our decisions. It is like gambling with a deck stacked by those
with more power than the common folk. in the lead calling the
shots
Few can find happiness in being wrong in public
especially with some one making it obvious that we are wrong. can be a
bitter pill swallowing ones pride and being humbled at being wrong and
being told it with and one may find it is to better
to carrying a large red letter on you chest stating that you
are wrong than admitting it.that reminding you that you dontg give a
damn. someone
|
