Author: Warren Tang

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

The relativity of “theory”

Warren Tang4 Comments

The term “theory” today is often used to mean Postmodernism theory or just Postmodernism. And because of this Postmodernism is often accused of high jacking the term. But that is just plain wrong.

In acts of elitism this may have occurred a century ago and can be said to still be practiced today. The term “philosophy” could be seen as one such word. Today it represents only the Western tradition (Russell, Kant, etc) and quietly excludes Eastern thought (Confucius, Vasubandhu, etc) all together. But theory is somehow different.

Theory as a term to be used as a stand-alone term represents a set of values, those of Postmodern thought, and it was not used in this manner until Postmodernism came along. Through an act of defamiliarity it has gained momentum through usage. And there is nothing wrong with this. As Postmodernism labours to point out words only have meaning insofar as a series of differences.

A word can be said to be relative to all usage within a language or even against all languages. I do not see there is snobbery or elitist tendency in Postmodernism’s appropriation of the term, but rather it has been seen as misappropriation and that it is a misunderstanding of Postmodern thought and its non-hidden agenda. It is a case of theory of relativity as well as being the relativity of (the term) “theory”.

Mr Blair, thermostats and nuclear power

Warren Tang3 Comments

There is this man named Tony Blair who one day decided to do something for the environment and then a month later decided to do another. Must be a pain to be scrutinized in the public light in this way.

What exactly is Postmodernism?

Warren TangLeave a comment

It seems nowadays we all know that we live in Postmodernism. But most are at a loss as to what exactly it is. And therein lies the problem. Perhaps it is better not to state what it is, but rather say what it does. While what Postmodernism “does” is not new, simply before the term Postmodernism came along we did not have a name for the combination of things it does. Here are just some of the things Postmodernism does.

Postmodernism is highly reflexive in the (grammar) sense of “reflection” rather than reflex. Before Postmodernism much of Western intellectualism tended to criticize the Other – other ways of thought, etc. It ignored its own failings by shutting out any possibility of internal critique. To borrow a term from late twentieth-century Russian political development Postmodernism ushered in an era of openness.

Actually much of that development in the former Soviet was due to Postmodern thought. Breaking down discourses is something Postmodernism does particularly well. No opinion is free from bias (including Postmodernism) as it is a condition of existence to which we are condemned to. Some discourses intentionally hide their bias. While others subconsciously do so. But either way they must be exposed, they must be open to scrutiny.

Postmodernism also exposes the reality of all claims as artificial constructs, that they are all a matter of choice. What becomes popular or dominant is only a matter of circumstance, sometimes through favourable conditions, and more often through accident. Chance plays more a role than choice. In other words, things are more out of our control than we really want to admit. Often Postmodernism is described as arbitrariness and relativity.

I have thus far avoided any link to Modernism because critics of Postmodernism misunderstand the latter’s intention believing it is no different to the Modernism that came before. But through a commitment to the belief and practice of relativity, arbitrariness, discourse analysis, openness and scrutiny Postmodernism has changed the way think. The intellectual mood is different to our recent past and it is different in a better way. But that does not mean we are living in a better world. This is another feature of Postmodernism – we longer believe in a unidirectional, universal, linear progression of history and development. Because all this talk of Modernism and Postmodernism really only has meaning only as difference to each other, in a form of relativism. There is nothing intrinsic in their definitions. And to think any different is to not understand what Postmodernism is all about. And that being wrong is a possibly that one must keep in mind at all times.

SDB News – May 2006

Warren TangLeave a comment

This month has been another very slow month. Finding the time to keep up with the news and write about it has been a struggle. The main goal is then to focus on “pillar” posts, which I see as my strength when taking time into consideration.

There have also been some aesthetic and practical changes to the appearance of SDB. The calendar function is now gone. Its function only seemed to be to highlight blogging infrequency. The lesson here is that calendars are only good if you are a prolific poster. So it seemed logical to remove it and concentrate on content – quality over quantity – instead.

Continue reading “SDB News – May 2006” →

Paradigm shift, dolphins, language

Warren Tang5 Comments

When man saw in his telescope a planet for the first time he noticed it was round and came to guess that his own planet (indeed that is what it was) might also be round. The act of circumnavigation by Christopher Columbus (even though it was not quite a circumnavigation – he mistook America for Asia) proved it conclusively. This is just one instance of how wrong one can be from using his senses alone. Sure, the earth seems to be flat, but it is not. The discovery brought about a major shift in our thinking to say the least.

Such shifts are not uncommon as Thomas Kuhn has famously shown – he called them paradigm shifts. Paradigm shifts have occurred many times throughout history. That the Earth revolves around the sun was one such shift. Less dramatic was the discovery that language does not have inherent meaning (that it is arbitray) is another. Our perceptions change or shift through such discoveries.

But how do paradigms come into existance? Most simply through a lack of information. The terracentric view of astronomy came to hold sway (at least in Western culture) – partly but not holy wholy – because 1) it seems that way since the planet does not feel like it is moving, and 2) a book (the Bible) said so. This is nothing but presumption from available information, without another method to verify it that it comes to become fact. And often with persumption comes arrogance, as in the following case.

It has been discovered that dolphins actually call each other by something akin to a name, suggesting that they have the capacity – like humans – for language. But why have we come to presume for such a long time that we are the only creatures on this planet to have language capacity is a complex and perplexing one. In our conceit we have dulled our senses to sounds that turn out to be sophisticated communication, perhaps as sophisticated as ours. Or to put it another way, we have simply dismissed something as noise when in fact it was language.

So please tell me: how many times do we have to make the same mistake before we will learn to be humbled by how little we really know? Or are we again going to congratulate ourselves for making such “great” discoveries and forget our past stupidities?

Why this blog was aimed at the wrong audience

Warren Tang2 Comments

Peter Gibson in this article argued a very good point – that people in poorer areas are simply too busy with life to worry about ozone depletion. He points out that the majority of people in green groups (in developed Western nations, at least) are mostly white middle class. In other words their message and concerns are for areas already well established and rich, or rather environmentalism is for those who afford to be concerned about the environment.

Most of the world’s population today still do not have internet access. So I am really talking preaching to other like-minded people who do not need to hear the message. What I do need to do then is not work for my already nice clean area, but help those in other areas in need of help.

Often I have talked about leaving human concerns out of the equation – calling this “strong sustainability” – but really leaving economics and government out is not the same thing as working for human rights. So I must reassess my line of thinking.

The work ahead then is both for the environment and for humankind. While the environment is most definitely a victim of politics and capitalism, I now must reconsider that the underprivileged and the need-not-be lower class are also part of the same systematic victimization.

Thank you, Mr Gibson.

Research needed on marine sound

Warren TangLeave a comment

There was an article in the Daily Yomiuri earlier this month about how marine sound might seem like a jet engine roar to whales. Sometimes we only think of noise pollution as a human problem, but really it is as much a problem to the animals with whom we share this planet as it is to us.

Bruce Springsteen in New Orleans

Warren TangLeave a comment

1.
Bruce Springsteen played at the 2006 New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival on April 30. And he took this opportunity to criticize the government’s response to the disaster, calling it “criminal ineptitude”. He also called labeled the man in the Oval Office as “President Bystander”. Rewriting the lyrics to some of his songs to highlight on the disaster Mr Springsteen brought many in the crowd to tears and causing some to hug nearby strangers.

Yes, Hurricane Katrina was a devestating natural disaster… or perhaps not so “natural”. Some environmentalists have pointed out that such superstorms are forming due to the changing climate. And yes, it all leads back to the President Bystander who refuses to uphold the Kyoto Protocol.

It really baffles me as to how does one get voted in twice on a track record like his. It really must mean something is wrong with the democratic system. While it is the best political system we have so far, it is far from being the best there is. I do not usually get political on this blog but sometimes it is necessary, especially when it is the political powers that are perpetuating environmental problems.

So Mr Springsteen is right and couragous to speak out. As an American icon (one perhaps greater than President Bystander) he will hopefully wake up the slumbering masses to the nightmare that is America today.

2.
With that said, let me return to a more sane message. The fact is that superstorms are related to human action. Our numbers and expansion has an effect on the tiny globe called Earth. Regardless of politics and business necessities we need to lessen the effect we have on the planet and its diversity. For without diversity the lifespan of our species (if we so choose to see only our future) is most definitely shortened.

The saying “no man is an island” could be (re)read as “no humankind is an island”. Even the loss of one species could mean the end of ours, and that is not an exaggeration. And whether we can verify this directly or not is inconsequential. Only humankind would want to verify this in the first place. No other animal does this except us.

But in the same vein, we have the ability to see this and do something about it. Our ability to see things on the macro-level is remarkable, if not god-like. But when we wake to this fact it may be too late to do something about it.

102 People… Oh, and One Whale

Warren Tang4 Comments

The recent main news in Japan was that of a high-speed ferry accident in which 102 people were injured. It was likely that the ferry, named Toppy, had struck a whale in an Kagoshima inlet (southern most part of the four main islands of Japan).

While I feel truly sorry about the injuries I feel more sorry for one particular victim – the whale. It is typical of the human-centred thinking of our society not to think of the pain inflicted on this whale. Take this quote from the Daily Yomiuri:

Koichi Akase, the ferry’s captain, who was hospitalized, told JCG [Japan Coast Guard] officials that the vessel probably was hit by a whale or some other marine animal.

According to a spokesman at Kagoshima Shosen, which operates the ferry, Toppy was cruising near its maximum speed of 80 kph at the time of the accident.

So who struck who? I seriously doubt the whale was going faster than 80 kph (50 mph).

This could simply be bad reporting or it could be something akin to a Freudian slip on the captain’s part. In an anthropocentric world the lives of other animals are not even seen as valuable as our own. Where we draw the line for consideration is ultimately a choice. That it has now become instilled in all of us to be cold-hearted lifeforms is truly sad. While I doubt the whales care for us, that is not an excuse. For humankind and whales are different creatures with a different capacity for compassion. Humankind definitely can act out of compassion. But equally we can act out of cruelty. And so often we have chosen the latter. It is what it means to be human today – to be cruel and uncaring.

I feel all people have a capacity to be good, but whether they choose to be good within a lifetime is something only each individual can prove by their actions.

Glaciers heading for a quick melt

Warren Tang2 Comments

The facts about glaciers are these:1) since 1850 we have lost 50 percent of our glaciers to warmer climate, 2) from 1850–1970 we have lost an average of 2.9 percent per decade, 3) from 1970-2000 we have lost an average of 8.2 percent per decade.

The predictions is that before the end of this century global temperatures will rise by 3 degrees. This translates into a 75% glacial area loss, the glacial line will be 340m higher than what it is now and precipitation will rise by 10% in summers.

Those hit hardest will be those who rely on the glaciers for drinking water and agriculture. And the water from glaciers will be released quickly early in spring when it is needed most for irrigation.

The need for drinking water and irrigation I can understand. Hydro-power too. But tourism I cannot. In today’s world there is an unhealthy and heavy reliance on the economy. This is something I feel that businesses and politicians want you to have in order to maintain a artificial and human system all the while ignoring larger factors which contribute to its sustainability.

The progress-driven philosophy of humankind simply cannot be kept up indefinitely. But I am not against our way of life, rather, if logic dictates, that if we continue to heat the room we call Earth temperatures will rise to uncomfortable levels.

I remember someone once telling me about how each person generates 200 watts of heat. Simple math will tell us that 6 billion people together generate 1.2 trillion watts of heat. So by being alive we are heating the planet. And just how much electricity is needed to run all those air-conditioners to cool us down, that is, if we each person utilizes air-conditioners. Which means we are generating the heat not once but twice just to keep us cool (inside our houses and workplace) but not the rest of the planet.

Our lifestyles need to change in order to survive. We have adapted the planet to our needs but that is coming at a cost. Maybe it is time for us to adapt to the planet like we used to. Wouldn’t that be a novel idea.