East and West, knowledge and consequence.

Something interesting I've thought about numerous times is the consequence of knowledge. There's a very interesting distinction between knowledge and ignorance when you compare "Western" and "Eastern" traditions.

The West, heavily influenced by Christianity, we have a lot of influential thought about intention and innocence. If one commits a wrong-doing, but doesn't know that it's wrong, it's forgivable. Provided, that is, if one knows that it is wrong from then on and does not do it again. After all, if they didn't know, it's not their fault, right? Innocence of intention is really important here. It is much more heinous to commit a wrong-doing when one knows that it is wrong. Their intention here is not innocent.

In the East, heavily influenced by Buddhism, you have a different perspective entirely. Throughout life, knowledge is really important. Thus, it is more heinous to commit a crime when one is ignorant of it. The logic there is that before one does something, they should understand what it is that they're doing, and the consequences thereof. It's more forgivable to commit a wrong-doing if you know that it is wrong. That's because one knew it was wrong, and still brought himself to do it. He must have had a reason, and so from there, it's easier to forgive and repent, and to atone and move on. Ignorance is not an excuse. How intention figures into this is a lot more complicated, but suffice it to say, the perspective does not change as much as you'd think.

An interesting point of contention.

Internal dialogue.

Through life, and college, I've found languages fascinating. I've studied many, but the highlight, I feel, was taking a few linguistics courses my senior year at Rutgers. I had a great professor, Susan Schweitzer. She really gave me the tools I needed to change and expand the way I thought about language.

Language is a fascinating thing. Language, in many ways, is contrived. There's no direct link between spoken words and their meanings; these are arbitrarily links that need to be learned. Think also of made up words, or "standardized" dialects of a language. When you really think about, though, we often act as if a word concretely fixes - no, captures - an idea. It's arbitrariness makes it external, but we internalize it completely. We judge others often entirely based on their accents.

Living in Jersey, I see it all the time. Just by the way we speak (never mind everything else culturally) we should be two (or three!) completely different states. Then, think of the stereotypes associated with people who use "British," "Southern," or "Canadian" accents.

Old Avestan, a language in the Indo-Iranian language family and a cousin to both Old Persian and Vedic Sanskrit, provides a great example. When you compare the phonology of Old Avestan and Vedic Sanskrit, a clear distinction emerges. Old Avestan's consonants appear in "normal" and "fricated" forms. Vedic Sanskrit's consonants appear in "unaspirated" and "aspirated" forms. Actually, the two languages were so close that many texts could be "translated" into the other by extremely simple rules.

(Of course, I haven't cited anything, so please don't take this concretely; I'm merely using this as one of a number of examples as a basis for an opinion.)

When you look at the deities of the Avestan texts and the Vedic texts, and then look at what happens to the cults over time afterwards, it seems as though the speakers of each could've been from the same community at some point. After diverging (or, indeed, diverging because of it), each group praises the opposing deities. The Avestan-speakers praise the ahura-s, as opposed to the hura-s, and the Sanskrit-speakers praise the sura-s, as opposed to the asura-s. (One rule for transliteration between the two is a predictable switching of /h/ for /s/.

Some other food for thought is that "Sanskrit" means "polished." If this was the original meaning (not attributed later on by the priestly class), then perhaps the Sanskrit-speakers were just pronouncing things differently from the Avestan-speakers, in a more "polished" (at least to them) way, and then eventually they went their separate ways. Of course, this is all unsubstantiated, and just the musing of my mind. Honestly, I don't think we could prove any of this at all anyway. I think you had to be there, so you can't really pick a side.

Really though, think about it. You can see how Latin and Italian diverge, and then eventually how other romance languages come about. You can see it with the Algonquin and Odawa North American Aboriginal peoples, who spoke almost the same language and were two distinct, separate communities.

Lets bring this to modern times. When you call up Google's free 411 service (1-800-goog-411), a computer picks up what you say and attempts to interpret this. The technological challenge in this (aside from having to go through crappy quality phone signals) is that everyone speaks differently, so it's difficult to create a system that can differentiate this stuff. Actually, they interviewed a lot of people to do the "operator" messages for phones back in the day, and they went with the sort of "Standardized" American pronunciation, so everyone would be able to understand them.

Language is something that we so completely internalize that it's integral to us. I don't really think in "words" so much, though many people I know claim they think in complete sentences, like a commentary in their heads. We even acknowledge this, as evidenced by the adage that one truly knows a language when they can dream in it.

Something else that's really important: no language is inherently any better or worse than any other language. Really, it's a matter of opinion, which is usually based on the fact that they learned their preferred language first, or that there's a specific reason why they learned it.

I really believe that people die because of language. Language-based prejudice goes beyond all other prejudices, I believe. Languages can bring people of many different faiths and cultures, as well as "races" together. Look at Arabic, the language of Islam and Coptic Christianity, of "Arabs" and "Africans," and of people from all different backgrounds. And, in a foreign land, it's much easier to group with people who speak the same language as you, or one that's close. Even if, as many Indian-Americans and Pakistani-Americans can attest to, your homelands are on opposite ends of wars. Language can bridge gaps. It can also create them.

Just remember, language is no absolute. Take a look at polyglots. If they know a word in two languages, and they think of it, it's not necessarily in the language they learned first, or even in the one they know better. There's a lot of linguistic and psychological theory behind that. So think twice before you insult someone else based on how they speak, or if you yourself are insulted. Remember the bigger picture.

You live and you learn, and sometimes you watch.

I realize that most of my posts are just ramblings of a madman, completely disorganized and indirect. I also realize that life presents itself that way.

---

The entertainment industry has a very practical purpose. I don't just mean to give stress relief or whatever. Really, it lets us experience life as perceived by other people in a very direct manner, and it lets us do it from the comfort of own homes (or theaters). It often gives us insight into experience we never would have a path to in our actual lives. The most important aspect of this? It lets us sit back and see things from the other person's point of view. We learn to be able to say, "Okay, I see where you're coming from." Regardless of right or wrong, it lets us see how people do what they do. Whether or not we agree with their actions and beliefs, we come to learn something important: empathy.

Driving down the Garden State Parkway, yelling at those idiotic drivers ahead of me, I often stop myself. I mean, they have to have some reason, right? How often do you do that? The problem's all about everyone's own free will. If we learn to stop ourselves and try to understand each other better, I'm sure we'll be less angry and more forgiving. At best, we make a positive impact on others, and spare ourselves unnecessary anguish in the process. At the least, we can hope to catch a break ourselves in the future.

Sometimes, people need to hear things from a specific person, at a specific place and time, in a specific way, to really get the message. After all, haven't we all been there? How many times have your parents told you one thing, only to find out 40-something odd years later that you understand. Even if you don't agree, and even if you do things differently, you at least understand.

A friend of mine gets really angry at people in general. He says people are dumb. I agree. He says they don't think. I agree. He wonders why they can't just be logical and wake up, and think for themselves. I don't. And the reason he's angry, is because he really cares. It's sort of counter-intuitive, but he would've made his peace long ago if he didn't really care. He'd be cynical and pessimistic and would take what he could, regardless of others. He's not like that. He's angry because he wants others to live better. In turn, that allows him to live better. The problem is, people don't get things like that right away. Some people need to hear it differently. I did, too. I used to be angry, too.

The beauty is there. And that's where our lovely system of movies, television shows, blogs, and weblogs all come in handy. We get to see things from others' perspectives. And it doesn't matter that we think they're stupid for not seeing something right in front of their faces, or that we cry and laugh right along with them. We don't need to agree. It's not about the result, it's about the process. As my pal Gerald (from Hey Arnold!) said once, "The journey's more than the destination, man." (It was from Downtown as Fruits, btw. What ever happened to great TV?) We have to learn to live life, and part of it is learning to live with others. Or, at least, trying to see where they come from.

I still hate soap operas and reality shows. But, I take comfort in the fact that somewhere out there, someone is learning a lesson from the stupidity of another.