If Nerds Ran The World
Just before I left Tel Aviv, at the Dizengoff mall, I saw one thing which gave me hope: a dozen young men, many of whom were dressed in soldier's uniforms sitting at some tables, playing what appeared to be Magic: The Gathering
Now, I know absolutely nothing about the game. I had a roommate in college who apparently was a big fan. He had two long boxes of cards, but I never once saw him play. He kept claiming he had special, "rare" Magic cards that were worth big money, to which I said,"Yeah? So why don't you sell them?" But he never did. See, that's the core of nerd-dom, to value that which outside of a select group is pretty much worthless.
But why does this give me hope? Because as we well know, nerds aren't fighters. They may play the games of warriors, but when it comes down to it, a nerd would rather reason through your differences, than kill you over them. Nerds do fight, but they fight over details.
And so, it came to me to consider what that alternative reality would be like if "nerds" were the mainstream, and the "non-nerds" on the periphery.
Thus, I give you...
Top Ten Ways Life Would Be Different if Nerds Ran The World...
BBC: bias or blasé?
Inherent bias makes the media go round
Much print and electronic press has been devoted to discussions of whether news media, particularly the British Broadcasting Company, perpetuate an anti- (or pro-) Israel bias. The seldom stated, but often whispered truth of the matter is that all newsreporting is inherently biased— towards the story that's most
While this is in part a conscious effort, I'd suggest it's also (1) the inevitable consequence of the mainstream mindset that believes everything is a "two-sided" controversy; and (2) a culture that promotes greater acceptance for and identification with a perceived weak "under-dog," versus rejection and disassociation from a strong "over-dog."
Dr. Andrew Cline's excellent Rhetorica site (and blog) identifies a taxonomy of such structural biases. He even takes on the issue of alleged bias in Israeli reporting, as presented in an
But while he describes what he terms "narrative bias," he fails to point out another pervasive psychology in traditional media: news, unlike editorial, hangs its public reputation on the notion that it is-- as one such outlet likes to claim-- "fair and balanced." Let us assume that a particular service has as its aim, reporting on actual reality when publishing or broadcasting (for example)
In effect, once a story's been written from their perspective , the journalist must buy into their own version of reality and dispute contrary views.
Don't dis the dissonance
The theory of self-delusion caused by "cognitive dissonance" was developed Dr. Leon Festiger in the 1950s . Festiger claimed that when faced with a situation or opinion that doesn't fit into pre-existing beliefs, people find themselves psychologically distressed, and their minds subconsciously create ways to relieve that distress. The easiest of which is to disbelieve the reality of the situation, or change the understanding of it to fit into the framework of the pre-existing one.
But cognitive dissonance guides not only the reaction after a newstory is run, but while it is being developed, too. When choosing supporting "authority" for a particular angle on a story, reporters can unconsciously self-select those facts and opinions that fit the mold of their pre-held belief. In science, this is known as fudging the data to prove a hypothesis. Followers of Kuhnian philosophy of science also hold this as "operating within a paradigm" where anything contrary is completely overlooked.
A worthwhile and fuller discussion of such "critical blind spots" in our world view appears at the parchment-backgrounded Sourcetext.com.
Dizzy in Dizengoff
Brought to you by the letter 'P'
Dizengoff back when she was young
I'm fifteen minutes at a brisk walk from the first major mall in Tel Aviv, Dizengoff Centre. It's a substantial structure, spanning both sides of a busy street, with winding levels that circle back onto themselves, and cross-over bridges between the two sides. I was there to return some purchases from the previous month. But I couldn't remember exactly where the store was located. It took half an hour of wandering around the multiple floors, until I discovered, much to my chagrin, the store had just closed.
When the Dizengoff mall was first built, it was considered striking and modern. Now it's showing its age; like a woman past her prime, putting on a little too much make-up and still wearing the same outfits she had years ago. The stores tend towards the kitschy, and generally are poorly laid out-- in part due to the theoretically innovative, but in practice annoying architectural decision of having the floor curve around the entire structure.
It does, however, provide excellent opportunities for people-watching, which seems to be what locals like about the mall, too.
On this particular trip, I took note of empirical evidence that some Israelis need a wee more cultural fine-tuning in the the sphere of public manners. As the mall was closing, on my way to leave, I was passed by a man strolling with a little dog on a leash. Now, I've seen people bringing their pets into stores before-- but walking one in a mall just seems like asking for trouble. And sure enough, moments later, the dog sashayed up to the corner of a now-deserted information counter and made sure everyone knew that this desk was his.
That's probably not what the owner intended. But he didn't try to stop his dog, nor did he look particularly concerned that it had just taken a leak on the furniture. He just glanced down, then walked on, as though nothing had happened.
Being raised in the polite and moderately civilized middle of America, when I see such things, I'm torn: should I try to say something to him, like, "How about I come over to your place and piss on the couch?" Would that make any difference? It doesn't take a whiz to figure out that your dog shouldn't be allowed to mark his territory indoors.
I could have taken one such urinary incident in stride, but as I approached the exits, I noticed a mother with her child, standing next to the raised planters just under the stairs. She had picked up her son, pulled down his pants and pointed him in the direction of the plants, upon which he proceeded to let out a stream of pee-pee.
Now I understand when nature calls in emergency situations, and there's no other option but to find a nearby tree, and see a man about a horse
But as it was, the restrooms were just down a hallway from where her child did his business. Did she think that urinating in public an appropriate lesson for the tyke? Was she at all embarrassed that people standing around were watching? Did anyone think to say, "Hey lady, this ain't Coney Island?"
I leave that assessment to you, gentle readers.
(For more public urination fun, see Seinfeld Episode #33. The Parking Garage)
The Awful Hebrew Language
An outline of my next cultural piece, with apologies to Mark Twain's A Tramp Abroad (Appendix D, 1880)
As a student of Hebrew, by fault of being in Israel and believing it necessary to learn the language of the general populous (even as more of them speak English than in many parts of Texas), I have endeavored to grasp the basics of this formerly dead tongue which started wagging again in public a century ago.
While so-called history books claim Eliezer Ben Yehuda revived the Hebrew as a spoken language in the late 19th century, I believe that like the inventor of Eli Whitney's cotton gin, it was actually his wife. (Note for historical accuracy: Catherine Littlefield Greene, Whitney's employer, is credited by some historians with originating the Cotton Gin. She was not his wife.)
Hebrew can only be the product of a woman:
1) Everything is written backwards (except anything to do with mathematics.)
2) Hebrew proponents claim the grammar is logical, but every supposed rule has multiple exceptions.
3) Every word has a gender-- including numbers-- and the rule of thumb is that words with "t" and "ah" (letter Hey) sound at the end are feminine. Except, of course, for ones that aren't. The masculine of "you" is "ata" (but aha! it doesn't ended in an actual "ah" sound, even though it is pronounced that way.)
Oh, and counting is done in female numbers; while the word for numbers ("mispar") is male.
4) You have to match the gender of every word to the person/s you're talking to/about so they won't be offended that you're referring to them as the wrong sex
When buying a quantity of male vegetables, like carrots or potatoes, you must use male gender numbers; when referring to female ones like turnips or tomatoes, you use female numbers. You have to memorize all the exceptions and know how to spell the word before you can guess at its gender.
5) Thus, it's impossible to have a secretive phone conversation without your girlfriend knowing if you're actually talking to a man or woman.
6) You have to guess how to read nearly every word, because Hebrew didn't bother to including all the vowels.
To make things extra complicated, there is a supposed system of dots and dashes intended to simulate vowels, called "nekudot" (points) but there are three times as many of these markings as necessary.
7) There's no consistency between the written and spoken language.
Four letters can be pronounced two different ways:
?) Bet is either B or V
?) Pey is either P or F
? ) Shin is either S or Sh
?) Kaff is K or Ch
Four sets of letters are pronounced the same;
? ) Aleph and (?) Ayn: A or no sound
?) Vav and (?) Bet (then called 'Vet'): V
? ) Het and (?) Kaff (then called 'Haf'): hard CH
? ) Samech and (?) Shin (then called 'Sin'): S
One letter "Vav” can be pronounced as a V, O, or U!
Four letters, Mem (?), Nun (?, Fay/Pay (?), Tsadik (?), turn into a different shape with the same sound if they show up at the end of a word and are called a 'sofit,' for no reason other than to be difficult to figure out.
When written, however, the Fey Sofit (?) and Tsadik Sofit (?) look like a Lamed (?) except for the direction of a little curve at the end.
7) You can only know from the gender context how to properly read a word.
For example, the word for "name" is spelled the same but pronounced differently if you're talking to a woman ("shemech") or man ("shimcha.") Likewise the word for "yours."
There are at least 12 words that all translate to the English "you."
Clearly, such a wacked-out system could only have come from the mind of a chick.
With its limited concept of vowels, my name would be written like: NMSYYLF NOMYYS, or in the Hebrew:
?????? ???????
And as I'm sure you know, the written script looks almost nothing like the printed.
