Time; in science and literature

Following quotes are both arguments or opinions on ‘what time is.’

Although it is a common-sense that time seems to flow straightforwardly from the past to the future, people who try to explain complex sciences such as the String Theory may disagree with such a simple explanation. For example, Bryanton mentions on this topic in a video attempting to explain the dimensions, from zero to tenth, in accordance with the String theory:

‘If we think of ourselves as we were one minute ago, and then imagine ourselves as we are at this moment, the line we could draw from the ‘one-minute-ago version’ to the ‘right now version’ would be a line in the fourth dimension. If you were to see your body in the fourth dimension, you would be like a long undulating snake, with your embryonic self at one end and your deceased self at the other.

… One of the most intriguing aspects of there being one dimension stacked on another is that down here in the dimensions below we can be unaware of our motion in the dimensions above…

… time (is)… actually twisting and turning in the dimension above. So, the long undulating snake, that is us, will feel like it is moving in a straight line in the forth dimension, but there will actually be, in the fifth dimension, a multitude of paths that we could branch to at any given moment. Those branches will be influenced by our own choice, chance and actions of others.

.. What if you wanted to go back into your own childhood and visit yourself. We can imagine folding the fourth dimension through the fifth, jumping back through time and space to get there… We can imagine our fourth-dimensional selves branching out from our current moment into the fifth dimension… The shortcut we could take would involve us folding the fifth dimension through the sixth dimension, which allows us to instantly jump from our current position to a different fifth dimensional line.

… In our description of the fourth dimension, we imagined taking the dimension below and conceiving of it as a single point. The fourth dimension is a line, which can join the universe as it was one minute ago to the universe as it is right now.’ (http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks.php)

In the mean time, literature treats time as one of the most fascinating sources for many authors’ imaginations. However passionately science tries to point out its possibility, actually, time travelling is only available within the extent of fictional stories so far. Authors can use, or even create, the concept of time freely as their stories require. Moreover, authors can philosophise the concept of time as groundwork for their own creations as well. For example, Thomas Mann summarises his opinions on the concept of time, relating to his creation of a story in its Foreword as following:

‘The story of Hans Castorp… belongs to the long ago; is already, so to speak, covered with historic mould, and unquestionably to be presented in the tense best suited to a narrative out of the depth of the past… 

In a word, the degree of its antiquity has noways to do with the passage of time — in which statement the author intentionally touches upon the strange and questionable double nature of that riddling element. 

But we would not willfully obscure a plain matter. The exaggerated pastness of our narrative is due to its taking place before the epoch when a certain crisis shattered its way through life and consciousness and left a deep chasm behind. It takes place — or rather, deliberately to avoid the present tense, it took place, and had taken place — in that long ago, in that old days, the days of the world before the Great War, in the beginning of which so much began that has scarcely yet left off beginning. Yes, it took place before that; yet not so long before. Is not the pastness of the past the profounder, the completer, the more legendary, the more immediately before the present it falls? More than that, our story has, of its own nature, something of the legend about it now and again.’ ( http://prosaicbytrinath.blogspot.com/2010/12/foreword-to-magic-mountain-thomas-mann.html)

Thus, it would be safe to conclude that a concept of time depends on how each one conceives it.

Reference:

Bryanton, Rob (2006), Imagining the Tenth Dimension (annotated) (electrically accessed 11/05/2011)

http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks.php

Prosaic (2010), Foreword to Magic Mountain, Thomas Mann (posted by Trinath Gaduparthi 01/12/2010, electrically accessed 09/05/2011)

http://prosaicbytrinath.blogspot.com/2010/12/foreword-to-magic-mountain-thomas-mann.html

Plato’s family background

Plato is one of the most famous philosophers in the Western history. However, despite the sheer volume of writing by Plato himself, things known about his biographical information is relatively limited. For example, as for his family background, biographers generally describe in the following way: ‘He came from a family that had long played a prominent part in Athenian politics’ (Lee, 1977, p. 1). This brief blog entry would like to search for further information on this specific topic and would like to some more details on the typical description quoted above.

First of all, it doesn’t require a huge effort for finding following information that says Plato was ‘born into an aristocratic and wealthy Athenian family. His father traced his ancestry in a direct line back to the early kings of Athens.’ (http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/agexed/aee501/plato.html) By comparing the two sources so far, it can be said that whilst the former only refers to ‘a prominent part’ his family played in the field of politics, the latter adds adjectives ‘aristocratic and wealthy’ to the family and limits the prominent feature to his paternal side.

However, making further research may lead to a different story: ‘His father died while Plato was young, and his mother remarried to Pyrilampes, in whose house Plato would grow up.’ (http://www.egs.edu/library/plato/biography/) Now, by giving a mother, a father and a possible stepfather, following questions come up to be answered; which father’s ancestry line can be traced back to the early kings?, and which one(s) came from aristocratic and wealthy family?

As for Plato’s mother, it is said that ‘His mother was the niece of the wealthy nobleman, Critias and the sister of the rich and famous Charmides.’ (http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/agexed/aee501/plato.html) From this, it can be presumed that regardless to her marital status, Plato’s mother was originally born in a wealthy family background.

Subsequently, searching for information relating to ‘Pyrilampes’, Plato’s potential stepfather, enables us to find following information:

‘… Periktion… after bearing Plato and his three siblings to Ariston, was later remarried to her own maternal uncle Pyrilampes, who thereby became Plato’s stepfather…’ (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3nCSw5Cr4PUC&pg=PA46&lpg=PA46&dq=Pyrilampes&source=bl&ots=tABDRODs0y&sig=KhRSfrOxyhJ7OMI5KTPU3K2fwjk&hl=en&ei=NwC4TejyDIPovQP06vjHDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CDwQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=Pyrilampes&f=false)

Now, it became clear that Plato was born to a married couple of Ariston and Periktione. Then, due to the early death of Ariston, he was brought to the house of Pyrilampes, to whom his mother remarried. However, the questions are still remaining without being given answers fully: the question of the ancestry and whether Ariston and Pyrilampes were wealthy or not. For filling in the whole questionnaires, the following information could be useful and decisive:

‘Plato’s father Ariston descended from the early kings of Athens. His mother Perictione came from a similarly distinguished line that included the sixth-century legislator Solon. Plato’s father appears to have died when Plato was still a young child. His mother remarried to Pyrilampes, an associate of the statesman Pericles, being otherwise unable to support Plato and his siblings.’(http://www.gradesaver.com/author/plato/)

Thus, finally it reached a conclusion that it was Ariston, whose ancestry was associated with the early kings of Athens. In addition, although there can be found no direct reference on either men’s financial status, since the above quote explains the circumstance where Perictione (or Periktione) remarried as ‘being otherwise unable to support Plato and his siblings’, despite her own wealthy family background, this would suffice to conclude both Ariston and Pyrilampes were enough wealthy, at least to support Perictione and her children’s lives.

Reference:

l        Book

Lee, Desmond (tr.) (1977), Timaeus and Critias by Plato

Published by the Penguin Group,London

l        Internet

Cartledge, Paul and Paul Millett (2002), Nomos: Essays in Athenian Law, Politics and Society, Google Books (p. 45- 46, electrically accessed 27/04/2011)

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3nCSw5Cr4PUC&pg=PA46&lpg=PA46&dq=Pyrilampes&source=bl&ots=tABDRODs0y&sig=KhRSfrOxyhJ7OMI5KTPU3K2fwjk&hl=en&ei=NwC4TejyDIPovQP06vjHDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CDwQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=Pyrilampes&f=false

EuropeanGraduateSchool, The (2010), Plato – Biography, Library – Plato (electrically accessed 25/04/2011)

http://www.egs.edu/library/plato/biography/

GradeSaver L.L.C (2011), Biography of Plato (428/7BC-348/7BC) (electrically accessed 30/04/2011)

http://www.gradesaver.com/author/plato/

NC State University (2009), Life of Plato, 427-347 B. C., Class 9 Philosophical Foundations of Agricultural and Extension Education (electrically accessed 23/04/2011)

http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/agexed/aee501/plato.html

The Lost Ark and Eli, the priest

The story of Indiana Jones, a famous fictional character in the Hollywood films, must have contributed much to enhance modern people’s interests and imaginations on the so-called Lost Ark. The Ark is referred in the Old Testament as a container of the original Ten Commandments, written on two tablets of stone, and therefore it is usually called the Ark of Covenant. It had been stored in the Temple of Solomon,  in Jerusalem, until the city was attacked and sacked by Nebuchadnezzar, king ofBabylon, in 566 BC. Since then, the Ark has disappeared from the history.

According to the Old Testament, this was not the first occasion where the Ark was taken away from the hands of Israelites. In the time of the Book of Samuel, even before the construction of the Temple of Solomon, the incident happened in a following way:

‘After Israel settled in Palestine, the ark remained in the tabernacle at Gilgal for a while. It was then moved to Shiloh till the time of Eli, between 300 and 400 years… when it was carried into the field of battle in an attempt to guarantee victory. However, it was taken by the Philistines (1 Sam. 4:3-11), who later returned it after seven months when they realized it was bringing a curse on them (1 Sam. 5:7-8).’ (http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/ark.html)

To explain why such a disgrace could take place upon the Ark of Covenant, it could be helpful to look at the priest called Eli, who was in charge of storing theArk.

‘Eli served as a priest and judge of Israel for forty years (1 Sam. 4:18). It was not an easy time in which to exercise leadership. Israel had no centralized government, and “everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judg. 21:25)—including Eli’s own sons, Hophni and Phinehas. They abused the sacrificial system and committed immorality with the women at the tabernacle (1 Sam. 2:12–17, 22).

Eli was in a position to put a stop to these abuses, but he was… unable either to restrain his sons or to remove them from the priesthood, and he and his descendants fell under the scathing judgment of God (2:27–36).’ (http://www.urbana.org/word-in-life-study-bible/eli-the-failed-leader-of-shiloh)

For further information relating to geographical points of the incidents, please refer:

http://www.bible-history.com/geography/ancient-israel/shiloh.html

Reference:

BBC News (1998), Real ‘Raiders of the lost Ark’, World: Middle East (electrically accessed 19/04/2011)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/131778.stm

Easton, Mathew G. and Paul S. Taylor (2011), Ark, The ChristianAnswers WebBible Encyclopedia (accessed 15/04/2011)

http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/ark.html

Nelson, Thomas (1996), Eli, the Failed Leader of Shiloh, Urbana Org – God’s World – Whole Life Stewardship – Word in Life Study Bible (electrically accessed 17/04/2011)

http://www.urbana.org/word-in-life-study-bible/eli-the-failed-leader-of-shiloh

Lopakhin in The Cherry Orchard

Yermolai Alexeevich Lopakhin is one of characters in The Cherry Orchard, a play by Anton Chekhov. Although he is not the main character of the play, some recognises the importance of this character for providing social and historical backgrounds of the play set in the turn of the twentieth century.

 

Goldman describes the role and meaning of this character in the context of social mobility:

 

‘The cherry orchard is heavily mortgaged and…the beautiful estate falls into the cruel hands of commercialism. The merchant Yermolai Lopakhin buys the place…He…who had risen from the serfs of the former master of the orchard!

‘A new epoch begins in the cherry orchard. On the ruins of romanticism and aristocratic ease there rises commercialism’ (http://www.theatredatabase.com/19th_century/anton_chekhov_003.html).

 

The argument can be endorsed from quoting from the play itself, especially what is assigned to Lopakhin to say:

 

‘LOPAKHIN: I have bought the property where my father and grandfather were slaves, where they weren’t even allowed into the kitchen’ (ibid).

 

Thus, Lopakhin simply represents a successful example in the newly introduced social mobility system in Russia. However, Goldman’s choice of words in the quote above does not seem to accord with the character’s supposedly cheerful state of mind. On the contrary, she connects ‘the beautiful estate’ to the old days’ ‘aristocratic ease’ and the rise of commercialism, which enabled Lopakhin to move up his social status from a slave of the estate to its owner, to the ‘cruel hands’. If so, should this play be recognised as a tragedy that depicts the downfall of an aristocratic family? Poplavskaya points out some difficulties on the genre issues of The Cherry Orchard as following:

 

‘Most producers prefer to see The Cherry Orchard as a comedy (even Chekhov wanted to see his play this way), however satirical part of the play is so weak. Lately The Cherry Orchard was known as comedy, drama, lyrical comedy, tragicomedy and tragedy. Probably it is little difficult to recognize the plays genre clearly. All characters go thru the conflict of “given” and “wished”– the conflict between everyday being and idea of human purpose in the world’ (http://www.my-chekhov.com/critics/cherry-orchard.shtml).

 

Reference:

Goldman, Emma (2002), The Cherry Orchard, an analysis of the play by Anton Chekhov’, Theatre Database (electrically accessed 03/04/2011)

http://www.theatredatabase.com/19th_century/anton_chekhov_003.html

 

Poplavskaya, Veronika (year unstated), The Cherry Orchard. A Literary Analysis by Veronika Poplavskaya (electrically accessed 12/04/2011)

http://www.my-chekhov.com/critics/cherry-orchard.shtml

Nature v.s. Society in Hobbes and Nietzsche

Thomas Hobbes, in his book entitled Of Man, one of four books that consist the entire work titled Leviathan, defines the condition of Nature in his famous term, ‘war of every one against every one’ (Macpherson, 1985, p. 185: spelling is modernised by the researcher). From this proposition, Hobbes deduces following logical conclusion:,

‘so long as a man is in the condition of mere Nature, (which is a condition of war,) as private Appetite is the measure of Good, and Evil: and consequently all men agree on this, that Peace is Good, and therefore also the way, or means of Peace, which… are Justice, Gratitude, Modesty, Equity, Mercy and the rest… are good; that is to say, Moral Virtues; and their contrary Vices, Evil (ibid, p. 216).

In summary, Hobbes’s view could be recognised in the following way: (1). Moral virtues are Good. (2). Because they contribute for archiving to establish Peace, which is unanimously agreed with all men as Good. (3). On the contrary, the condition of Nature is rather Evil because it provides a condition of war of every one against every one.

In contrast to such classical views, Friedrich Nietzsche, a German thinker in the late nineteenth century, argues similar themes as if they are seen from the opposite side of a mirror. According to Denneson, Nietzsche’s views on society and the effects of its power on individuals could be summed up in the following way:

‘It is plain to see that Nietzsche is quite concerned with the damaging effects of society and the Judeo-Christian moral tradition on individuals. These overpowering forces suppress a human being’s natural instincts toward the acquisition of power, thus keeping a person at the level of the herd, left to make peace with mediocrity. Nietzsche sees this keeping-in-check of the individual’s instincts as nothing less than a revolt against nature’ (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/travis_denneson/power.html).

Reference:

l        Book

Macpherson, C. B. (ed.) (1985), Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes

Penguin Books, London, England

l        Internet

Denneson, Travis J. (2011), Society and Individuals in Nietzsche’s The Will to Power, The Secular Web – Library – Modern (accessed 13/03/2011)

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/travis_denneson/power.html

The story of Deborah and Barak.

Deborah would be one of the most impressive female characters in the Old Testament mostly because ‘she is the only woman to be a Judge of Israel’ (http://www.essortment.com/old-testament-deborah-judge-44017.html). Regarding to her title, it is argued that being a prophetess and judge meant to be ‘the equivalent of king’ (ibid) and as for the historical point of view, it is also said that ‘Her story takes place between the years 1209 and 1169 B.C’ (ibid).

According to the Old Testament, when Deborah was a judge of Israel, her country was occupied by Jabin, king of Canaan, who ‘reigned in Hazor (and) the captain of whose host was Sisera (Judges 4:2), who had ‘nine handred chariots of iron’ (Judges 4:3). As a prophetess, Deborah delivers the God’s command to fight against Jabin’s army and by being asked from Barak, her general, she even goes to the battle field together with him, to lead the army that is obviously outnumbered to the enemy.

The story says that the battle was fought near mount Tabor, where ‘the LORD discomfited Sisera, and all his chariots, and all his host, with the edge of the sword before Barak’ (Judges 4:15), and in this way, it says that Deborah and Barak won a great victory and successfully recovered their territory from the king of Canaan.

However, there is no explanation on how Deborah came to be chosen to her position in the Judges book nor is it plausible to assume that a woman could have a legitimate candidacy to be chosen to such positions in ancient Israelite society. Thus, as far as historical authenticity of the story concerns, it can be only described with large amount of possible presumptions, as the following quotation shows:

‘The occurrence of the name Jabin in the books of Joshua and Judges has made some critics question the accuracy of the biblical record. However it is explained by the use of the name as a royal dynastic title (similar to Pharaoh for the rulers of Egypt) and it is quite possible that several kings carried the name Jabin during these historic periods’ (http://www.biblebasics.co.uk/natcit/hazor.htm).

Reference:

l        Book

Ivy Books (1991), The Holy Bible, King James Version

Published by Ballantine Books, New York

l        Internet

Demand Media (2010), The Old Testament: Deborah the Judge, essortment (electrically accessed 02/03/2011)

http://www.essortment.com/old-testament-deborah-judge-44017.html

Bible Basics (year unstated), Hazor (electrically accessed 02/03/2011)

http://www.biblebasics.co.uk/natcit/hazor.htm

Georges Bataille and his pseudonyms

Georges Bataille is widely known as a French writer in the twentieth century, who authored various fictions mostly consists of erotic themes. He is also known as a philosopher and this strange combination of occupations within the same person inevitably tickles human curiosities; what kind of life has he lived, how could he managed to balance his reputations in such obviously different fields in the same time? Therefore, it would be worth interesting to have a look at his brief biography as following:

 

‘Georges Bataille was born in Billon, Puy-de-Dôme, in central France. His mother was suicidal, (though never successful in her attempts) and his father was a strict disciplinarian who later in life suffered from illnesses related to advanced syphilis and died in 1915. At the time, Bataille was a deeply religious man; he converted to Catholicism at the outset of WWI, and even joined the seminary at Saint-Fleur with the intention of becoming a priest…He served in the army in 1916-17, but was soon discharged on account of his poor health due to tuberculosis, from which he suffered most of his life. His religious ambitions suddenly ended with a loss of faith, and from 1918-22 Bataille studied 13th century verse at the École des Chartres in Paris…

 

In the 1920’s Bataille associated himself with the Surrealists, though his views often differed from those of the influential André Breton, leading Bataille to declare himself “an enemy from within” the movement. At this time he underwent psychoanalytic treatment with great success… He founded and edited many publications that reflected his interests in sociology, religion and literature. Included in his early excursions were the first publications of Barthes, Foucault and Derrida. He married his first wife, the actress Silvia Maklès, divorcing her in 1934… in 1935 he cofounded an anti-Fascist group, Contre-Attaque, with Breton…

 

Bataille’s life from 1922-44 was an unusual mixture of sporadic work, the frequent visiting of bordellos, and ill health. He worked as a librarian at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, until his nightlife and his troubles with tuberculosis threatened his relationship to such work. In 1946 Bataille married Diane de Beauharnais; they had one daughter. In 1949 he was once again working as a librarian, this time in Carpentras, Provence, though two years later he left to take up the same work again in Orléans. His financial difficulties worsened, and in 1961 Picasso, Max Ernst and Juan Miro arranged an auction of their paintings to help Bataille’s growing debts. However, Bataille died the following year, not long after publishing his last book,  in 1961’the Tears of Eros (http://www.egs.edu/library/georges-bataille/biography/).

 

Obviously, except for a couple of mentioning on his ‘frequent visiting of bordellos (brothels)’ and the title of his last book, it is quite difficult to infer how was his reputation as the author of various erotic fictions by the given ‘official’ biography. Is there any clue to solve this problem? Yes, the clue is the way he used several pseudonyms to disguise his hidden identity as the erotic fiction writer. How did it work? The following quote would give enough information for this question:

 

‘It is worth noting that there was, co-existent with the Bataille who was to become a controversial public figure at the end of the thirties, (and) another Bataille…of “erotic” stories and novels. But this hidden side of Bataille was almost totally unknown to the general public. At the end of the thirties…among Bataille’s first erotic writings… only Histoire de l’œil had been published (in 1928), but under one of the various pseudonyms (Lord Auch, in this instance; other pseudonyms are: Pierre Angélique, Louis Trente, Dianus), which Bataille used, and in a very limited edition. As a rule, Bataille did his best to keep the paternity of his erotic stories secret: even in the forties and fifties, when some of… (his such) works were published along with many more erotic stories, he kept using these pseudonyms, so that Bataille, the “erotic” fiction writer, remained a very confidential figure until his death in 1962(http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=yps4Ad2jcmIC&pg=PA62&lpg=PA62&dq=pseudonym+pierre+angelique&source=bl&ots=EPt24VyLt5&sig=lH5c-HWExEDlzLO1-DSECu4RnVE&hl=en&ei=1yRZTbGnO86rcYOt_NoM&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&sqi=2&ved=0CFAQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false, p.62).

 

Reference:

European Graduate School, The (2010), Georges Bataille Biography, Library – Georges Bataille – Biography (electrically accessed 15/02/2012)

http://www.egs.edu/library/georges-bataille/biography/

 

Mayné, Gilles (1993), Eroticism in Georges Bataille and Henry Miller, Google Books (electrically accessed 14/02/2011)

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=yps4Ad2jcmIC&pg=PA62&lpg=PA62&dq=pseudonym+pierre+angelique&source=bl&ots=EPt24VyLt5&sig=lH5c-HWExEDlzLO1-DSECu4RnVE&hl=en&ei=1yRZTbGnO86rcYOt_NoM&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&sqi=2&ved=0CFAQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Freud’s ‘unconsciousness’

In a past entry of this research project, it briefly mentioned about the common feature and difference in the definitions on unconsciousness between two pioneers of modern Psychology, Sigmund Freud and Carl Gustav Jung (please refer to en entry posted within this blog on 1 April 2010).

 

Firstly, it discussed that both of them agree on the definition of unconsciousness as a ‘part of the psych inaccessible to the ego’ (http://psychological-counselling.suite101.com/article.cfm/jung_and_freud_two_views_of_the_unconscious). Then, it pointed out that while Freud ‘sticks to limit the range and contents of one’s unconsciousness explicitly to individual experience and forgotten memories’ ( https://wrex2009.wordpress.com/2010/04/01/jung-and-freud-on-unconsciousness/), Jung diverts from Freud exactly in this point as following: ‘In Freud’s view… the contents of unconsciousness are reducible to infantile tendencies which are repressed because of their incompatible character. Repression is a process that begins in early childhood under the moral influence of the environment.’ (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=2GdvEouVO0AC&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270&dq=jung+removed+repression&source=bl&ots=qfHmWcu3xl&sig=KGqNMJxOwaJZqBpmEDBMmrKe_ww&hl=en&ei=uW6zS-PaCIHk7AP9l4WbAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false)

 

Obviously, Jung disagreed with the concept of unconsciousness defined by Freud for its narrowly limited functions. In other words, Freud’s definition can be reduced in the following way: ‘the unconscious is the store of collected information that has been repressed and is not easily brought to the conscious mind. These memories not recognized by the conscious mind can be memories of trauma… that remain far below the accessible surface. Because they are in essence, inaccessible… they may drive and control the conscious mind on unseen levels’ (http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-the-unconscious-and-the-subconscious.htm).

 

In addition, as for the difference between the unconscious and the subconscious, it can be summed up as following: ‘In contrast to the unconscious, the subconscious mind lies just below consciousness, and it is easily accessible if attention is paid to it’ (ibid). In other words, ‘You’d be able to discuss memories in your subconscious that were memorably bad, but a truly traumatic day could be in part, or completely repressed’ (ibid).

 

Reference:

Ellis-Christensen, Tricia (2011), What is the Difference Between the Unconscious and the Subconscious?, WiseGeek (electrically accessed 03/02/2011)

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-the-unconscious-and-the-subconscious.htm

 

Fitz-Randolph, Megge Hill (2009), Jung and Freud: Two Views of the Unconscious, suite101.com – Mind & Soul – Psychology – Analytical Psychology (accessed 31/03/2010)

http://psychological-counselling.suite101.com/article.cfm/jung_and_freud_two_views_of_the_unconscious

 

Jung, Carl Gustav (1999), Two Essays on Analytical Psychology, second edition, P. 270, Google books (accessed 31/03/2010)

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=2GdvEouVO0AC&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270&dq=jung+removed+repression&source=bl&ots=qfHmWcu3xl&sig=KGqNMJxOwaJZqBpmEDBMmrKe_ww&hl=en&ei=uW6zS-PaCIHk7AP9l4WbAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

 

wrex2009 (2010) Jung and Freud on ‘unconsciousness’, my individual research, WordPress.com (electrically accessed 07/02/2011)

https://wrex2009.wordpress.com/2010/04/01/jung-and-freud-on-unconsciousness/

The origin of alphabet: from Egypt, Canaan to Greece via Phoenicians

It is said the ‘Phoenician alphabet developed from the proto-Canaanite alphabet, which was created sometime between the 18th and 17th centuries BC.’ (http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Grammar/Unit_One/History/history.html) According to the above website, the proto-Canaanite alphabet was a kind of pictographic script, which consists of 22 characters. Its creation was not utterly original but was an adoption from ‘randomly chose(n) pictorial Egyptian glyphs.’ (http://www.ancientscripts.com/protosinaitic.html)

 

Subsequently, it looks like the time of its creation, or the adoption, can be traced back to even earlier than the 18th century BC because in recent years ‘Inscriptions dating to 1900 BCE written in what appears to be Proto-Sinaitic were found in Upper Egypt.’ (ibid) Although the two terms, the Proto-Sinaitic and the Proto-Canaanite, are usually regarded as a sort of ‘a.k.a’, these can be distinguished in a following way: that the Proto-Sinaitic ‘spread to Canaan, hence its other name, Proto-Canaanite, or old Canaanite script.’ (ibid)

 

As for the Phoenician alphabet, it is described as ‘the immediately descendant of Proto-Sinaitic’ (ibid) because its change is all about the shape of characters that became more linear style. Consequently, the Greeks adopted the Phoenician alphabet ‘mostly like during the late 9th century BCE’ (http://www.ancientscripts.com/greek.html) and their adoption made the basis of the modern alphabet. The main changes the Greeks made were; (1) they assigned several letters to represent vowels while the Phoenician letters only represent consonants, and (2) they changed the direction for writing and reading from right-to-left to left-to-right.

 

In addition, though the Greeks once had another writing system called Linear B, adopted and used by one of Greek tribes called the Mycenaeans, more than three centuries earlier than the adoption of the Phoenician alphabet, interestingly the Linear B had nothing in common with its successor both in its origin and its type of writing system. For more detail about the Linear B, please refer https://wrex2009.wordpress.com/2010/04/04/the-menoan-civilisation-in-crete-and-the-origin-of-alphabet/ within this research.

 

Reference:

ancientscript.com (2010), Greek (electrically accessed 03/01/2011)

http://www.ancientscripts.com/greek.html

 

ancientscript.com (2010), Proto-Sinaitic (electrically accessed 03/01/2011)

http://www.ancientscripts.com/protosinaitic.html

 

Hakodesh, Lashon (year unstated), A Brief History of Hebrew Language, Hebrew for Christians (electrically accessed 03/01/2011)

http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Grammar/Unit_One/History/history.html

When did Dean Moriarty move to New York?

Dean Moriarty is a fictional character who appears in On the Road, one of the most significant novels in the history of American literature, by Jack Kerouac. It has been quite well known that this character was based on a real figure called Neal Cassady and actually, in Kerouac’s original scroll, this character is simply mentioned as Neil. (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aVskh9hHNzwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=kerouac+on+the+road&source=bl&ots=E6AAidWHM6&sig=hLkIlMtKollVCInL5orml5Ou0a4&hl=en&ei=S00PTc3KHomHceHS6fMO&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false) In the first few pages, the novel introduces the character Dean (or Neil in its original scroll) by referring to some incidents happened to his earlier life. According to the original scroll, he was born ‘in Salt Lake City in 1926’ (ibid, p. 109), he wrote several letters while he was ‘in a Colorado reform school’ (ibid), recently ‘married a 16 year old girl’ (ibid) and he ‘had arrived the night before, the first time in NY, with his beautiful little sharp chick.’ (ibid)

By looking at biographical information of Neal Cassady, it becomes quite clear how much the novel was written based on his real life. Actually, Neal Cassady was born in Salt Lake City on 8 February 1926 and in his school years he ‘spent time in reform school and juvenile prisons.’ (http://www.beatmuseum.org/cassady/nealcassady.html) As for his marriage, it is said that ‘after being released from prison, he married the fifteen-year-old LuAnne Henderson’ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neal_Cassady#Early_years) on October 1945 and consequently, Neal arrived at New York City for the first time for visiting his friend called Hal Chase, who enrolled at Columbia University in the same year, on December 1946. Thus, by matching facts above, it can be assumed that the time Kerouac described in the very beginning of the novel seems most likely to have been December 1946.

Reference:

Asher, Levi (2003), Literary Kicks, The American Museum of Beat Art (electrically accessed 27/12/2010)

http://www.beatmuseum.org/cassady/nealcassady.html

Google Books (2007), On the Road: the Original Scroll by Jack Kerouac (p. 109) (electrically accessed 20/12/2010)

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aVskh9hHNzwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=kerouac+on+the+road&source=bl&ots=E6AAidWHM6&sig=hLkIlMtKollVCInL5orml5Ou0a4&hl=en&ei=S00PTc3KHomHceHS6fMO&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false

Wikipedia (2010), Neal Cassady – Early Years (electrically accessed 27/12/2010)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neal_Cassady#Early_years