Author: Warren Tang

I write about linguistics and philosophy. I also write poetry and take photographs.

bttb

Warren TangLeave a comment

I haven’t gotten personal on my blog in a while. I had kind of lost my way in the wilderness so to speak.

For sometime now I have been fretting over the name and the purpose of the blog. I was trying to create a website instead of a blog. While content is important I had forgotten about how to live with the medium. So let’s get back to the basics.

This blog started with my interest in the environment and its problems and so I will return to them. It’s a blog so let’s get personal again. I have an interest in postmodern theory and the Buddha so don’t hide it but don’t let it obsess me.

A name change, a new header image, a clean up of the design and we’re back on track.

And one more thing: this blogger is going back to university to get more educated about sustainability so he can write a better blog about it (I lied. I am going back to school but it isn’t about the blog).

New magazine on sustainability – “Sasutena”

Warren TangLeave a comment

Japan – On the local scene a new magazine on sustainability is being published and will be available for free at university coop bookstores from October. The magazine Sasutena, short for sustainbility in Japanese, will be a quarterly publication.

According to the Daily Yomiuri newspaper the magazine is edited by Prof. Akimasa Sumi, 57, director of the Climate Research Center at Tokyo University and is published by Integrated Research System for Sustainability Science a group formed in April this year by nine universities and organizations which includes Tokyo University, Osaka University and National Institute for Environmental Studies.

Its purpose is to expand the awareness of the general public of this field of growing importance.

Honda to mass-produce bioethanol vehicles

Warren TangLeave a comment

Honda has announced it will begin mass-producing compact cars which will run off bioethanol. Bioethanol is a type of alcohol which is produced from sugar cane and corn and is considered an environmentally friendly solution that meets the the Kyoto Protocol requirements of zero emission because the carbon dioxide emitted from bioethanol vehicles and absorption rates by plants comes to zero.

According to Japan’s Daily Yomiuri newspaper Honda will convert its Brazilian factories to produce about 30,000 vehicles annually because Brazil is the world’s leading nation in utilizing bioethanol in transportation.

Together with the Japan’s Research Institute of Innovative Technology, Honda has been able to produce ethanol efficiently from biomass (a renewable resource from plants). This means that the traditional resource of sugar cane and corn – a food source – will not be stretched or impinged upon.

This is a step in the right direction for the environment and for the Kyoto Protocol since nothing significant has come from car industry in a long while.

Interconnectness and Differance

Warren Tang2 Comments

In my last post I wrote about the Derridean concept of differance. The idea is meaning is made through the system of difference and that there is no self-contained inherent meaning in words.

Yet this formulation is neither new nor unique. Environmental philosophy’s concern for interconnected is one such instance.

In plain terms interconnectedness is about how all things in the ecosystem is connected, that nothing is an isolated entity without affecting other parts in the web of life. Just like meaning the words as system of difference interconnectedness suggests that everything is part of the system and cannot be separated from it. The loss of a species (or of even a single life) affects the balance and has consequences that simply cannot be observed or be known. Every “happening” in the system changes the the system.

Put in other words everything is absolutely relative and that a change in status of one thing changes the relation within the system. To think that each item within the system is isolated from each other is an ideal and not a reality for nothing exists in isolation except in the mind. It is a trick of the mind and a good one, one that has deluded us for a long time.

To me interconnectedness is a positive way of saying differance. The latter term is colder more scientific in its formulation. We only need to look at nature, the animals – the food chain – and the mountains and trees to see how everthing has a role in the web of life and that something cannot be seen as having no role in the system even if it seems it does not affect the system. We must respect and see the importance of everything. In short sustainability is about giving up our complacency going beyond our self-importance. And if we can do this then we will have advanced as a species.

Difference and Differance

Warren TangLeave a comment

I didn’t know it back then but I had been a structuralist in high school.

It was during my mid-teens that I had stumbled upon a truth: that good meant nothing except when seen against evil. Put another way good can only exist if evil existed. By being brought up in a Catholic school meant I had to think about these things. Sad but true.

So if we look at the Christian God his whole existence really depends on the existence of the devil. Even though this doesn’t make sense because God is suppose be the first, even preceeding time. But really God and the devil could be said to have come into existence simultaneously. This of course is looking at God and the devil as logos, symbols or words which represent an idea and not really at God from the Christian believer point of view (I do not believe in God or gods). And that these logos have only meaning in relation to each other without internally stable meanings.

So the view I had back then was really a Saussurean structuralist outlook but did not know until much much later (like until a couple of days ago). Saussure saw words or signifiers as a system of difference. Signifiers as one half of the sign (the other half being the signified) were in Saussure’s words arbitrary. This means any combination of letters chosen to be put together in a way to represent something only had significance when it was contrasted to (every) other combinations of letters within the system. So ‘bat’ and ‘bet’ by its difference of one letter represents two entities. But it needn’t be a difference of one letter. ‘Bat’ and ‘esophagus’ are different not only in the number of letters they have but also by the distance of how completely different these two signifiers are.

Later Jacques Derrida, the French theorist, chose to use the word differance instead of difference to further develop on Saussure’s discovery. While Saussure had already stated that signifiers are both arbitrary and without meaning (or “meaning” is only made through differences to all other signifiers) he failed to see the radicalness of it and follow through on its implications. By choosing to use a different signifier ‘differance’ instead of the normal ‘difference’ Derrida wanted first to highlight a nuance. Differance served as the ground for play of pronunication (difference and differance do not differ in their pronunciation, thus highlighting their sameness) as well as serving as the ground for play of similarity between ‘differ’ (as in difference) and ‘defer’ (that meaning is always delayed, never fully being there because signifiers are always empty in meaning).

Critics have accused Derrida of being clever without real substance. Yet there is nothing wrong with being clever while still having something significant to say. Some thinkers miss the point and attempt to play in the Derridean manner but lack his substance, and therefore give Postmodernism a bad name. While others forego the cleverness all together and get to the point but perhaps boring their readers somewhat.

In the best tradition of the sutras of the Buddha I will give you the four possible combinations, from worst to best. You can lack cleverness and have no substance. You can be clever but have no substance. You can lack cleverness but have substance, or you can be clever and also have substance.

Derrida was definitely the last. Most good theorist are probably second from last. Bad postmodernists who hide behind their cleverness fit in the second category. And we won’t even bother to mention who goes into the first category.

The ocean, microbes and biodiversity

Warren Tang4 Comments

Human beings have such a habit of underestimating things. A recent survey of the ocean suggests that the Earth’s bioversity may be ten times more than previously thought.

In a single litre of sea water scientists can have as many as 20,000 species of microbes – they were only expecting to find two thousand. This number means that there could be more than ten million species of microbes alone.

Dr Sogin, one of the members of the research team in the new findings, said, “It really points to our lack of knowledge and how much more there is to learn.”

But should not the greatness of this number in itself teach us that it is impossible to master the knowledge? Should it not tell us that there will always be more to learn? And should it not make us aware of the fact that we are really insignifcant in the scheme of things?

We are but one species among tens of milllions if not hundreds or even thousands. It is estimated that the average species has a lifespan of 100,000 years. Some of these have changed little from since the beginning. Others have come and gone without us even knowing. And Man’s vanity has kept his species going for perhaps much too long.

Today we know approximately the age of our planet (3.5 billion years old) and how much longer it will exist if no “hiccups” occur (another 3.5 billion years). The Earth is middle aged. The present human species, with our ability to understand and record history in our own unique way, has only been here for 10,000 years. Some may stretch that back to thirty thousand years more. Either way the rest of the history of the planet makes this time – our time – insignificant.

I doubt we, as intelligent comprehending animals, will last much more than another 50,000 years. And that is being generous I think. But as for life itself it will go on as if nothing happened until the very end because we are just another species among millions, millions that have been far more successful at surviving than we have been so far.

We think six billion human beings is a great number when on our very bodies we may find more than that of any one species of microbes.

Rethinking population

Warren Tang2 Comments

Teaching elementary school in Japan gives me an opportunity to talk about Australia, my home country, quite a bit. Mostly I like starting with the land mass of the two countries. Australia is roughly 20 times larger than Japan. Then move on to the population. Whereas Japan has 130 million people, Australia has 20 million. And this shocks the students somewhat.

Remembering my pre-teen years I too was a little naive and believed a country’s size would be proportional to its population. It is only natural that being human we are fallible to make such an assumption.

I also remember that it seemed to me back then that a country’s population was somehow equated to the greatness of a nation. The Chinese want to claim that. As does India. As an English teacher I also see how English speakers hide the fact that even after totalling the number of English speakers in the world we still only manage to be second and that they were actually third until only recently. By number English is still ranked second and they do not want to remind you of this fact. It only embarrasses them. Yet there should be nothing to be embarrassed about. Simply a large population does not equate to cultural superiority.

Population growth is not something to proud of. There is no logic behind it. People talk as though it is some achievement to see an increase in its nation’s population like it is the strength points in some video game. Furthermore no one ever bothers to ask when enough is enough.

If a nation’s population were like the human body then the world today could be seen as being obese. And perhaps we should population as the human body analogy because like all things there is a limit.

While the environment puts a limit on the system by checks and balances human being chooses to see it as though there is no limit. And this is where human understanding has failed or is flawed. While man is undoubtedly clever he is also foolish to thinnk that he can beat the system.

So let’s just hope that some time soon he will become the wiser and learn to live within the limits of a system that is made for abuses because no matter what it will catch up to us in the end. And hopefully we will learn that the ecosystem does not care whether the human species is part of its picture or not.

Zero degrees of separation to Jimmy Carter

Warren Tang2 Comments

The distance between Jimmy Carter and myself used to be one degree but now I will meet the former president and intrepret for him.

This August I will be going to Atlanta for my town as their interpreter. They do this every year but he does not (or cannot) always meet with those from my town. Though he makes an effort because his hometown and ours are sister cities.

Through this chance I have gain insight into Mr Carter’s peace activities. He became particularly active after his term in office. Habitat for Humanity is one group where he plays a major role. This group is about building housing for the less fortunate in the poorer nations in the world. This year the Jimmy Carter Work Project will be in India. His goals are admirable, but again I cannot always agree with them.

From a holistic viewpoint the very name “Habitat for Humanity” seems to shut out the rest of life on Earth. Sure humanity is important but so is the rest of the web of life – the biodiversity that we depend on for survival. So to me, peace activism should include peace with the animal kingdom as well. And this is a dimension in Mr Carter’s work that I feel is lacking.

So if I had one question I could ask him it would something about his view on the relationship between (human) peace and environmentalism. But, unfortunately as interpreter it will not be the place for this. I am very much looking forward in meeting him and I feel privileged to be interpreting for him and be a bridge to the people of my town.

China – the “new face” on the environmental scene

Warren Tang2 Comments

China will spend over the next five years $175 billion dollars on the environment. This number, according to the BBC, is about 1.5% of China’s annual economic output (my italics).

So let me do my math: is not that equal to 0.3% of its current annual economic output each year? $175 billion sure sounds like a lot of money but it really isn’t if you think about it. That’s about one hundred US dollars for each person living in China over five years, or about twenty US dollars each year for the five years.

I think the people of China and environment will need much more than that to reverse the damage this country has already caused. So what is this new face of China anyway? Why now? Perhaps we should keep in mind that two years from now, in 2008, a very big money spinner called the Olympic Games will be hosted by Beijing.

Environmental sensitivity is sure a great place for public relations these days. Even better than, say, human rights. China, of course, is trying to deflect attention from its own track record on this issue. And what better way than to look good in one area that many find hard to criticise. So, to me, the new face of China is really an old one. It is only a face lift, one that has been done fairly well but somehow you still know its fake.

The True (Techni)colours of Al Gore

Warren Tang3 Comments

I used to think former vice-president Al Gore was an idiot. He was portrayed as such by the media. And people, like myself, bought into this unfair caricature. It was not until I read about David Suzuki’s encounter with Mr Gore that I was given a different perspective.

Mr Gore as vice-president used to avoid environmental issues in political campaigning. It was something of a dead platform he believed. The American people simply weren’t ready to hear it. And he knew it would not give him a chance in elections.

And how right he is. Politics isn’t about the issues. It is about choosing the right issues that win elections. How sad it is that something as important as the environment – our future – should be left out of the political discourse because it lessens one’s chance in winning elections. It says something about the fickleness of politics, particularly democracy.

And now that Mr Gore is no longer a man with political ambitions he can say what he wants, say what really is on his mind. It is truly a pity that good men (as well as the bad) in politics must spend much time and effort to deceive the public during the election campaign in order to do what they really want when they get into power. It is this deception that has led us to the environmental degradation today. But I blame not politicians (though they have a hand in it) but also voters must learn to see the political rhetoric for what it is and make better choices for our future’s sake.