Is this a trickle of reason?

May 20, 2008 — xanthippa

Democracy is a wonderfu ideal.  Yet, there will always be a question of how to exercise our democratic rights, while preventing a ‘tyrrany of the majority’?

To many people, the best answer is:

Protecting the rights of each and every individual, the minority of ‘one’,  is the best and only way to ensure the protection of the whole society from tyrrany by the State.

Yet, not everyone agrees.  The philosophy which seems to currently be gripping much of ‘the Western world’ turns its back to the individual, turns a blind eye to the violations of individual freedoms, in favour of collectivism.  I have wondered how much of this is a philosophical difference, how much is simply due to the attitudes inherrent in different political systems.

Many people today think that the best way to ensure peope are not discriminated against – the best way to promote tolerance and harmony within a society – is to put limits on the freedom of speech.  By instituting ‘hate speech laws’, these people argue, hate and prejudice will not be allowed to spread and will, eventually, be eliminated from our society.

I wish this would be so!

Time and time again, ‘hate speech laws’ have not only failed to reduce prejudice, I woud argue that they have allowed it to fester, until a time when it erupts in hateful and abominable acts.  What is worse, they have resulted in political institutions which are invariably used to opress, all in the name of preventing opression.  We have seen this happen many times in history, but we still seem unable to learn the right lessons from history!  

Let us consider the example of  Germany in the 1930’s.  After all, it is precisely to prevent atrocities such as the Holocaust that ‘hate speech laws’ are being instituted.  Yet, in Maclean’s, Mark Steyn (both he and Macleans are also being persecuted under ‘hate speech laws’) quotes Canada’s leading libertarian lawyer, Alan Borovoy, as saying:

“Remarkably, pre-Hitler Germany had laws very much like the Canadian anti-hate law. Moreover, those laws were enforced with some vigour. During the 15 years before Hitler came to power, there were more than 200 prosecutions based on anti-Semitic speech. And, in the opinion of the leading Jewish organization of that era, no more than 10 per cent of the cases were mishandled by the authorities. As subsequent history so painfully testifies, this type of legislation proved ineffectual on the one occasion when there was a real argument for it.”

To the contrary!  Hitler, once elected, effectively used these laws to usurp power.

Should there be ANY limits on speech?  Mr. Levant, also currently being persecuted by the thought crime police, has videotaped part of his interrogation by the Alberta HRC.  He makes the most passionate, well reasoned speech on the attributes of free speech! 

But, is tide turning?

For the past several years, what would appear to be illegal behaviour in both its investigations and prosecutions by the HRCs in Canada has inexplicably been tolerated.  Now, this may come to an end. This week, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) have announced they are opening a criminal investigatigation of some actions by the HRCs.  Ezra Levant has more information on this. 

Australia may also be changing its ideas with regard to limiting freedom of speech.  As Robert Jago writes on Dime a Dozen, Australia’s Liberal Party is calling for a change to its ‘hate speech laws’, because they have been shown to promote, not curb, divisions in their society! 

But, perhaps the best news comes from Erope! Czech Republic is a nation of reason (fully 59% of Czechs describe themselves as atheists, agnostics or non-believers) and their scepticism extends to other areas, as well.  Lubos Motl, one of the world’s leading theoretical physicists, writes that Vaclav Kaus, the President of Czech Republic, has vetoed an ‘anti-discrimination’ bill.  His justification?

“I consider the bill to be a useless, counterproductive, and low-quality bill while its consequences seem to be problematic….”

 Good on you, Czechs!

You can read the full, well reasoned and excellent speech here.  Mr. Motl writes that, ironically, “Because the bill has been “ordered” by the European bureaucrats and the country may face sanctions (let’s say it: the Czechs may be discriminated against) if the anti-discrimination bill is not approved”

Yes, the overwhelming bureacracies still want to control every aspect of society, including what we say and think.  But, little stories like this make me hopeful.  Perhaps these are the beginnings of a real change in attitudes:  one that will place more value on each and every individual, and treat all of us with the respect and equality in the eyes of the law that we deserve!

Has the dyke of opression finally sprung its first little leaks of reason?

 

P.S.  President Klaus’ book, ‘Blue Planet In Green Chains – What is Endangered:  Climate or Freedom’ is due for release in English this month.  

Posted in freedoms, human nature, opression, philosophy, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , . 3 Comments »

A Father with Real HONOUR!

May 19, 2008 — xanthippa

Oppression comes in many forms, all of them disgusting and condemnable.  All of them have something in common:  the willingness to sacrifice the rights and well being of an individual, a specific human being, for some higher principle.  The principle itself is less imoportant – and it varies from ‘the good of the society’, or ‘religious piety’, or, paradoxically, ‘family honour’.

The opressors smugly wrap themselves in the ‘cloak of righteousness’.  They truly and honestly believe their ends justify the means…which they NEVER do.

I planned to write about something else today, when I came across this  article on ‘A Chocoholic’s Piece of Mind’ blog:  Rand Abdel-Qader, a 17-year-old student, was murdered by her father an brother for being seen speaking to a Brit soldier….  She worked as an aid worker, and spoke English…translated and became infatuated.  No affair, no clandestine meeting, just a schoolgirl crush…and translating for him, as part of the volunteer work she did with refugee families. 

I wonder what another Rand, Ayn Rand, would have to say about this…her father’s reaction (quoting the article linked above) was:

‘Death was the least she deserved,’ said Abdel-Qader. ‘I don’t regret it. I had the support of all my friends who are fathers, like me, and know what she did was unacceptable to any Muslim that honours his religion,’

…

‘I have only two boys from now on. That girl was a mistake in my life. I know God is blessing me for what I did,’ he said, his voice swelling with pride. ‘My sons are by my side, and they were men enough to help me finish the life of someone who just brought shame to ours.’

…

He said his daughter’s ‘bad genes were passed on from her mother’. Rand’s mother, 41, remains in hiding after divorcing her husband in the immediate aftermath of the killing, living in fear of retribution from his family. She also still bears the scars of the severe beating he inflicted on her, breaking her arm in the process, when she told him she was going.

…

Sources have indicated that Abdel-Qader, who works in the health department, has been asked to leave because of the bad publicity, yet he will continue to draw a salary.

And it has been alleged by one senior unnamed official in the Basra governorate that he has received financial support by a local politician to enable him to ‘disappear’ to Jordan for a few weeks, ‘until the story has been forgotten’ – the usual practice in the 30-plus cases of ‘honour’ killings that have been registered since January alone.

…

Abdel-Qader, 46, a government employee, was initially arrested but released after two hours. Astonishingly, he said, police congratulated him on what he had done. ‘They are men and know what honour is,’ he said.

This is not honour, and we must stop thinking that just because people come from different parts of the world, they should not be expected to treat each other – including their daughters and wives – with respect.  Thinking these attitudes are too deeply entrenched is a very insidious and destructive form or racism, and we must all work together to show it is unacceptable!

Please, indulge me with a story about an Iranian man and HIS attitude towards his teenage daughter:

When I came to Canada as a teenager, I befriended an Iranian girl who arrived at about the same time.  They were devout Muslims.  At her apartment, my friend showed me the charcoal-gray hijab she was forced to wear in Iran – the very first one I ever saw – and I tried it on.  Her father was angry at the sight of the hijab.   What he said has made a deep impression on me, and is with me still.

He told me that the hijab was not part of Islam.  Not even a little bit.  He explained that when the Koran was written, the rights it granted women were much more than women had in that society before, and that it meant that the Prophet wanted to eventually bring full equality between men and women.  It just had to happen one step at a time.

The hijab, he went on, was a symbol of opression:  not just of women, but of all true Muslims by those who wish to have power over them.  He was very angry that they would do this, when the religion itself teaches the equality of all humans.  He was also angry that many young Mulsimas were brainwashed to think the hijab was a symbol of a proudly pious Muslima – he said teaching young women that was a crime against Islam, because it was a part of a doctorine that reduced them from humans to possessions.

He explained that in Iran, he had done well, a professional with his own business…but he left because he would not allow his daughter to be brought up in a society which would only treat her as cattle, or a piece of meat!  He wanted her to grow up a good Muslima who has confidence in herself as a person, and who is not a slave to anyone…in other words, as a real human being!

Now THERE is a FATHER WITH HONOUR!!! 

If only more men – Muslim or otherwise – would have enough honour to value their daughters as much as my friend’s father valued her!

Posted in freedoms, immigrants, opression, philosophy, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

‘First they silenced…’

May 16, 2008 — xanthippa

 The old saying says:

Those who do not learn from the past are destined to repeat it.

Perhaps we should re-phrase it to:

Those who do not learn the right lesson from history are destined to repeat it. 

After all, learning the wrong lesson could be worse than learning no lesson at all!

This all goes back to my rant on how often people do not recognize the difference between ‘symptom’ on the one hand, and a ’cause’ on the other.  Are they really so difficult to tell apart?

Many years ago, I went through a period when I was reading a lot of eyewitness books about WWII and the political atmosphere in Europe following the war.  I came across something intersting that Barbara Amiel had written:   she spent her childhood in ‘wartime London’.  Following the war, there was a determination among her relatives that nothing like this must ever be allowed to happen again.  And because Hitler was perceived as being ‘right wing’, Ms. Amiel asserts, ‘everyone’ became suspicious of – and opposed to – everything that was deemed to be ‘right wing’.

In other words, the lesson this group of people learned was:

  1. Hitler = right wing
  2. Hitler = evil
  3. ergo, right wing = evil

This is almost as sophisticated reasoning as that used for forcing women to wear a hijab, so they would not tempt men to rape them – as uncovered meat tempts cats to eat it. In other words, that is not the correct lesson.  Yet, many very intelligent people still fall into this trap in one form or another.

Yet, lots of people do learn the right lesson.  This one may be exemplified by the ‘First they came for…’ poem, attributed to Martin Niemoller:

“First they came for the Communists, but I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

Yet, even now, people are misunderstanding the poem!  So, please, in my never-humble way, let me pay homage to the right lesson here and write today’s version, as it could be.

“First they silenced the crackpot and nutcases, but I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a crackpot or a nutcase.

Then they silenced the bloggers, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a blogger.

Then they silenced the journalists, newspapers, magazines and books, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a journalist and didn’t write newspapers, magazines or books.

Then they silenced the Christians, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t religious.

Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left who was allowed to speak.”

If we fail to learn this lesson, this will be in store for us!  This is NOT HISTORY!  This is now, here, in OUR WORLD! 

This is what happens when people think a political party, or a particular political bend is the problem and fail to recognize that political oppression and governments who do not follow due process of law to achieve their ends that is the problem!!!  And if you are an adult, and not afraid to see a graphic example of the result of a state not bound by its laws is, here are some pictures that were too gruesome to print in a newspaper. 

But I warn you – do not look if you are sqeemish.  It took me a while to realize what part of the human body I was really looking at…

As it is taking so many of us to realize what type of oppression it is that we are facing!

Posted in freedoms, human nature, opression, philosophy, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , . 4 Comments »

Common law vs. civil law

May 15, 2008 — xanthippa

Humans form communities – that is one of our defining (and best) characteristics.  In order to coexist peacefully, we must agree on a set of rules to govern our interactions. Yet, different communities don’t always go about it the same way.

Some adopt ‘common law’, which takes the approach that all behaviours are permitted, except for those deemed to be harmful, which are then specificly forbidden under the law.  This suggests an underlying philosophy that each person is a free, independent individual.  People ought to be free to act according to their will, and only those behaviours that infringe upon the rights of other individuals within the community to enjoy thier freedoms are forbidden. The goal of laws is to ensure all individual members of the society are able to exercise their freedoms as much as possible.

Communities which develop one of the forms of ‘Civil law’ have a different point of view.  They specifically list the behaviours which are acceptable to the society and permits them, all others are forbidden.  This suggests a philosophy that it is ‘the society’ which is the ‘basic unit of worth’, not the ‘individual’.  As such, it is the goal for the laws to protect the society.

This is a really big philosophical difference. 

It seems to me that common law promotes individualism, while civil law seems more focused on collectivism.

Of course, this is a major simplification.  Also, there are several forms of civil law. This is not intended to be an exhaustive description…  Rather, it is meant to explore the differences in the philosophical undercurrents between societies which choose to govern themselves under civil or common law.  It is not meant to look at the specifics as they are, but at the patterns of thought that led to the differing attitudes of how we ‘ought to’ govern ourselves.

Common law (in its idealized state) sees the individual as the empowered one, the one with inherrent rights who chooses to lend some freedoms to the state in order to create a society.  The law is loath to interfere with these rights and freedoms of each one of its citizens and will only curb them with great reluctance.  It could be summed up by the sentiment: 

‘Upholding the rights of the one ensures the rights of the many.’

Civil law sees the society as the one with all the power.  ‘These are (or ‘ought to be’)  the customs of our society, thus codified here into law.  Do not stray outside of these behaviours, or you will have to answer to the state.’  And while many countries that practice civil law have accepted that an accused individual has the right to a fair trial, including a presumption of innocence, not all of them do.  It could be summed up by the sentiment:

‘Every one must adhere to these rules, because they are in the best interest of the society.’

Many modern countries do incorporate some aspects of both philosophies.  Rather than opposite sides of a coin, I see these as different ends of a continuous philosophical spectrum.  Most countries fall somewhere within this spectrum, and may move along it in one direction or another with time.

Yet, regardless where along this spectrum a particular state’s legal system lies at any specific time, these underlying philosophies will influence its attitude towards its citizens.

add to del.icio.usDigg itStumble It!Add to Blinkslistadd to furladd to ma.gnoliaadd to simpyseed the vineTailRank

Posted in freedoms, human nature, philosophy, politics, society. Tags: , , , , . 4 Comments »

A letter to my PM

May 14, 2008 — xanthippa

For those of you not following the Canadian struggle for free speech, this letter, which I emailed my Member of Parliament today, may seem a little confusing.  Here is a REALLY quick recap:

In order to provide disadvanteged groups easy and affordable access to legal protection agains illegal discrimination, Human Rights Commissions (HRCs) were established several decades ago:  one federal (Canadian, or CHRC) and one for each province.  These HRCs have, lately, been interpreting their mandate in unforseen ways, asserting that any speech which ‘potentially could’ have negative impact on individuals or groups because of their race, creed, disablitiy, and other reasons, must be censored and that this censorship overrules any rights of freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of thought.

Many individuals, and some media organizations, have been going through several years long legal battles in their defense of their inalienable rights.  Even the very people who originally created the HRCs have been apalled at the misuse of their powers in recent years…  What is even worse, recently released tribunal transcripts contain admissions by some HRC employees which suggest that in their zeal to pursue (and entrap) people whom they are investigating, criminal laws are being violated.  That is a serious matter, because no government agency should be allowed to break laws in order to enforce laws…

The Minister of Justice recently said what I understand to mean that as far as the Canadian Government is concerned, all is fine…hence, my letter.

Dear Mr. [MP], 

Thank you for your kind reply, in which you say you will direct my concern over the HRCs and their actions directly to the Minister of Justice.  It arrived at about the same time as the Minister of Justice made his position on this situation known….   

How unfortunate that the official Government position is based on a brief by Mr. Tsesis, who is not regarded highly among the experts in this area and whose disregard for supportable facts required to assess causality can clearly be seen in the document he produced. 

For example, Mr. Tsesis claims:  “[Hitler fomented] a mass delusion that Jews were responsible for bad times, and as a result, a Holocaust could be perpetrated against them without general opposition.”   This displays blatant ignorance of (or disregard for) the fact that during the 1930’s, Germany did indeed have ‘hate speech’ laws, which (ironically?) were almost identical to those we have in Canada today!  Jewish leaders in Germany in the 1930’s expressed satisfaction with the protections from persecution which they and their community received under these ‘hate speech’ laws. 

Since ‘hate speech’ laws were present in Germany of the 1930, proposing (as Mr. Tsesis does) that our current ‘hate speech’ laws are the one tool necessary to prevent another Holocaust-like event is an error of judgment at best, intentionally misleading at worst.  Either way, it clearly demonstrates the unsoundness of the conclusions in this document.   Basing our national Justice policy on it would be ill advised.

How embarrassing for our Government, to reveal that this is indeed its intention!  How embarrassing for our Minister of Justice!

 Yet, my original comment was not intended to request a simple review of the policies of the Human Rights Commissions by the Government.  It is essential that the Government maintain its ‘arm’s length’ distance from judicial and quasi-judicial bodies.  That should not change.   

The HRCs answer directly to the Parliament of Canada.  It is essential that the Parliament of Canada ensures that bodies such as the HRCs do indeed perform the tasks for which they had been created, and that they conduct themselves in accordance with the laws of Canada, the very laws they were created to uphold!  

 There is a widespread perception among the citizens of Canada that employees of these commissions may have broken criminal laws of Canada while performing investigations on behalf of the HRCs.  This perception is largely based on the information in legal documents, transcripts of hearings from the HRCs themselves.  These statements were given under oath, and in them an employee of the Canadian Human Rights Commission describes actions he took while acting on behalf of the HRC which appear to be a clear and direct breech of the criminal laws of Canada, as well as a blatant breech of the very ‘hate speech’ laws the CHRC was created to uphold.

 It is not, and must never become, tolerable for an Agent of the State to break the laws of the State while acting on behalf of the State.  In order to assure the integrity of our governance structures, it is essential that a full criminal investigation be launched immediately, to determine whether laws were indeed broken, or not. 

 If it is found that criminal laws were broken, a further in-depth investigation will be required to determine whether some rogue employees broke criminal laws on their own, or if the policies of this public institutions are the root causes of criminal behaviour by its employees – in which case, a full evaluation of all the procedures and methodologies of the HRCs would need to be done.  If a criminal investigation determines that laws were indeed broken, laying criminal charges will be required against every employee who broke our laws as well as against all supervisory personnel (currently or in the past employed by the HRC’s), who, through ignorance or complicity, allowed this illegal behaviour within their department to take place. 

 If the perception that criminal laws are being broken at the HRCs is erroneous, it is important that we, the citizens of Canada, see them exonerated, so that we may again place our trust in our government agencies and institutions.  

 This determination cannot be made without a full criminal investigation of the HRCs, their procedures, methodologies and practices, as well as of the conduct all of its employees, past and present.  Therefore, I ask that you, Mr. Poilievre, as my Member of Parliament to which the HRCs report directly, channel your efforts and energies to launching a full and thorough investigation into this whole mess.

 Thank you.

If you wish to read more on this saga, please see the excellent sites Blazing Catfur, Ezra Levant, Mark Steyn, Small Dead Animals, and many, many more…

Posted in debate, freedoms, human nature, language, philosophy, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , . 12 Comments »

Aspergers and ‘painting music’

May 13, 2008 — xanthippa

Over the last few decades, there have been very big changes in classroom attitudes – at least, in this part of the world.  Many teachers are of the opinion that academic rigour stifles self-expression, and in an attempt to foster creativity in their students, they have systematically dismantled structured teaching.

This might work for some students.  Yet, many students do not do well in this new environment, do not learn well using this new method.  Yes, I do focus on kids with Aspergers, but they are not the only ones who are having difficulties.  Many ‘normal’ kids find this ‘unstructured’ method of teaching makes learning more difficult.  The Aspie kids get completely lost in it.

Let me give you an example:

During a series of grade 3 art classes, the teacher played different types of music.  The assignment was to ‘paint’ the music while the students were listening to it.  I thought this was the height of idiocy:  no skills were being taught, and precious school time was being wasted.  But it was explained to me that I was being boorish, that this ‘exercise’ is scientifically designed to stimulate different areas of the brain to synthesize information, which is what kids at this age need more than anything else.

Please, do not misunderstand me.  I don’t have anything against art classes in general:  to the contrary.  My mother teaches art, and I have a deep love for it.  However, I think that kids actually get more enjoynment out of art if they are actually taught about it.  They will derive pleasure from drawing if some of the rules of proportion, or different  fun techniques are broken down into steps for them, so they can master the skills.  Once they have understood the rules, it will be more fun to ‘bend’ them to express their own artistic talents (and no, I don’t mean after years of study….rather, teach a specific skill, rules that govern it, and how to bend them and have fun with art).

Well, my son was in this particular art class.  He was in it because that teacher had gone to receive specific training on how to teach kids with Aspergers.  And then she got angry with an Aspie kid for ‘not being able to paint the music’ he was listening to????? 

Of course, what she was expecting was just non-sensicals colourful swirls – but she would never tell the students that.  With a prim smile, she insisted they ‘paint what the music makes them see’.  Questions of ‘How?’ were met with ‘That is up to YOU!’

Just before setting marks onto the report card, she called me to warn me that my son is about to fail art…  Let’s just say that I found it somewhat difficult to keep my temper.  (The problem was the frustration he experienced in being asked to complete a task he did not have the tools to perform, asking for help and being denied it, then penalized for failing by a bad mark.)

I explained to her that in that case, by her own standard, my son should have received an A+ for his artwork:  the music did not make him ‘see’ anything, so that is what he painted.  Or did not paint.  Either way, the result was accurate, and that he made a bold artistic statement by leaving the page blank.  Quite literally, he ‘drew a blank’!  In other words, I tried to ‘out-pretentious’ her.  It did not work – I’ve never been very good at it. 

However, the teacher said that if my son does 3 of these paintings and hands them in by Monday, he will not fail art.  So, we were left with the task to ‘paint music’.  My son and I talked about it, and it became clear that his frustration level was higher than usual.  But I came up with a solution I am still proud of!

Selecting a Physics textbook which had a good, simple explanation of ‘sound waves’, we read it over together and I explained all the diagrams to him.  Now, here was ‘sound’, represented visually!!!!  We were making progress.  Yet, many Aspies are sticklers for rules – my son could not paint the different types of music the same way!!!  And I was ready…

Rummaging around in the basement, I dusted off our old logic analyzer and brought it up.  Then I set up the display to emulate an oscilloscope, and we played the different types of music.  It worked!  The different sound waves made the oscilloscope display different curves.  Lifting his brush, and dipping it into the green paint (the display was green), my son went and happily painted the different types of music!

His teacher was thrilled!  She told him she knew that if he tried, he could paint music!  He told her they were ‘music waves’ and that he saw them.  I did not tell her that he saw them on an oscilloscope screen – somehow, I did not think that would please her.  Why spoil her pleasure? 

Posted in Aspergers, education, human nature, philosophy, science, society. Tags: , , , , , , . 12 Comments »

XKCD – Aspie Humour

May 6, 2008 — xanthippa

Many people claim that Aspies do not have a sense of humour.  NOT TRUE!!!

We certainly do enjoy humour.  Some of us naturally find some things funny, others need to learn the rules of humour – but we certainly enjoy it.

In my never-humble opinion, teaching kids with Aspergers the rules of humour may be helpful with overall social skill development.  I have done this, and seen the improvement in their ability to interact with their peers and the resultant increased comfort level with themselves.

Here is how I might go about ‘explaining humour’:

There are several things that constitute ‘humour’ and different people will find different things funny – so there is no need to feel bad when you understand a joke, without thinking it is funny.  Some people think that anything to do with bodily functions is funny – and they will laugh when someone farts, or of they burp.  Other people think this is gross and not at all funny.  So, it is normal that not everyone finds every joke funny.

Many poeple laugh when they find themselves in situations which either do not go as expected, or when some danger is lifted.  This is done to release tension which people experience in such situations, and which is unpleasant.  It demonstrates to others that either the danger has passed, or that even though things are unexpected, the new course of actions is acceptable.

Perhaps that is why so many jokes are ‘funny’ because of an ‘unexpected’ or surprising ending.  It might even tie in with why ‘strange’ or ‘different’ or ‘unexpected’ is sometimes called ‘funny – but not as in ha-ha’.  Puns are an excellent example:  the correct (or correctly sounding) word is used, but in with an unexpected meaning.

It is not easy for Aspie kids that many cartoons rely on facial expressions to convey humour.  That is why I was so entertained when I came across this (not aimed at kids) comic, XKCD.  To me, it screams ‘Aspie Humour’!

And since along with a sense of humour, many people incorrectly describe Aspies as lacking feelings or empathy, I have selected, for your viewing pleasure, these few XKCD comics:

We like to spend time with our loved ones.

We love to spend time with our loved ones - XKCD

 

Passion reaches new levels for us!

Sharing thought - XKCD

 

 Of course, we may have a hard time remembering names….  Nothing personal!

forgetting names - XKCD

 

 Yet, we can be very particular in whom we select as potential mates:

xenocide - XKCD

Personally, I could not date someone who did not thing ‘Ender’s Shadow’ was the best book in this series.  Ok, if he were cute, I might settle for ‘Shadow of the Hegemon’.  But ‘Xenocide’??? Really!

And ‘pillow talk’ is much easier if both of you are Aspies….

pillow talk - XKCD

 

And many of us fully appreciate the advantages of online interactions with others (my husband claims this ‘has to be’ taken from one of my online comments….):

venting - XKCD

 

Here is a good example of how not everyone ‘gets’ every joke.  For example, in the following one, I do not understand why the characters are implying this practice is unusual.  Surely, it is the norm!  (See my posts on Old Men in the Bible)

graphs - XKCD

 

But we all enjoy good quality entertainment!  (And no, this is NOT just a cheap ploy to get ‘Papyrus font’ onto my blog!  Though, who could resist the allures or ‘Papyrus Font’???  It’s even better intelic…)

 River Tam - XKCD

 EVERYONE loves River Tam!!!

add to del.icio.usDigg itStumble It!Add to Blinkslistadd to furladd to ma.gnoliaadd to simpyseed the vineTailRank

Posted in Aspergers, human nature, Humour, philosophy, science, society. Tags: , , , , , . 13 Comments »

Obama’s apostasy

May 5, 2008 — xanthippa

It is unusual for me to write about the US presidential race, because, frankly, it is a bit overdone.  We are inundated with the minutest details and the wildest speculations over and over, whether we care or not.

Yet, there is one very important speculation that I have never heard voiced.  Perhaps it is my own fault for shutting out so much of the detail, and it has been covered and dealt with.  If that is the case, then I beg your forgiveness.  But, if it has not been addressed, then I would humbly request that people give this some sober, realistic consideration.

Different people – and nation states – react very differently to identical ‘facts’.  Mundane example: I see a rabbit, I will think ‘pet’.  Another person looks at a rabbit, they may see ‘dinner’.  It would be unreasonable to expect the same reaction from both of us to being served a rabbit-burger.  The same is true of many, many things, not all of them mundane or witout deep impact.

Many supporters of Mr. Obama’s bid for the Democratic nomination, and ultimately the Presidency of the USA, say that he would be well received in the world, and enjoy much more credibililty than either Ms. Clinton or Mr. McCain.  While his lack of experience and specific policies he suggested may have come under attack, his supporters maintain that his multicultural outlook would be great assets giving him (an by extension, the USA) great credibility, especially in Africa.

But are we not overlooking one extremely important point?  Mr. Obama is an apostate to Islam – and much of the Muslim world, including in Africa, consider this to be very bad thing indeed.

This has less to do with the views of Mr. Obama himself.  It does not concern anything a preacher he’d listened to may or may not believe.  All it has to do with is the fact that as a child and young man, Mr. Obama was a Muslim, and now he is not.  He does not deny that – nor has he ever tried to.  By definition, this makes him an Apostate.

The very fact that he has converted from Islam to another faith may make it impossible for many fundamentally Islamic nation-states to accept him.  After all, rightly or wrongly, many of them do interpret The Qur’an, specifically Sura (chapter) 4, verses 89-92: “If they turn away [convert away from Islam], then sieze them and kill them wherever you find them;…”. 

Also, many Muslims use several books in addition to the Qur’an.  These are not given the central importance that Qur’an is, but because they contain the collected sayings of the Prophet Muhammad and strories of his life, these are often used as a guide according to which the Qur’an is supposed to be interpreted.  One of these is often quoted as to the proper interpretation of the above verse: ‘Bukhari’ 4.52.260 – “The Prophet said, ‘If a Muslim discards his religion, kill him.’ ”

In 2006, a man was sentenced to death in Afghanistan for having converted from Islam to Christianity.  This was well after the Taliban were out of power, but even the moderates in Afghanistan did not understand why people in ‘The West’ were upset by this.  Most of us are familiar with the case of Lina Joy, and others like her.

In fact, four of the major Sunni as well as the major Shia schools of Islam all agree that a sane, adult male who converts away from Islam deserves the death penalty. 

I offer this as an entirely pragmatic consideration:  will some people be able to see Mr. Obama, the man, or will they only see an Apostate? 

How will they react if the USA elects an ‘Apostate President’? 

Posted in atheism, debate, freedoms, human nature, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , . 7 Comments »

Aspergers and accurate words

May 1, 2008 — xanthippa

School!  It can be a testing place at the best of times!

For people who need to use ‘precise’ and ‘accurate’ words to describe things as those of us with Aspergers do, it can be baffling.  After all, one becomes used to the vocabulary and expectations at home – but at school, the rules are different.  And people just do not communicate clearly.  In the words of the immortal Inigo Montoya, “I don’t think that word means what you think it means.”

Let me give you an example.

Schools are filled with many kind and caring people who truly have the best intentions towards our kids.  They are dedicated.  At times, they will even enter ‘uncomfortable’ situations, if they think the ultimate result will help one of ‘their’ kids.  I admire that.

One year, at the beginning of winter – just as it was time to start wearing hats and mits etc. – I got a phone call from one of my kids’ teachers.  Even though I am pretty thick at picking up on such clues, I could tell she was very uncomfortable.  She spoke in a little soft voice and picked her words very carefully.

The school, as it turns out, gets some free ‘stuff’ from the milk people, through the milk program.  Yes.  And it there are some families, which – at some times, and through no fault of their own – needed a little help, they could give these things as ‘prizes’ to their kids.  Since it is a ‘prize’, there is no stigma…

I was really beginning to wonder what this was about.  We were not in any financial difficulties – at least, I thought I would notice if we were.  So I made a non-commital sound, to show I was listening…

The teacher, kindly and gently, continued.  The promotional items they had included hats.  Since the weather was getting kind of cool, it was important that kids should wear hats.  And, today, during recess, my son had told her that he does not own a hat, and that he does not think we’re planning to buy him one.  So, if it would not cause offense, they could give him a hat from the milk programme…

Whatever reaction she was expecting, laughter was not it.  But, I just could not help myself!  I burst our laughing.  You see, my son was absolutely correct!!!  Yet, I owed the teacher an explanation…

The previous weekend, we had indeed gone shopping for a new winter hat.  My son became intrigued by these ‘hat and neckwarmer in one’ contraptions.  It looked just like a winter hat that was attached to the ‘neck’ part of a turtleneck.  It had a nice round opening for the whole face, but covered more skin than a ‘hat’ would.  That is what he chose to get instead of a regular hat.

And what did he wear the previous winter (to be used as a spare)?  A tuque!  If many people think that ‘tuque’ and ‘hat’ are the same, they should be corrected:  if they were the same, they would not have different names!!!

So, with puppy-dog eyes, solemnly and truthfully, my son told his teacher that he does not onw a hat!  And when she asked if we were just slow at getting ready for the winter, he truthfully said that we were not planning to get him one…instead of simply saying he forgot his new headwarmer.

The teacher was amused and greatly relieved! I suspect the story was used as a source of amusement at the teacher’s lounge. 

But this is a very real example of how people with Aspergers do not understand what they are being asked, unless the accurate word is used.  The terms used must be specific, precise and accurate, because Aspies do not ‘make leaps of faith’ or read things into stuff.  If we don’t know, we don’t know – we are not likely to jump to unsupportable conclusions.  The teacher would likely have received a different answer had she asked him if he owned something to wear on his head to keep it warm.

Another example of ‘crossed communications’ occurred when my other son was very, very young – certainly under 2 years old.  He absolutely loved watching ‘Bill Nye the Science Guy’, and absorbed much of his early vocabulary from that show.

One time, my mom was over, and was in the livingroom with my son.  When I came into the room, she was frustrated:  “I told him to stop picking his nose, but he just stares back at me as if I just fell off the moon!  What is wrong with him?!?!?”

I told her he just did not understand what she meant.  He already had a nose, so how could he pick another one?

Turnning to him, I said:  “Stop touching your mucuous membranes.”

He took his finger out of his nose, looked at me and said:  “Ah, spread germs!”  And went to wash his hands…

These may be funny incidents, but they do illustrate the difficulties Aspies have trying to understand people who use language sloppily.  Just imagine how impenetrable the meaning of many test questions is to them!!!  No wonder they often score very poorly on school tests – many questions do not really ask what they think they ask…

(This is ALWAYS the hardest part of writing a post:  how to end it!  I could go on talking about this endlessly…)

Aspies can, and do, learn to search the speech patterns of others for ‘similar concepts’ – this way, many Aspies learn to ‘decipher’ common speech.  And when we do, we are often so delighted, we drive others mad by playing with it!  Yet, this is not an easy skill to acquire, and it would not be realistic to expect young kids to ‘pick it up’.  This will lead to frustration – not just of the child, but also of educators, parents and others who interact with Aspie kids.

And, Aspie kids usually experience very high levels of frustration, even if they do not communicate this (or display the ‘typical’ signs of frustration, until it builds up into uncontrollable anger).  Making all these people aware of the need for accurate, precise and non-ambiguous use of language (and what that actually is – in the mind of an Aspie) would go a long way towards making life easier for everyone involved. 

If we could only teach the rest of the world to communicate accurately!

Posted in Aspergers, education, human nature, language, science, society. Tags: , , , , , . 3 Comments »

Climate Change Tales

April 30, 2008 — xanthippa

The whole ‘Global Warming’ – under whatever name one chooses – issue is a mess.  Unmitigated, tangled up and muddled mess.

So, how can a person make sense of it all?

Frankly, I don’t know.  What I do know, however, is that we are actively being presented with only a very small part of the story through the main stream media (MSM).  And I also know that reasonable points raised by bonafide scientists from the field of climate change are being shouted down or smeared before their ideas are even listened to.

That is not how scientific debate occurs.  It is anathema to science itself!  In true scientific community, people are willing to listen to dissenting points of view – provided these are scientific and  testable hypothesies (using the term in the narrow, scientific sense).  Why?  The reason for this is very simple:  sometimes, even what appear to be ‘crackpot’ ideas may indeed turn out to be better models of reality than the original theories.

Scientists are only human.  Yes, as much as this is contrary to some opinions, they are only human.  Many times in the past, the ‘current scientific consensus’ was just silly in rejecting even the consideration of ‘things’ that we now regard as integral tools of science: 

“… my dear Kepler, what do you think of the foremost philosophers of this University? In spite of my oft-repeated efforts and invitations, they have refused, with the obstinacy of a glutted adder, to look at the planets or Moon or my telescope.”

                                                                                        –     Galileo Galilei

Today, most scientists are careful to not have the ‘obstinacy of a glutted adder’, and tend to seriously examine ideas which run contrary to mainstream opinions.  How far are they prepared to go?  Well, consider the case of Dr. Peter Duesberg:  he came out with not just one, but two controversial theories. 

In the first one, he proposed that while there is a co-occurrence of the HIV virus and AIDS, he thought the causality had not been established with sufficient scientific rigour.  (I am not particularly versed in his theory – if I am misrepresenting it, I apologize.  The point is not his theory as such, but the scientific community’s reaction to it.) 

The reaction? 

Scientists actually went and checked his data, looked over his studies, and found where he had made mistakes.  Even so, his views are often referred to in scientific publications on HIV/AIDS, in order to ensure that the scientific basis for refuting them is easily available.

Long after this, he proposed another very controversial scientific hypothesis:  this time on the nature of cancer.  Even though he was one of the researchers to have identified one of the ‘cancer genes’, he now proposed that cancer may be more due to chromosomal abnormalities than to problems within individual genes.  Again, the details of his hypothesis are less important than the reaction it received.

Even though his first hypothesis has been flatly rejected, scientists listened when he proposed this one.  In May 2007, Scientific American published his controversial theory in an article called ‘Chromosomal Chaos and Cancer’.  Earlier in the same issue, the editor’s page was titled ‘When Pariahs Have Good Ideas’, where the editors explain that even though Dr. Duesberg’s ideas on HIV/AIDS have been discredited, he might have a good point here and that scientific ideas ought to be judged on thier merit. 

So, what was my point in bringing up Dr. Duesberg? 

To show how scientists tend to evaluate ideas, even from scientists who have been proven wrong in the past:  they tests them, then – right or wrong – they reference them.  One thing they certainly do not do is try to shut each other up.  That would be unscientific! 

“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.”

                                                                                       –     Galileo Galilei

Sadly, this is not happening in the field of Climate….

Scientists who do not subscribe to the ‘bad humans making Earth too hot and this will be a disaster’ point of view have systematically been insulted, bullied, their reputations smeared and jobs threatened, and more than one has received threats of bodily harm.  As Dickens might say:  “What the Sheakespeare is going on here?!?!?!?’ 

Oh, but I have made some general accusations here:  I had better support them! 

Here is one article from the Wall Street Journal by Richard Lindzen, a scientist who had been threatened, and who has seen others under similar pressure.  In this April 2006 article, he also charges scientific publications ‘Science’ and ‘Nature’ with bias and underhanded tactics.  He also names several other scientists who have faced threats.

If the Wall Street Journal is not your cup of tea, here is an article from ‘Telegraph’ from the UK about the death threats received by scientists who publicly question the ‘global warming catastrophy’ dogma.  But this is only a small sample of a large body of scientists who are speaking up.

Sadly, most people don’t realy get to hear what these scientists have to say.  Their views are not often published.  Why?  I don’t know.  However, here is an article from ‘The Australian’ about how journalists at ‘The Age’ (an Australian publication) had been ordered to not write anything negative about the ‘Earth Hour’ earlier this month:

“Reporters were pressured not to write negative stories and story topics followed a schedule drafted by Earth Hour organisers.”

All right, ‘Earth Hour’ is just fluff – what about real climate stories?

It seems that we may not be getting the true story there, either.  Earlier this month, BBC (yes, THE BBC) had done a big ‘no-no’:  they totally changed the story, without noting it!!!

When a story is edited or changed, this is supposed to be noted.  However, BBC ran a story on the topic of climate, was bullied by a ‘climate activist’, and changed the whole meaning of the story WITHOUT NOTING THE CHANGE!!!  That is not very nice at all.

Thankfully, wee have access to the full email exchange of the activist’s bullying and the BBC reporter giving in.  It is a little long, but here is a telling phrase the activist used:

“I would ask : please reserve the main BBC Online channel for emerging truth.

Otherwise, I would have to conclude that you are insufficiently
educated to be able to know when you have been psychologically
manipulated. And that would make you an unreliable reporter.”

EMERGING TRUTH???

What about ‘documented truth’?

And ‘PSYCHOLOGICALLY MANIPULATED’? 

I cannot help but feel that we, the ‘unwashed masses’, are being manipulated here…  It seems certain that we are not getting an accurate picture of what scientists are truly finding out about these processes which might significantly impact us all.

 

Posted in debate, human nature, politics, religion, science, society. Tags: , , , , , . 1 Comment »
« Older posts
Newer posts »