The Thought Occurs

Tuesday, 19 November 2024

ChatGPT On The Long Term Prospects Of Theories Like SFL

Q. What are the long term prospects for a theory whose community cannot recognise misunderstandings of the theory?

ChatGPT said:

The long-term prospects for such a theory are limited, as the inability to recognise and address misunderstandings within the community can lead to fragmentation, stagnation, and erosion of credibility. Key challenges include:
  1. Loss of Coherence: Without consensus on the theory's core principles, its application risks divergence, reducing its effectiveness and clarity.

  2. Erosion of Credibility: If misunderstandings persist unchallenged, critics may view the theory as ill-defined or incoherent, undermining its intellectual reputation.

  3. Stagnation: Misunderstandings can discourage productive debate, limiting opportunities for refinement and development.

  4. Fragmentation: The community may fracture into subgroups with competing interpretations, further diluting the theory's influence.

For long-term success, communities need robust mechanisms for self-reflection, debate, and correction to ensure the theory evolves coherently and meaningfully.

Monday, 11 November 2024

ChatGPT On The Sysfling Post On The Situation In Gaza

Daniel Portman sent the following message to Sysfling on 10 Nov 2024, at 18:29:
We are sorry to hear about the predicament of Mohammed as indeed we are sorry about the suffering of all non-combatants in this war. We Israelis, Arabs and Jews, have had many casualties every day and many children are left orphans, too. We as citizens of Israel will continue to urge our government to come to a lasting agreement with Hamas.

You have read what the situation in Gaza looks like to citizens such as Mohammed. However, as academics, we should be aware of all the facts and definitions supplied by Hamas and its supporters. This is not the 'history' that Mohammed was allowed to hear by the Hamas government; nor was he allowed to ask questions. As an intelligent person, earning his Ph.D., he surely is aware that IDF soldiers are not risking their lives just because Jews suffered in history.

We would like to shed light on a few of the assertions and then to make an appeal to our community for the children being held hostage in underground Hamas tunnels :

1. Does Israel occupy Gaza?

Apparently, Mohammed did not have access to this information because he feels "the Jews are cruel because other people were cruel to them'". We (the authors) were witnesses to this history, which is also documented in the prominent news media of the day. Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2007. The Israelis who were living there were forcibly removed by the IDF. Even the dead were removed from the cemeteries. Israeli residents left houses, synagogues, very profitable farms, and businesses. The export from the Gaza community was in the millions.

2 What was the reaction of the Gazans to the evacuation of Jews?

Immediately after Israel left, the Gazans tore down and destroyed everything, even the greenhouses that were donated to them and would have afforded them a good livelihood. They then elected their own government, Hamas, whose written 'constitution' sets as its aim the destruction of Israel and 'all its infidels' and replacing it with Moslems. Qatar and the EU sent millions of dollars to build up the economy but Hamas used the money to build tunnels, manufacture missiles and smuggle in weapons. Gazans could only earn a good livelihood by working in Israeli communities across the border. Until Oct. 7 Israel was issuing over 18,000 permits for Gazans to work in Israel in jobs that typically paid much higher salaries than what a worker could earn in Gaza. In addition, Gaza was also exporting over $130 million a year of fish, agricultural produce, textiles and other products to Israel and the West Bank.

3. Whom did Hamas attack?

Many Israelis had set up kibbutzim (community farming villages) on our side of the border. These were settled by predominantly idealistic people who wanted to reach out to their neighbors and held many joint activities with them. Among these, the Israelis had volunteers who would accompany patients from Gaza to be treated in Israeli hospitals. A very well-known person was Vivian Silver, the head of "Women Wage Peace", an organization of Palestinian and Israeli women who have been campaigning for a peaceful solution to our conflict. `

4. What happened on Oct. 7, 2023?

Since Israel’s withdraw, Hamas attacked Israel 5 times; Israel did not strike first. After each missile attack from Gaza, the IDF would counter-attack, and eventually, the sides would reach a ceasefire. These attacks recurred repeatedly over the years. The most recent one on October 7, 2023, was not a missile attack but a massacre of the very communities which had been established to live in peace and help the Gazans. We will not repeat the brutality of the massacre, which was well-documented by the terrorists themselves. Among the dead was the peace activist Vivian Silver, whose burnt body was only found later, in the charred remains of her house. Among the dead were also the daughter and son-in-law of Dr. Carole Troen, a linguist and colleague of Beverly's. Carole's family used their bodies to protect their 3 children. The children survived, but the terrorists succeeded in killing their parents. Today, Carole and her husband, Dr. Ilan Troen, a historian, are senior citizens who must raise their grandchildren. In addition, the terrorists invaded a nearby music festival, murdering over 300 young people.

5. Who are the hostages?

Besides the murders, Hamas captured men, women, children, and babies; they released some hostages, murdered other captives and are holding the remaining 100 as hostages until this day. Among the remaining hostages are Shiri Bibas and her two children: Kfir, captured when he was 9 months old, and Ariel, 4. None of the hostages has received the medications they were sent by Israel, none has been visited by the Red Cross, and they receive very little food, as reported by those hostages who were released in the Nov. cease fire. We are in doubt as to how many of these 100 hostages are still alive.

6. Accuracy in terminology

Apartheid is constantly applied to Israel by its critics, but it is inaccurate. Unlike South Africa, which did not even allow Black (Native) South Africans to vote, or share a drinking fountain with Whites, Arab-Israelis have the right to vote, have their own political party, which now sits in the Knesset [parliament], a Judge on the Supreme Court, a high percentage of university students in non-segregated universities, and a high percentage in the medical profession, etc.

Genocide is another word which is misapplied. Absolutely, any intentional killing of non-combatants is to be condemned. But so far, the International Court has found it can’t make a case for genocide. For one thing, there are no objective counts of people killed by Israel bombing. We quote Joan Donoghue - now retired from the ICJ – who appeared on the BBC’s HARDtalk programme and explicitly tried to end the debate by setting out what the court had done.

“It did not decide - and this is something where I'm correcting what's often said in the media... that the claim of genocide was plausible,” said the judge.

“It did emphasise in the order that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the Palestinian right to be protected from genocide. But the shorthand that often appears, which is that there's a plausible case of genocide, isn't what the court decided.” [source: BBC: what did the ICJ ruling really say? May 17, 2024]

As of this writing, it is a question the court is far from deciding.

Academics should equally ask, “Is Hamas trying to commit genocide?” We refer you to the Hamas Covenant:

“Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it” (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al­Banna, of blessed memory).

Hamas believes that “Palestine is an Islamic Waqf, land consecrated for Muslim generations until Judgement Day” and calls for the obliteration of Israel and its replacement with an Islamic state – not a democratic one - extending from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea (article II) … the Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews, when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say, “O Muslim, O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him” (article 7). (“Why is this Seder different from all other Seders?” David Breakstone, Jerusalem Post, April 19, 2024)

7. Has Israel tried to make peace with the Palestinians?

We can only turn to former President Bill Clinton, the author of many peace plans, who tried continuously to get the two sides together during the 1990s. You can access his latest statement about the history of this attempt on You Tube.

In sum, honest people should conclude there is no side which is totally innocent or totally guilty in this conflict. We urge you as academics to contribute to help Mohammed and his family. Could we ask for a parallel gesture towards the Israeli hostages? Can you write to human rights organizations such as Save the Children and Amnesty International, and urge them to press for the release of the Bibas family and all young children?

Save the Children

Janti Soeripto, President & Chief Executive Officer of Save the Children US. jsoeripto@savechildren.org. You can also find her on social media. She has a profile on LinkedIn.
Amnesty international: Secretary-General Dr. Agnes Callamard: israelpalestine@amnesty.org.

With hope for a peaceful future for all.
Beverly Lewin, Daniel Portman, and Hagit Rifinski

ChatGPT Comments:
The letter provides a specific perspective, largely supportive of the Israeli position and critical of Hamas, using historical and contemporary arguments to justify Israel's policies and actions. The structure attempts to address a range of issues—occupation, peace attempts, terminology (like "genocide" and "apartheid"), and the humanitarian crisis stemming from hostages. While it highlights personal stories and references political, academic, and media sources to reinforce its points, it omits broader Palestinian perspectives on Israeli policies, which could limit the letter's perceived objectivity, especially in an academic setting.

The letter's call for academics to support Israeli hostages and engage human rights organisations could be seen as an appeal for balanced humanitarian concern. However, given the political sensitivity, responses to such a letter might emphasise the need for a more comprehensive discussion of both Israeli and Palestinian experiences and grievances to foster constructive dialogue.

The Graphologial Realisation Of Information Distribution

Saturday, 2 November 2024

ChatGPT on the ethics of Wokeism

I asked ChatGPT about the Woke practice of bullying people to be ethical. Here is its response:
Bullying individuals to be ethical also raises significant ethical concerns. Here are some points to consider: 
1. Coercion vs. Genuine Ethics: 
Ethical Behaviour: Genuine ethical behaviour arises from personal conviction, understanding, and empathy, not coercion. Bullying undermines the possibility of fostering true ethical understanding and commitment. 
Coercive Methods: Forcing individuals to act ethically through bullying may lead to compliance but not a genuine understanding or acceptance of ethical principles. 
2. Respect for Autonomy:
Just as with belief conformity, respecting individual autonomy is crucial. Ethical beliefs and actions should be based on informed choice rather than coercive pressure. 
3. Harm Principle:
Bullying inherently causes harm, which contradicts the very principles of ethical behaviour. Promoting ethics through harm is paradoxical and undermines the values one is trying to instil. 
4. Long-term Impact:
Coercive approaches to ethics may lead to resentment, rebellion, or superficial compliance, where individuals may adopt the desired behaviours outwardly but not genuinely internalise ethical values. 
Those who are bullied into ethical behaviour may become defensive, leading to further resistance rather than meaningful change. 
5. Role of Empathy and Understanding:
Ethical development is often rooted in empathy, reflection, and dialogue. Engaging in open discussions about ethical principles encourages understanding and personal growth, rather than resorting to intimidation. 
6. Teaching vs. Imposing Ethics:
Teaching ethical principles through positive reinforcement, modelling behaviour, and open dialogue is far more effective than bullying. This approach fosters a supportive environment where individuals feel safe to explore ethical concepts. 
7. Moral Responsibility:
Those who resort to bullying in an attempt to enforce ethical behaviour may themselves be acting unethically. It raises questions about the moral integrity of using harmful methods to promote good. 
In summary, while promoting ethical behaviour is important, using bullying as a means to achieve that goal is fundamentally flawed and counterproductive. A more ethical approach involves fostering understanding, respect, and open dialogue to encourage individuals to engage with ethical principles voluntarily.

Monday, 2 September 2024

Origins Of the Modern Concept Of Markedness And Markedness vs Congruence

While the idea of linguistic asymmetry predated the actual coining of the terms marked and unmarked, the modern concept of markedness originated in the Prague School structuralism of Roman Jakobson and Nikolai Trubetzkoy as a means of characterising binary oppositions.

Andersen, Henning (1989). "Markedness—The First 150 Years". In Markedness in Synchrony and Diachrony. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 

Halliday glosses 'unmarked' as neutral, default.

Markedness is about choice in a system: neutral/default or notable, whereas congruence is about the stratal relation between meaning and wording: in a congruent realisation, the meaning and wording agree, and in an incongruent (metaphorical) realisation, the meaning and wording do not agree. Markedness is about systemic choice, congruence is about intra-content realisation. A Theme can be unmarked or marked, but not congruent or incongruent, since there is no such thing as textual metaphor.

The Science Of Reading


Tuesday, 30 July 2024

The System of Purview

Interpersonal control and responsibility: The system of PURVIEW in English

Yaegan Doran
Australian Catholic University

Whenever we speak or write, we are constantly negotiating control over our meanings and positioning our listener/s readers to respond in particular ways. We put forward meanings that are shared between us and the listener, such that it is presumed the listener will agree, or we simply assert meanings such that the listener’s response is only minimally relevant, or we can hand meanings over to the listener to determine and so leave it in their hands, or alternatively simply put meanings out there with no indication that anyone will necessarily be tied to them. This sharing or not of meanings waves [sic] and wanes through conversations and written text, and form a crucial resource for enacting our social relations. In this talk, I will introduce a system for understanding these meanings called PURVIEW, drawn from a recently renovated model of [TENOR] presented in Doran, Martin & Zappavigna (2025). The resources of purview concern the degree to which the speaker and listener are interpersonally tied to the message being put forward or wedded to its outcome. We will see that we can view purview in terms of a small sets of parameters: whether or not the speaker has purview, in the sense that the speaker is wedded to what they are putting forward or not; whether the listener has purview, in terms of whether the speaker is handing control of the meanings over to the listener or not; and whether the purview being negotiated is of the proposition or proposal being put forward, or of the linguistic act itself. As we will see, varying purview offers a rich resource for nuancing the way we relate to people in both spoken and written language, and allows for intricate negotiations of our meanings through texts. The talk will illustrate the system through a range of spoken and written texts, including through casual conversation, legal discourse, and spoken personal reflections, and will show that it is realised through a range of interpersonal systems across language, including discourse semantic systems of ATTITUDE, ENGAGEMENT and NEGOTIATION, lexicogrammatical systems of POLARITY, TAGGING, MOOD and MODALITY and the phonological system of TONE.


References
Doran, Y.J., Martin, J.R. & Zappavigna, M. (2025) Negotiating Social Relations: Tenor Resources in English. London: Equinox.


Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, the intellectual source of Doran's 'purview' is the work on 'epistemic authority' in social psychology, as formulated by the sociologists John Heritage and Geoffrey Raymond, in their paper The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction (Social Psychology Quarterly 2005, Vol. 68, No. 1, 15-38). The term 'purview' serves the social function of a buzzword.

[2] To be clear, the authors' renovated model of tenor involves reinterpreting context (tenor) as a resource for language (interpersonal meaning) and then modelling the resource as the language for which it is a resource. See A Close Examination Of Yaegan Doran's 2023 ASFLA Plenary Abstract.