Idle Sunday Observation -

One of the most recent links offered by ALD is to the New Humanist, a correspondant by the name of Johnathon Re'e (there is supposed to be an accent on the first e). He is offering yet another repatitive and boring rationalisation on the relationship between atheists, atheism, and the Christian religion.

Why is it that 99% of the modern atheists (I can not in truth say 100%) follow the well-trodden path of single religious atheism. As he does this, Ree has pointed out the inconsistency of his own argument. His observation that Christians were considered atheists by the Romans of the time follows the single religion path to its source.

When will "atheism" and its promoters be able to take the truth of their own belief to its foundation? The "well-trodden path" (is it the narrow path to heaven of the Christians?) should be the broad highway that excludes all theism. Does Ree's rejection of Christianity reject Bhuddist or Hindu beliefs as well?

Aldous Huxley was brave enough to analyse the common ground between all the major religions (his "Perrennial Philosophy") rather than to express a full atheism. That book should be a required reading for anyone who leaps to print on the subject of atheism. Not only should it be read, it should also be understood and appreciated as one expression of the foundation of all religious belief.

I profess to have no religion. That to me is atheism. I do not need to support or even debate what it means. That it is my belief makes it as valid in every sense as Catholicism, Jaine, Sufism, Bhuddism, Islam, or Southern Baptist.

In no way does that make me amoral. The counter that atheism is the same as amorality does not cut the mustard. I live by the morality of my up-bringing, of the society in which I live. That does not in any way counter my belief, counter the fact that I have no belief in any religion.

On freedom and having free will...

I picked this one up through the new old mates who are running ALD these days.

The experiment helped to change John-Dylan Haynes's outlook on life. In 2007, Haynes, a neuroscientist at the Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience in Berlin, put people into a brain scanner in which a display screen flashed a succession of random letters1. He told them to press a button with either their right or left index fingers whenever they felt the urge, and to remember the letter that was showing on the screen when they made the decision. The experiment used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to reveal brain activity in real time as the volunteers chose to use their right or left hands. The results were quite a surprise.

"The first thought we had was 'we have to check if this is real'," says Haynes. "We came up with more sanity checks than I've ever seen in any other study before."

That is the intro. The next bit gets into realms of philosophy whence angels might fear to tread...

The conscious decision to push the button was made about a second before the actual act, but the team discovered that a pattern of brain activity seemed to predict that decision by as many as seven seconds. Long before the subjects were even aware of making a choice, it seems, their brains had already decided.

As humans, we like to think that our decisions are under our conscious control — that we have free will. Philosophers have debated that concept for centuries, and now Haynes and other experimental neuroscientists are raising a new challenge. They argue that consciousness of a decision may be a mere biochemical afterthought, with no influence whatsoever on a person's actions. According to this logic, they say, free will is an illusion. "We feel we choose, but we don't," says Patrick Haggard, a neuroscientist at University College London.

Now I think that is quite an interesting idea.

If only because I can just hear les religeaux piping God hot and strong into the mix.

Further on...
.

The practical effects of demolishing free will are hard to predict. Biological determinism doesn't hold up as a defence in law. Legal scholars aren't ready to ditch the principle of personal responsibility. "The law has to be based on the idea that people are responsible for their actions, except in exceptional circumstances," says Nicholas Mackintosh, director of a project on neuroscience and the law run by the Royal Society in London.

Owen Jones, a law professor at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, who directs a similar project funded by the MacArthur Foundation in Chicago, Illinois, suggests that the research could help to identify an individual's level of responsibility. "What we are interested in is how neuroscience can give us a more granulated view of how people vary in their ability to control their behaviour," says Jones. That could affect the severity of a sentence, for example.

(Just wait for Weatherstone to get hold of that idea!).

Sorry lads and lasses. I think it is no more than a measure of how thick the human brain is... the unconcious says "press", and it takes the concious 7 seconds (or 0.7 seconds depending on measure and a lot of other variables) to decipher the message. The concious says "I am going to press in five, four, three..." and the "press" neurones fire up, "two, one, fire!".

Very similar to a launch as Cape Canaveral.

"Minimalist"?

In view of my opines regarding "minimalist photography" I should perhaps follow up on that with an example of my own.

I grabbed this when I was leaving the Manukau Photographic Soc meeting, after I had made up my mind that it was not really what I was looking for. I went to the car for the camera (the Lumix) and was returning to get the image set up when one of the members walked past and asked what I was doing. I gestured to the trees in front of me and she said, "You know, I have never seen that!".

Just goes to show...

I'm dreaming of a white Christmas...

My thanks to Metservice for the map. It is theirs and I have knicked it. Just this once.

For those who know weather maps this should need no explanation. The high off to the east there graced our shores for about two weeks. It goes nowhere fast.

So there are no prizes for guessing the weather for this Christmas.

One thing - it is NOT cold...

On the topic of minimal whatevers...

I had an email from a very good friend concerning my passing comments back here on minimalist photography. He was kind enough to include a photograph of his own that I would count as being a worthy example.

His communication had the effect of twisting the probligo's tail just a bit. Out of that I have taken yet another run around the traps of the various webpages that google throws up. The exercise has done nothing to change my mind about my original comments. I think I am beginning to get an idea of why that might be so.

I have an image that is similar to that of my friend's; it is misty, it is of a set of mooring poles in the Tamaki estuary at the end of Waipuna Rd. The mist was thick enough that the bridge (an enormous concrete thing)behind is invisible despite being no more than a couple of hundred metres away. I have others that would "qualify"; such as a liquidamber tree seed pod against a brilliantly clear blue sky. (Both are candidates for competition at the club next year). I have posted another example here. That is an idea that is on my list of works in progress; I think it has potential.

The point of difference between much of what I see on the 'Net on the subject, and what I and others (my good friend for example) see as "minimalist" includes one very major factor. It is not difficult to separate subject from background in a photograph; there are a number of different ways of achieving that specific objective.

A very large number of the examples I have seen - and I include in this category my own and my friend's examples - are based upon atmospheric conditions such as mist and/or very long exposure times to get that separation. The second of my examples does not use the "monochrome effect" that comes from low light low contrast scenes but from the opposite; using uniform colour as the "separator".

When you start digging into the "how to" pages though, a somewhat different aspect comes to the fore. Rather than doing the work of separation "in the camera" - working the image and components to achieve the effect of isolation - the process changes to the use of image file processors to "dodge and burn" the required effects.

Now I know that makes no difference between digital and film examples and the comparison (highlighted intentionally with "dodge and burn") between the two is entirely valid.

I still think that the challenge of photography is not just in the capture of the image, but in making the image directly what the taker is seeing. In other words, what the camera retains is the image; it should need no further "processing" to convey its reality to another person. I read someone saying "that if an image requires explanation then it is not a good photograph".

I agree that is a very fine hair to split.

Post -

To return to the topic of labels, I try and take images that interest me. Difficult or snapshot is not the point. The photo at Waipuna was hand-held, 1/80 exposure. That does not make me, nor do I want to be, a photographer who is a "minimalist".

All about labels...

Karl du Fresne writes about “A ruinous and oppressive ideology” to which I have commented that what he is really speaking of is the appellation and interpretation of labels.

If he is going to get too righteous about that comment, there is another – totally independent but equally contentious in its own community – example that I have come across in recent times; though the debate has been going for many years in the past.

Those who puddle around in the morass that I call my virtual home might have realised that I have a passing interest in photography. That interest has strengthened to the extent that I have resolved to join (re-join, as I am a past member) the local camera club. I originally joined in order to learn how to take better photos, how to see better images. I was successful to the extent that I did learn enough to earn (as a lower caste animal) recognition for a number of my attempts at fame and winning in the process a couple of the Club annual awards. Yes, I was a very small fish floating around in a very small puddle, but I did get a request to submit a portfolio of three images to the North Shore Salon and a specific request to include one photograph taken at the Auckland Commonwealth Games.

How does this come through to the debate about labels? Well, that starts with a question I was asked recently, “What kind of photographer are you?” My immediate response was “A not very good beginner.”. The intention behind the question was in fact to apply a label; portrait, landscape, abstract… there is a great long list to choose from.

The debate that I tripped over came from a comment concerning an image I had posted up on the net recently. It is a photo of the end of a twig, on which there is a drop of water (it was raining) and in that drop was lensing a branch from another tree. One comment (received by email) admired it as an abstract, an excellent “minimalist” image. That comment tweaked the interest; not because I want the label, I abhor them. It was an idea that had crossed my mind in the past and I was interested enough to see what others were doing…

After three days of searching around the ‘net I can report.

“Minimalist” photography is a category that does have some very worthwhile work. There are some very expert photographers included in the producers, the artists, of those images and I can admire their expertise and vision.

There is also a huge quantity of images, sincerely and seriously presented as “minimalist” work. In my opinion, the label in fact covers no more than a range of work from reasonable, landscape, still life and other generalised categories to the “almost offal”.

In general there is a similarity between the best; they are usually monochrome, with just enough to outline the subject. An instance – submitted to one debate in jest – was a white image titled “Golden Gate Bridge in fog”. Yes, I can image-ine the Golden Gate Bridge right there… That image gave rise to a side-debate about “photography in the absence of light”.

And that, I think, is a good point at which to return to Mr du Frene’s comments.

On matters of free speech... and letters to Editors

Its funny (peculiar) sometimes how things pan out in life. The letter I sent to SST was published (with some fairly injudicious editing. At least I can thank my lucky stars that they published it without (as TFS is always complaining) leaving out all of the sense of it. They did remove the “potty jockey” crack I had at Michael Laws. All in all it was about a half of what I had originally writ.

And therein lies the funny. Printed in small red letters above my contribution (as printed in SST) were the words “Winning Words”. Now if you look down to the end of the letters space you find a little note to the effect that you may win a ball-pen… It is now Friday and I haven’t yet seen it.

Not, you understand, because it is coveted; far from it as at work I use a very simple slim ball-pen refill (no cover or cap), a practice which stops me from walking out the door with it in my pocket and stops anyone else from knicking it off of my desk. I also have a very nice “special” at home which includes a wood barrel and cap turned by a very good friend and given me for my 60th. The wood is swamp kauri, reputedly (from the certificate Len gave me) aged at 6,500 BPE. Was there a hint there, old Len? It is a thing of beauty indeed and thus far unused. That might change when I renew my Will in a few weeks’ time. I also have (somewhere in the laboratory) a very expensive Scheaffer (like this one) fountain pen. Last time I used it (to sign my Marriage Certificate and the Register) I needed an ink cartridge for it and I ended up refilling the old empty with ordinary cheap ink.

I am wondering if the Subbie who re-wrote my contribution has claimed the pen as his own in return for the work he put in to get my letter published.

"The probligo's Progress"

Al the Bourgeois Philistine has written a very good and most readable start to a "spiritual autobiography". That led me to thinking what the ol'probligo's version of the same journey might look like.

I guess that the landscape has to begin with the family; my father of Anglican stock, my mother Methodist at best. Other than the usual family events was always "home work", chores and preparing for the following school week.

The school at Te Whaiti is right next door to the local Presbyterian kirk; well, there was a shortcut through a swamp, or it was a brisk walk a hundred yards up the road. So we were "required" to attend Sunday School where we were "baby-sat" for about two hours every Sunday morning. The significance of this move escaped a naive nine year-old and in fact it was another 15 years before I worked out what may have been behind the idea.

It was an "interesting" experience. Interesting because I almost immediately began running to difficulties. I have the memory of trying to understand the meaning of the Catechism; if I have to say this, what does it mean?. Colouring pictures of the major festivals, while learning the story of the man and the pictures; artistic ability zero, concentration about the same.

I think I lasted there about 6 months, I remember the Christmas and Easter services because the Sunday School took part (after suitable teachings) and all of the hymns were sung (very beautifully I think) in Maori. There was then a brief sotto voce but fairly heated discussion between the Minister and the old man following which I was told that I had been expelled from Sunday School for being "too disruptive" and asking too many hard questions.

My parents made another attempt after we moved north. The Baptist Church had a "camp" just down the road from us and used to turn on a Sunday School programme on the beach during the summer holidays. There was an associated three week "boarding camp holiday". I was sent there as a twelfth birthday present. My chief memory of that experience was being woken - or kept awake - in the wee smalls by two of the senior boarders. Their intent was to "convert" me to religion. Sorry guys, but the myth of "original sin" still escapes me; there is no honest belief in me; anything that I might do or say will be nothing more than pretence; without honest belief my participation would be a lie. After that exerience, "Sunday worship" for the warmer half of the year became the religion of "messing around in boats" as Ratty put it. The Sundays of the colder half were spent recovering from the previous day's rugby game and schoolwork.

It was about that time that I discovered two of my father's books. First was "The Importance of Living" by Lin Yutang, which I still have. Second was "Perennial Philosophy" by Aldous Huxley.

Yutang gave me a very small peep-hole into Chinese traditions and beliefs, Confucionism and Tao. Huxley put me on the road to Hindu and Bhuddist thought.

And so began a long period of digestion. It continues.

To misquote a sf writer "Either there are gods out there, or there are not. Both prospects are equally frightening."

In the meantime I am quite comfortable with how I have lived my life, and the fact of my mortality.

On Facebook and matters of privacy...

About a month ago, a tennis-friend of the Mrs probligo joined up with Facebook. There was no need for her to publicise this, nor did she do anything more than follow the process of form-filling to get her page set up.

The first that we knew of it was an email - through Facebook - saying the the Mrs probligo should join up and become a "friend".

That would also explain how Facebook got a hold of our email address.

What is inexplicable is that the email includes the names and Facebook addresses of four other people.

Those four people are -

the probligo's daughter, whom we know has a Facepage.

a lady the Mrs probligo worked with about 5 years back and with whom we have occasional direct contact.

Tommy Miesel whom I suspect might be the same gent I conversed with some years back on matters modelling.

Alan Erkkila, whom I presume might have a very direct relationship to an old whig.

And therein lies the mystery.

How was Facebook able to make the connection between the latter two and the Mrs probligo (or perhaps the probligo's private email address)?

Bits and pieces; odds and ends...

Those words that stick in the mind -

Prolix; prolixis(?) Unnecessarily long and wordy. I wonder why that came to mind.

I was trying to think of a word for the unnecessary use of epithets.

The f'rinstance that brought that to mind was one of the writers I read regularly joining in the castigation of a person for using the word "fart" - one of the good old Anglo-Saxon words if ever I heard one. What made me wonder was the same person not a few days later addressing the same intent with the spelling of "phart".

Strange!

OK, so there are a few words in my personal lexicon that I would not use in public. But then I can not think of any where a more publicly acceptable alternative does not exist.

On being responsible for the development of a new superhuman

Hat tip to Al (old whig) for this one.

Your child is a DoublePlusHuman. Don't make him or her into any less than that. Instead, strive to grow with him or her.

I say this as someone who was a child once and who has gone through the whole process of being programmed and then deprogrammed. I was for a while a mere drone, subject to the whims of social norms. I felt rebellion so many times in my childhood and felt terribly guilty for it. Now I understand I was right. When my parents told me they love me I felt smothered because anything I do imperfectly was not enough to make up for her love. When my parents told me life was suffering I did not want to believe. Today I know I was right, about nearly everything. If there was someone to show me what I know today, many of my current compulsions which limit my present personal freedom would not exist.

Children are not blank canvases that you can paint whatever you wish on. They already are masterpieces. You just have to let them flourish.

I have two objections to this.

The first is that every child is different. While not trying to contradict the general thrust of the line of thought, the idea has to be put into the context of individual ability.

The second is that (from my experience) an enormous part of child-raising these days is predicated on the (often quite unreasonable) expectations of the parents. I must say that this is very much a two-edged sword; that sometimes the parental expectations can undershoot their child’s actual ability by a very long way.

I left Al with the thought that “There is always that very tentative balance between guiding and restricting development of a child, and providing the social skills and morals needed to cope with living in society.”

Rather than the “programmed and de-programmed” description from the author I would describe it as more of a process of “learning and refinement”. I would like to think that I was a fairly “moral” child though there could be some debate about that if I were totally honest.

I have to confess to having very little ability in social interaction, especially in my youth. I was at one level shy, backward, and felt very awkward dealing with other people. Social contact with girls was totally foreign to me, to the extent that at the age of 13 at a school social the old man had to quite literally drag me out of a film (being shown for the parents) and into the room down the hall where there was a dance. Dance? How?? With GIRLS? By the end of the evening I had sort of cottoned on to Military Two-step and Quadrille. Trying a foxtrot had me quite literally in a sweat. And as for the last waltz!! Say no more.

Five years later I wasn’t much better. I was living in Auckland, away from the family, having to cope on my own.

Five years after that, I had managed to talk a very nice young lady into marrying me so I must have learned some social skills by that time.

Another five years and I am responsible for the education and raising of my own first-born. How the h3!! do I do that??

Yes, children are very much "blank canvasses". I see my responsibility as a parent to put the frame around that canvas. To limit the development of the picture to the kind of norms I consider to be appropriate for society but at the same time to not influence the shape and form of the picture.

Atamira

This year was the second Atamira - the first was two years ago, the next will be 2011 to coincide with the Rugby World Cup. It is a "cultural presentation" of urban Maori and is funded by Auckland City and Manukau City. Confused yet?

Admission is free - how "collective" is that!! But then, I refuse, point blank, to pay to attend similar "shows" where 90% of the content is commercial and advertorial.

Anyhoos, it was most enjoyable. There was plenty of people, but not the crammed-in-shoulder-to-shoulder crowds of the Easter Show of past years (the commercial and advertorial referred to, and which cost $25 per head last time we went 30 years back).






I enjoy faces - and I hate formal and posed photography. So, what is set out below are all hand-held, natural light, shutterspeed as slow as 1/4s.


This lady is stripping flax to remove the "plant" from the fibres. Traditionally a pipi (like a cockle) shell is used. The strips she is working on will end up as "lilys" like those in the foreground.








It is a long time since last saw this being done. The panel is tukutuku, thin wood laths bound over raupo (you can see that in the gaps as light fawn vertical bits). The panels were used as lining in important houses and there are many traditional patterns used as decoration. This panel was about 4m long and 1.5m high - large! The binding is done in pairs, one each side of the panel, and when there are three or four "teams" singing as they work it is great to sit and watch (if you are allowed).







Also performing (two 20 minute stints) was Whirimako Black.





The "theatre" is no more than 8m across, and about 3m from stage front to back. Truly, "intimate" theatre!

It was good to hear her sing, in person, and with no "backing" other than Kevin Kereama doing the percussion and bone flute bits reasonably well.

Oh, one last thing. The woman pictured above, peeking out from behind the white and blue needs explanation. The white and blue is the back and head (hoodie and balaclava) of her son(?) who is a quadraplegic and is a mouth-painter. I thought her face was quite dramatic and wore the cares of looking after her (30ish) son.

A good "boil-up" for lunch, $10 per head. Mutton, kumera, potato, watercress boiled (hence the name) for quite some time. The hangi was $15, but I haven't had a decent boil-up since I was a kid so there was no contest. We were there for a good 5 hours.

Time well spent on a wet and cold winter Saturday.

Ah, the pleasures of life...

...is sitting here, thinking of as little as possible having dined very well on my wife's cooking - lamb shanks is red wine - and listening for the first time to El Misteri d'Elx.

Beautiful music, written in the 15th Century but the recording made from a Renaissance document.

The CD? Veritas 7243 5 45239 2

Recommended!

On "near death experiences"...

There is a small item over at TF's place about traffic offences, speed limits, red-light cameras etc.

I dropped the note that (amongst other relative but more mundane things) I have had three "near death" experiences while driving. I thought that I would give a brief description of each, not to brag at all about any aspect but to illustrate just how much on a knife edge we are on the roads.

First, going sideways on a gravel road in a Mini (the original 1960's style). Cause? Poor observation on my part. We had been following another car on a gravel road for some 20 minutes. I knew the road well and knew exactly where I could get past and out of the dust. The problem was that I did not notice as I pulled out to overtake that there was a ridge of gravel about 8" deep up the middle of the road - left by the road grader. Minis being what they were, the front wheels went through the ridge but the back wheels didn't. Going sideways at 60mph within 2 feet of another car is not exciting...

Second, losing traction at speed on a lifting corner. You know the kind of thing, you are going round a bend where the road is going uphill then as you go round the road starts going downhill. Cause - stupidity, driving far too fast for the corner.

Third, skating through four lanes of heavy traffic with no rear suspension. Cause - bad luck. Driving at 65mph and I hit a 3/4" square bar, probably about 2ft long. The bar got tossed into the rear suspension, bending the lh suspension arms into a "U" shape and causing the car to turn violently to the right (we drive "Keep left" so guess where I was heading). I managed to get the car to turn left when I had already crossed one lane of opposing traffic - there was no centre barrier - and heading back to the correct side of the road. Someone was looking out for me as I passed into the only gap in the opposing traffic and out again without hitting anything or anyone. I think that TF would say "Praise the Lord" but I was just far too busy getting the car onto the side of the road and stopping it to think much past the original Aussie/Kiwi cuss-word...

After the festivities...

We (SWMBO and I as the rest of the family now have their own paths to walk) went north to Opo the Monday before Christmas. Work was done plastering the carport wall to get that all sealed off (to little avail but that will take another post)and painted.

Christmas dinner was enjoyable - roast lamb and veg, Demifroix ( I hate with intensity people who call it "demi-freddo" or "semi-freddo") made with apricot which was not an outstanding success.

Then we got into the serious business...

It ran through my mind while driving home that there is so much that happens in this world which, on reflection, matters very little.

Instances that come to mind -

The shenanigans around the Senate seat vacated by OHB.

The Israeli government getting into yet another "Wag the Dog" war with Gaza because their popularity with the electorate was dropping fast just a few weeks out from an election. Where did that deja vu flash come from?

GWB frantically trying to find something that people will remember him for. He found it - in the form of most of the North Pacific. What right he has to donate that area to posterity I don't know but I guess that after having the crap nuclear bombed out of it in the '50s and '60s there is little left there of real economic value.

Pontifications on the future of mankind from all manner of people from Il Papa on downward.

How education should be working and isn't. Interesting one this, as it is fairly close to the ol' cockles. Not worth pursuing though as half the world would not care and the other half would misinterpret the intent, and then half would think it a darned fine idea and spend the next 20 years and millions of bucks trying to make it work, which it probably wouldn't because the teachers think it is a stink idea anyway.

And so the list goes on. It does get quite depressing really.

Highlights? Walking to the Waiotemarama Falls. Took film rather than digital and might post up when I get the film back. Sometime. Seeing my sister for a second, no sorry third, Christmas dinner. Had Vichyssoise, boerewurst and salad for lunch. Nice. I did not take a dip in Stephan's moat. Biggest highlight was my first swim in 3 years, since Feb 06 in fact. Can't omit the woodchop on NYD. Always good fun, and the hangi was a good lunch for $8 a pop.

On Father's Day...

Today is Father's Day here in NZ.

I had a very good Father's Day.

My wife gave me a very nice card with the inscription -

Families are like fudge...

mostly sweet with a few nuts.

Number One Son and his family came over for an afternoon tea.

Number Two Grand-daughter was in a very grizzly mood having had a disrupted morning schedule. Took a few funny faces to get her attention and things quietened down considerably.

Number One Grand-daughter got the double wink (both eyes, one at a time). Five minutes later I caught her "practising" from the safety of Dad's lap. When they left I got a full blooded double wink from her :) :) Gorgeous!!

So, I am better off by two cards, a box of scorched almonds (which will probably live in the cupboard for a few months because they do the waistline no good at all) and a phone call from Number One Daughter.

All in all, a good day.

Thought for the week...

In a conversation with the Mrs probligo, the topic the attitudes of others to things like courtesy and respect for others...

For some people, the universe extends no further than their ears.

I am NOT here...

... because for the next ten days I am withdrawing from this care-filled world.

In emergency, I will be found on a beach in sunny Savai'i.

No phone.
No net.
No radio.
No tv.
No cares.
No worries mate.

Only my fine woman and BLISS!!

I don't even care that Dave the Justus deleted my penultimate comment. The tags were bad, I have to admit.

Perhaps this goes some way to expaining NZers

Ol'Whig Al has me going with a "get rich quick" - one of these "earn $75,000 in your spare time" - schemes.

Personally I can't abide them, but please don't tell Al that. As far as I am concerned they come under the "...sound too good to be true..." along with "...if it is so successful, why does he want to sell it..."; the kind of offer that appears in some of the tabloids for "I have made thousands winning on the horses with this simple technique - I will sell it for $2,500!!" I can't help but imagine a line of "finders" trading off each other, each adding their little bit to the cost of the oil that I want to buy for my trip to Opononi this weekend.

And that brings me to the explanation - in the Herald (tomorrow?) is this little gem...

Living a morally good life and having free time is more important to New Zealanders than getting rich, according to a recent survey.

The poll, conducted by UMR Research, asked 750 respondents to rate six values on whether they were very important, somewhat important, not that important or very not important at all.

Only eight per cent valued being wealthy as "very important", but most rated living a morally good life (78 per cent), having enough time to do the things you want to do (64 per cent) and having children (59 per cent) as very important.

Climbing the career ladder didn't appeal to many, with only 37 per cent rated being successful in a career as very important compared with 49 per cent who rated helping the wider community by volunteering and donating as very important.
...
Similar research conducted in the United States shows New Zealanders and Americans rated things much the same as each other, but with one important exception.

While 61 per cent of Americans rated being successful in a career as very important, only 37 per cent of New Zealanders felt the same.

As I said to Al, I am rich. But I am rich in ways that he might not comprehend. The results of this survey suprise me not at all. At least the first three headings of morality, free time and recreation, and family are head of my list.

I do not need money to enjoy any of those.

On pedants, pedantry and good language.

I am slowly dragging my way through the thoughts of JS Mill on “Utilitarianism”, a term which I firstly suspected coined by 21st century bloggers with an angle to promote but which to my chagrin I find was used by the good man himself.

I often struggle – as apparently does Obama among a very large number of other people – to find the right words to correctly express an idea that is floating through the probliverse. Sometimes the words are easy to find and are direct. In other instances it can become extremely difficult to put together the right words, in the right order, to properly express a fairly difficult concept.

I recall that when reading the Gita many many moons back, a good part of the Introduction, and many of the footnotes in the first few pages, guided the reader through the translation of the more religious terms and symbology. In many instances the “meaning” came down to there being “no direct equivalent” in the English language.

JS Mill had the same problem in a much more limited fashion. He uses the word “pleasure” as the nominator of a concept central to his argument. (There will be more to come on this later). As far back as Mill’s original publication, that term has been deliberately interpreted (or rather mis-interpreted) in order to oppose and denigrate his argument.

In more everyday situations, there is the same problem occurring between what could be considered different dialects of English – where the same etymology is used for quite different concepts. Most pronounced are the very slight differences between NZ and Australian English, and the differences between Australasian English and English English, or US English.

Another example that comes to mind is the old joke (probably more true than is admitted) about the Inuit, or the Lapps, or whoever, having a large number of terms for “snow”. AS an English word, “snow” has some twelve meanings (listed in dictionary.com). First with the etymology for “frozen water falling from the sky in a specific form”, two of those meanings cover noun and verb. Second with the etymology “to obscure or mislead”, there are a further two meanings as noun and verb. Similar in intent is “to overwhelm with the intent to confuse”. There are further derivative meanings like “snow” on a tv screen, and the literary meanings attributing “snow-like” to other objects and concepts as well as the slang and street usages.

Essentially what this all comes down to is that English – as a language – can be said to have far too many words for a comparatively limited number of concepts. At the same time, there is also the criticism that English does not have the means of expressing alien concepts accurately other than by adopting the alien term (hence in the Gita, those terms not having direct or accurate English equivalents were presented in the original Sanskrit).

It has led, as a personal example, to my use of terms such as “mana” in the sense(s) that derive from the Maori word to express the appropriate emotive and respect responses that I am trying to put forward. I know that for an Australian or American, those responses would be far more limited than they would be from someone from Opononi or Whakatane.

The consequence is even more difficult to deal with. As Mill discovered, it can take a chapter in a book to clarify and express exactly what is meant by the term “pleasure”. That difficulty is increased geometrically when a reader intends that it should be mis-interpreted because the concept is not acceptable to him. My personal approach is to try and find a word where the first meaning in the dictionary is the concept that I wish to convey. That does not (in any way) prevent the intentional mis-interpretation. It does not stop the accusations (particularly from my wife) of my tendency to get quite pedantic about the meanings of words.
____________________________________________________

As for Mill, I thought I had a problem with sentence structure and readability. I take it back. My writing on average would be easy reading for a fifth-grader by comparison. Mill is convoluted, highly nested, and extremely precise writing. The typical sentence might contain as many as three or four levels – of noun and adjectival clauses – and often more than 50 words. Not easy going at all.