Longmanox's Page

Is Communication So Predominant As You Think M ind and idea are fundamental to our life. The very common idea that people communicate with each other to exchange their mind seems hackery and around every corner. However, is the idea you hold the same as in your mind? Is it valid for you to suppose that language is "your" property, which you almost exclusively need when you convey all in your mind? I say this because we share some exceptional cases for the prevailing myth above. Truly, your idea occasionally falls your mind. Or your mind abruptly turns down immediate ideas you have cherished so far. Are you really able to convey meaning through the language you use? Our mind endorses and supports our daily life, whilst people like to talk about communication just because it helps us to communicate, exchange ideas, and socialise! Organic mind wondering, or poetic language is obsolete. People just leave much of the mind behind and hurry off seeking something to propagate,

There are two ways  　　　　　　　　　　　 of implication   for a freedom , One with your mind, and the other your body. Freedom of mind is for everything you think, A world of consciousness: will, decision, inference, and behavior. Freedom of the body is for the entire rest of all your unconsciousness, Where you can only sense an ambience, air, or impression around. "Wow, I can do whatever I like!" you rejoice. Then, you are talking about the mind freedom. "What a release," "How comfortable!" you sigh. Then, you utter the body freedom. These two are a bit different, although they appear the same. Be careful, because everyone has both freedoms equally. So let you just see both your mind and body, If you would like to balance both freedoms' growth. ao This short sentence was written, inspired by "The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down To Size" (Nǿrretranders, 1999).

Learning a foreign language (L2)  as decoding information (e.g., translation) may be difficult in a local context,  such as in schools and communities where no one around speaks the language, but not too difficult to address because we can optimize our first language (L1) to the utmost limit. However, learning L2 speech in the local context in addition to one’s L1 speech is probably the most complicated and collisional challenge if it is compared to the other academic achievements in schools pursuing globalism, such as prulilingualism. This conflict, which learners, teachers, and theorists as well, often confront, has its origin in a unique feature we experience when we learn or teach any L2. In fact, every teaching plan, in the classroom practice, entails language-in-interaction to maneuver. It is thus doubled in this sense for us to learn L2 speech by speech; that is, because we are orally situated in our community, we need to use a spoken language, and it is so even right a

Consciousness is so-called an ongoing process of acquiring yourself; A newborn baby is incapable of being either conscious or unconscious. Amazingly enough, he or she will soon be aware of their own flaring existence. Growing up, hearing the voices of the adults around, Boys and girls will gradually notice the other existence of unconsciousness, Something weird who never speaks, staying just around themselves. Some do not notice it even when they grow up, Some call it the unearthly ghost or superstition. Meanwhile, every morning we wake up from a night's sleep. For it is a custom of our society, of our body from birth. Even some more will be indefinitely convinced to take for granted, Unconsciousness (e.g., sleep) first, then everyday awaking. Therefore, little do we think in our daily life that; The sea of your unconsciousness--you are just unaware of it-- is actually Connected to the shore of your consciousness of which you are aware right now! Consciousne

   Quality of life (QOL) is often discussed to proclaim the quality of mundane opportunity for the physically challenged people such as the blind and/or deaf. It tells us that those who don't inherently see or hear will nonetheless live their life to the same (or even more) extent as most of the others do. However, this idea sheds light upon a more general question of how to think about your origins and encounters: that is, the question of your own interpretation about circumstantial perception and behavior.    Parents spending money for their kid's academic motivation, for example, would probably run against a later glitch, hearing, "It won't pay for God's sake!" When he or she grew up in the college, a pretension of belief that you pay for academic achievement to deserve it is in turn brandished. The thinking runs gradually dry and eventually halts just at the moment of paying tuition. One explanation of this is that the non-creative consumptive society

    Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) lived his life in 19th-century Germany. Although his thoughts and philosophy is very hard for us who lives in 21th-century Japan, and it is too dense to understand, recently I found an interesting verse delivered by Zarathustra (1885), "The happiness of man is, ' I will.' The happiness of woman is, ' He will'" (p. 1174 in Kinddle).        This line has apparently been understood as a controversy of men's (or his) insolubility in women, which I do not like to participate here. In addition, the snap judgment of his would be subject to criticism from feminist theory and politicalization  in many ways than one. Incidentally, however, there is no denial of interpreting this idea from the point of view of natural science.    Male sex drives. The strength of man comes from his weakness, want . Further, men simply believe that hiding their weakness must lead to their own happiness. Therefore, men's happiness is not cau