I like watching the TED
talks. I like listening the different kinds of speakers. I admire the
really nervous ones who are so passionate about their subjects that
despite their nerves – many of them shaking visibly - they get up
in front of an audience of their peers and deliver their message,
whatever its popularity may be. Sometimes, I admire them far more
than the subject of their discourse. Its not often that I will find a
subject completely absorbing, or one that I totally agree with,
infact they are in the minority. Take this example of the talk you
will find attached today.
The subject matter deals
with cultivating and re-establishing trust. That many difficulties
could be avoided or resolved, if trust exists between the two
parties. So far, I agree with that concept albeit with some
scepticism. However, I didn’t particularily agree with the manner
of going about achieving that trust. The speaker propounded that we
need to project the image of who we really are, that we shouldn`t
seek to hide from people our true selves. And so, it would
naturally follow that people would then be more inclined to trust us.
Sounds good doesn`t it.
Sounds like that might actually work. But in the end, in my opinion,
its the very image that we put forward that engenders trust, be it a
true or a false one. Well, false isn`t necessarily the most correct
word. Let me explain.
Surely what we need to
establish are the ground rules for what trust may be based on. Is it
“total honesty, come what consequences may”? Should we all be
saying, “this is me, this is who I am, like it or not”. Where
then, is the striving for improvement, even, in some cases, the
striving for excellence? Is it likely, for instance, that some giant
corporation is going to say, “Look! We`re here to make a profit at
your expense”? And then sit back and relax and expect us, Joe
Public, to say “Oh yes, I now trust them implicitly since they`ve
been so honest as to admit their true selves”? I think none of us
would be that green!
If that doesn`t work with
corporations, what about individuals? It`s true to say that we are
all so quick to distrust. In fact, in the world in which we live,
distrust has become a natural part of our daily existence. Isn`t
Preseident Trump always accusing the press of diseminating false
news. And while we might think him a little on the idiotic side, can
you really say that you remain completely unaffected by his comments?
What is it that really
forms the basis of trust? Yes, of course honesty is important, but in
the end trust is about the relationship between two separate
entities. What other things may affect that relationship? Many
things. We may admire it when the other entity – individual or
corporation – admits a fault, for instance. But that in itself
doesn`t make a basis for trust. Isn`t it also, the desire to believe
that the other entity is striving to improve? To be more than they
have been? To be better?
Where would Roger Federer
be if, the first time he lost in tennis he just said “well, that’s
just who I am”, and then never tried to achieve improvement? Isn`t
there, therefore, a danger of self-complacency? We despise it in the
big corporations; international relations are all about wanting the
other party to show signs of being open to discussion to see where
improvements and consessions can be made. Should we, as individuals,
at least not strive to be more than as we were born? Isn`t life all
about learning? What then, is the point of learning, if not
improvement? At what point do we say,”OK, I`m done with the
self-improvement thing”? Hasn`t history condemned those who said
such a thing? Do we not say: “you should have know/seen the
consequences”?
Well, if nothing else,
this article is full of questions! But I hope that they at least make
you think about the image you may be projecting and how truthful or
perceptable that image may be. If, indeed you care?
This week I watched a TED talk about
one man’s quest to show gratitude for the cup of coffee he has in
the morning everyday on his way to work. He wanted to say thank you
to everyone involved in growing, processing, delivering and finally
pouring it for him. This turned out to be a major undertaking and he
actually did quite a lot of travelling to fulfill his quest.
Generally his efforts were well received, but occasionally he got a
strange reaction from some people who felt that something suspicious
was happeneing. Even when he explained, they didn’t seem to really
understand and certainly didn’t appreciate his efforts.
And I was thinking, what an indictment
that is on modern society, firstly that we dont show nearly enough
gratitude, so that when someone is truly appreciative we are somewhat
taken aback and secondly that there are people who regard expressions
of gratitude with suspicion.
I know we live in a world where the
pace of life is generally hectic, hectic enough to cause us to
believe that we just don’t have the time to show the gratitude we
feel or at least should feel. So I’m going to encourage everyone to
work on this. As a child, I was taught that saying ‘please’ and
‘thank you’ was an essential part of everyday life and to forget
to say those “magic” words was unforgivable. I still actually
enjoy being polite and thankful to people and for the most part
people seem to appreciate it. But there are those around us who never
experience that little tingle of satisfaction that comes from just
being nice to others. The person in the car, whom you allow to enter
the lane in front of you and doesn’t doesn’t thank you. Or
someone for whom you hold open the door, (now
its become a sexist battle ,when did that start!)
You know, the little everyday things maybe we don´t think about. The
things that don´t really matter.
But just think if it did
matter, if somehow our lives depended on the level of gratitude we
show. Goodness me, what a change that would produce! We would then
all be bending over backwards to thank everyone for every little
thing. Ok I know that sounds silly, but take a moment to imagine how
much nicer your day might be if people showed their gratittude for
something you did, or for your job, or any little thing you do for
someone, whether our nearest or dearest, or total strangers. Wouldn´t
that be ever so much nicer? Wouldn´t it make your day a at least a
little bit lighter?
If sincerity is added, it
could make the whole day feel that its been a worthwhile day.
Yesterday, someone did that for me, just took the time to personally
and sincerely thank me for the classes I,d given. It was a talking
point when I got home, because it made me feel so appreciated.
And in the end isn´t that
what we all want? To feel that someone notices and values us? As
humans we have this inbuilt need to be loved. And whilst we may feel
that we just can´t love everyone, making someone´s day a little
better can’t be a bad thing, can it?
Will we one-day soon see this title
as a sign posted in shop windows, newspapers and internet pages? If
it isn’t already?
Almost any quick
or basic internet search these days, may quickly lead you to the
answers you seek, but immediately you enter a web site you are
offered the service you have been seeking all your life! Yes, you can
now download the app of your dreams: you can instantly know what
take-out eating places deliver straight to your door; what the prices
are in your local dry cleaners who will then pick up your items at
the clic of the mouse; or do you want to know what flight prices are
for a trip to Outer Mongolia? Yes folks, its all there. No catch,
honest!
Well, there may be a slight catch,
just a miniscule totally non-important one.
All these
wonderful instant-access apps come with quite a hefty price tag,
actually. It’s knowledge. Not the knowledge you
want to know (book an appointment
directly for Fluffykins to get a luxury pet-pampering), but in fact
the knowledge will be flowing almost entirely in the other direction.
We all know that any internet site we visit puts cookies on our
device so they can monitor what we are looking at and then send us
the best offer of something in which we just might be ever so
slightly interested . But downloading the actual app is like inviting
the company directly into our life, rolling the red carpet out for
them. If you dont believe me just watch the accompanying video. This
in turn, leads us to other sites that want us to download their app
too!
However, the
other question, and in my view a more important one, is why are we
even thinking about downloading these apps at all? How come we are
submitting ourselves to the ever-increasing spread of the disease of
app-downloading? We are becoming app-junkies. In fact, looking back
at this blog, the pernicious world of apps is spawning a whole new
style of vocabulary! Do we really need that so-called money-saving
shopping app? Just whose money is it saving? Certainly not ours. We
like to think we are trendy and keeping ahead of the pack but
instead, the app designers are rubbing their hands together in oily
fashion as they pedal their wares to the manufacturing/service
industries, persuading them that this is what the market is
demanding. And then they bend over backwards to persuade us, - “the
market”- that these things are a must-have.
Meanwhile, maybe
there is a development of the spirit of competition in the
app-downloading community with each poor app-crazy person who has
lost all self control in order to find the latest, state-of-the-art
must-have; must see; must-do app slowly losing their grip on reality.
Maybe they are hiding in the office stock cupboard or lounging
apparently nonchantly against the doorpost, not quite leaving or
entering as they just have to see this one oh-so-important download
opportunity, until one day they start actually falling under buses or
causing other kinds of horrendous accidents in their frenzy not to
miss it.
In the end what
will become of all these app-ophiles? Will there be clinics and
self-help groups for those who cannot control their addiction? Will
they need professional healthcare and counselling to deal with their
overwrought out-of-control app-mania. Will a whole new industry
develop around counteracting this socially invasive addiction?
Probably, until the next phase of technology delivers us its new baby
for us to fawn and coo over. Dont wait, get help now before it’s
too late.! You have been warned.
People often mention toleration and
prejudice within the same framework of the written or spoken word,
but I decided just to concentrate on the perception of toleration, so
as to take a positive point of view from the start. The word
prejudice carries with it the weight of the negative and its not my
purpose to be either negative or unduly critical.
So let me begin with commending my
chosen compatriots of Spain for their toleration according to my
immediate experience of it. That is to say, that as a foreigner,
albeit within the European neighbourhood, I want to begin by
examining my own experience of how I have been treated since moving
here some 16 years ago. From the beginning of my time living in a
small coastal town on the Mediteranean Sea, I have been generally
pleasantly surprised at the toleration with which I have been
received. I have often stopped people in the street and in halting
broken Spanish (at first anyway) I have asked directions, or for help
in some way, and almost always have been met with kindness and
patience. Sometimes, people have even taken me to where I wanted to
go, proudly depositing me on the doorstep of the local Ayuntamiento,
or wherever, with a grand gesture of a wave of the hand and “De
nada” graciously bestowed on my grateful thanks.
People have helped me in
supermarkets, train stations, car parks and the like. Even though the
small town I chose to live in was at one time during the peak of the
housing boom, over-run with Brits buying up houses left, right and
centre, I never felt the spur of resentment that foreigners often
feel when settling in Britain. You only have to look at the desire of
the British to leave Europe to see the truth of that. In fact such
has been the desire of my Spanish compatriots to show tolerance and
friendliness, that often, rather than disappointing me with the
answer that they sadly don't know the place I'm looking for, many have
chosen instead to give me entirely erroneous directions on the basis
that a positive answers is better than no answer at all, lest I
should think them uncaring and intolerant!
However, just how deep really does
this apparent penchant for tolerance really go? I'd like to think
that it is an essential part of the Spanish make-up, that its not
only skin deep. But other experiences have shown me that this is not
necessarily a given truth.
In our changing world there has
been a great influx of foreign nationals across Europe in recent
years. From European exchange students to refugees, Europe has,
albeit reluctantly, opened its doors. There are the retired British
ex-pats who have flooded some spanish communities, buying up all
kinds of properties from new builds to old “quaint” townhouses.
But is it us or our bank accounts that have been welcomed? What about
those who do not come with disposable income attached? What about
those who come with a strong work ethic and are determined to “make
it” in the West? Or those who come with nothing more than a
povery-soaked dream that Europe is paved with gold, if only they can
get their foot on the first rung. And that first rung is just
surviving the journey. we`ll never know how many didn`t.
I`m not talking here about hatred
but resentment, about the need for tolerance and the need to change
our perception of those who are different from us; those who need our
compassion or just tolerance, in that they just want the same things
that we want, a home, a mobile phone, a tv and actual running water
in the house!
Well, I`m talking about the Spanish
as a whole from the perspective of the British foreigner, but the
same can be said of any european country. No doubt some of you will
have your own opinions of the British!
But remember, my aim here is not to
create argument or dissension, but to take a brief look at the
Spanish culture of tolerance in particular as a subject for
discussion in this blog. I welcome the opportunity to be educated,
though of course in the spirit of tolerance please! As to the roots of the development
of this kind of personality trait, I welcome your comments. Do you
see the ex-pats living in Spain as being equally tolerant, or come to
that, in your own visits to Britain, does their underlying
intolerance peek through their outer skin of politeness? Do you think
that the spanish gift for tolerance has changed in modernt times i.e.
the last fifty years?
No doubt Spain is changing, and
with moderization there is a price to be paid, but at least for now
Spain continues to display its tolerant, relaxed approach to life at
least. And I for one, applaud that.
During extensive IQ tests, children below 5 years of age were found to be 98% 'genius', as in possession of true divergent thinking skills. Once they reached 8 years of age, the percentage of divergent thinking was 30, and once they were over 25 years of age, this ratio was reduced to 2%.
To live within western culture at the start of the 21st century is to experience a double-edged sword.
On the one hand, it is sophisticated and pushes ‘forward’, with philosophy and science as ‘enquiry tools’ at its forefront. On the other hand is the cultural detachment from perceptions that such intellectual tools should help to attain.
The way sand and water particles rearrange themselves in patterns when vibrating to certainfrequencies is clearly a system, formed by the pattern that encloses the particles within it: seemingly individuated particules form geometric patterns and rearrange themselves into an observable form, a ‘pattern’, a system, an ecology. Particles behave as though they belong to a greater vibrational ecology than their own individuated existence. This is a scientifically measurable phenomenon, studied by the science of cymatics. It is the subject of ongoing research, as technology increasingly allows for the detailed study of the behaviour of molecules when exposed to changing frequencies.
In recent years, the science of physics has also proven the properties of cross-scale self-similarity, also called fractals. Similar to the ‘russian-doll’ situation,where the outer doll contains self-similar, smaller dolls, fractal behaviour implies that systems display recurring patterns at smaller or larger scales. This is used when describing the structure of snowflakes and when describing ‘partly random or chaotic phenomena’ such as crystal growth and galaxy formation.
In a similar way to which sand molecules arrange themselves in orderly patterns reacting to audio frequencies, it is observable how cultural systems tend to arrange themselves in ‘cohesive’ ways which seem somewhat orderly and respond to patterns of organization. Hierarchy, policing, governance systems, urban organization, linguistic systems, social classes, occupations, calendars, are all systems of observable organization. There are, also, as Raymond Williams points out in Culture [1983], actual‘tangible’ works that stem from culture, such as art. Pierre Teilhard De Chardin described this as part of the Noosphere in The Phenomenon Of Man [1955] the ‘atmosphere of the productions of mind’, where human cognition fundamentally transforms the biosphere, emerging as a sort of ‘shell’, enclosing the planet: an ecology within an ecology.
A resonance within a vibration.
“I think religion has done great damage to ecology. A human being has a soul and is therefore deemed different to the rest of ‘creation’ - at least this is what you’re taught if you, like me, were brought up under the Christian tradition. You are a ‘superior’ being thanks to your body-soul duality, which has placed humans above the idea of being integrated in an ecosystem - within which we are actually just ‘one more’ element, and in fact, the most intrusive element. …And I think that, consequently, whenever you bring up ecology, the culture’s subconscious mutters: “people first!” …As long as there are grave economical and political problems -which there always are- they take precedent over preoccupations for a greater ecology. …When, actually, we should probably consider it as a whole: the problems that stem from the same system are related. Quite possibly, there are people dying of hunger because we are trashing the planet. Quite possibly, these are connected” - Risto Mejide, 2012, ‘What: About the Future’ interview'.
As Cambridge, Oxford and Trinity College lecturer Raymond Williams points out in Culture, the word ‘culture’ applied to human deeds derives from the observation of bacterial behaviour, given its ‘clogging’ into overarching systems of ecologies within a lab petri dish, and as also related to the cultivation of crops.
This very metaphor reveals human culture’s ability to recognize and reflect on the existence of fractal patterns, metaphorically revealing an ´as above, so below´ natural behaviour of systems belonging to different scales of other systems, arranged into smaller or bigger –including the unfathomable by human intellect- ecologies.
Information is so called because it defines systems that display form-ation and therefore display perceivable patterns, from which in-form-ation can be extracted.
As Alfred North Whitehead stated in Process And Reality [1929], intelligence can be defined as the acquisition of pattern as such.
There is an all-permeating presence of patterned arrangements in the observable world: nature’s cyclical behaviour, the formation of hurricanes, the ‘pi’ ratio present in petal and leave formation and arrangements, the molecular arrangement of ‘pure’ water molecules, the sequence of prime numbers, the fibonacci sequence, etc.
All of these phenomena abide the ‘constant’ of patterns within patterns, or fractality. ...Aesthetically apprehensible order.
Aesthetics -as an apprehensible phenomena- should provide information
about the plausability and impeccability of any system and/or idea, and
aesthetics are definitely apprehensible within ideological, social and/or cultural
systems.
When only logic and analysis are applied to a situation, with no space left to chance, no evolution occurs, as stated by Darwin. This just shows how slippery regular reality actually is, despite all of our intellectual endeavours and abstract systems of rationalization. ...The greater ecology of which we are part of does not respond to, nor function through, human reason and logic.
For instance, western industrial systems of agriculture have chosen to narrow biodiversity into 9 main cultivation crops, ignoring previously present biodiversity, in favour of for-profit, yield-rich, industrial concepts of cultivation. And this is, obviously, out of kilter with what is advisable towards the greater biological ecosystem that human culture is part of.
So, does our cartesian logic accurately, aesthetically, represent reality?
..Because if this is the case, the 'progress' and 'civilisation´ western societies simbolise should have brought us to a different 21st century status quo than the perpetual threat of imminent international war, xenophobia, racism, publicly justified corruption, social programming as executed by mass-media, and cut-throat financial and economic markets.
....We should, pershaps, stop collectively feeling so self-fulfilled with our civilised assumptions, and should rather start proving that evolution has enabled us to generate perceivable motion towards better socio-cultural spaces.
Dr Lara Boyd - Repeat those behaviours that are healthy for your brain.
As Dr Boyd states during her TED presentation, learning -evolving- is about doing the work that the brain / mind requires, and this requires practice and engagement in order to avoid repeated and undesirable patterns of behaviour... because the opposite of aesthetic is an-aesthetic - to be dormant, unaware, asleep, sedated, as explained below (5min 51secs) by british linguist Sir Ken Robinson, PHD.
"Life is not a linear or mechanistic phenomena, it is organic, and human success depends on synergistic relations with the environment"
"Our view of intelligence is exceedingly narrow" (Sir Ken Robinson)
Evolution implies change, at whichever rate of adaptation may be necessary, in order to change undesirable circumstances as related to one´s environment.
"The problem with human beings is not that we aim too high and fail... The problem with humans is that we aim too low, and succeed". (Michelangelo)
------------------------------
(Clip 1) Cymatics, from Greek: κῦμα, meaning "wave", is a subset of modal vibrational phenomena. The term was coined by Hans Jenny (1904-1972), a Swiss follower of the philosophical school known as anthroposophy.
Typically the surface of a plate, diaphragm or membrane is vibrated,
and regions of maximum and minimum displacement are made visible in a
thin coating of particles, paste or liquid. Different patterns emerge in the excitatory medium depending on the geometry of the plate and the driving frequency.
(Clip 3) Dr. Lara Boyd is the Canada
Research Chair in Neurobiology of Motor Learning, a Michael Smith Foundation
for Health Career Investigator, a Peter Wall Scholar, and an Associate
Professor in the Department of Physical Therapy, at the University of British
Columbia. She is a Neuroscientist and
Physical Therapist.
Dr. Boyd directs the Brain Behaviour Lab at the University
of British Columbia, which performs research designed to advance theoretical
conceptualizations of how brain
function relates to behaviour during learning. She is an expert in neuroimaging
and neurophysiology, and uses a variety of cutting edge technology in her
research.
(Clip 4) Sir Kenneth Robinson, PhD, is a British author,
speaker and international advisor on education in the arts to
government, non-profits, education and arts bodies. He was Director of
the Arts in Schools Project (1985–89) and Professor of Arts Education at
the University of Warwick (1989–2001), and is now Professor Emeritus at the same institution. In 2003 he was knighted for services to art.Originally from a working class Liverpool family, Robinson now lives in Los Angeles with his wife and children.
[...we must] transform our perception of the universe
(Dr Stephen Hawking, 1942-2018)
Whatever he meant with this sentence, uttered, once more, as he was publicly announcing the opening of the London 2012 Paralympic Games, it is fairly clear that with a world in its current state...we most definitely could do with a transformation of our perceptions.
Stephen Hawking suffered in many ways throughout his life, but the motor neurone disease he experienced since age 21 was not high on this list. He repeatedly stated that he was happier towards the end of his life than he had ever been, including the time previous to the onset of his medical condition.
A complicated man, who most probably suffered mild -and not-so-mild- abuse at the hands of his nurse and second wife, Stephen Hawking had one most striking message, as an atheist physicist: we must transform our perception of the universe.
...The famous showbiz sentence "perception is all when it comes to launching films" could be compressed into "perception is all when it comes to the arts", and even further into, simply, "perception is all" without much of an ontological problem taking place. We all obviously perceive -and privately interpret- the world as information.
in-form-ation /in-formation / ...pattern-like
We (aim to) perceive -make sense out of- form. ...Some classic philosophers have gone further and simply put it that "we are pure perception".
'A Brief History Of Time', by Hawking, did, amongst other things, place this 'perception' concept within a scientific context.
Stephen Hawking's last words from his final speech were "my motto is: there are no boundaries"
...And one can almost believe these very words, however challenging, when you look at one of Dr Hawking's last public contributions, below.
The man must have had a phenomenal sense of humour, to have agreed to appear on such narrative. I still remember the shock / laughter I personally experienced once the video picked up its pace, and it became clear just how much of an accomplice Dr Hawking must have been to the whole plot, throughout its ideation. ...Humour without boundaries.
(By the way, no animals were hurt during the making of the video above, as can be seen here)
This MojoTv compilation of Dr Hawking's cameos in pop culture is an evident sign of a genius sense of humour:
Below -not for the first time on this blog- Hawking opens the London 2012 paralympics by way of spoken prelude to Orbital's "Where is it going?", choosing to stay onstage throughout the execution of Orbital's uptempo, electronic-dance-music anthem, medley-ed with Ian Dury's british classic 'Spasticus Autisticus'... just for good measure.
The complexity of Hawking's personal story is best shown on the biographical movie 'The Theory Of Everything' (2014), a much applauded effort by the British Film Industry (BFI) which follows him throughout his Cambridge University years, his lovelife, and his scientific endeavours.
Hawking had a rare early-onset slow-progressing form of motor neurone disease (also known as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis "ALS" or Lou Gehrig's disease) that gradually paralysed him over the decades. Even after the loss of his speech, he was still able to communicate through a speech-generating device, initially through use of a hand-held switch, and eventually by using a single cheek muscle. He died on 14 March 2018 at the age of 76.
...So people such as Jordan Peterson -from this blog´s last entry- believe that one per cent of the population (human or animal) will inevitably control eighty per cent of the resources within any given situation - be it money, power, opportunities, or simply resources per se.
This is, in his view, the ratio and dynamic which will be generated within any societal structure, and it cannot be helped - nor can any specific structure of societal organisation be blamed for this ´natural tendency´.
One word: evolution. If evolution is, at all, the great driving force we have been told about, then it must account for the changes we thrive towards, changes which are observable and whithout which, in fact, 21st century society cannot be understood.
It´s interesting how nature and ´natural tendencies´ are brought into the discussion of society´s organisational patterns, while the evolutionary aspects of our human predicament and condition are ignored: for starters, humans only became so while evolving out of a previously monkey-primate status.
When the modern car was invented by Henry Ford, wealthy industrialists sentenced: "It will never catch on! horses can run on either uneven ground or tarmac, and horses do not require those ´roads´ which cars do!"
...Right?
Take the recent phenomena that is texting, for instance. It has been around for the last 17 years - as experts arbitrarily count from the year 2000 onwards, when researching the texting phenomena. Texting has greatly affected our view of language, communication, the frequency of this very communication, the quantity of things that we now more or less collectively consider worthy of sharing, etc etc etc.
Professor David Crystal, a life-long linguist, honorary linguistics lecturer at two prominent british universities and patron of the International Teachers Association of English as a Foreign Language, has this to say on the matter of texting and the evolution of the English language:
Professor David Crystal during his BBC "It´s Only A Theory" appearance.
It´s Only A Theory is a primetime BBC program where experts are given the opportunity to defend "a theory of theirs" within their field of expertise, which they may not have a chance to delve into, during their regular professional lives. Professor Crystal argued the validity of "texting language", and its evolutionary significance.
The current narrative which underpins occidental society argues that tough characters thrive, "everything has been invented", and that human evolution finished with the acquisition of a thumb.
This is not the case.
Evolution is an ongoing process, by its very definition.
We may not personally like the direction in which a society may be going, or the fact that it is at all in motion - just as we may not personally be able to appreciate this planet´s perpetual and orbital motion. It would, however, appear that neither of these two are about to be stopped due to personal discomforts and dislikes.
Why? Quite simply, "...because you can´t hold the tide with a broom".
"We´re all just looking out for something real" ...Ryan Gosling´s police boss tells him, during a private chat, in Denis Villeneuve´s Blade Runner 2049.
...Well, forget science fiction.
Our current world is striving to identify the'real'out of the immigration phenomena, cultural meltdown and dissolution, the proliferation of new, uncontrolled emergence of technologies, the loss of ´traditional values´, cultural amalgamation, ecological fragility, ideological pendulums... However much all of these things may really be currently happening, we seem to be on the lookout for something real which may suit our idea of the real.
Apparently, convenience defines our concept of the authentic, to a much greater degree than we had realised.
...Not a very authentic attitude, in and of itself.
...We seem to be currently enduring a kind of evolution - which some of us seem to be resisting with all of their might.
We can stay monkeys, stuck on meaningless traditions, whilst human rights are swept away, or we can better ourselves, improving what we deem worth shedding, observing, analyzing, feeling just what it is that makes us feel good, and what it is that we could do without... Because, indeed, plenty of the evolutionary aspects of existence are epigenetic, beyond the biochemical diktats of our genes and/or past-acquired behaviours.
On another episode of BBC´s It´s Only A Theory, ex-BBC programme coordinator and internet entrepreneur Andrew Keen tries to argue that social media is harming "proper and adequate audio-visual media" narratives - as he deems teenage (in any case, amateur) provided youtube content to be of a lesser quality than approved, traditional, filtered, supervised, edited, censored, audiovisual "entertainment".
See below.
...And how about this verbal jewel of a reply to Mr Keen´s argument, above, concluding the programme, from american panelist, comedian and social commentator Reginald D. Hunter (thumbnailed above), on "traditional media", economics, and old models of social cohesion, as the very conclusion to this blog entry - which you can see here, at 27 mins, 07 seconds. Hats off to you, Reginald.
David Crystal, OBE, FBA, FLSW, FCIL (born 6 July 1941) is a British linguist, academic and author. Crystal studied English at University College London between 1959 and 1962, and was a researcher under Randolph Quirk between 1962 and 1963, working on the Survey of English Usage. Since then he has lectured at Bangor University and the University of Reading and is an honorary professor of linguistics at Bangor.Retired from full-time academia, he works as a writer, editor and
consultant, and contributes to television and radio broadcasts. His
association with the BBC ranges from, formerly, a BBC Radio 4 series on language issues to, more recently, podcasts on the BBC World Service website for people learning English. Crystal was awarded the OBE in 1995 and became a Fellow of the British Academy in 2000. He is also a Founding Fellow of the Learned Society of Wales and is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Linguists. His many academic interests include English language learning and teaching, clinical linguistics, forensic linguistics, language death, "ludic linguistics" (Crystal's neologism for the study of language play), style, English genre, Shakespeare, indexing, and lexicography. He is the Patron of the International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language (IATEFL, honorary vice-president of the Society for Editors and Proofreaders (SfEP), and Patron of the UK National Literacy Association. He is a consultant for Babel - The Language Magazine, for which he has also written articles. Reginald Darnell Hunter (born 26 March 1969) is an American stand-up comedian based in the United Kingdom. Having initially travelled to the UK at the age of 27 as a theatre student training at the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art, Hunter became a comedian after performing his first comedy set as a dare. Realizing that he enjoyed performing comedy, and that it might be remunerative, Hunter turned his attention from acting to stand-up. Hunter was nominated for the Perrier Award in the 2002, 2003 and 2004 Edinburgh Festivals. He won the Writers' Guild Award for Comedy in 2006 for his show Pride & Prejudice... & Niggas It's Only a Theory is a British television panel game show, first aired on BBC Four in 2009. It was conceived by and starred Andy Hamilton and featured Reginald D. Hunter as a regular panelist. Announced by the BBC in April 2009, the eight episode series was produced by Hat Trick Productions. The panelists discuss theories "about life, the universe and
everything" submitted by professionals and experts. The panel debates
each theory and decides whether it is worth keeping. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)
is a British public service broadcaster. Its headquarters are at
Broadcasting House in Westminster, London and it is the world's oldest
national broadcasting organisation and the largest broadcaster in the
world by number of employees.
