On the last TOK Class: Connections between Words and Symbols/Signs

Starting off, some definitions (straight from notes I took on class x) )

Sign: Characteristic of the species - fixed in meaning and immediate place and time.
Symbol: Created through convention (agreement)

So, to resume (not really) what happened in last TOK lesson, we simply saw how words and symbols connected to each other. This was quite intresting because: what if you went to a totally different country that had a symbol you recognized? The only trouble would be,... well, maybe the people of this country might have a different meaning to this symbol (hence, your perception of what it means is wrong in the context of the coutry you're at). This was really interesting as it made me think on how language and culture can affect the way in which visual references are seen in.

After this we were put on pairs to do a quick exercise in which we had to act out a situation to another pair and they would have to figure out what we were trying to say through our gestures and actions.

Isidro and me had to act out a situation in which a really bad maths student is doing a test. This student finds the test really hard and complicated to do, so he finishes it but already knowing that his mark is going to be low. Then the teacher comes over, marks the test and shows the student the really bad grade he got, leaving the kid real dissapointed and worried.

This mini-scene wasn't too difficult to act out to the other pair, so it was quite easy for them to figure it out. However, the other group was given a similar scene to play. The only differences were that: 1. There were abstract concepts involved such as emotions and thoughts - hard to be conveyed simply by gestures & 2. This scene was rather positive (the student was quite good at maths and not pessimistic xD) So, kidding aside - the other pair did find it a lot more difficult to explain only by using acting and no words to support it (nevertheless it wasn't too difficult to figure out because it was really similar to our scene - only more positive and stuff.)

The next thing we did in class was very intresting as I never had put any thought into it until that day. It naver occured to me how certain things couldn't be explained by either words or a set of diagrams alone. Even simple things such as explanation of how to tie your shoelaces has to be done by explaining visually (ie. showing how its done with an actual shoe) and by explaining textually (ie. First you have to grab the laces and....) Whilst doing my set of intructions on how to tie shoelaces I struggled a bit to find appropiate words and sentences to explain what I meant to the others. You can often see how things are explained by joining words and images to give the person a very clear view on what they are supposed to do. This even applies to manuals and cooking books, which commonly join both images and words. This is why I consider that words and symbols couldnt exist without the other as they are very important to support each other when transmitting messages, instructions and ideas to other people.

Noticing words and symbols/signs

So, I thought about what we had learnt at the last TOK class we had. Thinking back to last year (Year 11), I remember doing very similar exercies to the ones we did in class. Mr Sanderson (our past English teacher) would encourage us to pick a scene from a play (in that case it was Absent Friends) and make silent acting or still frames of the scene and have the rest of the class guess. We often used hand gestures (symbols) in order to convey something. For example, if the person had a fist held in front of the other charecter it could be used to represent confrontation and trouble between these two charecters. 

Body gestures also fit into the symbol/sign rules as, you can use them to give the other person an idea of what you're trying to mean without having to say a single word. Someone nodding with their head will tell the other person they agree or that their saying "yes", a thumb held up can be interpreted as a sign of support, an eyebrow raised could mean confusion, and many other things can be held from this point. All in all, images and words (read) are taken in through the eyes and the sense of sight in order to fill in the blanks in case that words aren't available. 

So, back to the actual pictorial symbols and signs, lately when going around the town I've been noticing more and more of these. Some of them aren't even too visible - not because their hidden, but because they seem so normal to our daily lifes that we alreadt overlook them and we immediately react upon seeing them. For instance, if  someone sees a red traffic light flash on, it means that cars on the lane have to come to a halt to the the other cars pass. A green light means to advance and keep on going, and a yellow line means to have precaution when crossing. These are very common to people's lifes, but like always, people aren't born knowing - so indeed symbols and signs are created through agreement and passed down to newer generations by education depending on the place where this takes place.

Sight

So I must confess that I have lately (in 1 week) I have gotten quite excited with a new... ermm... TV show I discovered. To put it plainly I've been seeing quite a lot of Doctor Who during the past days as its extremely intresting. Sci-Fi, mixed with facts here and there, history, astrophysics, Sherlock Holmes type of mystery and of course funny overall. Still, the point I wanted to make across with this is that just yesterday I was watching the episode "Vincent and The Doctor". This episode to me was very shocking as it showed a lot of relationship to the sense of sight. 

Not to give any spoilers or anything, but the protagonist and his companion travel to the past to talk to Vincent Van Gogh as he believes he sees a face in one of Van Gogh's paintings. As the episode continues, we are introduced with the main facts of Van Gogh's life which includes his depression and mental issues, his artwork, the villager's distrust of him, his little success as an artist and others. However, the part I thought that was quite intresting is how, at one point, Vincent begins attacking at something the other's can't see. It turns out its a beast that only he can see and from that point on the protagonist and his companion help him to get rid of it. This is a very nice explanation as at the end its discovered that this beast is blind, alone and as it dies it is afraid. Later, Van Gogh says that the beast just attacked out of fear. He says that villagers are unable to see that he's not a bad man like they think he is, this lack of knowledge turns into fear, which consequentially turned into the villagers' agression as they began insulting him and children began throwing rocks at him. Which this I mean how people tend to use their sight to just judge a person for the first things they see on the outside, but they don't take their time to actually look carefully and realize there's much more than what it seems at first sight.

Additonally, as the episode includes an artistic icon, there are many parts in which he talks about the way in which he perceives the world.

Vincent Van Gogh: It seems to me there's so much more to the world then the average eye is allowed to see. I believe, if you look hard, there are more wonders in this universe then you could ever have dreamt of.

The Doctor: You don't have to tell me

Vincent Van Gogh: (Explaining how he sees the world) Look at the sky. It's not dark and black and without character. The black is, in fact deep blue. And over there: lighter blue and blowing through the blues and blackness the winds swirling through the air and then shining, burning, bursting through: the stars! (the sky gradually transforms into van Gogh's painting Starry Night) And you see how they roar their light. Everywhere we look, the complex magic of nature blazes before our eyes.

These two quotes of the epsiode are really relevant to be able to partially explain why I consider sight as an important sense, as it allows people to really focus on whats around them in terms of people or sights. There's always much more hidden to what the eye looks at first sight, making the world be full of meaning and new things to discover and explore, which is why I think that personally sight is very important. 

Listening to: Chances - Athlete, Night of The Hunter - 30 Seconds To Mars, Our Lady Of Sorrows - My Chemical Romance 

5 senses in place... or not?

So last class we discussed the ways in which we adquire, take in and analyze primarily the world around us. The basic ways in which we are able to do this are through the 5 basic senses: Sight, Hearing, Touch, Smell and Taste. All of these often work in colaboration or not entirely separately to be able to understand the different obects around us. All of the senses are equally important to some extent, but it really depends on the person invoved in what sense they give priotity to. 

To continue with what we learnt in class, we did a quick exercise on how little we focused on things on our daily lifes. People could get divided into 4 types on the way they pay attention 1. Either zone out submerged on their own thoughts and plans 2. Taking in detail and external sounds non-related to what they should be paying attention to 3. The ones that pay 100% attention all the time to what they are supposed to be paying attention to 4. All of the above merged. I would consider myself as a person who pays attention in the surroundings and my thoughts as well as largely on what I'm supposed to pay attention to. I tend to oscilate between these three states, but I mostly focus on what I should be doing more than anything else. This is why the excercise of closing our eyes and taking in the sounds of the school was an extremely intresting one as I was able to separate the focus of the current subject onto one that focused more on the external environments.

Its quite curious how people often ignore the feelings of pressure all around us, as the body seems quite accustomed to all of these different pressures and senses being constantly present. This is why the brain just omits them, making the irrelevant anymore. I never really thought about it until that day.

Anyhow, the question that was of most interest to me was "If I had to lose 1 of my sense, what would it be and why?" This was a very intresting question. I first thought about sight. Even though people say that losing sight would be better than losing any of their other senses, I wouldn't like to lose my sight. This is because personally for me (as a person who loves art), sight is one of those things that really allows me to see things - literally of course. Its quite difficult to explain the way i see it. For example, every day that my dad drives me to school I notice the colours and the strong vibrance and wonder of the landscapes I view. Even thought I've been travelling back and forth from the school to my home for the past 11 years of my life, each day I discover new things. Once I noted that there were lots of bluebell-like flowers all the way down the road, in other ocasion I saw how there were some light ripple effects underneath the car bridge over the river, in other times I see how the sun causes the clouds of the evening to turn of different shades and of colours that seem impossible in your mind. So to me, sight is a way of seeing and analyzing a lot of things beyond first sight. Everyday things hide too many things, but they're all at plain sight - you just have to learn to be patient and  truly observant to actually realize beyond first appearances. I would be the most afraid to lose this sense as, even though I've seen colours and I know them already and all, there's still so much to see and be discovered -  from colours, to landscapes, to people and others.

Moreover, I would be almost equally uneasy of having to lose my hearing sense as one of the things that really takes a larger part in my life is music and sounds all around me. The sense of hearing allows me to be aware of my immediate surroundings, probably better than sight, but it doesn't allow me to immediately notice a lot of things like I would with sight. Still, if I didn't have my sense of hearing then I wouldn't be able to locate myself in relation with other people and surroundings. Additionally, music and playing guitar is one of the many things that really intrests me and that I really love having in my life. This is because music is able to evoke many strong feelings and thoughts on me whenever I hear it or when I play a song. At times I sort of randomly (not really) end up playing different chords just to practice or relax after school, and there's times where I end up doing complete invented riffs that usually reflect the mood I'm in at the moment. This is why for me music is a way of expressing what I feel and to get knew emotions provoked by other people's music.

The sense that  I really wouldn't mind losing could be the sense of smell as I consider it less important to all of the others. Its not like "I wouldn't care to lose it" - its more like, in comparison to all the other types of senses I see it as a very limited way to perceive the world. The sense of touch and taste can allow us to know about objects in a much broader way than the sense of smell.

I was going to write about...

...the relationships between Peru and Ecuador after the "War of CENEPA" and about the fact thay the GOVERNMENT (the people are not to blame) of Peru took a great piece of our territory not many years ago. Nevertheless, after taking a look at Vale's blog, I can see that she already wrote about it - so I will write about other thing instead. Its also related to the sterotypes and ideas that people have about countries and how these affect their views on their habitants. For example, it can be commonly heard lately how people link Colombian people to mafias and drug producing and to FARC and all of that. Its quite common to hear how people think that the USA is full of overweight and overly consumist people that are damaging the climate with CO2 emmisions. Its quite common to relation people living in the Middle East to the events of the twin towers and to terrorism. All of these imposed stereotypes found in relation to the countries show how people often tend to categorize individuals by the country in which they belong and the things they generally say about that type of people.

This often happens because of the lack of informantion given to students from an early age, which limits their knowledge of the different cultures and people in the world. I myself could prove that this was indeed, sadly enough, true. Last summer holidays, when I went to the exhange programme to Cheltenham, we were invited to one of the girls houses in Bournesmouth. That night we stayed over at her parent's house we had dinner with them and they began asking us about our country and its features. All of the sudden, this girl's older brother asked us how it was living in an African country. An AFRICAN COUNTRY. It was rather shocking how his knowledge of countries outside of his own were quite limited. He even said with full confidence after that how he had learnt that our country had been invaded by Chinese people from early days (Ok, we're not invaded - there's only a lot of chinese people that have been migrating to Ecuador to open their own little shops and all xD). He didn't realize he was wrong until we explained that Ecuador wasn't in Africa and that he might have confused it with Equatorial Guinea.

Additionally, lately, every time someone talks about Ecuador they link it to all the FARC and drug selling activity that takes place in Colombia, which shows how the "stereotypes" have been filtering through to the country's own image, making that immigrants in countries such as USA and Spain are often treated badly and discriminated. This shows how the name of a country can adquire a significance based on the actions of few.

Song's I'm listening to: Fairytales - Jon Walker, Clocks - Coldplay, Creep - Radiohead

Name Meanings.

So for this I actually had to stop and make some research (after the TOK class, of course). In class we discussed if the names we were given at birth had some significance in our lives or not and we were put in pairs to discuss the reasons for why we were given the names we have nowadays.

So first off, my complete name would be: Evelyn Alicia Cañas Correa (check P).

Second: pulling it apart.

Evelyn: I remember asking my father a long time ago why they had chosen that name for me. He simply replied back, "Because its a pretty name!". Of course, me being me, this answer was never enough for me. At the time I loathed my name as it didn't reflect my way of being completely - it only showed the part of me that my classmates knew. I saw the name as a synoymous of "really girly and poilite girl that is always really normal and lives like in a fairy tale". Some parts of this bothered me, as it didn't reflect my personality fittingly (or so I thought... well to some extent - I obviously wouldn't agree with the 'girly' bit xD). So, a few years later (this summer holidays to be exact) I asked again, this time to my mother. She replied, "Well, your father thought it was a pretty name that wasn't too common in Ecuador, so thats that :)" Again, this reply bothered me, but I arrived to the conclusion that yes: My parents did indeed chose the name merely for the fact that it was pretty. In meaning, the name means: (For French - deriving from Aveline) "Little Bird" (In Celtic) "Life or Life Giver".

Alicia: So this name, ever since I was a little kid I relationed it to one of my favourite stories - Alice In Wonderland. What's ironic nowadays is that my friends, knowing that my middle name is Alicia (spanish version of Alice), the taunt me playfully if we're coincidencially in a forest at the time, saying I'm Alice in the middle of wonderland (the forest xD). Despite all of that, I also asked them years ago why they had chosen that name. Once more my dad replied, "Because it was pretty". It was pretty annoying that they had chosen those names for how nice they sounded, so then again years later I repeated the question - this time more successfully. Aparently one of my dad's aunts whom he loved very much and that had passed away long before I was born shared the name - so he decided to give me that name in her memory. The meaning of this name is: (Old German) Noble kind, of the noble sort.

Cañas: Well, as my dad didn't meet much of his family when younger (back in the '40s communications and transports were really quite slow still) he doesn't know the roots of the surname in itself. The only thing I know is that most of my family from my dad's side (the men) were involved heavily with the Ecuadorian army, so I suppose that some military backgrounds could be involved somewhere along the line. Additionally, I know by fact that my grandfather and grandmother came from the coast areas of Ecuador (Vinces, province of Guayas). This would connect to the literal meaning of the surname which is "sugarcanes" as in these parts of the country there are great ammounts of plantations of this type.

Correa: Even though its my mother's name, I'm really uneasy of letting people know that this is my second surname. The president is much to blame in that. Everytime someone finds out they immediately ask me if I'm the president's (Rafael Correa) relative or something. As far as I'm concerned, I'm not (I would rather not be -.-), but people often link me to him whenever they find out, which has turned to be quite annoying at times. As my mother's family lived in the border between Peru and Ecuador (literally just an hour walk from their house to the border), I could speculate that i might have family in Peru and that the name's roots actually did come from the coastal areas (even though I don't like linking myself to the president, its well known fact that his family is from Guayaquil, province of Guayas. This province borderlines with the province of Loja, which is where my mother's family is from O.O) The translation of the surname is "Belt".

(Check P)

So the conclusion I reached after seeing the context of my own names was that they were chosen merely becuase they were really nice in the way they sounded more than anything else. Nevertheless, the fact that one of my relatives was called Alicia just like me is important to me and my father. Its important for my father as its his personal way of remembering his aunt and showing gratitude to her memory by giving me her name. For me its important as it made me feel as if I knew this person even though I never had an opportuniy to meet her, getting me closer to my family roots. In terms of the surname, it can be seen how people instantly try to relate me to the president as soon as they find out. Nevertheless, I consider that the surname keeps all my family closely related as we all share it in some way or another.

Do names even matter?

For all I know tomorrow a table could be called a hat, and instead of saying, "Hey! Stop moving the table! I'm writing" I would be saying,  "Hey! Stop moving the hat! I'm writing" In the first place, the names for objects were made so that people could say, for example, "I found this table lying around" and know what the other person meant. If that wasn't too clear enough, its basically so that different people from different backgrounds can relate an object with one common word so that communication of ideas is easier. However, this isn't always effective as the language barriers and even cultural barriers can make the names given to objects be different. For example, when Valeria first came to the school, she had a bit of 'trouble' with making her point across as there were certain "peruvian words" that were different from the Ecuadorian ones. For instance, here in Ecuador we call a sharpener "sacapuntas" (if you defragment the word its basically 'to get out the tip of the pencil'). Meanwhile, in Peru they call it "tajador" (when defragmented it is 'to cut away'). Still, even though the words are quite different in both countries, it doesn't mean that the objects themselves are different in any way whatsoever - they still sharpen the pencils and do what they're supposed to do. 

Its the same with the idea of changing the name of a rose. No matter of what name you label it with, it will still have its natural attributes of smell, sight, touch and its symbolism would still be the same. In other words its essence would carry on. In class we were given a quote from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet which is spot on to explain this idea:

Juliet:

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose

By any other name would smell as sweet." - Romeo & Juliet, William Shakespeare, Act 2, Scene 2 

In this case, it wouldn't matter if Romeo Montague would suddently change his surname to Romano as he would still be the same person whom Juliet has fallen in love with. The only issue that they have in the play is how the different families are full of prejudice as the immediately judge the other family because of the acts of one of the members or by past actions. Therefore, in the play it can be shown how these families had grown so attached to the ideas and relationships between the "supposed" way of acting of the other family and the surnames. This could be a link to what we learnt in class as, nowadays, it would be quite difficult to change people's ideas of what objects should be named as, showing the attachment people have to words after many centuries of using these to refer to the different things in the world. 

Where do you live?

This question was one of the many that we were asked in our last TOK lesson. For one part, the question at first sight seemed really easy as it was quite straightforward.However, as the question was asked even more in depth each time, the harder it seemed to get an exact answer. First off:

Where do you live?
A house. -.-
Where's that?
In the streets *insert streetnames here* such and such
Where's that?
In 'El Valle de Los Chillos'
Where's that?
In the outskirts of Quito
Where's that?
In the Province of Pichincha
Where's that?
In Ecuador
Where's that?
In South America
Where's that?
In planet Earth
Where's that?
In the solar system, just between Mars and Venus
Where's that?
In some part of the Milky Way
Where's that?
In the UNIVERSE... -.-
Where's that?
How AM I supposed to know?! O.O

So after a few turns the question got quite... mind riddling as it just could keep on going on forever. Not only that, but there would be different ways of facing this question depending on the backgrounds in which people are born into and the knowledge they have of the world around them and their place in the... universe, I guess *that sounded way too deep and astrological, but its true*. Anyhow, it was a rather intresting question to be asked, not only because we racked our brains thinking of it, but also because it really got me thinking if it would make any difference if I grew up in a place. In my opinion, it would make some difference in your life. Well, not some - more like a really big difference because of the different languages and cultures that are involved in these parts of the world. They have different ways of seeing themselves in relation to the world based on the beliefs that might have passed to them through the different family generations. In fact, this reminds me of how back in the times in which religion dictated most sciences it was thought that the world was actually in the center of the solar system - with the sun and all the other planets and stars spinning around us. The different knowledges they had about the world back then and their culture affected the way in which the saw themselves in the universe.

So conclude, personally because of the many things I've learnt from my family and from school itself I have my personal ideas of where I belong to in the... universe xD Yes, I'm from Quito, Ecuador - a relatively small but beautifully cultural country in the middle of the Northern/Southern hemispheres, at the north ends of South America, in planet Earth, between Venus and Mars in the solar system, somewhere in the vast Milky Way galaxy (only a few many light years away from Proxima Centauri - nearest star), somewhere in the vast, vast universe nearer to the Andromeda galaxy, in some place that is yet unknown to science and religion and that can only be speculated (because nobody really knows whats outside and they probably never will unless they investigate far more) - so then, who really knows?

Triple-thinking everything and the impact small things have on a larger scale

So, about last post I made (link), maybe I was overthinking everything just a little bit too much. Its funny how a single phrase you see somewhere (in this case Twitter), mixed with mutual silence, added the fact that you both are a thousand miles away from each other can cause mild to severe misconceptions of what was being said. Or to whom it was being said. Anyways, right now I'm not too sure about what is going on, but I am bound to find out. Lately it seems like everything out there is bound to confuse me epicly in some way or another, leaving me totally dizzy and more confused and annoyed than before (and yes, that includes TOK classes - as intresting as they are, it's got to be admitted that they are very mind riddling *then again, thats the point of it, amongst many other things -.- *). So now, I just got to sit down and think what I'm going to reply back before replying blindly like I did the first time around. Maybe I was just being paranoid and taking the blame on myself with no reason whatsoever like I always do. Maybe its the other way around and this is just to confuse me. Maybe karma is getting back at me for being so slow at replying (the problem is that I often don't know how to address myself at the moment of speaking/mailing/chatting/etc., so I leave it be until I make up my mind properly). Maybe I'm just overreacting a little bit too much to everything. No clue.

Apart from the mind riddling inner conflict if knowing if I'm right or wrong (or both), lately I've been up to something that is helping the community for a greater good... well, maybe thats an overstatement. More like helping a "ecuadorian fandom" community. Trying to bring people of a country together to stand up for a common belief/like/purpose/etc. is not as easy as it seems - especially in Ecuador's case. Unlike in the United States (where people are so united that they celebrate Halloween together and where most neighbours know each other), here in Ecuador that sense of community isn't as strong unless you have something in between to help them bring them all together physically in the first place (i.e. a school, a party, a football match, a race, etc.). In my case, trying to bring people together physically isn't too easy for me because :

1. I'm not a natural leader - yeah, once in a while I could take this job and whatnot, but it would just be awkward 
2. I know no one (face to face) who shares this common like with me
3. School (Can't mix my life between school, graphic designing, art, music and fangrouping - I would have to get a schedual or proper time managing skills)
4. The only mediums for bringing people together I know are through the internet, announcing stuff on the radio,aaaannndd... thats about it really :(

However, after months (2 months) of ardous work in the blog http://panicatthediscoecuador.blogspot.com/ and on it's Twitter account, it now seems like its all finally working out like I intended to. Yeah, maybe now I have like 3 Ecuadorian followers on Twitter that know about the page, and that may not sound as much - but for me its a good start. Hopefully, if this keeps going on the way it is up to this point and I keep investing my time onto this, I maybe could achieve large things with this (bringing fans together and knowing each other, projects, bringing the band to Ecuador eventually?) and that could possibly give me experience to carry on other things aside from this that are for a greater good for a community rather than to an specific group of people. Nonetheless, I'm very excited from where this is leading to.

Songs currently on: Tonight, Tonight (The Smashing Pumpkins) cover by Panic! At The Disco, The End of the World - Jon Walker, What You Want - Evanescence