Frank Sinatra one the most influential & popular musical artist of the 20th century renowned for his most impeccable voice clarity in one of his song "what now my love" with Lyrics: What now my love, now that you've left me / How can I live through another day / Watching my dreams turn to ashes / And my hopes turn to bits of clay... reminds listener to a process with potentially undesirable outcome.There is a saying that without love there is no light. One emotion that it has mystified every one. love is indeed such powerful aphrodisiac that we all should use it to our benefit. Though love is extremely powerful potion however it is a process that takes one through a journey surpassing all logic.
Among the strongest love is the bond that brings man and woman together. if the past is any thing to go by, such love has brought together kingdoms into nations in the past, and ended many great wars. It's is also for the love of a woman that has started a few of well-known war such as Greek myth, Helen of Troy. Helen was considered the most beautiful woman in the world. By marriage she was Queen of Laconia, a province within Homeric Greece, the wife of King Menelaus. Her abduction by Prince Paris of Troy brought about the Trojan War..
For all those glorious feelings in between man and woman and its physical nature, whenever one party's expectation is let down, the inner sanctuary turns inside out shattering all hopes into bits of clay. Watching dreams turning into ashes, feeling is turned into numbness. When it is over sense of hopelessness conspires the world to closes in on us. Like painted kites Autumn and Winter come and go, still lonely days stay on. We all carry things inside that no one else can see. They all hold us down like anchors, According to Sinatra it is all down to the Summer Wind that we loose the one we love.
Tuesday, 4 April 2017
Monday, 3 April 2017
whistle blowers
why whistle blowing is a noble act yet risky? because group loyalty condemn it and it is considered as treason in murky waters of national security! Though most of us are not thinking in becoming a whistle blowers like Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, and Edward Snowden, Nonetheless we approve the heroic act of such individuals because they bring many rewards for our societies, reminding us how vital it is that our democratic values are preserved. Image in our contemporary society generally overwhelms pedigree of substance and the truth is usually the victim. Compromise over moral imperative for self interested rational has become the norm in capitalistic societies where elite with the help of main stream media control information channels and the content at the expense of our civic rights.
Whilst whistle blowing is considered a trade off between fairness and loyalty, question remains why and what are the reasons behind dissents? Fairness & loyalty generally take a second proceeding where and when ethics is concerned. It is the ethics that drives man kind to adhere himself to values that transcends him above pettiness. Ethics is the deep rooted in man's conscious that allow man to make sense of his existence in other words ethics is moral principles that govern a person's behaviour for the conducting of an activity.
The psychology of whistle blowing James Dungan1 , Adam Waytz1 and Liane Young "available on line" - is about: Experimental data reveal the double-edged nature of whistle blowing. Experiments have compared settings where it is possible or not possible for individuals to voice information about another person’s unethical behaviour (similar to whistle blowing), looking in particular at whether individuals then choose to exchange goods in a competitive, self-interested fashion or in a cooperative, pro social fashion. Giving individuals an opportunity to blow the whistle increases cooperation and decreases selfishness within collectives. These results point to the positive consequences of whistle blowing for groups. By contrast, other studies that have examined people’s responses to those who speak out against morally questionable behaviour (i.e. whistle blowers); dissenting individuals are often denigrated by the ones who themselves engaged in morally questionable behaviour. These studies again show that whistle blowing can be to the detriment of group harmony.
Then, why the authorities who themselves are engaged in morally questionable behaviour have the rights to go after the likes of Julian Assange. Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden? The logic of these individuals who have become whistle blowers, is on building the kind of community that values constructive dissent while maintaining group loyalty. Individual though are highly committed to their group such as Snowden, & Chelsea manning express their dissent when they notice shameful behaviour of authorities harmful to the group’s interests and society. it is thus up to society to protect its civic rights by standing firm behind whistle blowers.
why whistle blowing is a noble act yet risky? because group loyalty condemn it and it is considered as treason in murky waters of national security! Though most of us are not thinking in becoming a whistle blowers like Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, and Edward Snowden, Nonetheless we approve the heroic act of such individuals because they bring many rewards for our societies, reminding us how vital it is that our democratic values are preserved. Image in our contemporary society generally overwhelms pedigree of substance and the truth is usually the victim. Compromise over moral imperative for self interested rational has become the norm in capitalistic societies where elite with the help of main stream media control information channels and the content at the expense of our civic rights.
Whilst whistle blowing is considered a trade off between fairness and loyalty, question remains why and what are the reasons behind dissents? Fairness & loyalty generally take a second proceeding where and when ethics is concerned. It is the ethics that drives man kind to adhere himself to values that transcends him above pettiness. Ethics is the deep rooted in man's conscious that allow man to make sense of his existence in other words ethics is moral principles that govern a person's behaviour for the conducting of an activity.
The psychology of whistle blowing James Dungan1 , Adam Waytz1 and Liane Young "available on line" - is about: Experimental data reveal the double-edged nature of whistle blowing. Experiments have compared settings where it is possible or not possible for individuals to voice information about another person’s unethical behaviour (similar to whistle blowing), looking in particular at whether individuals then choose to exchange goods in a competitive, self-interested fashion or in a cooperative, pro social fashion. Giving individuals an opportunity to blow the whistle increases cooperation and decreases selfishness within collectives. These results point to the positive consequences of whistle blowing for groups. By contrast, other studies that have examined people’s responses to those who speak out against morally questionable behaviour (i.e. whistle blowers); dissenting individuals are often denigrated by the ones who themselves engaged in morally questionable behaviour. These studies again show that whistle blowing can be to the detriment of group harmony.
Then, why the authorities who themselves are engaged in morally questionable behaviour have the rights to go after the likes of Julian Assange. Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden? The logic of these individuals who have become whistle blowers, is on building the kind of community that values constructive dissent while maintaining group loyalty. Individual though are highly committed to their group such as Snowden, & Chelsea manning express their dissent when they notice shameful behaviour of authorities harmful to the group’s interests and society. it is thus up to society to protect its civic rights by standing firm behind whistle blowers.
Monday, 23 December 2013
Why origin matters?
Yale psychologists George Newman and Paul Bloom, point out in their paper's introduction, the monetary value we place on artwork has everything to do with the provenance of the work and little, if anything, to do with its aesthetic properties or whether we think it’s skillfully executed.
We know history is important because understanding of who we are, it strengthens our community and regional identity and it raises appreciation of our heritage. History in a way it improves the understanding of other evolutionary and revolutionary path of societies, it fosters intellectual skills needed by a modern economy and society to operate under and to go forward.
Why is then so important to man to distinguish in between two similar art works? why we value one art work, ready to pay millions of dollar for it and we discard an exact replica, considering it worthless?
Does it matter diamond or zirconium when man buys a ring for his beloved fiance?
It appears man is enamoured with the idea of that objects take on special value because of
its origin and who had physical contact with them!
People pay considerable money for a tape measure owned by President Kennedy, an autograph by astronaut Neil Armstrong, and pop star Britney Spears’s chewed-up bubble gum! "An autographed pair of Elvis Presley's own blue suede shoes is estimated to fetch around $80.000.00" This is because they came from and the people they came into contact with and not because of their tangible properties or presumed speciality utility.
Law of Contagion state that the value things are increased substantially when the object is owned by or touched by a special person who we esteem highly. People will be outraged asking for refund if the object is not authentic though nothing perceptible or tangible about the object would have changed.
Origin matters because it is important to man.
We know history is important because understanding of who we are, it strengthens our community and regional identity and it raises appreciation of our heritage. History in a way it improves the understanding of other evolutionary and revolutionary path of societies, it fosters intellectual skills needed by a modern economy and society to operate under and to go forward.
Why is then so important to man to distinguish in between two similar art works? why we value one art work, ready to pay millions of dollar for it and we discard an exact replica, considering it worthless?
Does it matter diamond or zirconium when man buys a ring for his beloved fiance?
It appears man is enamoured with the idea of that objects take on special value because of
its origin and who had physical contact with them!
People pay considerable money for a tape measure owned by President Kennedy, an autograph by astronaut Neil Armstrong, and pop star Britney Spears’s chewed-up bubble gum! "An autographed pair of Elvis Presley's own blue suede shoes is estimated to fetch around $80.000.00" This is because they came from and the people they came into contact with and not because of their tangible properties or presumed speciality utility.
Law of Contagion state that the value things are increased substantially when the object is owned by or touched by a special person who we esteem highly. People will be outraged asking for refund if the object is not authentic though nothing perceptible or tangible about the object would have changed.
Origin matters because it is important to man.
Sunday, 22 December 2013
Goethe famous German philosopher once said «Only the soul that loves is happy», and Victor Hugo believed: «The supreme happiness in life is the conviction that we are loved».
Common man usually but wrongly reduce love to personal or to romantic love, forgetting the many other forms it may assume. Man likes to follow his dreams and adventure in what it might be where reality is reshaped to accommodate his values and desires.
When reality takes over man's dreams usually ends and the imposition bring about an end to his hopes.
since not all love is a game, the true love unfold before man in a way its aesthetic values become apparent to him.
Where man does not appreciate generosity at heart and any form of devotion to a cause is because these traits have no romantic value in the eye of man and to lesser extent they seem less tangible to him.
Commitment to a man is all about long term attachment to a cause and it usually means about personal relationship where in particular rewards are sexual attraction and desire.
Since love is a game, in games and places where we admit or exclude friends on the slightest cause, governing idea of love becomes shallow and dishonest, yet very sweet to pundits.
We all have at some point a fair share of disappointments when we play the game of love and to a degree we become the victim of our own devices. The question remains why those of us who have been let down by smooth operators keep playing the game?
To most of us who play the game, reward is highly valued and we think we learn from our failures and excel at our approaches. we therefore exercise patience and accept life with all its unanticipated disappointments.
Seeking someone whose personality complements our own is very hard at best of times, particularly where one encounters with different circle of friends. Like any player I have taken the plunge and may I say that I have been very fortunate on separate occasions to come across outstanding characters who have been the source of caring and compassion.
Common man usually but wrongly reduce love to personal or to romantic love, forgetting the many other forms it may assume. Man likes to follow his dreams and adventure in what it might be where reality is reshaped to accommodate his values and desires.
When reality takes over man's dreams usually ends and the imposition bring about an end to his hopes.
since not all love is a game, the true love unfold before man in a way its aesthetic values become apparent to him.
Where man does not appreciate generosity at heart and any form of devotion to a cause is because these traits have no romantic value in the eye of man and to lesser extent they seem less tangible to him.
Commitment to a man is all about long term attachment to a cause and it usually means about personal relationship where in particular rewards are sexual attraction and desire.
Since love is a game, in games and places where we admit or exclude friends on the slightest cause, governing idea of love becomes shallow and dishonest, yet very sweet to pundits.
We all have at some point a fair share of disappointments when we play the game of love and to a degree we become the victim of our own devices. The question remains why those of us who have been let down by smooth operators keep playing the game?
To most of us who play the game, reward is highly valued and we think we learn from our failures and excel at our approaches. we therefore exercise patience and accept life with all its unanticipated disappointments.
Seeking someone whose personality complements our own is very hard at best of times, particularly where one encounters with different circle of friends. Like any player I have taken the plunge and may I say that I have been very fortunate on separate occasions to come across outstanding characters who have been the source of caring and compassion.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)