We are all so inherently biased. When you look at your reflection in a mirror, you are laterally inverted. But, yet you are upright. What then is being upright? Or inverted? Put in another way, being upright goes hand in hand with being inverted, laterally. Throw away the bias for direction, and the previous sentence implies that any image in any mirror is upright and inverted at the same time...
Showing posts with label Wordplay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wordplay. Show all posts
When I first put up this status message, I never expected it to turn into another post on my blog... But here's the interesting thing. I came across this new word - Cyberchondriac, somewhere on the net. And I learnt that it referred to a person who suspected that he had a certain illness after reading about it on the internet. Now, the first time I read that, it rang a bell. I have done that on numerous occasions. For instance, I believe I have Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), and the belief originated after I read the Wiki article on it. There have been other cases which I will safely omit here. But, it seemed fairly clear to me that I was a Cyberchondriac.
I took an instant liking to the word, and because I believed I was one, I put it up as my status message on GMail. And then, it struck me... I was suspecting that I am a Cyberchondriac after reading about Cyberchondriacs on the internet! And that, in my opinion, is testimonial enough to me being one... The subtle recursion, or positive feedback associated with the word left me fascinated, and so the post.
I took an instant liking to the word, and because I believed I was one, I put it up as my status message on GMail. And then, it struck me... I was suspecting that I am a Cyberchondriac after reading about Cyberchondriacs on the internet! And that, in my opinion, is testimonial enough to me being one... The subtle recursion, or positive feedback associated with the word left me fascinated, and so the post.
This is another occasion when one of my status messages on GTalk is turning into a post here. But, this one is really weird. It all started when my roommate got a new set of speakers for his laptop. We were amusing ourselves with some good music until we were asked by our neighbours to turn the volume down. What's the point in having a good set of speakers and not making use of it? But, we had to oblige, for the fear of getting sued is ever-present in this country.
This made me wonder about how 'inaudible' these walls are. Now, if walls can be invisible, why can't they be inaudible? When you see the light reflected from an object, you 'see' the object. But, when you hear the sound reflecting off a surface, you don't 'hear' the object, do you? So, my theory was that if you can listen as to what is happening in the next room, the wall separating the rooms allows sound to pass through, i.e. is 'transparent to sound', or is 'invisible for sound' - thereby making it 'inaudible'. If you are in a sound-proofed room, you are 'hearing' the silence of the wall. So, in that sense, the walls of my home are inaudible.
This made me ponder about the reason why such an idea is almost non-existent, though common sense would allow such an analogy to be drawn immediately. I could zero-in on the fact that sight is the most dominant of our senses, far more dominant than the others. Dominant to an extent that such an idea is almost baloney!
Imagine the sensitivity of our sight and auditory senses swapped. You would enter your room, turn on a 'sound bulb', listen to everything in the vicinity and do stuff. Sounds like a rather boring life. The awesome blue of the sky replaced by the high frequency squeaks, the red of the stove by deep and bass tones, the pleasing green by the irritating mid-range gibberish.... Aah! I love the way things are... Or am I just not imaginative enough?
This made me wonder about how 'inaudible' these walls are. Now, if walls can be invisible, why can't they be inaudible? When you see the light reflected from an object, you 'see' the object. But, when you hear the sound reflecting off a surface, you don't 'hear' the object, do you? So, my theory was that if you can listen as to what is happening in the next room, the wall separating the rooms allows sound to pass through, i.e. is 'transparent to sound', or is 'invisible for sound' - thereby making it 'inaudible'. If you are in a sound-proofed room, you are 'hearing' the silence of the wall. So, in that sense, the walls of my home are inaudible.
This made me ponder about the reason why such an idea is almost non-existent, though common sense would allow such an analogy to be drawn immediately. I could zero-in on the fact that sight is the most dominant of our senses, far more dominant than the others. Dominant to an extent that such an idea is almost baloney!
Imagine the sensitivity of our sight and auditory senses swapped. You would enter your room, turn on a 'sound bulb', listen to everything in the vicinity and do stuff. Sounds like a rather boring life. The awesome blue of the sky replaced by the high frequency squeaks, the red of the stove by deep and bass tones, the pleasing green by the irritating mid-range gibberish.... Aah! I love the way things are... Or am I just not imaginative enough?
Hasn't it happened that you've typed in something, then you quickly read it yourself, and backspace those to say something that is usually a lot less intense than your original words? Would you prefer that you always said what you thought? Put in another way, would you want to first think about your thoughts before saying something? The IM, gives ample scope for this - thanks to our typing speeds being infinitesimally small compared to our thinking speeds. Wouldn't it all be good if the whole world was IM-ish? So you see, it's more than just being emoticonal!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)