The color red provokes a stronger emotional reaction in people than any other color. Things designed to attract attention – like stop signs, warning signs, and the cape waved in front of a bull – are very often colored red. Why red, and not a different color?
I think the reason is as follows. The three primary colors are red, green and blue. Green and blue are very common in nature – they are the colors of plants and the sky, respectively. Red, in contrast, is rare. Since red is the only primary color we don't see all the time, it is effective at attracting our attention.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Monday, February 08, 2010
Demographics
Some notes from a trip to the CIA World Factbook.
Comparing the growth rates of India and China, it seems that within 5 years India will surpass China to become the world's most populous country.
Also, a look at fertility rates shows that world population growth is concentrated in Africa and the Indian subcontinent. The rest of the world has, or can expect, a low rate of population growth (a few small countries are exceptions though).
And Iran has the world's lowest fertility rate (births per mother) except for Europe, four East Asian countries, and several small island countries. Perhaps indicating that despite (or because of) the fundamentalist government policies, the population has become quite secular.
Comparing the growth rates of India and China, it seems that within 5 years India will surpass China to become the world's most populous country.
Also, a look at fertility rates shows that world population growth is concentrated in Africa and the Indian subcontinent. The rest of the world has, or can expect, a low rate of population growth (a few small countries are exceptions though).
And Iran has the world's lowest fertility rate (births per mother) except for Europe, four East Asian countries, and several small island countries. Perhaps indicating that despite (or because of) the fundamentalist government policies, the population has become quite secular.
Saturday, February 06, 2010
Metaphysical dualism
The title of this post is a philosophical term, so profound-sounding that when I learned it in high school philosophy class I thought it was incredibly cool. It refers to a theory first popularized by the ancient Greeks, most notably Plato. According to this theory (see here), the world consists of two kinds of things: physical matter, and intellectual ideas or “forms”. To take an example, the chair I'm sitting on consists of an arbitrary collection of carbon and hydrogen atoms, and also approximates the “form” describing what a “chair” is in its ideal nature. These “forms” are considered to be part of reality, and in fact the most important part of reality, despite their lack of physical presence in the world.
As is typical with this kind of philosophical idea, dualism cannot be proven not “right” or “wrong”. At most, it can be considered useful or non-useful depending on how much it helps simplify complicated philosophical problems. In any case, dualism has had an immense influence on succeeding thought. Early Christians, medieval scholastics, and early modern philosophers like Descartes in turn adapted it as a central part of their philosophies. Perhaps the most basic idea distinguishing Christianity from Judaism is dualist: that the material world is inherently corrupt, and should be abandoned in favor of spiritual quests and declarations of faith. Since modern intellectual culture in large part descends from Christianity, even non-Christians today (at least in Western cultures) will find it hard to avoid thinking in dualistic terms.
The goal of this post is to point out one error that results from dualistic thinking. The critical point is that Biblical Hebrew dates to before Plato's time, and thus does not share the assumptions of dualistic thought. In particular, a verb in Biblical Hebrew frequently refers to both a thought and an action. In dualism, thoughts and actions are as different as any two things in the world can be, and it's inappropriate to use the same word for both. But in the Bible's non-dualistic language, thoughts and actions that typically go together share a word, and the meaning is inferred from context. Not realizing this leads to many incorrect translations.
In the following table I have listed several Hebrew verbs. For each, I list what it means as a thought, and as an action. Finally, I give examples of Biblical verses, translated in the usual way, for which I think the other of the two meanings would make much more sense.
I'm guessing there are other such verbs – feel free to suggest in the comments.
As is typical with this kind of philosophical idea, dualism cannot be proven not “right” or “wrong”. At most, it can be considered useful or non-useful depending on how much it helps simplify complicated philosophical problems. In any case, dualism has had an immense influence on succeeding thought. Early Christians, medieval scholastics, and early modern philosophers like Descartes in turn adapted it as a central part of their philosophies. Perhaps the most basic idea distinguishing Christianity from Judaism is dualist: that the material world is inherently corrupt, and should be abandoned in favor of spiritual quests and declarations of faith. Since modern intellectual culture in large part descends from Christianity, even non-Christians today (at least in Western cultures) will find it hard to avoid thinking in dualistic terms.
The goal of this post is to point out one error that results from dualistic thinking. The critical point is that Biblical Hebrew dates to before Plato's time, and thus does not share the assumptions of dualistic thought. In particular, a verb in Biblical Hebrew frequently refers to both a thought and an action. In dualism, thoughts and actions are as different as any two things in the world can be, and it's inappropriate to use the same word for both. But in the Bible's non-dualistic language, thoughts and actions that typically go together share a word, and the meaning is inferred from context. Not realizing this leads to many incorrect translations.
In the following table I have listed several Hebrew verbs. For each, I list what it means as a thought, and as an action. Finally, I give examples of Biblical verses, translated in the usual way, for which I think the other of the two meanings would make much more sense.
Verb | Thought | Action | Mistranslated verses |
YDA | know | experience, acknowledge | Tree of knowledge of good and evil Adam knew his wife |
ZChR | remember | address, implement | God remembered his covenant Please remember and strengthen me [Shimshon] |
AMR | intend | say | Do you [Moshe] speak in order to kill me? |
ShMA | obey | hear | We will do and we will hear. |
DAG | worry | take care of, ensure | |
SMKh | be happy | celebrate | You shall celebrate on your holiday (Chazal: "'Celebration' means meat and wine") |
I'm guessing there are other such verbs – feel free to suggest in the comments.
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
Vayaaminu bashem uvemoshe avdo
Bnei Yisrael "believed" at the very moment they became permanently free from Egyptian oppression.
Once they saw that there really was justice in the world, they were capable of belief in God.
(From here)
Once they saw that there really was justice in the world, they were capable of belief in God.
(From here)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)