Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Cultural commentary’ Category

You know a metaphor to be a word picture, that is, words that bring to mind certain scenes or ideas. I was looking for a word whose definition is a picture that suggests words. Perhaps some of you wizened wordsmiths could help me out here and come up with the word. Unless and until that happens, I’m going to attempt to coin my second(1) word. Pictometaphor(2,3)- a picture or other visible art meant to suggest words. Now, you know we see these all of the time, but I don’t know if anyone has given it a name. And we say a picture is worth a thousand words, to which I say, of course, pictometaphor.

So, I want to try out my new word on you. I am making wedding rehearsal dinner decorations (That was a mouthful.). I am not really creative in this realm, so that the contrivance of my wife and I is a modified copy of things we liked online. It is in some respects simpler, and by me making it, much cheaper. But all that is not the point here, and I can’t give away too much before the dinner, so the pictures are limited. My point is for you to look at the following picture and write down pairs (in this case) of words that immediately come to mind. To see the quality of my pictometaphor, please don’t look at my answers until you have written down several pairs. It is totally fair and desirable to consider that this pictometaphor is in the context of an upcoming wedding. It needs context.

20190805_134150

Before I give my answers, let me further comment on the quality of a pictometaphor. The picture, sewn cloth (in this case), statue, etc, should universally suggest the same words to all people. This might be too much to expect given different cultures, so perhaps, it should at least be universal within a given culture. Or perhaps it becomes a code word (code picture?), a sort of jargon joke for the initiated.

When I look at the picture above in the context of marriage, I immediately think male/female, strength/beauty, utility/luxury, mundane/special (plano/fancy?), daily/special event. How do your pairs fare? Do they align with mine, mean the same thing with different words, contradict at points? Share by commenting.

Now, I like extended metaphors, as long as they don’t verge on the ridiculous. So I have added some possible additional accoutrements to the decoration. (This is somewhat tongue in cheek, and my wife said that was not happening when I suggested it.) Make your list of pairs again and let me know how you did.

20190805_134235

The selection of additional items colors(4) the connotations of the pictometaphor. Because I have selected two items that involve work or chores, the suggestion is not work versus play, but what kind of work. Probably for many of us, they suggest traditional gender roles. I am not going to apologize for that. I have hung up many clothes, particularly as a child, and my wife has helped me by hauling lumber and bags of concrete, but there are differences in our roles as male and female, and those have quite naturally and thankfully expressed themselves in our culture in nurturing and supporting ways. Much that is wrong with our society at present revolves around the abandonment of God ordained, given, and declared gender roles within the family, church, and society. Therefore, the first pair that came to my mind when seeing the nails and clothes pins was male/female. Also, I think home/job.

I could have directed the pictometaphor in a completely different direction by some simple change like replacing either the clothes pins or the nails with a few Lego bricks or a small doll. Then I would be driving the picture toward work/play, responsibility/privilege, chore/leisure, or even childhood/maturity depending on the exact toy I select.

I hope that you have enjoyed reading my comments and selecting your word pairs for the pictometaphor. The connotations of the pictometaphor need not be pairs, but the ideas must be ones that are widely understood. That is where culture and history and language come in. Language and art are at least partially an archive for culture and history. We should not revel in language and art changing so fast, because that blurs and eradicates much that can be learned and shared between generations. For instance, Western Culture has a rich language and art based on a biblical understanding. Many pieces of literature and art can not be understood in isolation from an understanding of the Bible. Of course, some want to rush the change, obliterate the references and understanding for the Bible given by language and art, and wholeheartedly reinterpret both, but that is a pictometaphor for another day.

1- The first word I tried to coin is “momentaneously”- circa 1995- used in response to impatient inquiry to mean you are high on my priority list and I will get to you with all speed as circumstances allow. Used in a sentence: “I will answer you momentaneously, but you are interrupting Jane at the moment.” For evidence of my coinage I site numerous classrooms full of students. Please spread the word since this may be my best possibility at fame. And, oh, by the way, don’t take me too seriously.

2- I considered iconometaphor, photometaphor, or imagometaphor, but each of these suggest connotations not in line with my definition, so I settled on pictometaphor.

3- “Hey, George.” What, Frank?” “How about photaphor or imaphor (or imagaphor) or iconaphor.” “Oh, Frank, that last one sounds good, but do you think people will understand what it means?” “George, the sound of a word can help the availability of its meaning, but ultimately, there is nothing like a clear and consistently used definition. ‘Is’ means ‘is’ even if some people say it ‘ain’t’.”

4- I am also partial to puns.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Early this summer I had a student ask me a question by e-mail: “Do you think it is truly possible for someone to find the correct answer to the Drake Equation? If so, how would they prove it?”

After some research I gave the following reply:

“”The equation was written in 1961 by Frank Drake, not for purposes of quantifying the number of civilizations, but as a way to stimulate scientific dialogue…”(1) Therefore, the terms in the equation are considerations of what would have to be known in order to quantify (that is, count) civilizations. It is a thought experiment, and since we cannot go to many of those places (or probably any of them) because the distance is too great for even several lifetimes of travel [“Hey, grandkids, the goal of this mission when we started out 60 years ago was for you to visit two planets around the third star from our home star, Sun, to see if there is anybody living there. We’ll be there 40 years or so after your grandchildren are born.”], the whole scheme is pure speculation. In fact, I would go a step further and say that it is not even useful speculation.

So, to answer your question, no, it can neither be solved nor checked (proven). Based on my belief in the God of the Bible, I believe that it is not even a useful thought experiment. The Scripture says,”in as much as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.” (Hebrews 9:27-28) Since “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” (Romans 3:23), and since “Christ…offered once [died]”, then if any civilizations did exist, they would be without hope because God has not redeemed any of them. Instead, I think that it means they do not exist. And because of the distance we cannot know if they exist. The whole thought experiment becomes fruitless, a deceptive worldview way of avoiding the real truth about how [we got here and how] we “die once” and need that salvation.

A better thought experiment would be to explain how the rocks and ice we see confirm what God said about a worldwide flood in Genesis 6-9. Check out the “Lost Squadron” that landed on Greenland(2). Ask yourself some questions. 1) How deep were the “Lost Squadron” airplanes under the ice? 2) How long did it take for the ice to accumulate? 3) In how long of a time could the whole ice sheet have accumulated at that rate? 4) Has the rate of accumulation always been the same? 5) Is there any evidence for the rate of accumulation changing? 6) Comparing these estimates to the “declared age” of ice cores in Greenland, is there a problem with the present explanation of how the ice sheet got there?”

I think you will realize that the standard explanation for what the layers in the ice sheets means is flawed. Therefore, distractors are thrown up to keep us from seeing the logical fallacies of the ill-conceived conclusions masquerading as a scientific theory. There are many worthy thought experiments to be done. Einstein was particularly good at those, but much of today’s theoretical science is lacking in a creativity that adheres to truth as its basis, instead heralding false agendas and distracting from useful science. Let us be done with having any part of that.

1- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation

2- https://creation.com/the-lost-squadron

Read Full Post »

Time to graduate some students. It is a time for smiles and celebration and happy tears. The education we give our young is too focussed on knowledge and understanding devoid of moral evaluation, too lacking in wisdom for living and discernment for awareness of various dangers. I hope that I may be a mentor in thoughtful and careful living.

Knowledge leads to understanding
This path will serve you very well
To your mind and heart rewarding
In interactions it will tell

Acquire wisdom in your youth
Always prudent to do what’s right
Acting kindly along with truth
With wisdom overcoming might

Many deceived by false knowledge
Seek that you may discernment find
That at home or work or college
By truth delivered, sharp of mind

Read Full Post »

I have two compulsory periods each year when I must sit still for hours at a time, and a third one was added this year. It is a good time to organize thoughts. Even so, I am surprised at the amount of poetry I have produced in the last year. Though I have not actually counted, there may be more poetry entries than others.

I love to say how God should be glorified in each facet of life and thought. He is a kind and worthy Master. Any value I have comes from Him.

This latest attempt at communicating His worth in poetry was prompted by posters and decorations that are meant to pump people up. Why isn’t it working? Why is depression and suicide at its highest? Here is my take on the subject:

Over fragranced
Over stuffed
Brightly colored
Greatly fluffed

Thus promoted
Self-esteem
So developed
A mere meme

Accomplishment
That is real
Encouragement
The real deal

Truest value
Comes from God
Another view
Fake and odd

In God’s image
We were made
So His brightness
On parade

In the garden
Sin did mar
Need of pardon
Left a scar

Jesus overcame
Sin and death
He took our shame
Gave us breath

These two reasons
Give us hope
Bright new seasons
Help us cope

You have value
Purpose, too
Eternal view
To pursue

Jesus is our
Fragrance sweet
Strength in each hour
Makes complete

Sweetest flowers
Come from this
Shout from towers
Eternal bliss

Brightest colors
Truly blest
End of horrors
Ever rest

Read Full Post »

While sitting quietly the other day, I noticed once again a print of an ink stippling on my wall. It was given to me by the artist, Paul S., over 35 years ago. I offer my students the opportunity to interpret its meaning each semester. They have little context for understanding what the picture could mean. As you read the poem by which I tried to interpret it, consider three details: when it was drawn, over 40 years ago; the fact that the wind up key was not in the original drawing (added to soften the message); the driver is a self-portrait of the artist:

Business on parade
Corporate charade
Self-importance stance
Condescending glance

All dressed to impress
Picture of success
Lean and hungry look
Sales castling rook

Off to war we go
Corporate G.I. Joe
Competition war
Watch our profits soar

Take seriously
Capitalist free
Make a better place
Of our world and race

Bosses all are we
We work for a fee
All cogs in the wheel
We stagger and reel

Get on the bus
That’s left even us
Once to camp and play
Now late at work stay

Thus we bid adieu
Commitments renew
Now hard on the track
Taking business flak

business on parade crop

Read Full Post »

It shall not grow if the soil is not prepared. It shall not be caught if there is no net in the air. No reason, no logic based in truth will occur without the moral component.

What is not caught is not taught
So they say
Lead them to water add salt
Make it play

But how do you break the hard pan
Unfriable soil
Minds for which learning is ban
Refuse slightest toil

Closed to logic and reason
Parroting thought
Flocks of birds out of season
Nothing new sought

Where are those seeking learning
Knowledge sponge
Understanding discerning
For truth lunge

True wisdom comes from above
Two-sided gift
Truth one side, the flip side love
Between no rift

Read Full Post »

My son and I had a conversation nearly 2 months ago now about the most influential people in the world. I do not remember what precipitated the discussion, but it was not in a vacuum. When he was young our family had watched an A&E program named “The 100 Most Influential People of the Millennium”. It began with #100 and built up as they approached their #1 pick for the years 1000 to 2000 A.D. (If you want to see the list, click here. And if you are not really interested in my commentary but want to look at my list, scroll to the bottom.) After much discussion, my son suggested that we challenge the extended family, with whom we would be gathering in a little over a month for Thanksgiving, to make their own lists so we could discuss it after dinner. The A&E list is ranked and we said that each person could decide if they wanted to do that. Additionally, we purposely stated that each person should interpret what kind of influence, who was influenced, and when they were influenced, in making his/her list. I wrote these things in an e-mail to the family e-mail group, not mentioning the A&E list but admonishing participants to not confer with others so that the lists would be more varied and produce more discussion. When I saw the good-hearted discussion on the e-mail replies, I took the additional step of asking two colleagues at my work, who I knew to have different worldviews than my family, to make their lists for the purpose of contrast.

I am happy to say that the whole scheme brought about significant discussion. It was interesting to watch the phases of interaction. After a brief explanation on my part as to how the challenge had occurred, with inclusion of the A&E list, family members began comparing who was on most lists. Next there was a discussion of the rationale behind various member’s lists (more about that in a moment). Then we progressed into names we supposed to be possibly unique to our own lists, asking others if they included them, and if not, why not. It occurred to me that in order to make a really good list you would need a plethora of perspectives. I made the mistake of mentioning that this procedure would work best in a committee. There were some of the strongest opinions about the pitfalls of committees, like slow and argumentative, but they also have the advantage of collaboration and consensus. Since the whole of this blog entry is commentary, I would also add that collaboration is an overused buzz-word and politically correct requirement of public interaction these days. Frequently, isolated, deep contemplation, followed by sharing is more efficient and brings better results, but woe be unto the educational ‘facilitator’ who broaches that perspective.

The rationales for selecting candidates for the 100 lists varied with as many people as participated. My oldest son, who completed his list mostly in his head while working, stated that he did not know enough about the East and confined his list to people who influenced Western Culture. He also said that most lists would not sufficiently include the influence of Christians for now and eternity, so his list is heavy (not meant to imply too heavy necessarily) on Christians. He also said that he had trouble limiting his list to 100 people so his first list had 211. Actually it had more than that because in certain listings he put multiple names, for example the founding fathers of the U.S. His brother added accomplishments onto his list, persuaded him to reduce his list to 200, but then added 25 he thought his brother had left out. It was a collaboration within the individual lists.

I also found mulitple listing unavoidable on some subjects so that I have Watson and Crick for DNA, and Wilbur and Orville for the airplane. But I opted to try to find one revolutionary idea or execution of an idea as representative of a thought or influence, for example, Philo Farnsworth invented the scanning television. His was not the very first or the exact one that number in the millions by the time I was a child, but he broke ground toward a practical, modern TV. I also tried to include significant people from the East. I too am largely ignorant of the East, but I think that it helps tremendously that we were limited to 1000 to 2000 A.D., because many of the formative, significant names in the East are more ancient. For all of this, it is curious that we chose to emphasize what affected our culture, our time, and ourselves the most. Compared to the A&E list, I think we were more far-reaching and inclusive than they were. Some of their picks were simply politically correct, narrowly influencing idealogues and icons of cultural fad. It is good to realize that you are being narrowly focussed on what surrounds you, but be more inclusive tends to adding people that were not really influential, just an influence on some small group you don’t want to leave out.

The chore of ranking these people was the hardest part, and I gave up after #31, because it began to seem ridiculous to me. The whole exercise of ranking may be equally so. I did find it much easier to rank within groupings of types of influencers, for example, spiritual, inventors, scientists, leaders and politicians, literature and the arts, and philosophers. And this is the list I have included below.

I found the whole process stretching, challenging, and enjoyable, with the discussion with family particularly so. If you have a few minutes, peruse my list and give some feedback on why you think certain people should or should not be on my list. Happy listing.

Leon’s Most Influential People of the 1000-2000 AD  (ranked within Groupings)

Spiritual Leaders

  1. Martin Luther (started the Reformation)
  2. John Calvin (Reformer and Theologian)
  3. William Tyndale (English Bible)
  4. Hudson Taylor (Missionary to China)
  5. Billy Graham (Worldwide Evangelist)
  6. George Whitfield (Early American Evangelist)
  7. Charles Spurgeon (Prince of Preachers)
  8. Luis Palau (Latin American Evangelist)
  9. John Wyclif (English Reformer)
  10. Mahatma Gandhi (Indian Holy Man)
  11. Ignatius Loyola (Jesuit founder)
  12. Mother Teresa (Nun to poor of India)

Inventors

  1. Johannes Gutenberg (Moveable Type Printing Press)
  2. James Watt (Inventor of the Steam Engine)
  3. Thomas Edison (Inventor)
  4. Guglielmo Marconi (Wireless)
  5. Jean Joseph Etienne Lenoir (Internal Combustion Engine)
  6. Orville and Wilbur Wright (Airplane)
  7. Henry Ford (Assembly Line, affordable car)
  8. Werner von Braun (modern rockets)
  9. Henry Bessemer (economical steel process)
  10. Charles Goodyear (Vulcanized Rubber)
  11. Alfred Nobel (High Explosives; Nobel Prize)
  12. G. LeTourneau (Earth Moving Equipment)
  13. Christiaan Huygens (Pendulum Clock)
  14. Bartolomeo Cristofori (Piano)
  15. Jacques Cousteau (Aqualung, ocean preservation)
  16. John Bardeen, Walter Brattain, and William Shockley (Transistor)
  17. Alexander Graham Bell (Telephone)
  18. William Cullen (Refrigeration)
  19. Theodore H. Maiman (LASER)
  20. Philo Farnsworth (Scanning TV)
  21. Bill Gates (Software Developer)
  22. Alexander Parkes (Thermoset Plastic)
  23. Daguerre (Photography)
  24. George Washington Carver (Agriculture)

Scientists

  1. Isaac Newton (Laws of Motion and Gravity)
  2. Michael Faraday (Electromagnetism: motor)
  3. Albert Einstein (Relativity)
  4. Charles Darwin (Evolution)
  5. Louis Pasteur (Germ Theory and Vaccination)
  6. Gregor Mendel (Genetics)
  7. James Watson/Francis Crick (DNA)
  8. James Clerk Maxwell (Electromagnetic Equations)
  9. Galileo Galilee (Motion and Astronomy)
  10. Johannes Kepler (Elliptical Orbits)
  11. Nicolaus Copernicus (Heliocentric Solar Sys)
  12. Rene Descartes (Philosopher, Mathematician, Scientist)
  13. Roger Bacon (Sci.Method, gunpowder to West)
  14. Dmitri Mendeleev (Periodic Table of Elements)
  15. Niels Bohr (Atomic Model/Quantum Mech)
  16. Edward Jenner (vaccination)
  17. Alexander Fleming (Penicillin)
  18. Pierre and Marie Curie (Radioactivity)
  19. William Harvey (blood circulation)

Government/Political Leaders

  1. William the Conqueror (Conquered Britain)
  2. Mao Zedong (Chinese Communist Revolution)
  3. Suleiman The Magnificent (peak of Ottoman) 
  4. Gustav II Adolf (Supported Protestant States)
  5. George Washington (General/President)
  6. Genghis Khan (Mongol Empire)
  7. Adolf Hitler (Nazi Germany)
  8. Simon Bolivar (Liberator of South America)
  9. Pol Pot (Mass murder in Cambodia)
  10. Queen Elizabeth I (Queen of England)
  11. William Wilberforce (Ended Slavery in Britain)
  12. Napoleon Bonaparte (Defeated Europe)
  13. Vladimir Lenin (Russian Revolution)
  14. Peter the Great (Modernized Russia)
  15. Thomas Jefferson (Declaration of Independence)
  16. Fredrick the Great of Prussia (Peak of Prussia)
  17. Mustafa Ataturk (Liberalization of Turkey)
  18. Abraham Lincoln (Civil War)
  19. Martin Luther King Jr. (Civil Rights Movement)

Explorers

  1. Christopher Columbus (rediscovery of New World)
  2. Marco Polo (European trade with China)
  3. Ferdinand Magellan (Explorer)
  4. Hernan Cortes (Conqueror of Aztec Mexico)
  5. James Cook (Explorer)

Literature, Music and the Arts

  1. William Shakespeare (Playwright, Writer)
  2. John Bunyan (Pilgrim’s Progress)
  3. John Milton (Paradise Lost, Writer)
  4. Johann Sebastian Bach (Baroque Composer)
  5. Dante Alighieri (Divine Comedy)
  6. Leonardo da Vinci (Inventor, Sculptor, Painter)
  7. Charles Dickens (Novelist)
  8. Michelangelo (Painter/Sculptor)
  9. Wolfgang Mozart (Composer)
  10. Ludwig van Beethoven (Composer)
  11. Fyodor Dostoyevsky (Writer)
  12. Leo Tolstoy (Novelist)

Philosophers

  1. Thomas Aquinas (Christianity &Greek thought)
  2. Carl Marx (Marxism)
  3. John Locke (Social Contract)
  4. Sigmund Freud (Psychoanalysis)
  5. William Blackstone (Law)
  6. Immanuel Kant (Transcendentalism)
  7. Soren Kierkegaard (Existentialism)
  8. Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Political)
  9. Friedrich Nietzsche (Nihilism)

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »