Welcome to my page for Humanity and Human Intellectualiy. (Last time updated by 2/2/2003)
From Political Science to Linguistics and Cognitive Science.
1 **Although my statements may not be a precursor of the academic world, a notion of copy right is still better off for you and me to treat with. Bottom line, you have someone to blame on. **
2 **Special thanks to Professor Chung & Professor George signed on my Guest book as well as my friends and dear sister. (Note put on 1-3-2003)**
My American nam is Sunny Liao, and my Taiwan name is Shao-Chun Liao. I obtained a B.A. in Political Science from San Francisco State University in 1999. Then I worked for 2 years and began to take graduate program of same major in SFSU since 2001 fall.
When I started my master study of political science, I had a hard time to figure out what I should focus on in political science. After a struggle, I have finally figured it out during last two months, (June~August, 2002). I could have possibly focused on political philosophy, but I found something was missing in this realm. I used to think that the thought of Post Modernism might make up the missing part of the classic science tradition, however, I also found that it was not really true for me.
I began to review my life experiences, school, and my readings and writings in the past. I found it interesting that I was able to relate to thoughts that contradict to one another yet I did have an opinion too. I think you can feel that too. Some people may call it confusion of thoughts, yet to me it was rather an explosion of thoughts. If I make it brief, I will say that I found those thoughts, which contradict to one another, are all legitimated. **Therefore, it is not what do we believe; it is rather how we choose what to believe that applies to our lives better. All those thoughts can be also broken down to pieces that are related to our language ability and capacity**. It is to speak, to write, to read, and to think, then to speak again. In this diagram to-speak appears to be the leading element, actually it is not. This is more like a Chicken & Egg paradox, thinking speaking reading and writing are all equally important in the constitution of our daily thoughts and behaviors. In further, the entire diagram processes in mathematical mechanisms.
|
|
"Self-Destruction" as a Phenomenal and Descriptive Theory (Last partially updated! 1/23/2003)
**I create this section & intent to introduce/share my thoughts or findings that have changed me. The statement may not be the main thesis of my WebPages. I am more working on the research on Emotion and Words as my core study.(Please check later part of this page)**
**I am not trying to use S-D theory to self-destruct Humanity, it is describing how we process information and reassemble information to sense the world. (though the description leaves an open-ended interpretation space for anyone of us whenever "you want to")**
I am undergoing the production of the one of my dissertation candidate called:
The Self-Destruction Theory. It can be easier to be described in a Mathematical expression.
(special thanks to communication Dept professor Chung, who advised me to describe the S-D theory in more conceivable way)
On a glance of superficial level, S-D theory sounds much alike to the idea of Deconstructionism from the Post-Modernist master Jacques Derrida.
However, my S-D theory is different in many degrees from the Deconstructionism by its initiation, approach, and conclusion.
---------------------------------------------
The S-D theory is (but not as limited) as followed:
A statement Y claims that thought A is not thought B. The statement can be examined in several ways. Today I am going to share one of it(9/28/02):
(1)Statement Y claims that set A is not set B, therefore, when you examine set A&B, if you can find either set contains one or more elements share by the other set, people should not say A is not B.
**Instead, we should say, what makes A & B different than their share element(s). Furthermore, we should find out what significance the different element(s) really make(s).
I also would like to share some other ways(10/01/02):
(2)A person X utilizes thought A to describe event Z, the result is A'. The X also uses thought B to describe Z, the result is A' as well. Then, we cannot say Z is not Z, A is not B, or A' is not A'.
**Instead, we should examine if Z carries both A & B, or X carries both A & B, or A carries B or B carries A, or A and B shares A'.
(3) A person X uses thought A to describe event Z, the result is A'. Person Y also uses thought A to describe Z, but the result is B'. We cannot say Z is not Z, A is not A, or X's A is not Y's A.
**Instead, we should examine if Z carries both A' & B', or A carries both A' & B', or X's A overlaps with Y's A except A' & B'. Furthermore, we still need to examine if A' share any elements with B'
There are more ways I will explain in the future. (1/23/2003)
--------------------------------------------------
Besides, instead of claiming S-D associate with "-ism," S-D is really more to do with Newton style of descriptive statement to the human tradition.
S-D theory is not a prescriptive claim, it is a bottom-line description to the phenomena on thoughts.
Furthermore, my footnote to this is that S-D theory as a phenomenal finding could be more crucial than pushing it to be a school of thoughts/theories waiting to be deconstructed. Instead, it implies that S-D phenomena exist in all aspects of our human life as a fact.
Recognizing the method of deconstructing meanings of text reveals the different perspective of thoughts from the text author, S-D theory is more articulating the any human conceivable argument will essentially lead to its self-destruction because thoughts are processed by individual's cognition, which is not attached to reality as assumed. A thought needs either its contradictory elements to process or claims self-destruction as a result. If one formats all energy and elements to one formation of philosophy, the result is: Self-Destruction of the philosophy. My most vivid operation on Self-Destruction is Hannah Arent's thesis of her book: The Human Condition. My another viable operation on S-D theory is the melt down of the concept of Power (in all perspectives). Power does not exist!?
|
|
Linguistics & Cognitive Sience:
The Plotting/Mapping of Thoughts
This leads me to the understanding of linguistics traits of thoughts. Although linguistics has different thoughts toward the learning of language and learning of cognitive, the way we learn our language is very much corporately embedded with our cognition competence. The way we learn, determined the way we retreat our stored knowledge. The secrete about the idea and solution are bound together has made some awkward people called geniuses since they can see solution and the question flashing at the very same time in their brains. This is not a myth, this is the way everyone thinks, just the routing (mapping) of bounds are different. Some take conventional (or say normal) rout, the geniuses take another rout.
|
|
Emotion & Words:
How do we build up our feelings?
A.I. to A.H.
(My Main Concern is Here!)
Furthermore, I am observing on the biological aspect of emotion bounds to linguistic words. My hypothesis is emotions are bound to linguistic words. This is my deepest argument of the hypothesis about the tie between Humanity and Human Intellectuality. The manifestation of Humanity is artificial as strong as Human Intellectuality. This may lead to the AI (artificial intelligence) evolves into AH (artificial Humanity) faster.
(2/2/2003)The Artificial Humanity is very much claiming that humanity is manipulatable, & duplicatable. However, this statement does not join the conflict of Nature VS. Nurture issues, instead, it discribes how humanity is artificially manipulatable and duplicatable through both biological and social psycological factors.
Biologicaly, gene is modifiable through prenatal dynamic manipulation through human conditioning or environmental change, and Horomone conditioning.
Social psychologicaly, evidently behavioral development, which involves both behavioral & cognitive change or addition toward their safistications contamporarily or permanently.
Claiming humanity to be artificial does not bias on the idea of humanity is "born-to-be" or "grow-to-be." On contrary, "Artificial" this term actually acknowledges that humanity is both preprogramable to make it born-to-be and also postprogramable as "grow-to-be." (2/2/2003)
I am also interested to A.I. & Mind calculation by Linguistics perspective. As known that math, computation, logic, philosophy, and some other factors will deeply involve in the A.I. field and help it evolve into satisfactory sophistication.
|
