There are eleven different (K) sounds in the Thai language. I can only comprehend three. How about you?
REH ----- Original Message ----- From: "Selma Singer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Darryl and Natalia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Harry Pollard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 4:27 PM Subject: Re: [Futurework] new book > Sociologists spend a great deal of time exploring the way culture affects > perceptions of reality. While it seems to some of us simply common sense > that physical reality is what it is, sociologists and anthropologists have a > mountain of evidence to illustrate that our perception of physical reality > is affected by our culture and particularly by language. Cultures do not > have words for things that are not particularly important in that culture > and people in that culture may simply not see certain physical things that > are commonplace in other cultures. > > For example: some Eskimo tribes have many words for different kinds of snow > because snow is vitally important in their culture. In our culture we have > one word for snow and if we want to indicate differences in snow we have to > add an adjective-sticky snow, fluffy snow, etc. > > Selma > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Darryl and Natalia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Selma Singer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Harry Pollard" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 3:13 PM > Subject: Re: [Futurework] new book > > > > Hi Selma, > > > > Darryl was reminded of a discussion on C.B.C. radio about the historical > > usage of colour definition. > > It was cited that people living in the jungle areas, for example, had most > > colours defined in terms of the > > green spectrum. In Europe, browns and yellows were emphasized, the Indian > & > > Orient had yellows > > and orange, whereas Egypt, which revered the scarab, had various and most > > brilliant blues to define. > > Royalty traditionally had exclusive use of reds and purples, both for > class > > distinction and accessibility. > > > > How grey is seen will be dependent on your personal experience with the > > grey in question. If both parties > > are looking at the identical colour chart, then it is likely to be > perceived > > similarly by most, but for the colour- > > blind or one third of men who apparently have difficulty and differences > in > > the green/blue scales. > > > > Emotionally, colours are perceived differently by virtue of your > > experience with them, and by virtue of > > societal implications & preservation. Colour therapy, of course, has a > huge > > bearing on such a discussion. > > > > Perception is always unique, which is why the idea of an objective > reality > > within a chaotic physical universe > > is impossible. I get the feeling, however, that the colour grey has been > > raised as metaphor for a rather involved > > topic. What might that be? > > > > Natalia > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Selma Singer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: pete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Harry > > Pollard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 6:53 AM > > Subject: Re: [Futurework] new book > > > > > > > questions for the group: > > > > > > If the only language you know does not have a word for the color gray, > do > > > you think you will see the color gray? Will you see it as gray in the > same > > > way as someone whose language does have a word for that color and who > has > > > seen that color labeled as such? Or will it look different to a person > who > > > doesn't have a word for it than it does to a person who has a word for > it > > > and has seen the color with that label? Will it look more green or blue > to > > > someone whose language has a word for green or blue but not gray? > > > > > > Selma > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Harry Pollard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 9:35 PM > > > Subject: RE: [Futurework] new book > > > > > > > > > > Pete, > > > > > > > > The only reality I can confirm is objective. > > > > > > > > No-one can confirm subjective reality. > > > > > > > > But, I enjoyed your post. > > > > > > > > Harry > > > > ---------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > pete wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >On Wed, 28 May 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >when uncertainty becomes unbearable, faith provides solace. > > > > > > > > > > > Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [wrote:] > > > > > > > > > > >>Selma, I think you've put the matter very well. It reminds me of > > > Thomas > > > > > >>Merton's concept that, to understand God, we must depend on both > > > reason > > > > > >>and faith. In understanding who and what we are, we must let > > > > > >>rational thought take us as far as we can possibly go with it. > With > > > > > >>each passing day or year, or with each scientific breakthrough, we > > > will > > > > > >>know a little more, but we will then increasingly recognize that > > what > > > we > > > > > >>cannot know is much larger, perhaps infinitely larger since there > > may > > > be > > > > > >>no boundaries, than what we can know. That is where reason ends > and > > > > > >>faith must take over. > > > > > > > > > > >>Selma <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Singer [wrote:] > > > > > > > > > > >>>Hi Natalia, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>I am familiar with The Course in Miracles; I have the book and > its > > > > > >>>companion and did a little work with it some years ago; as you > say, > > > > > >>>there are many paths to the same end. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>I am not comfortable however, with the idea that there is no > > > objective > > > > > >>>reality, although I doubt that my idea of objective reality is > > > exactly > > > > > >>>like that of those who believe that's all there is. > > > > > > > > > >I regard the subjective reality of Berkeley as possessing equal > > validity > > > > >as the objective reality of western science, and I think the true > > > > >nature of reality embraces them both in a synthesis beyond the > > > > >apparent paradox our limited understanding perceives, analogous to > > > > >the synthesis of wave and particle, or other such complements > > > > >which abound in physics. The world of subject and object is a > > > > >result of a symmetry breaking event analogous to that which brought > > > > >the multiplicity of fundamental forces into being. > > > > > > > > > >Furthermore, I applaud uncertainty, and hold that the position of > > > > >agnosticism is the first step in understanding. You can't learn til > > > > >you assume the position that you don't know. I see no value in > > > > >abandoning that position in favour of faith. Rather, I promote > > > > >the concept of active introspection, to replace agnosis with > > > > >gnosis by direct experience. > > > > > > > > > >As far as the "mind", there are problems with the precision of > > > > >terms, and much is lost in translation from the philosophies of > > > > >other cultures. The concept of "no mind" in Buddhism is not > > > > >an endorsement of an objective reality of a western nature, > > > > >rather a rejection of the arcane profusion of mental "worlds" > > > > >in some other eastern philosophies. However, from the simple > > > > >western perspective, one can say, to illuminate the nature of > > > > >mind, that either you have one, or there is no "you", rather > > > > >"you" are one of the filler bodies, extras added to the world to > > > > >bulk out the crowd scenes, golems which have no experiences > > > > >and no subjective existence, ie no one home. This is a useful > > > > >distinction to introspect on, to explore the nature of the bare > > > > >essence of being, which is where one can apply one's attention to > > > > >pry open the secrets of the true nature of reality. > > > > > > > > > > -Pete V > > > > > > > > **************************************************** > > > > Harry Pollard > > > > Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles > > > > Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 > > > > Tel: (818) 352-4141 -- Fax: (818) 353-2242 > > > > http://home.attbi.com/~haledward > > > > **************************************************** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > > > Version: 6.0.484 / Virus Database: 282 - Release Date: 5/27/2003 > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Futurework mailing list > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Futurework mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
