The Importance of Euphemisms

Even though language has become an integrated part of our lives, most of us do not pause to consider the importance in which it plays in our perception of the world around us. Language is a product of social norms, tradition, culture, and even history. In fact, many historians have even found evidence of geographical migrations of populations using a method of comparative linguistics, such as comparing Sanskrit to Germanic languages to find that populations have moved from India to Europe in ancient times. It goes without saying that language plays a role in creating and reinforcing social distinctions, if only through our subconscious.

Malcolm Gladwell illustrated the importance of language in the way we subconsciously “think” through a simple experiment. In this experiment, Americans were asked to associate race with characteristics. The first category was “white” and “bad,” the other was “black” and “good.” The Americans were then given words such as “intelligent,” “European,” “amazing,” “uneducated,” and “abysmal,” and told to put them into the correct categories as fast as possible. Many people found that they had a lot of trouble with this because they, through some form of subconscious brain activity, found it much more difficult to associate “black” with “good” and “white” with “bad.” This is not because they truly believed that African Americans were inferior. In fact, Gladwell himself was half “black” as well as an extremely successful writer, but still had the same problem. This is simply because people’s minds are influenced by language, such as newspapers, magazines, and television, through subconscious ways. Even after generations of washing down the derogatory languages used to describe minority races, a form of exclusion still exists. If a child is told that all rats are evil, then he or she will subconsciously categorize rats with evil, and will have a difficult time later in life associating rats with “goodness.”

Of course, in reality, the issue is much more serious than evil rats. In the Rwanda genocide, for example, this form of subconscious brain washing was used by the Tutsis through radio and other forms of propaganda to incite the murder of more than 800,000 Hutus. In Germany, Nazi beliefs of a “supreme race” and the inferiority of the Jewish population led to the Holocaust. Even today, subtle forms of language distinctions still exist. Take a look at the gender issue, for example. While it is perceived as a compliment to be called, “manly” or use phrases like “man it up,” being called “girly” or “a woman” is definitely derogatory. Even though we think that these are simply humorous phrases we use with our friends, it still, on some subconscious level, suggests to us that woman are inferior to men in some way. This extends into real life through the male domination of the work force, politics, and in essence, society. An interviewer may not believe in his or her heart that women are inferior to men, but these subtle associations their minds have with women being inferior to men may pop up and give job applicants a severe disadvantage.

Language is like the building blocks of a civilization. A story in the Bible even told of how God decided to stop the building of a tower by making everyone speak different languages. Without it, an effective and cooperative society simply would not exist. Thus, language is a very power tool. Through subconscious ways, it can create class, gender, and racial distinctions. Perhaps it is not so bad that we have euphemisms for the handicapped, the elderly, and the disadvantaged. This way, in our minds, we automatically associate them with the respect that they deserve.

Russell On Happiness

I really adore the 'Conquest Of Happiness' by Bertrand Russel. From the title itself, it makes me so eager to know more about his definition of happiness. For me, all humans need happiness. Without it, what are we living for? To know more about this book, I've done some research to get to know the content of it. I found it very interesting and so let me pour my happiness about this.
 These are what I found inside The Conquest Of Happiness'.


With the current interest in happiness studies, it is worthwhile taking a look back. Our concern with our own happiness, with how we can get it, how we can keep it, and how we can give it to and take it away from others, is nothing new. For millennia, philosophers have thought and argued about the nature of happiness. Research psychologists have only recently begun to address this topic, in part, in an attempt to make the discipline overall more “positive.” 


A couple of years ago, I stumbled on Bertrand Russell’s “The conquest of happiness,” published in 1930. Being a Russell fan, I looked forward to reading it, hoping that the old Brit had anticipated some of the things that make the science digest these days. 


I was not disappointed. I now offer a brief summary of Russell’s ideas relying mainly on quotes from his book (page numbers are in parentheses). See for yourself how you respond to his ideas. I hope you will find them inspiring, but perhaps you will find them trite, reactionary (e.g., note the gendered language of the day), or undone by modern empirical research. 


Russell’s key concept is zest. Zest is an “appetite for possible things, upon which all happiness, whether of men or animals, ultimately depends.” (5) “What hunger is in relation to food, zest is in relation to life.” (111) As hunger does not automatically lead to satiation, zest does not automatically lead to happiness. Nor can happiness come from gratification obtained without effort. “Happiness is not, except in very rare cases, something that drops into the mouth, like a ripe fruit, by the mere operation of fortunate circumstances. That is why I have called this book The conquest of happiness.” (162-163) “The human animal, like others, is adapted to a certain amount of struggle for life [and] the mere absence of effort from his life removes an essential ingredient of happiness. [. . .] He forgets that to be without some of the things you want is an indispensable part of happiness.” (15) The things we want need to be difficult, but not too difficult, to obtain. “Pleasures of achievement demand difficulties such that beforehand success seems doubtful although in the end it is usually achieved.” (101)


Having zest is the natural human condition. It is destroyed by “mistaken views of the world, mistaken ethics, mistaken habits of life.” (5) One enemy of zest is boredom. The desire for excitement runs deep, says Russell, and it should be honored. In ancestral society, men (and perhaps women), found excitement in hunting and courtship. Agriculture changed that. Farming is boring. Sitting in an office is boring. Living in the suburbs is boring. During “happy family time [. . .] paterfamilias went to sleep, his wife knitted, and the daughters wished they were dead or in Timbuktu.” (36) 


Anxiety—Russell calls it “fatigue”—is a kind of excitement that is incompatible with zest. Contemporary humans often feel overwhelmed and overworried. To stop worrying and start living, Russell advises that “when you have looked for some time steadily at the worst possibility and have said to yourself with real conviction, ‘Well, after all, that would not matter so very much’, you will find that your worry diminishes to a quite extraordinary extent.” (50)


For those who find that even “the exercise of choice is in itself tiresome,” (147) Russell has a remedy that anticipates the smart unconscious. “I have found, for example, that if I have to write upon some rather difficult topic the best plan is to think about it with very great intensity—the greatest intensity of which I am capable—for a few hours or days, and at the end of that time to give orders, so to speak, that the work is to proceed underground. After some months I return consciously to the topic and find that the work has been done.” (49-50)


Perhaps the greatest obstacle to happiness is “the disease of self-absorption.” (173) 
Russell offers that his own conquest of happiness was due “very largely [. . . ] to a diminishing preoccupation with myself.” (6) A happy person knows that “one’s ego is no very large part of the world.” (48) “One of the great drawbacks to self-centered passions is that they afford so little variety in life. The man who loves only himself cannot, it is true, be accused of promiscuity in his affections, but he is bound in the end to suffer intolerable boredom from the invariable sameness of the object of his devotion.” (172) 


To the self-absorbed person, other people primarily serve as objects of comparison. “What people fear [. . .] is not that they will fail to get their breakfast next morning, but that they will fail to outshine their neighbors.” (27) Russell warns that “the habit of thinking in terms of comparisons is a fatal one.” (57) To overcome it, “teach yourself that life would still be worth living even if you were not, as of course you are, immeasurably superior to all your friends in virtue and intelligence.” (173) “You can get away from envy by enjoying the pleasures that come your way, by doing the work that you have to do, and by avoiding comparisons with those whom you imagine, perhaps quite falsely, to be more fortunate than yourself.” (58-59)


Likewise, Russell advises not to worry too much about what others think of you. On the one hand, he suspects that “if we were all given by magic the power to read each other’s thoughts, I suppose the first effect would be that almost all friendships would be dissolved.” (76) On the other hand, he doubts that “most people give enough thought to you to have any special desire to persecute you.” (79) This is a nice example of regression to the mean: Chances are you overestimate the love of your friends and the disdain of your foes. 


Once you start retreating from self-absorption, you need not entirely ignore what others think. “One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison, but anything that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary tyranny, and is likely to interfere with happiness in all kinds of ways.” (92) Here Russell anticipates an underappreciated danger of conformity. A conformist society is not necessarily evil (though it may be vulnerable to evil influence), but it is certainly boring. “A society composed of men and women who do not bow too much to the conventions is a far more interesting society than one in which all behave alike.” (93) 


Russell knows that “a civilized society is impossible without a very considerable restraint upon spontaneous impulse.” (120) Yet, societies that extract conformity by instilling a sense of sin create unhappiness on a large scale. “There is in the sense of sin something abject, something lacking in self-respect.” (70) The emotion underlying the sense of sin is guilt, which, in turn, is driven by fear. “The man who entirely accepts the morality of the herd while acting against it suffers great unhappiness when losing caste.” (64) In contrast, “the ideally virtuous man [. . .] permits the enjoyment of all good things whenever there is no evil consequence to outweigh the enjoyment.” (66) Russell rejects categorical morality as “sickly nonsense” (70) because it entails the idea of sin. A rational person weighs the pros and cons of each decision. Unlike Moses and Kant, who proscribedlying categorically, Russell chooses to lie when it leads to more good than evil. He tells how he encountered a wounded fox and later lied to the hunters to save the animal. Once a rational choice is made, it is absurd to feel remorse. 


Russell is a hedonist. To him, a theory of happiness that is mute on love and sex is unthinkable. “To be unable to inspire sex love is a grave misfortune to any man or woman, since it deprives him or her of the greatest joys that life has to offer.” (126) If you love, love with abandon, for “of all forms of caution, caution in love is perhaps the most fatal to true happiness.” (129) How do you find love? On this question, Russell wisely counsels to take the indirect approach. “Human nature is so constructed that it gives affection most readily to those who seem least to demand it.” (122) And, “the man who receives affection is, broadly speaking, the man who gives it.” (172) 

p/s: Bertrand Russell's theory of happiness is quite modern, no?

Art + Instinctive Happiness + Love

I found his quote very interesting and I adore the way he thinks about life, human and happiness in the 'Conquest of Happiness' by Bertrand Russel.

• Men who are unhappy, like men who sleep badly, are always proud of the fact.

• One of the symptoms of an approaching nervous breakdown is the
belief that one’s work is terribly important.

• Of all forms of caution, caution in love is perhaps the most fatal
to true happiness.

• A sense of duty is useful in work, but offensive in personal
relations. People wish to be liked, not be endured with patient
resignation.

• To be able to fill leisure intelligently is the last product of
civilization, and at present very few people have reached this level.

• The main things which seem to me important on their own account, and
not merely as means to other things, are knowledge, art, instinctive
happiness, and relations of friendship or affection.

• Not to be absolutely certain is, I think, one of the essential
things in rationality.

• To be without some of the things you want is an indispensable part
of happiness.

• To fear love is to fear life, and those who fear life are already
three parts dead. (Bertrand Russell, Marriage and Morals (1929)

• Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men; although
he was twice married, it never occurred to him to verify this
statement by examining his wives’ mouths. (Bertrand Russell, Impact of
Science on Society (1952)

• The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego
ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering
with the pleasures of others.

• The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence
whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the
silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more
likely to be foolish than sensible.

• The place of the father in the modern suburban family is a very
small one, particularly if he plays golf.

• The time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time.

• The true spirit of delight, the exaltation, the sense of being more
than Man, which is the touchstone of the highest excellence, is to be
found in mathematics as surely as in poetry.

• The universe may have a purpose, but nothing we know suggests that,
if so, this purpose has any similarity to ours.

• The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are
always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.

• There are two motives for reading a book: one, that you enjoy it;
the other, that you can boast about it.

• This is one of those views which are so absolutely absurd that only
very learned men could possibly adopt them.

• This is patently absurd; but whoever wishes to become a philosopher
must learn not to be frightened by absurdities.

• War does not determine who is right – only who is left.

• What the world needs is not dogma but an attitude of scientific
inquiry combined with a belief that the torture of millions is not
desirable, whether inflicted by Stalin or by a Deity imagined in the
likeness of the believer.

• When one admits that nothing is certain one must, I think, also
admit that some things are much more nearly certain than others.

• Every man, wherever he goes, is encompassed by a cloud of comforting
convictions, which move with him like flies on a summer day.

• Mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know
what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true.

• When one admits that nothing is certain one must, I think, also
admit that some things are much more nearly certain than others.
Certainly there are degrees of certainty, and one should be very
careful to emphasize that fact, because otherwise one is landed in an
utter skepticism, and complete skepticism would, of course, be totally
barren and completely useless.

• One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is
necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison, but anything
that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary
tyranny, and is likely to interfere with happiness in all kinds of
ways.

• We have, in fact, two kinds of morality side by side: one which we
preach but do not practice, and another which we practice but seldom
preach. (Bertrand Russell, Sceptical Essays (1928)

• It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground
whatsoever for supposing it is true. (BR “On the Value of Scepticism”)

• It is obvious that ‘obscenity’ is not a term capable of exact legal
definition; in the practice of the Courts, it means ‘anything that
shocks the magistrate.’

• The point of philosophy is to start with something so simple as not
to seem worth stating, and to end with something so paradoxical that
no one will believe it.
(Bertrand Russell, The Philosophy of Logical Atomism)

• Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the
absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad
ones. Fear is the main source of superstition, and one of the main
sources of cruelty. To conquer fear is the beginning of wisdom.
(Bertrand Russell, Unpopular Essays (1950), “Outline of Intellectual
Rubbish”)

• It is a waste of energy to be angry with a man who behaves badly,
just as it is to be angry with a car that won’t go.

• Life is nothing but a competition to be the criminal rather than the victim.

• Many people would sooner die than think; In fact, they do so.

• Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth — more than
ruin — more even than death…. Thought is subversive and
revolutionary, destructive and terrible, thought is merciless to
privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habit. Thought
looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid. Thought is great and
swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man.

• No one gossips about other people’s secret virtues.

• Patriotism is the willingness to kill and be killed for trivial reasons.

• Patriots always talk of dying for their country but never of killing
for their country.

• Science may set limits to knowledge, but should not set limits to imagination.

• So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in
praise of intelligence.

• The good life, as I conceive it, is a happy life. I do not mean that
if you are good you will be happy – I mean that if you are happy you
will be good.

The Stairway To Critical Thinking

"The more one listens to ordinary conversations, the more apparent it becomes that the reasoning faculties of the brain take little part in the direction of the vocal organs." -Edgar Rice Burroughs

Critical thinking is the process of applying reasoned and disciplined thinking to a subject. To do well in your studies you need to think 'critically' about the things you have read, seen or heard. Acquiring critical thinking skills helps you to develop more reasoned arguments and draw out the inferences that you need to use in your assignments, projects and examination questions.

These skills are essential if you want to obtain high grades in your university study and, like other skills, they improve with practice.

                                                               

The stages and skills involved in critical thinking can be seen as an eight-step stairway to high grades. As your thinking skills develop in depth and complexity, your other study skills will also improve.

1. Process - Take in the information (i.e. in what you have read, heard, seen or done).
2. Understand - Comprehend the key points, assumptions, arguments and evidence presented.
3. Analyse - Examine how these key components fit together and relate to each other.
4. Compare - Explore the similarities, differences between the ideas you are reading about.
5. Synthesise - Bring together different sources of information to serve an argument or idea you are constructing. Make logical connections between the different sources that help you shape and support your ideas.
6. Evaluate - Assess the worth of an idea in terms of its relevance to your needs, the evidence on which it is based and how it relates to other pertinent ideas.
7. Apply - Transfer the understanding you have gained from your critical evaluation and use in response to questions, assignments and projects.
8. Justify - Use critical thinking to develop arguments, draw conclusions, make inferences and identify implications.

                                

       

Article #1 - All The Cool Kids Are Quitting Facebook.

                                                                  Jenna Wortham

“All the cool kids are Quitting Facebook” is an article written by the reporter from New York Times, Jenna Wortham that exposed about how Facebook continued to grown drastically since it first released on net. But one thing that really weird is that the percentage of Facebook’s users that quitting from Facebook is increasing in number nowadays. No doubt that Facebook is something so familiar to every ear of the people living in this whole wide world. This well-established social network used to be one of the most popular and addictive site compared to other social networks. This trend of having Facebook  account which is called “cool” among the people in every level of ages now is changing to the trend of quitting Facebook which is considered cooler. The question mark that lingers in my mind right now is why Facebook was so acceptable at the first place and now it is getting ignored by most of the people around the world.

Well for me, Facebook is a good tool of two way communication when I first registered for it last four years where at that time I was still in high school. I can’t deny the fact that I got into this virtual Facebook world because I felt that I need to follow the newest trend of “facebooking” among teenagers. But as years goes on, I admit that I'm not interested to Facebook anymore. I think that it is lifeless, a waste of time and yes, it is not COOL at all.


From my viewpoint, this article wants to make people realised that Facebook is not everything and it is just a social networking site that actually can decreases the trust of people towards each other in some way. Yes it is true that by facebooking you can interacts with your friends, but remember that it is actually creating a virtual life for you that might make you forget about the real world you are living in.

Honestly I fully support Wortham’s article about the changes numbers of Facebook followers as it can make people realised the real phenomenon happening among internet users in this era. Plus, people should know that they should appreciate the life given by God and they should live it to the fullest and not wasting it on the matter of “facebooking”. We should never let go of our strong bonds relationship in life with our friends or family just because of the name of “Facebook”.

In short, I can say that Facebook is not a bad either a good thing to be seen as .It’s actually depends on ones to benefits it or to get disasters from it. We should think critically on every aspect before we involved in anything or even in any virtual world. Hope with the falling numbers of the Facebook account users it will brings more happiness and new environments for them. If there is a better luck, may the society will not experienced any cons from Facebook site anymore. Quitting or continuing is located just on the tips of your fingers, so just make a good choice.

p/s: Jenna Wortham, you are cool. 

The Pianist

Wladyslaw Szpilman was the last musician to play live on Polish radio before the Nazis arrived. Much more significantly, he was also an ordinary Jewish man whose life, like so many millions of others, was turned upside down by the Holocaust. In The Pianist, director Roman Polanski – himself a survivor of the Krakow ghettos in which Jews were sealed following the outbreak of war – brings us Szpilman's story.

The film chronicles Szpilman's struggle to stay alive from 1939, when the Nazis first arrived and gradually began to introduce anti-Semitic law, to the final days of German occupation in 1944. After a slow though undeniably hard-hitting opening period, The Pianist only begins to take off when Szpilman is saved from a labour camp and embarks upon years of hiding, battling illness and scavenging for food.

Adrien Brody excels in the lead role, as a man whose tale is set apart from so many others adapted for the big screen – he is not a hero, just a survivor. Indeed, perhaps that's why Polanski felt he had to take up this challenge.

But, while the quality of acting never ceases to amaze and there are moments to pull on even the tightest of heartstrings, the film often veers dangerously close to tedium and has an unexpected feeling of overkill. Some parts of Szpilman's story appear rushed, while the piano-playing scene towards the end of the picture drags on a little too long for this reviewer's admittedly short attention span. What's more, we've already seen much of this before in Schindler's List, and it's difficult to see what this film is adding that's new.

While it's important that we should never forget the Holocaust, we shouldn't mistake that with placing false kudos on every film ever made about it. The Pianist is in many ways an excellent production but, essentially, it's also one that I won't be watching again in a hurry.

p/s: great movie.