پیمانه

My Freedom, Your Freedom, Our Freedom

2012-01-01T01:16:00.002-05:00

Who could argue against Freedom? It is such a beautiful concept and every one wants more of it.
That's usually where the problem starts to show itself.

People have discussed this in various contexts, mostly economic and social stuff.

I like to make some remarks about what it means in societies where a certain or several religions are being devoutly practiced to various degrees.

Consider Iran, always a religious country since thousands of years ago. In the pre-Islamic revolutionary times, I hear that, people were relatively free. A large fraction of people were practicing religion. A quite considerable fraction were not. The society especially in Tehran, was quite similar to European cities.

The Revolution was mostly about democracy and social justice, and political independence from west. As far as you can study the currents of the day and the slogans and speeches, no body was crying loud about the signs of religious depravity. Well there were some but it wasn't the main theme of the revolution.

So the question is, What was the opinion of Iranians about how much Islamic they want their society to be ?

well, we don't know, we know that a significant fraction of people truly did not like the overt exhibition of un-islamic behavior. Now how significant I do not know, but it definitely was and still is significant.

Here a question of freedom naturally arises. The question is to achieve a semi-ideal situation what needs to be done ?

We have two groups inside the society. One group is obviously bothered by a woman walking around in her mini-skirt, the other group is obviously bothered by having to wear the islamic hejab all the time. One group is bothered by having bars and night clubs, the other group wouldn't mind having a couple of them around.

I am talking about genuine grievances. I can understand that a religious person would see a rising tide of anti-religious behavior as an assault on his way of life.
I can also understand that imposing religious life style on a person who doesn't believe in it, would most certainly cause undue discomfort.

Obviously we can't solve this problem by totally ignoring one group to the advantage of another. It's unjust, all members of a humane society are entitled to pursue their own way of life, as long as it does not cause harm and injury to another.

Each group uses Freedom as an argument in its righteousness. Sure, you would say, the person who doesn't believe that a certain behavior is wrong, and that behavior is not harming himself or herself or any one else, should be free to engage in that behavior. On the other hands, the other group claims to be offended and harmed by the behavior of the former group.

So what needs to be done ?

I have thought about this conundrum. The best solution I can think of, is to bring the two group together, and make them understand that both have to give up something.

The religious side can no longer ignore the basic humane freedoms. The non-religuous side can not ignore that certain behaviors would irritate the religious. Both have to give up some of what they want.

How much they should give up can only be resolved if the two groups, sit together and discuss, and negotiate.

A social contract would surely emerge, It could be something pretty innocuous that would not offend and inflame the average tendencies of either group, and allow each one to have a modicum of basic freedoms to which their believes is considered rational, normal and acceptable by vast majority of reasonable people.

The most important thing is that people's reasonable sensitivities should be respected to within rational and reasonable norms and extents. People's beliefs and feelings should never be exploited to amass power, authority and/or wealth.

Freedom is precious, but so is justice. We can find a balance. We have to. for the sake of the future generations.

تحول «نافرجام» موسيقي ايران زمين

2011-12-28T11:29:00.002-05:00

اين عکس فرضيه بنده رو توضيح ميدهد که اگر سازهاي موسيقي ايران بيشتر رشد و توسعه پيدا ميکردند به سازهايي شبيه همتاهاي باختري خود تبديل ميشدند . به ويژه شکل ابتدايي تمام سازهاي يک ارکستر سمفوني در تمدن هاي خاور نزديک وجود داشته پرسش من اين هست چرا کسي به فکر تنظيم آهنگ براي ۳۰ کمانچه يا بيشتر نيافتاد ؟ يا کسي به اين فکر نيافتاد که با بيشتر از دو چکش و بکاربردن هر ده انگشت براي نواختن آنها سنتور آهنگ هاي بيشتر و پر محتوا تري را مي تواند بنوازد؟
توضيح : نگارنده این جمله ها کارشناس موسیقی نیست این ها تنها برآمده از کنجکاوي نگارنده هست

The Importance of Language

2011-12-23T00:20:00.003-05:00

There are certain concepts that are enormously and startlingly important, but no one seems to pay attention.
One of those things is language. And by language I don't mean french or dutch, although human natural languages can be included but what I mean when I say language is any arrangement of other primitive concepts that would enable you to communicate another concept and draw conclusions.

For example, numbers, difference civilizations adopted different ways to express numbers.
But only one of these "languages" prove to be powerful enough to meet the needs of humanity.

Sure you can express numbers by Roman Numerals, or by Indian Numerals, Let's consider Roman Numerals, since, we have been told Romans had such a great "empire".

Try to multiply two Roman numerals, say MCMIIX, MMCXV, , the rules of a the game is you can not use any thing but Roman numerals to carry out the calculation.

It's very difficult to carry out this task.

Now let's do the same thing using Indian Numerals, (Notice, there is no such a thing as Arabic Numerals, Indians came up with it, and Iranians communicated it and expanded on it)

The rules are straight forward, and there are even ways to do speed calculations.

Another example, find the root of a quadratic equation, two languages, Algorithmic, and Algebraic. Needless to say, Algebraic formula is much more powerful, its power is revealed when you consider how you can simplify it, how you can use it to find sum and product of the roots.

While the Algebraic language is more powerful in expressing simple functional dependencies, there are other areas that it reveals its limitations. Suppose you want to explain the intricacies of chaotic systems, cellular automata, game of life or things of that nature. The Algebraic language falls short and the Algorithmic language shows its strength and flexibility.

Is there another language there ready to be discovered ? We look at the nature around us, and we see things, and we understand its beauty and universality but we can't find, express or use the universal principle behind them. Machine vision provides examples, so does the field of human natural languages.

There might be a new language needed to describe non-locality, the entire mathematics is based on the principle of locality. That what happens here and now, only depends on what is happening at that point or in some point in the past and some far place.

Do we need a new language to describe things that happen simultaneously and quite possibly affect each other at the same time ?

Some of our most difficult problems of science and technology could be simply hard to solve, because we are using an incorrect language to describe or to approach them. Just like we are trying to multiply two numbers that are described with Roman Numerals, rather than properly by Indian-Iranian numerals.

Mathematics is described by symbols, and by relations between those symbols. Is this the right language for every thing ? Is it possible to describe Mathematics by a totally different language ?
Could that language accelerate understanding and reasoning, concluding and producing new concepts, faster, easier and deeper ?

How about organization of ideas ? Is there a new language that allows you to describe the "totality of this situation" without attempting to look at parts to combine and get the "whole" ?

به ایرانیان زار وگریان شدم

2011-12-03T23:57:00.004-05:00

وبلاگ های ایرانیان را که می خوانی دلت ریش ریش میشود. یک ژرفایی دارد اندوه انگیز.

دل من پر از خون شد و روی زرد
دهن خشک و لبها شده لاژورد

آنها که این سوی آب هستند . وبلاگ هایشان پر از اندوه دوری از میهن مادری هست و خاطره هایشان از آن میهن و مقایسه ها یشان میان این جا و آن جا و می نالند از این که میهن شان می تواند به این جا برسد و نمی رسد

کز نیستان تا مرا ببریده اند
از نفیرم مرد و زن نالیده اند

و آنهایی که در میهن خود نشسته اند
همه سرگردانند و همه نالان. مشتی هستند در آب فتاده ، هر یکی بر دیگری آویخته تا از پایین کشیدن او خود را به کرانه رهایی برساند
و نمیرسد چون کس دیگری نیز بر او می آویزد

زندگی شان به بیهودگی میگذرد و این را می بینند و درمی یابند و از این دانستن می سوزند و با این می سازند. از دورویی و از دروغ به ستوه آمده اند و برخی از آنها برای آنکه نانی بخورند جز دروغ و دورویی راهی برای خود نمی یابند و به آن تن در داده اند و از این هم در در رنجند

پیشرفت های دیگران را که می بینند در درون می سوزند و پسرفت های جامعه خود را که می بینند نمک به زخمهایشان پاشیده میشود
همه یک چیز را می خواهند همه یک آهنگ میخوانند ، همه یک مقصد دارند و با این همه از همکاری و هم اندیشی ناتوانند

ترس ، دودلی ، ناچاری ، بی چیزی ، بی اعتمادی ، نابکاری ، پستی ، بیهودگی ، پوچی همه را گرفته و همه را می رنجاند
مینای همه واژه ها دگر شده - دانشجو ، دانشمند ، سیاستمدار ، کارگردان ، کارگر ، اوباش ، اراذل ، مذهب ، دین ، فداکاری ، دلیری ، سادگی ، زرنگی ، دارایی ، نداری ، ندانم کاری ، مهارت ، تاریخ ، جغرافیا

بد ، خوب شده ، خوب بد همه چیز واژگون شده و وارونه

ستم دیده ، ستم کار شده و ستم کار ستم دیده

یا ناامید از فردا هستند یا امیدوار به دیروز . یا دلخوش از گذشته ، یا هراسان از آینده

به کجا چنین شتابان ؟

ترسم نرسی به کعبه ای ایرانی

تو پری بودی و پردیس برین جایت بود
پس چه کسی آوردت به این خراب آباد ؟

Re-enforcing Rigidity

2011-10-16T20:33:00.002-05:00

Suppose there are two points of view, Opposite each other. You can take your pick. More government intervention in the economy, Less government intervention in the economy. More personal freedom, Less personal freedom. More consumption less consumption. etc. etc.

When the discussion is framed under a one dimensional basis, and the only thing that is being considered is less or more of something, A strange thing happens.

Two groups, one asking for more and one for less (or more of the opposite) forget the reason behind why they want any of it at all. The extent to which the scale is pushed toward each end, becomes a winning score. At that point, the two groups no longer think or care about the underlying effect, all that matters is to get the upper hand.

Suppose one group wins and an equilibrium emerges, in which for the time being each group is satisfied with its share. Suppose the ideal situation for one is 100, and that's the worst situation for the opposite group say, being 0. Suppose a status of equilibrium has been achieved in which one group has settled on 70% of what he wants, and the other group is happy with 30%.

The plot now thickens !!!

The group that already has the upper hand, after a while forgets the struggle through which it achieved the 70% ration, and says to itself, now that we are only 30% away from complete victory why not go further.

The mere fact that they have gotten the higher hand, re-enforces their belief in their righteousness and they become more rigid and more entrenched. It then becomes harder to convince them that they have to accept the status quo or even give up a little bit.

This dynamic is at work in the US now and in many other places. In the US, the right managed to push the scale in its own favor, having abolished high marginal taxes on the upper bracket and bringing the high earner tax to its lowest level since WWII, they are re-strengthened in their belief and want to shift more of the tax burden to low income groups.

In Iran, after the conservative groups pushed through a major victory in 1979, imposing a massive conservative agenda, they have now gone back to the drawing board, pushing for more of the same. The minute amount of freedom observable in the society has become even less intolerable than the high level of freedom, they were content to live with before.

what was acceptable in the 1960s, and 1970s, has impossible, and what's available now, has become intolerable.

It must be understood, that at this point, it does not matter if higher taxes is good for the economy or not, or if more rigidity is good for the country or not. It does not matter how many women are allowed to participate, or how many women are allowed to show what fraction of their hairs. Any number bigger than zero is considered a loss, a give away to your competitors, a surrender to the enemy. Thus a minuscule amount of move to left, on the count of Obama, makes him Hitler. A tiny amount of smile and a tad bit of make up on TV, turns the entire TV into a whorehouse of lust and intolerable sin.

The bloodhounds are barking and they want total victory for themselves and total defeat for their enemies. NO the rich should never be bothered with taxes or any regulation whatsoever. NO the women should live in rooms with no window all day long. NO, they should never come in any proximity of another man, old or young.

This is not about an ideology, it's not about an economic or social doctrine. This is not about the future of country, or the society, this is not about God, or heaven or hell.

This is about winning and loosing. One group wants to win and have every thing and force complete and utter defeat on its opponents.

Any thing less than that, is unacceptable and any cost to achieve this victory is worth it.

The Selfishness Trap

2011-10-07T19:22:00.003-05:00

When you look at societies and nations, you can see patterns. You can see that certain nations rise to greatness in a short time. Certain nations stagnate for centuries. One can ask oneself, what are the circumstances under which a nation rises and another keeps spinning its wheels going nowhere ?

One thing that one notices is that, in the nations that rise to greatness, there is a sense of togetherness, there is a sense of sacrifice. People let go of their selfish, near terms needs and wants, and do things not for themselves only, but for the good of country. They may not brag about it. They may even complain of the hardship. Nevertheless, at the core of their progress is this collective sense that we are all in this together.

In the nations that work and work and can't seem to make any progress, you can see, every body is struggling to get his own share. Every one is trying for himself it is always about me. "my job", "my son", "my money".

These nations are trapped in their own selfishness. They remain incapable of group and collaborative work. Every one says, "You want ME to work, so that HE benefits" "You want me to PAY, so that HE gets to eat" "Why do I have to do this? Let somebody else do the hard part" "Don't make ME pay for HIS well being !! "

And when the selfish and un-sympathetic people combine their lack of sympathy with aggresiveness more often than not they get to control the levers of power in the government. When that happens this country falls deeper and deeper, into the selfishness trap.
The government is the place for people who care for their country and their nation.

Under no circumstances, a person who does not care for his or her people should get any where near any position of power and authority in the government apparatus. Such people would destroy every thing and every one. Both long term and short term future of a country is at great peril when the upper echelon of the government of that nation is occupied by selfishness, greed and ignorance.

Extreme selfishness is contagious. When one person sees that another person has gotten ahead by trying to look after his or her own interest to the exclusion of others, that person decides to forget about any cooperation and to take care of his own interest.

So what to do ? How do we get out of this trap ?

It is incumbent on selfless people to take on this challenge. They must find each other and learn to trust each other. The government and the education system must be first and foremost cleansed and purified. The education system is of great importance.

Unfortunately when selfishness is widespread and chronic, families learn to teach selfishness to their children. That's when the future generation is contaminated. That's where education comes in.

Pupils must be thought, that this is a ship. We are all in this together. If I take care of you, and you take care of me, we will all benefit, we will all be better off. If I help you realize your idea and your dream, and you return the favor by helping me, we will all realize our dreams. Selfish behavior must be punished, selfless sacrifice must be rewarded. Individuals can be praised for their talents, BUT they should not be promoted to the level of heroism and divinity.

These must not be slogans, the society must internalize them. This will take a while, but it's necessary.

Also, we have to notice that our planet is actually a space ship. In addition there is no shore and no life boat. If we the inhabitants of this ship make it uninhabitable, there is no place to go. Currently It seems that the entire planet is in selfishness trap.
The developed countries are moving their polluting industries to the poor countries, the poor countries trying to raise money for their impoverished nations can't get enough of these industries. Every one is trying to have it all, and no one is prepared to give up on even the slight amount of convenience.

This problem will not be solved only through educating the public. The entire socio-economic order must change. As Noam Chomsky has pointed out, a system that considers amassing material wealth at all costs, a virtue, even praiseworthy, will destroy itself in time. The technological underpinning of this economic system must change radically.

Nevertheless if your scope is a country and its people, the goal of creating a nation with solidarity, justice, improved well being and hopeful future, is feasible.

This goal is worth living for. It is even worth dying for. at least, I think so.

باز هم بگوییم

2011-06-11T15:07:00.006-05:00

هر چند کلیشه ای و تکراری شده ولی شوربختانه «خودباوری» یکی از نقاط قوت ما ایرانیان نیست. پس چاره ای نیست جز این که هر از چند گاهی به خودمان و به هم میهنانمان یادآوری کنیم

شمار دانشمندان ایرانی آنقدر زیاد هست که هیچ کس نمیتواند برتری ایرانیان را در دانش رد کند . رازی ، غیاث الدین کاشانی ، خوارزمی ، ابن سینا ، خیام ...

، در دوران های پیش ایرانیان نخستین قومی بودند که باتری های امروزی اسیدی رو اختراع و کشف کردند

و نخستین قومی که دستگاه های دلپذیرسازی هوا (تهویه مطبوع) یا
airconditioning
را اختراع کردند

یکی از نخستین ملت هایی که دانشگاه های پزشکی نو و امروزی را پایه گذاری کردند

از نخستین قوم هایی که قانون های امروزی کار و روابط کارفرما و کارگر رو پایه گذاری کردند
و برده داری رو باطل و منسوخ کردند

ابن سینا نخستین دانشمندی بود که به مفهوم اندازه حرکت پی برد

و خوارزمی نخستین ریاضیدانی که جبر را پایه گذاری کرد

مطالعات ژنتیکی ملت های مختلف نشان داده که حتا با وجود حمله های نظامی ، میراث ژنتیکی یک ملت به طرز قابل ملاحظه ای در طول سد ها سال یکسان می ماند1

ما همان مردم هزارسال پیش هستیم ، ما همان مردمی هستیم تمام این پیشرفت ها و دست آوردها رو داشتند . ما میتوانیم به مقام شایسته خود در دنیا دست یابیم

ما می توانیم

1. http://www.insideassyria.com/archive/5/messages/15758.html

The Threat of Independent Development

2010-12-05T20:28:00.002-05:00

When you look at the history of development around the world for the last 100 years, is there a pattern that we can see? Beyond the normal cliches of hard work and ingenuity, what those countries that have been able to develop have in common?

When you look at wars, and look at the state of a country just before the war was waged against it, what pattern do you find?

I posit that that there is a pattern. A pattern of subservience. Countries can develop (South Korea, Singapore etc ) so long as they are integrated into the Anglo-American framework. As long as they absorb American investment and use American market and adopt american methods.

Japan developed rapidly prior to the second world war. It became an imperial power and stared to compete with Europe and US in finding consumer markets and natural resources. The reason that Japanese went to war and attacked the Perl Harbor can be traced to pre-existing conditions that were imposed on japan to limit her development. The Pacific war then ensued right when the imperial Japan was at the height of its power. The war and the two nuclear bombs reduced Japan to ashes and rubble.

After the war Japan again developed but with no military dimension. Japan's development this time was allowed and tolerated. US opened its own market and allowed Japanese corporations to sell their goods to American consumers. One could ask what was the difference.

Around the world any country that attempts to develop independently of the US and its allies faces a unified front. The propaganda model has managed to create the belief that any country that develops outside the sphere of influence of the western world is by definition irresponsible and it would cause massive problems of unspecified nature. Therefore any such development must be opposed by any method regardless of the short term consequences of such efforts.

In the light of the fact, that the countries south of the Persian Gulf seem to be so scared of Iran's alleged nuclear development, two points come to mind :

-At the national level, whenever a lot of people seem to be afraid of your successes you must know, you are on the right track and must go forward at full force and speed.

-When people think you are crazy, it doesn't help if you start acting like you are actually crazy. You don't have to bend backward for the powers to be. But at the same time, you also don't need to send containers full of weapons to places that are already flushed with weapons.

بازدیسی زبان فارسی

2010-10-12T22:59:00.005-05:00

وقتی این مقاله را در
http://persianlanguage.ir/articles/920
دیدم به خود گفتم جانا سخن از زبان ما میگویی
واقعیت این هست که فارسی زبانان ، زبان فارسی را ناتوان کرده اند. درد ما این هست که پس از تازش تازیان ایرانی چنان تکان خورد که نه تنها از سوی نظامی جنگ را باخت که از روی روانی و ذهنی خود را نیز باخت . ایرانی هنوز در حال باختن است . آن روزی که رستم فرخزاد بر خاک افتاد آغازروز مردنی بود که هنوز پایان نیافته است . زبان پارسی شد زبان فارسی، ایرانی نام شهرهای خود را برگرداند تا تازی که پ و گ و چ و ژ نداشت بتواند آنهارا بر زبان بیاورد، بزرگمهر شد بوذرجمهر، بروگرد شد بروجرد ، ما چنان سربه زیرآوردیم و چنان کمر خم کردیم که هنوز هم که هنوزاست نمیتوانیم کمر راست کنیم هر چه بیگانه میگوید ما مثل توتی از بر میکنیم و تلاش زیادی هم میکنیم که درست چون آنها به زبان بیاوریم
این طرز فکر و این راه و روش هست که ما را به خاک بیچارگی و بدبختی نشانده نه اسلام نه دین .این که ما در برابر اینها دریوزگی پیش گرفته ایم بزرگترین عامل شکست پی درپی ماست.
ما خودباخته ایم . خودباختگی فکری و ذهنی ما توان آزادی عمل را از ما گرفته،ما باور کرده ایم که بیگانه و زبان بیگانه و راه هایی که بیگانه پیدا میکند و دانشی که بیگانه فرامیگیرد و واژه هایی که بیگانه برزبان می آورد ، همیشه و همیشه و بدون هیچ استثنایی برتر و بهتر و کارآمد تر است
این خودباختگی فراگیر و همه جانبه ماست که بزرگتری مانع در راه بهروزی ماست ما تا وقتی که برای مشکلات ایرانی راهکارهای ایرانی پیدا میکردیم و برای مفاهیم نو واژه های ایرانی می ساختیم بر دنیا و آنچه در آن است آقایی و فرماندهی میکردیم
از آن روزی که ما برتری بیگانه را بر خود پذیرفتیم بدبختی و تیره روزی مان آغاز شد و از همان روز در سرازیری سقوط و بیچارگی می غلطیم
ولی اینگونه نشاید و نباید . ما می توانیم دوباره به بزرگی و برتری و مهتری دست یابیم ما میتوانیم چرا که پیش از این توانسته ایم و کرده ایم . زبان ما از توانمندترین زبان ها بوده تا سال های دراز و یا بیشتر تمام کارهای دیوانی بارگاه خلیفه های اسلام به زبان پارسی انجام میگرفت ناصر انقطاع می نویسد: پس از تاختن تازیان، تا پیش از فرمانروایی «هشام بن عبدالملک اُموی» (41 تا 95 قمری) زبان دیوانی و دفترهای دولتی ایران، همه بزبان فارسی بودند.

هُشام، «حجاج بن یوسف» را بفرماندهی سپاه خود برگزید، و حَجاج، عبداله بن زُبیر را سرکوب کرد، و با منجنیق خانه ی کعبه را در هم کوبید، و هُشام، فرمانداری ایران و عراق را به او سپرد.

در زمان فرمانروایی «حَجاج» کارهای دفتری و دیوانی به «زادان فرّخ» سپرده شد. و او، آمارها و فرمانهای کشوری و دفترهای دیوانی را بزبان پارسی نوشت.

در همان زمان، «زادان فرخ فرزند پیری» مردی بنام «صالح بن عبدالرحمان» را که پارسی و تازی را بخوبی میدانست، برای یاری دادن به خود، نزد حَجاج برد و او را به همکاری با خود گماشت.

روزی «صالح» به «زادان فرّخ» گفت: بخدا سوگند اگر بخواهم نوشته های دیوانی را به تازی برگردانم، بآسانی می توانم» زادان فرخ برافروخت، و او را از این کار بر کنار داشت، و گفت: «با این کار ننگ جاودان را برای خود مخر» چندی پس از آن زادان فرخ کشته شد.

روزی «صالح» داستان سخنان خود و «زادان فرخ» را در زمینه ی جابجایی دیوان ها و دفترهای فرمانروایی از زبان پارسی به عربی، به «حجاج بن یوسف» باز گفت.

حجاج بر آن می شود که همه ی دفترها و آمارها و نوشته های دیوانی را به تازی برگرداند. و صالح را بر اینکار می گمارد. و صالح نیز دستور حجاج را انجام می دهد.

«مردان شاه» فرزند «زادان فرخ» با آگاهی از این کار، به صالح سخنی می گوید که در تاریخ می ماند. او گفت: «ریشه ات کنده باد، که ریشه ی زبان پارسی را کندی»

در این باره «بلاذری» در کتاب «فتوح البلدان» چنین می نویسد:

.... دیوان خراج سواد، و دیگر بخش های عراق به فارسی بود. چون حجاج ولایت عراق جُست، امر کتاب را به «زادان فرخ پسر پیری» سپرد. صالح بن عبدالرحمان، مولای بنوتمیم، که تازی و فارسی می دانست با وی بود. پدر صالح از اسیران سیستان بود، و زادان فرخ او را بخدمت حجاج در آورد. روزی صالح گفت:

بخدا قسم اگر بخواهم حساب را به تازی بگردانم، بتوانم. «بلاذری» در دنباله می نویسد:

... پس از آن «فرخ» بقتل رسید، و حجاج امر کتابت را به صالح سپرد. صالح سخنی را که میان وی و زادان فرخ در نقل دیوان، به تازی رفته بود، با حجاج گفت. حجاج بر آن شد که دیوان را به پارسی از تازی بگرداند، و صالح را بر آن گماشت. «مردان شاه» پسر زادان فرّخ به او گفت: خدا ریشه ات را از جهان برکَناد، که

ریشه ی زبان پارسی را برکندی...

آز آن پس بود که واژه های تازی، اندک اندک در سراسر پهنه ی ایران، به دستگاههای دیوانی و فرمانروایی راه یافت، و رفته رفته به زبان مردم هم کشیده شد.

در سده ی چهارم هجری قمری، با اینکه غزنویان، سامانیان را از میان برداشته، و خود فرمانروای بخش بزرگی از ایران آنروز شدند، ولی شیوه ی سامانیان را که نگهداشت و گسترش زبان پارسی بود، دنبال کردند. و در بارگاه سلطان محمود، گروهی چامه سرای پارسی گوی مانند فرخی سیستانی و عنصری و عسجدی و منشوری سمرقندی و کسایی مرزوی و غضائری رازی، گرد آمده بودند و بزبان پارسی شعر می سرودند.

فردوسی توسی نیز در همین دوران با آفرینش شاهنامه، دیواری استوار در برابر واژه های عربی کشید و کاخی بلند برافراشت که از باد و باران گزند نیافت و نمی یابد.

تا سال 346 (قرن چهارم هجری قمری) هنوز زبان پارسی در برابر فشار واژه های تازی پایداری می کرد. در این سال «ابو منصور محمد پسر عبدالرزاق» فرماندار توس، به کلیددار خود «سعد فرزند منصور عمری» دستور داد دانشورانی که بزبان و تاریخ ایران آگاهی دارند، گرد بیایند و برای او شاهنامه بنویسند
ای کاش می توانستم با ایرانیان هم میهنم سخن بگویم و به آنها بگویم هم میهنان بزرگوارم شما رابه خدا کمر به نابودی زبان خود نبندید شما را به یزدان قدری حوصله کنید قدری سر از زندگی روزمره خورد و خوراک درآورید و ببینید که با ما چه میکنند از واژه های پارسی به کار برید که به کار می آید فرزندان ما را در این دنیا گنگ و بیزبان و لال نکنید و نخواهید
خواهشمند است مقاله زیر را بخوانید .

بازدیسی زبان پارسی

۲۰ مهر ۱۳۸۹
ع. پارسا

پیش‌گفتار

از زمانی که با کتاب‌ها و نوشته‌های انگلیسی سروکار پیدا کردم خیلی زود متوجه ناتوانی زبان کنونی فارسی (زبانی که تا آنزمان آموخته بودم و یا بهتر بگویم به من آموخته بودند) در بازگفتن واژگان علمی شدم. روزانه به ده‌ها واژه‌ی فنی و علمی برمی‌خوردم که نه تنها برابری در فارسی نداشتند بلکه نمی‌توانستم برابری برای آنها بی‌انگارم. اینها انگیزه‌ای شد برای بررسی همسنجشی زبان‌ها و شناختن تفاوت‌ها و شباهت‌های آنها.

شناختن رابطه‌ی میان زبان‌ها، شباهت‌ها و تفاوت‌های ساختاری آنها برایم بسیار جالب بود. برایم جالب بود که بدانم زبانم (که خود یکی از فاخرترین زبان‌های شرق شمرده می‌شود) با بسیاری از زبان‌های فاخر دنیای غرب نیز هم‌خانواده است، و البته ساختاری کاملا متفاوت از زبان عربی دارد. شناخت نیاگان زبان پارسی جهان دیگری پیش چشمانم گشود و بسیار خوشحال بودم از اینکه می‌دیدم بیشتر قابلیت‌های زبان‌های غربی در نیاگان پارسی هم هست و بسیار غمگین از اینکه می‌دیدم زبان کنونی‌ام از آن قابلیت‌ها بی‌بهره است. تازه می‌فهمیدم “دو قرن سکوت” چه بر سر زبان‌ام آورده است.

مانند کسی بودم که پس از سال‌ها پی به تبار خویش می‌برد و خانواده‌ی خود را می‌یابد و تازه می‌فهمد که با چه کسانی خویشاوند است و با چه کسانی بیگانه! از یک سو خوشحال بودم از این کشف و از سوی دیگر غمگین، از ستمی که بر من رفته بود. ستم پنهان نگه داشتن اصل و تبارم، ستم تحقیر خانواده‌ام در برابر بیگانه!

این آگاهی‌ها پرسشی را در ذهنم پدید آورده بود: چرا زبان‌های علمی و فاخر جهان مانند انگلیسی، فرانسه، آلمانی، روسی، ایتالیایی، لاتین، یونانی و … همگی زبان‌های علمی و توانمندی بودند ولی زبان فارسی که با همه‌ی آنها هم‌خانواده بود و ساختاری همانند آنها داشت، ناتوان!

کلید ماجرا این بود که آنها به اصل و ریشه‌ی خود همچنان پایبند مانده بودند و ما بیگانه شده بودیم! آنها از همه‌ی ظرفیت زبان خود (و حتا دیگر زبان‌های کهن اروپا مانند لاتین و یونانی) استفاده می‌کنند و ما نه تنها زبان‌های باستانی خود (فارسی اوستایی، میانه، پهلوی) را فراموش کرده‌ایم بلکه زبان بیگانه را نیز بر زبان خود ترجیح داده‌ایم.

در این نوشته برخی از مشکلات کنونی زبان پارسی بررسیده خواهد شد، بخشی از ظرفیت‌ها و توان آن بازنموده می‌شود و روش‌هایی برای بهکرد زبان پیشنهاد می‌شود.

آسیب شناسی وام‌گیری و وام‌واژه‌ها

ساده‌لوحی است که بیاندیشیم اگر واژه‌ی بیگانه‌ای را وام گیریم آسیبی به زبانمان نمی‌رسد و تاثیر چندانی بر زبانمان نخواهد داشت. بر عکس، هر واژه‌ی بیگانه به محض ورود مانند ویروسی در پیکر زبان شروع به تکثیر می‌کند. برای نمونه، روزی که واژه‌ی بیگانه‌ی “علم” به زبان پارسی پانهاد هیچ کس فکر نمی‌کرد که بزودی واژه‌های هم‌خانواده‌ی “علم” نیز می‌آیند (یا دقیقتر بگویم لشگر می‌کشند). هر واژه متعلق به یک “واژه خوشه” است که اگر چنانچه یک واژه از این خوشه را وام گیریم، دیر یا زود دیگر واژگان آن خوشه را نیز باید بپذیریم. واژگان بیگانه‌ی علم، علوم، معلم، عالم، معلوم، تعلیم، تعلم، علیم، علامه، اعلام، استعلام و .. همگی در یک خوشه‌اند و شوربختانه همه به زبان ما راه یافته‌اند. پس با آمدن هر واژه ده‌ها واژه‌ی دیگر می‌آیند و کم کم شمار این واژگان سر به فلک می‌کشند.

گاهی هم شنیده می‌شود که “زبان پویاست و با زبان‌های دیگر داد و ستد می‌کند و هیچ زبان پاکی وجود ندارد و حتا انگلیسی هم شمار زیادی واژه‌ی بیگانه دارد…” و از این دست ژست‌های روشنفکرانه که بیشتر توجیه‌گر تنبلی ماست تا نتیجه‌ی اندیشه‌ورزی پیرامون زبان. هدف پاک کردن زبان از هر واژه‌ی بیگانه نیست، بلکه برخورد خردمندانه با وام‌واژه و پاسداری از زبان فارسی است. برای نمونه، اگر همه‌ی وام‌واژه‌های پارسی، تازیک، هندی و .. را به نسبت کل واژگان زبان آلمانی بسنجید خواهید فهمید که درسد وام‌واژه‌ها به بوم‌واژه‌ها در حد صفر است ولی در زبان پارسیک گاهی به ۸۰ درسد هم می‌رسد که قطعا نشانگر پویایی زبان نیست بلکه گویای تنبلی ما و برخورد نااندیشمندانه با واژگان بیگانه است. زبان پارسی زبانی است توانمند و اگر به وام‌واژه‌ها نیاز داشته باشد، این نیاز در حد نیازیست که هر زبان دیگر می‌تواند داشته باشد، و چه بسا کمتر از بسیاری از دیگر زبان‌ها نیازمند وام‌واژه‌هاست. یا گفته می‌شود که “زبان جنگلی وحشی است و بطور طبیعی رشد می‌کند”, اتفاقا باید گفت در همین جنگل وحشی درختان بسیاری هستند که خودرو نبوده‌اند و فرهنگستان آنها را کاشته و مردم نیز پذیرفته‌اند. جنگل وحشی دانستن زبان (به ویژه زبان علمی) به معنی درک نکردن رشد علمی و صنعتی روزافزون و چشم‌گیر بشر است. جنگل زبان علمی اتفاقا مصنوعی است. جالب این است این اظهار نظرهای به ظاهر اندیشمندانه فقط در مورد واژگان فارسی صدق می‌کند و همین اندیشمندان وقتی واژگان بیگانه‌ی “اطاله”، “اعاده”، “اضمحلال” و … (واژگانی که بیشتر مردم معنی آنرا نمی‌دانند) را می‌شنوند بی آنکه نگران آسیب‌های این درختان درخت برای خاک این جنگل باشند می‌کوشند این درخت مصنوعی را به زور هم که شده در این جنگل خودرو بکارند. زمانیکه برخی طلاب و فاضلان! گذشته درختان مصنوعی تعارض (conflict)، تناقض (contradiction)، “تنافر”، تطبیقی (comparative), متعالی (transcendental) و .. را در این جنگل بی‌صاحب می‌کاشتند روان کسی نمی‌پریشید ولی امروز که درختان طبیعی “هم‌ستیزی”، “پادگویی”، “هم‌گریزی”، “همسنجشی”، “ترافرازنده” را می‌کارند همه جنگلبان شده‌اند!

اگر ورود این همه واژه‌ی بیگانه (۸۰ درسد) به زبان ما ایرادی ندارد پس بیاییم این ۲۰ درسد بازمانده (مشتی حرف ربط و اضافه و …) را هم به کناری نهاده و به یکباره زبان بیگانه را برای خود برگزینیم تا مجبور نباشیم مرگ تدریجی زبانمان را به تماشا بنشینیم. چنانکه بسیاری از کشورهای آمریکای لاتین، آفریقا و … چنین کردند. البته پیشنهاد من اینست که دست کم زبانی را برای خود برگزینیم که مشکلات کمتری داشته باشد و از پس واژگان دانشیک برآید نه زبانی که خود تا گردن در مشکلات فرورفته و گویشورانش به این باور رسیده‌اند که بیهوده نکوشند و برای بازگفتن واژگان دانشیک از زبان دیگری بهره گیرند.

اگر از همان روز نخست واژه‌ی “علم” را به زبانمان راه نمی‌دادیم و در را به رویش می‌بستیم و از داشته‌های خود (دانستن) بهره می‌گرفتیم، امروز هیچ یک از واژه‌های بیگانه‌ی پیش‌گفته در زبان پارسی نبود. در واقع اگر پارسی می‌اندیشیدیم، واژگان پارسی دانش، دانا، نادان، دانسته، پیش‌دانسته، دانستنی، دانشمند، دانشور، دانشیار، دانش‌آموز، دانش‌جو، دانش‌پژوه، دانش‌آموخته، دانشگاه، دانشسرا، دانشکده، دانش‌بنیان، دانشنامه، دانش‌افزایی و … را بجای واژگان بیگانه بکار می‌بردیم.

پس می‌بینیم که هر وام‌واژه، انبوهی از واژگان بیگانه‌ی دیگر را به دنبال خود می‌آورد و امروز زبان پارسیک آکنده از واژگان تازیک شده است، بگونه‌ای که امروز حتا جای فعل‌های زیبا و ساده‌ی پارسیک “فرستادن”، “کوشیدن”، “اندیشیدن”، “دیدن”، “دریافتن”، “انگاشتن”، “پنداشتن”، “افزودن”، “کاستن”، “پَناهیدن”، “رَستن/رَهیدن”، “تباهیدن”، “پذیرفتن”، “شگفتیدن[۱]“، “شرمیدن”، “شکیبیدن[۲]“، “شیویدن/شیفتن”، “شتافتن/شتابیدن”، “گماشتن”، “خَستن” و … را فعل‌های ترکیبی بیگانه‌ی “ارسال کردن”، “سعی کردن”، “فکر کردن”، “مشاهده کردن”، “درک کردن”، “تصور کردن”، “فرض کردن”، “اضافه کردن”، “کسر کردن”، “خلاص شدن”، “فاسد شدن”، “قبول کردن”، “تعجب کردن”، “حیا کردن”، “صبر کردن”، “عاشق شدن”، “عجله کردن”، “منصوب کردن”، “مجروح شدن” و .. گرفته است. و البته این پایان کار نبوده و ترکیب‌های شگفت‌انگیز سه واژه‌ای مانند “در معرض نمایش گذاشتن” ، “به مرحله عمل در آوردن”، “تحت سلطه درآوردن”، “به منصه‌ی ظهور رساندن”، “مورد حمله قرار دادن” (تاختن)، “مورد تحسین قرار دادن” (ستودن)، “مورد تقبیح قرار دادن” (نکوهیدن)، “دچار استیصال شدن” (درماندن)، “ورود پیدا کردن” (درونیدن) و … نیز ساخته شده‌اند که شاهکارند!

آسیب دوم این وام‌واژه‌ها این است که ویژگی‌های آواییک زبان را می‌دگرانند. هر زبانی ویژگی‌های آواییک خود را دارد و واژگان نو‌ نیز هماهنگ با همان ساختار آواییک ساخته می‌شود. اگر وام‌واژه‌ها با ساختار زبان وام‌گیرنده هم‌خوانی نداشته باشند، کم-‌کم ساختار آواییک زبان را می‌آشوبند، بگونه‌ای که امروز حتا نام زبانمان (پارسیک) به “فارسی” دگریده است و ترجیح می‌دهیم نام زبان خود را به زبان تازیک بگوییم! زبان ما دگرش‌های آواییک بسیاری را پذیرفته، چند واکه را از دست داده و چند واکه نیز دگرگون شده‌اند. مانند دگرش “گ” به “ج” در واژگان بروجرد (بروگرد)، امزاجزد (امزاگرد)، دستجرد (دستگرد) و .. در حالیکه “گرد” در زبان پارسی معنی “شهر” را می‌دهد و با این دگرش، زایش واژگان نو با پسوندگونه‌ی “گرد” نیز فراموش و کم‌ کم از میان رفته‌است. نکته‌ی مهمتر این دگردیسی‌ها اینست که هر چه ساختار آواییک زبان بیشتر می‌دگرد، راه را برای آمدن واژگان بیگانه‌ی‌ بیشتر هموارتر می‌کند و چه بسا گویشوران آن زبان پس از مدتی با ساختار آواییک زبان خویش بیگانه شوند و به ساختار دیگری خو بگیرند. برای نمونه، امروز بازگفتن واژگان بیگانه‌ی “محیرالعقول”، “مدعی‌العموم”، “حق‌التحقیق”، “مشمول‌الضمه”، “استغاثه” و … آسانتر از گفتن واژگان پارسیک زیبا و خوش‌آوای “پادافره”، “اوژندن”، “بیوسیدن”، “نیوشیدن” و .. است.

آسیب سوم: این پایان داستان وام گرفتن واژگان بیگانه نیست که آغاز آنست. چرا که این واژگان بیگانه، در ظاهر مشتی واژه‌اند که وارد زبان شده‌اند ولی در باطن روش و تکنیک واژه‌سازی و ساختار زبان منبع است که وارد زبان می‌شود. یعنی نه تنها وام‌واژه‌ها جا را برای واژگان پارسیک تنگ می‌کنند (آسیب نخست) و ساختار آواییک آنرا به هم می‌ریزند (آسیب دوم)، که ساختار زبان را نیز می‌دگرانند و زایندگی آنرا می‌گیرند. بگونه‌ای که امروز ما ترجیح می‌دهیم “استخراج” را به جای “درآورش و درآوردن” بکار بریم و همچنین “مقایسه” (همسنجش)، “مصالحه” (همسازش)، “تعمیر” (بازسازش)، “تحلیل” (واکافت-واکاوش)، “نازل کردن” (فروفرستادن)، “سقوط کردن” (افتادن/فروافتادن)، “تکامل یافتن” (فَرگشتن) و بی‌شمار نمونه‌ی دیگر. در واقع ما برای ساختن واژه به سراغ روش‌های زبان خود نمی‌رویم بلکه روش‌های آسان‌یاب‌تر زبان بیگانه را بر‌می‌گزینیم و این بیشتر و بیشتر ساختار زبان را به هم می‌ریزد و ذهن ما را با روش‌های بیگانه‌ی زایش زبانیک می‌پرورد. این هم‌افزایی شوم توان زایش زبان را می‌کاهد و به جایی می‌انجامد که مجبور می‌شویم مانند بسیاری از ملت‌های جهان زبان‌های انگلیسی، فرانسه، .. را برای خود برگزینیم. اگر چه امروز نیز بیش از ۵۰ درسد این توان فراموش شده یا بکار نمی‌رود.

با اینکه نیاز امروز ما به روش‌های فراموشیده‌ی واژه‌سازی زبانمان بیشتر از هر زمان دیگریست ولی از آنجا که وام‌واژه‌ها دگرش‌های بنیادینی در زبان و اندیشه‌ی ما بوجود آورده‌اند، زنده کردن آن روش‌ها دشوار و حتا ناشدنی می‌نماید (مانند پیشوندهای آ، اف، ن، اردا، اَپی..). همچنین، برخی از روش‌ها که توسط فرهنگستان زبان و زبان‌شناسان زنده شده است، هنوز نتوانسته‌اند ذهن زبانیک فرهیختگان و نویسندگان ما را بدگرانند چه رسد به ذهن مردم عادی (مانند پیشوندهای پاد، ترا، پیرا، اندر, دش، هو و ..).‌

نکته‌ی دیگری که باید یادآوری کرد این است که حتا اگر واژگان بیگانه را پی‌رو دستور زبان فارسی کنیم و بتوانیم بر سر زبان مردم هم بیاندازیم (مانند فهمیدن)، بر خلاف نظر برخی، باز هم نمی‌توان بطور کامل از ویژگی‌ها و توانمندی‌های زبان پارسیک بهره برد. چرا پس از چند سد سال که از پذیرفتن ریشه‌ی “فهم” و برساختن فعل “فهمیدن” می‌گذرد، هنوز نتوانسته‌ایم واژگان “فهما”، “فهمش”، “فهمانش”و “فهمنده” را بسازیم؟ چرا ترجیح می‌دهیم از “فهیم”، “مفهوم”، “تفهیم” و … استفاده کنیم؟ ساخت مصدر برساخته‌ی “فهمیدن” باعث نشد که نویسندگان واژگان “فهیم”، “مفهوم”، “تفهیم” و “استفهام” را بکار نبرند. همانگونه که داشتن چهار گزینه‌ی “هراسیدن”، “ترسیدن”، “باک” و “پروا” (که همگی زنده، آشنا و دم‌دست هستند) باعث نشد تا “خوف”، “مخوف”، “خوفناک” و “خائف” به زبان راه نیابد. پس بهتر است اصلا خطر نکنیم و از آغاز با حساسیتی میهن‌پرستانه جلوی واژه‌ی بیگانه را بگیریم، حتا اگر پی‌رو دستور زبان پارسیک شده باشد.

روش‌های بهکرد زبان

روش‌های زیر نتیجه‌ی یک کار علمی زبان‌شناسانه و یا ادیبانه نیست بلکه نتیجه‌ی آشنایی و برخورد ده دوازده ساله‌ی من با زبان انگلیسی است و برخی از مشکلاتی است که خود در دانشگاه و کار با آنها درگیر بوده و هستم. اینها مشکلات واقعی‌ای هستند که هر دانشجویی به آنها برمی‌خورد و خیلی زود به این نتیجه می‌رسد که فارسی زبان علم نمی‌تواند باشد و به قول معروف در برابر زبان پرتوان انگلیسی کم می‌آورد و نتیجه‌ی این کم آوردن‌ها در عرصه‌های مختلف حال و روز امروز ایران ماست. بر این باورم که زبان پارسیک می‌تواند زبان علمی باشد اگر ما بخواهیم و اگر بتوانیم ذهنمان را به برخورد علمی عادت دهیم و از بند تعصب برهانیم. پیاده کردن همه‌ی روش‌های زیر دشوار می‌نماید، ولی دست‌کم می‌توان در زبان علمی آنها را بکاربرد تا کم‌کم به گفتار مردم نیز راه یابد.

۱- روش‌های ساخت صفت

ساخت صفت از اسم با افزودن “ی”: پیشنهاد می‌شود به دیس پهلوی آن (ایک) بازگردیم چرا که روش کنونی (که ظاهرا تاثیر گرفته از زبان تازیک بوده است) با مشکلات بسیاری همراه است.

a. نخست اینکه “ی” در زبان پارسیک (افزون بر صفت) هم برای ساخت “اسم” از “صفت” و هم برای ساخت “اسم نکره” بکار می‌رود و ابهام زیادی هنگام خواندن ایجاد می‌کند. شاید برای همه‌ی ما پیش‌آمده باشد که مجبور شده باشیم برای فهمیدن جمله‌ای آنرا دوبار بخوانیم [۳]. برای نمونه “آزمایشگاهی(ی نکره) از موش‌های آزمایشگاهی(ی صفت) برای اندازه‌گیری آزمایش‌پذیری(ی اسم) برخی نشانه‌های بیماری …”. اگرچه یک واژه در نقش‌های اسم و صفت متفاوت است ولی هم‌دیس هستند و این هم سرعت خواندن را کم می‌کند و هم در بسیاری از موارد ابهام ایجاد می‌کند. به نظر نمی‌رسد با کوشش‌های انجام شده برای بازنگری خط[۴]، بتوان این مشکلات را برطرف کرد.

b. دوم اینکه، ساختن فعل، قید و .. از صفت‌هایی که با روش کنونی ساخته می‌شوند، امکان پذیر نیست. در واقع روش کنونی راه را برای زایش بیشتر می‌بندد و زبان را سترون می‌کند. نمونه:

درحالیکه اگر صفت را با یکی از روش‌های زبان خود مانند “یک[ik]“، “ال[۵][āl] “، “این[in] “، “ول[ul] ” و … بسازیم، می‌توان دوباره از این صفت فعل ساخت، برای نمونه:

این دگرش سترون کننده، که اثر زبان بیگانه است، باعث شده که حتا برخی نیز به خطا روند و برای نمونه فعل‌های “فارسیدن” و “عربیدن” را به معنای فارسی شدن و عربی شدن گرفته‌اند در حالیکه معنی فارس شدن و عرب شدن می‌دهند. مانند خیسیدن (خیس شدن)، خشکیدن (خشک شدن). آشکار است که ما از واژگانی که به “ی” ختم می‌شوند نمی‌توانیم فعل‌های بیشتری بسازیم و این روش با زبان ما سازگار نیست و بی‌دلیل نبوده است که نیاکان ما صفت را با “ایک” و “این” می‌ساختند. در حالیکه ساخت صفت با “ی” روشی است که با زبان وام‌دهنده (تازیک) کاملا سازگار بوده و آنرا سترون نمی‌کند و جلوی ساخت فعل‌های بیشتر را نمی‌گیرد.[۶]

۲- روش‌های ساخت اسم

روش ساخت اسم با افزودن کسره “ه”. نگاهی به نمونه‌های نوساخته‌ی زیر بیندازید:

اینجا نیز “ه” دست زبان را برای زایش بیشتر می‌بندد و این ارمغانی! است که زبان‌های بیگانه برای ما می‌آورند و برخی چنان متعصبانه به آن چسبیده‌اند که گویی زبان مادری آنهاست.

نتیجه‌ای که از روش‌های گفته در بندهای ۱ و ۲ می‌توان گرفت این است که اساسا واژگانی که به حروف بی‌صدا ختم می‌شوند مشکل‌زا هستند و اگر واژگان باستانی را واکاویم، می‌بینیم که غالبا به حروف بی‌صدا ختم نمی‌شوند (تا جایی که من می‌دانم!) مانند: تاگ(تا)، اباگ (با)، پیداگ (پیدا)، روستاک (روستا/رستاق)، ریشک (ریشه)، نامک (نامه)، زندگ (زنده) و برهنک (برهنه)، دهک (دهه)،. جالب اینکه هنگام جمع بستن واژگانی که به “ه” ختم می‌شوند “گ” می‌آید که خود نشانگر وجود پنهانی آن است: پرندگان، خوانندگان، نوازندگان و پروانگان و گذشتگان. در واقع زبان به نوعی به اصل خویش باز‌می‌گردد. حتا “به” نیز “پد/پاد” بوده و بی‌دلیل نیست که به جای “به او” واژه‌ی “بدو” بکار می‌رفته است. یا واژگانی مانند پای (پا)، بوی (بو)، همای (هما)، ابرنای (برنا) که هنگام کاربرد در بسیاری از موارد باید حرف “ی” به پایان آنها افزود (مانند پایش[pāyaš]، بویی[buyi]) و این نیز نوعی بازگشت به اصل واژگان است و به روشنی نشان می‌دهد که زبان پارسی این دگرش‌ها را برنمی‌تابد و پس از ۱۴۰۰ سال هنوز کاملن با آنها کنار نیامده و اگر این نشانه‌ی بدگواری زبان در گوارش واژه‌ها و روش‌های بیگانه نیست پس چیست؟ صفت‌ نیز با پیشوند “ایک” ساخته می‌شده ‌است مانند تاریک، نزدیک، تازیک (عرب)، پارسیک (فارسی)، پهلوانیک، زندیک (زندیق)…[۷]

سخن این نیست که این واژگان را به دیس کهن خود بازگردانیم، بلکه باید هنگام گزینش یا ساخت واژگان نو، این نکات نیز در نظر گرفته شود. مانند واژه‌ی تاگ (دیس پهلوی تا) که برای clone گزیده شده است.

۳- روش‌های ساخت قید

فعال‌تر کردن روش‌های زبان فارسی برای ساخت قید از صفت. امروزه برای بیشتر واژگان انگلیسی که به ly ختم می‌شوند (قیدها) مترجمان از فرمول بطور..، به لحاظ ..، از منظر .. استفاده می‌کنند، به این نمونه‌ها بنگرید: بطور خودکار (automatically)، بطور تصادفی (randomly)، به طور مجانبی (asymptotically)، به طور مورب (diagonally)، بطور قطری (diametrically)، از منظر تکنولوژیک (technologically)، به لحاظ روانی (mentally)، به لحاظ قانونی (legally)، به لحاظ زبان‌شناختی (linguistically) و بی‌شمار نمونه‌ی زشت و ناهنجار دیگر که در هر نوشته‌ی امروزین می‌توان یافت. امروز حتا بجای واژگان ساده و زیبای گریان، خندان، دوان، .. از ترکیب‌های ناهنجار درحالی که گریه می‌کرد، درحالی که می‌خندید و .. بهره می‌بریم!

اکنون به نمونه‌هایی که دکتر حیدری ملایری پیشنهاده‌است بنگرید: ناهَمساویکانه (asymptotically)، تَراکُنجانه (diagonally)، تَرامونیکانه [۸](diametrically)، نَزدینانه (approximately)، شیدیکانه/نوریکانه (optically)، زبان‌شناسیکانه (linguistically).

۴- زنده کردن روش‌های کهن واژه‌سازی

زنده کردن و بکاربردن روش‌های ساخت‌واژه در زبان‌هایی کهن ایرانی که نیاگان زبان پارسیک برشمرده می‌شوند، مانند پارسی پهلوی، پارسی باستانی و پارسی اوستایی. برای نمونه پیشوندهای “پاد”، “تَرا”، “پیرا/پَر”، “هو”، ” دُش/ دُژ”، “ا”، “‌اَپی”، “اَردا/ اَرتا/اُردی[۹]“، “اَندَر” و … که فرهنگستان یا زبان‌شناسان آنها را زنده کرده‌اند، بسیاری از ناتوانی‌های زبان پارسیک را برطرف می‌کنند:

پادگفتن (to contradict)، پادشاریدن (conterflow)، پادفروغ (counterglow)، پادساعتگرد (counterclockwise)، ترادیسیدن (to transform)، ترابُردن (to transit)، ترانهادن (to transpose)، تراکنش (transaction)، تراگُسیلیدن (to transmit)، ترافرازیدن(to transcend)، ترانوشتن (to transliterate)، ترابُریدن (to transect)، ترادَمیدن (to transpiration)، تراکافتن (دیالیز کردن to dialyze), ترامون (diameter)، پیرامون (perimeter)، پَرناویدن (to circumnavigateto)، پَرگَشتن (to circumvolve)، پیراکشیدن/پَروشتن (to circumscribe)، پیراپوست (periderm)، پیراشاماس (pericarditis)، پیرابین (periscope)، پیرابر (pericarp)، پَرهون (circle)، پَربند (contour)، هومرگاندن (to euthanize), هومرگ (Euthanasia), هوهسته (Eucaryotae)، هونهنگ (Eubalaena)، هوگویش (eulogy), هوگُواری (eupepsia), هوپرورش (eutrophication)، دش‌پرورد (dystrophic)، دُژگُواری (dyspepsia)، دُش‌گویی (dysphasia)، اَبیراهی (aberration)، اَریخت (amorphous)، ‌اَپی‌‌زایش (epigenesis)،اَپی‌چرخه (epicycle)، اَرداکنج (orthogonal)، اَردابینیک (orthoscopic)، اَندَرکُنش (interaction)، اَندَرزنش (interference)، اَندَریابش (interpolation)، اَندراَبریک (intercloud)، اَندرکهکشانیک (intergalactic)، اَندراَختریک (intersteller).

واژگانی که با روش‌های پیش‌گفته برساخته ‌شده‌اند معنی دقیقتری دارند و بهتر فهمیده می‌شوند. با دانستن معنی واژه‌ی “مون” (اندازه) و پیشوندهای “ترا” (سرتاسر/از میان) و “پیرا/پر” (دور/اطراف)، روشن است که معنی “تَرامون”، “پیرامون”، “پَرهون” و “پَربند” بسیار بهتر از “قطر”، “محیط”، “دایره” و “کانتور” فهمیده می‌شود و البته در زبان علمی دقیقترند. درواقع بیشتر ما می‌دانیم “قطر” به چه می‌گویند ولی نمی‌دانیم که چه معنی‌ای می‌دهد! “پَرناویدن” دقیق‌تر است یا “دور زمین را با کشتی پیمودن”؟ “پَرگشتن” بهتر است یا “دور چیزی گشتن”؟

آیا بدون زنده کردن این پیشوندها می‌توان این همه واژه ساخت؟ می‌توانید بینگارید چه توانی در زبان پارسیک نهفته است؟ و چقدر از واپس‌ماندگی‌های زبانی و علمی خود را می‌توان جبران کرد؟

یکی از بهترین نمونه‌های این روش را می‌توان در کار پروفسور حیدری ملایری دید که با شناخت ژرفی که از زبان پارسی داشته واژگان بسیار زیبا و دقیقی را ساخته است. برای نمونه: دَرشَمیدن (absorb)، بَرشَمیدن (adsorb)، واوشتن (describe)، دَروشتن (inscribe)، نپاهیدن (observe)، اَفماردن، میازیدن، پَتواژیدن، ..

۵- استانداردسازی روش‌های واژه‌سازی

اگر در واژه‌گزینی روش‌های استاندارد و هماهنگی وجود نداشته باشد و هر کس ساز خود را بزند و روش خود را بکاربرد، زبان بیش از آنکه سامان یابد آشفته می‌شود. به نظر می‌رسد فرهنگستان حتا با خودش هم هماهنگ نیست چه رسد با زبان‌شناسان و اندیشمندان دیگر. نمونه‌های نوساخته‌ی گروه پزشکی فرهنگستان را ببینید: دُش‌میزی (dysuria)، بی‌‌ادراری (anuria)، چرک‌میزی (pyuria)، کم‌ادراری (oliguria)، خون‌میزی (hematuria)، شب‌ادراری (nocturia)، صفرامیزی (choluria) و بالاخره میز یا ادرار! این آشفتگی در همه‌ی روش‌ها و واژه‌ها دیده می‌شود. مانند:

پیشوند “Bio” است که به دو پیشوند “زیست” و “زی” ترجمه شده است (زیست‌فناوری، زیست‌شناسی، زیست‌بسپار، زیست‌سنجی[۱۰]، زیست‌مه[۱۱]، زی‌گونه[۱۲]، زی‌توده[۱۳]، زی‌سازند[۱۴])، پیشوند دوم بدلیل کوتاه‌تر بودن مناسب‌تر است. همچنین کاربرد بن مضارع به عنوان پیشوند دارای پیشینه بیشتری ست تا بن ماضی! (مانند پیشوند “که” به معنی کوچک که بن مضارع کاهیدن است).

و یا پیشوند “inter” که به پشوندهای ” اَندَر”، “میان”، “درون” و “برهم” ترجمه شده است. “درون” (مانند درون‌یابی) معنی نادرستی دارد چرا که Inter به معنی درون چیزی نیست بلکه به معنی میان دو چیز است و نمی‌توان برایinteratomic ”درون‌اتمی” را بکاربرد چرا که معنی آن بین دو اتم است نه درون آن. “برهم” (مانند برهم‌کنش) نیز معنی inter را نمی‌دهد، interaction به معنی کنش میان دو چیز است نه کنشی “برهم”، “با هم”، ” به هم” یا “از هم” . آیا می‌توان برای intercollegiate از “برهم‌دانشگاهی” بهره برد؟ برخلاف “میان”، “درون” و “برهم” که در زبان محاوره بکار میرود “اندر” در زبان محاوره بکار نمی‌رود و با توجه به هم‌معنایی و همریشگی واژه‌شناسیک و همانندی آواییک “اندر” با “Inter”، این پیشوند بخت بیشتری برای پذیرفته شدن در زبان علمی و محاوره دارد. همچنان که امروز در نام درس‌های آموزشی مقطع کارشناسی ارشد در دانشگاه‌های معتبر ایران بکار میرود: اندرکُنش سازه و آب، اندرکنش خاک و سازه، و اندرکنش سیال و سازه [‏۱۰] و [‏۱۱].

۶- ابهام‌زدایی در روش‌های واژه‌سازی

برای نمونه پیشوند “در” در زبان فارسی هم به معنی بیرون [out] (درآوردن، درکردن، دررفتن …) بکار رفته و هم به معنی درون[in] (درآمدن، درکشیدن). شاید به همین دلیل بوده که آقایان ملایری و ادیب سلطانی از پیشوند “اس” برای out و ex/ec بهره برده‌اند.

نمونه‌ی دیگر پیشوند “پیش” است که دو معنی زمانی و مکانی دارد، در زمان به معنی “قبل” (پیشامدرن) و در مکان به معنی جلو (پیشرفت) است، این ابهام قطعا برای یک زبان علمی مشکلاتی ایجاد می‌کند. می‌توان پیشوند “پار” و “پری” (در واژگان پارسال، پریروز، پریشب، پیرار و ..) را بجای “قبل” بکاربرد و “پیش” را به معنی “جلو”.

همچنین، پیشوند “خود” بجای سه پیشوند auto و self/sui کاررفته است. پیشوند Auto بیشتر نقش فاعلی دارد ولی self نقش مفعولی دارد. شاید بهتر باشد به جای auto پیشوند “داو”[۱۵] را بکاربرد. معنی خودخواه[۱۶] (کسی که خودش را می‌خواهد) و داوطلب (کسی خودش می‌خواهد) نیز کاملا متفاوت است با اینکه اجزای آنها ظاهرا هم-معنی هستند (داو=خود ، طلب=خواه).

۷- آینده‌نگری و باز اندیشیدن در واژه‌گزینی

اگر در واژه‌گزینی باز نیاندیشیم خیلی زود به بن‌بست رسیده و از واژگزینی ناامید می‌شویم. برای نمونه واژه‌ی Load در پارسی معنای بار، بار کردن، وار (در خروار) و بارکرد را دارد ولی زایش واژگان نو از این برابرها ممکن نیست و هیچ‌یک از این برابرها نمی‌توانند پاسخگوی نیاز امروز ما باشند چرا که نمی‌توان برابرهایی برای واژگان reload، download، upload و دیگر مشتقات این فعل ساخت. روش خردمندانه این است که برای واژه‌ی Load یک فعل ساخته شود و با پیشوندهای باز، فرو و اف (یا بر) فعل‌های دیگری ساخت. نمونه‌ی دیگر absorb ،adsorb ،resorb و desorb است که با پیشنهادهای دکتر حیدری ملایری (درشَمیدن، برشَمیدن، واشَمیدن[۱۷]) در جدول زیر همسنجیده می‌شوند.

و نمونه‌ی دیگر: روشن است که وقتی بجای analysis ناآگاهانه واژه‌ی بیگانه “تحلیل/تجزیه” را برمی‌گزینیم بی‌آنکه به معنی اجزای این واژه (ana[18] ، lysis) دقت کنیم، نمی‌توانیم از پس واژگان دیگری که با lysis (کافتن) ساخته شده‌اند برآییم. کسی که واژه‌ی “تحلیل” را برگزیده دانشش از زبان انگلیسی همانند دانشش درباره‌ی توان زبان خودش محدود بوده است.

داوری با شما، ببینید بهره بردن از زبان بیگانه برای واژه‌سازی بهتر است یا زبان پارسیک؟ کدامیک زبانمان را برآشفته است، کدامیک بسامان‌تر، زیباتر، علمی‌تر، با معنی‌تر و گسترش‌پذیرتر است؟

این نکته را از نیز باید در نظر داشت که ترجمه‌ی یک واژه‌ی بیگانه ممکن است در یک حوزه مناسب باشد ولی باید دید در حوزه‌های دیگر نیز مناسب است؟ برای نمونه labyrinth ممکن است در ادبیات به “هزارتو” ترجمه شود و ترجمه‌ی خوبی هم شمرده شود اما با “هزارتو” نمی‌توان از پس واژگان labyrinthits، labyrinthotomy ، labirinthectomy در حوزه‌ی پزشکی برآمد. واژه‌ی نوساخته‌ی “پیچال” (مصوب فرهنگستان) ترجمه‌ای است که می‌توان با آنها پیچال‌آماس (labyrinthits)، پیچال‌بَرداری (labirinthectomy)، پیچال‌برُی (labyrinthotomy)، پیچالیک (labyrinthic) و هر ترکیب دیگری را ساخت.

۸- بهره‌گیری از گویش‌های ایرانی

بهره گرفتن از همه‌ی گویش‌های پارسیک و زبان‌های ایرانی مانند گیلکی، تبری، تالشی، لری، کردی، بختیاری و بلوچی و ..

این زبان‌ها تا حد زیادی دست نخورده مانده‌اند و به دیس کهن و باستانی خود نزدیکترند و می‌توانند به توانمند کردن زبان پارسیک کمک شایانی کنند چه در عرصه‌ی واژگان و چه تکنیک‌های واژه‌سازی. مانند رُمبیدن[۱۹] (فروریختن و خراب شدن ناگهانی)، اشاندن[۲۰] (پرتاب کردن)، هشتن (نهادن، گذاشتن) در لهجه‌ی همدانی، که آقای ملایری به زیبایی از این فعل‌ها برای ساخت واژگان علمی اخترشناسی بهره برده‌است: رمبش (collapse)، رمب‌اختر (collapsar)، اَندَرهلیدن (to intercalate)، اشاندن (to eject)، اشاناک (ejecta)، دراشاندن (to inject)، اشان (ject).

۹- زنده کردن فعل‌های کهن پارسی

فعل‌ دستگاه عصبی هر زبانی‌ست و اگر این دستگاه از کار بیفتد زبان فلج خواهد شد. از فعل می‌توان واژگان بسیار دیگری ساخت. برای نمونه‌ فعل پایه‌ی “شَمیدن” را دیدید که توانش (potential) ساخت چندین فعل (برشمیدن، درشمیدن، واشمیدن, بازشمیدن) و ده‌ها اسم و صفت و قید دیگر را به زبان می‌دهد. با ساخت فعل “فرگشتن (to evolve)” می‌توان “فرگشت‌‌باوری (evolutionism)”، “فرگشتیک (evolutionary)” و ”فرگشتیکانه (evolutionally)” و … را ساخت وگرنه باید بگوییم “از روی قواعد تکامل”!

فعل‌ها سرمایه‌ی اولیه هر زبانی هستند که اگر این سرمایه‌ی اولیه ناچیز باشد، با بهترین روش‌ها و تکنیک‌ها هم نمی‌توان کار زیادی از پیش برد. برای نمونه فرهنگستان با زنده کردن فعل “وَرتیدن/وَردیدن” (to vary) واژگان ورتش (variation)، ورتندگی (variability)، ورتایی (variance)، ناورتایی (invariance)، هم‌ورتایی (covariance)، پادورتایی (contravariance) و .. را ساخته است. دوسیدن، یاختن/یازیدن، شاریدن، تَنجیدن، سُنبیدن، اُوباردن، آهنجیدن، میزیدن (گمیزیدن) و … نمونه‌هایی هستند که امروزه در زبان علمی استفاده می‌شوند: هَمدوسش (coherence)، وایازش (regression)، اَبرشاره (superfluid)، تَنجش (spasm)، پیراشامه‌سُنبی (pericardiostomy)، دُش‌اوباری (dysphagia)، آهنجیده (abstract)، اَندرخَلیدن (interpenetrate)، پادمیزیک (Antidiuretic)، کم‌میزی، خون‌میزی.

نکته‌ی دیگر صرف کردن خود فعل‌ است به جای صرف آنها با فعل‌های کردن، نمودن، گردیدن و … مشکلی که هم‌اکنون وجود دارد گرایش به استفاده از فعل‌های ترکیبی است. هم‌گراییدن (همگرا شدن)، دریافتن (دریافت کردن)، درخواستن (درخواست نمودن)، بازخواستن (بازخواست کردن)، بازنگریستن (بازنگری کردن)، بازگفتن (بازگو کردن)، واریختن (واریز کردن)، برداشتن (برداشت کردن) و … حتا برای فعل‌های ساده‌ هم این روش بکار می‌رود مانند: کاستن (کاهش دادن)، افزودن (افزایش دادن). به نظر می‌رسد تا چند سال آینده بیشتر فعل‌ها با فعل‌های کردن، شدن، نمودن و گردیدن صرف شوند!

۱۰- پیشوند‌های فعلی

جدا نکردن برخی از پیشوندها (باز، بر، در، هم، وا و..) از خود فعل برای حفظ یکپارچکی و هویت مستقل فعل. برای نمونه:

هم‌می‌گراید–> می‌همگراید

وامی‌گراید–> می‌واگراید

پیشوندهای باستانی ترا (در تراویدن)، ن (در نوشتن، نشستن، نگریستن و ..)، اف (در افراشتن)، پر (در پرستیدن، پراکندن)،فر (در فرسودن)، آ [۲۱] (در آوردن)، هَم/ هَن/ان (در انباشتن، اندودن، اندوختن) و .. به خود فعل می‌چسبند و هنگام صرف کردن از فعل جدا نمی‌شود. دقیقن نمی‌دانم چرا برخی از پیشوندها (باز، وا، در، بر ..) به فعل نمی‌چسبند و هنگام صرف جدا می‌شوند (شاید هم تاثیر زبان‌های بیگانه باشد!)، ولی آنچه که مسلم است گفتن “می‌ترادیسیم” از “ترامی‌دیسیم”! آسانتر و زیباتر است همچنین عمل “ترادیسیدن” هم بیشتر دیده، شنیده و فهمیده می‌شود. همچنین اگر دو تا از این پیشوندها با هم بیایند (بازفرآورش reprocess) دو حالت ممکن است: بازمی‌فرآوریم و بازفرمی‌آوریم! پس منطقی است که بگوییم می‌بازفرآوریم. همچنین تکلیف برخی پیشوندهایی که به تازگی به زبان علمی راه یافته‌اند (هو[۲۲]، دش[۲۳]، اندر) نیز مشخص نیست، مانند هوپرورش [۲۴] که معلوم نیست “می‌هوپروریم” درست است یا “هو‌می‌پروریم”!

البته “می” در فعل استمراری می‌تواند حذف شود: می‌دانستم/دانستمی، با این روش صورت مساله پاک می‌شود! همچنین تکلیف “ن” نفی نیز در فعل‌های ترکیبی (که یک یا چند پیشوند دارند) بر من دانسته نیست. برای نمونه فرنیاورد (مانند درنیآورد)! درست است یا نفرآورد، البته در شعرهای کلاسیک پارسیک هم گاهی این گونه جابجایی‌ها دیده می‌شود. به نمونه‌ی زیر از عراقی بنگرید:

گفته بودی که بیایم چو به جان آیی تو من به جان آمدم اینک تو چرا می‌نایی (نمی‌آیی)

۱۱- آموزش نیاکان زبان پارسی

می‌بایست زبان‌های کهن ایرانی در کتاب‌های درسی گنجانده شوند، همچنان که اروپاییان زبان لاتین (با اینکه برای آنان زبان بیگانه‌ای شمرده می‌شود) را می‌آموزند. دانستن زبان‌های کهن، استفاده‌ از تکنیک‌های این زبان‌ها را نیز آسانتر و پذیرفتنی‌تر می‌کند. آنها برای علمی کردن زبان خود دست به دگرش‌های بنیادینی زدند و بسیاری از تکنیک‌های زبان لاتین را وام‌گرفتند و زبان خود را لاتینی کردند (latinization)، چگونه است که ما استفاده از زبان‌های کهن خودمان را روا نمی‌دانیم؟ آقای آشوری در مصاحبه‌ای عیب کار آقای شمس‌الدین ادیب سلطانی را این دانسته است که آقای سلطانی از این نکته غافل است که زبان لاتین تا چند سده پیش زبان علم و فرهنگ اروپا بوده و به همین دلیل پذیرش این لاتینی کردن برای اروپاییان آسانتر بوده‌، ولی زبان‌های کهن ایران زبان‌های مرده‌اند و در نتیجه پذیرش آن دشوارتر است و ایستادگی‌ها بیشتر. اتفاقا کوتاهی از ماست و باید از خود بپرسیم چرا از هویت زبانی خود آگاه نیستیم؟ اگر ما نیز در مدارس بجای آموختن زبان‌های بیگانه زبان‌های کهن خود را بیاموزیم (یا دست کم آشنا شویم)، آنگاه تکنیک‌های این زبان‌ها نیز پذیرفتنی‌تر خواهند شد. حال اگر شوربختانه این امکان در کشور ما فراهم نیست، وظیفه‌ی نویسندگان و روشنفکران ماست که این غفلت را جبران کنند و کار آقای ادیب سلطانی در این زمینه بسیار شایسته و ستودنی‌ست. همچنین برخی گویش‌های زبان‌های ایرانی هنوز دیس باستانی خود را نگه داشته‌اند و نمی‌توان این زبان‌ها را زبان مرده شمرد.

اگر دانش‌آموزان ما بدانند که پیشوند دُش/دُژ/ دُز (در واژگان آشنای دشنام، دشوار، دشمن، دژخیم و دوزخ) چه معنی‌ای می‌دهند آنگاه از شنیدن واژگان نوساخته‌ی دش‌پرورد (dystrophic)، دش‌دمی (dyspnea)، دش‌رویش (dysplasia)، دش‌میزی (dysuria)، دژدود (fume)، دژگواری (dyspepsia)، دش‌آوایی (dysphonia)، دش‌نگاری (dysgraphia)، دش‌جنبی (dyskinesia)، دش‌زایی (dystocia)، دژآهنگی (dysrhythmia)، دش‌دشتانی (dysmenorrhea)، دش‌آمیزی (dyspareunia) و … در دوران دانشجویی نه تنها نمی‌شگفتند که معنی آنها را نیز خوب درمی‌یابند و می‌توانند خود نیز چیزی بر آنها بیافزایند (و مجبور نیستند اصطلاح‌های بیگانه، ناهنجار، دراز، زشت و سترون “اختلال تنفس”، “عسرالبول”، “سوء هاضمه”، “اختلال قاعدگی”، “مقاربت دردناک”، “اختلال حرکت” و .. را بکاربرند). آیا دانش‌آموزان ما که توان یادگیری صیغه‌های گوناگون و پیچیده‌ی فعل‌های عربی و قانون‌های مربوط به فعل‌های معتل و … را دارند نمی‌توانند پیشوندها و پسوندها و تکنیک‌های واژه‌سازی زبان‌های باستانی خود را فراگیرند؟

۱۲- برساختن فعل از اسم

اگر چه مردم در بکار بردن این روش پیشرو هستند (ساخت فعل‌هایی مانند چتیدن، زنگیدن، تیغیدن، دردیدن و …) ولی روشنفکران و نویسندگان بهره‌ی چندانی نمی‌برند و فرهنگستان هم آغازی لاک‌پشتی داشته است: انبوهیدن-انبوهش (to aggregate-aggregation)، هنجیدن- هنجیده- هنج (to norm-normed-normate)، هنجاریدن (to normalize)، پپریدن-پیرش (to age- aging)، سامانش (systematization)، پایانیدن-پایانش (terminate-termination)، سردیدن (to quench)، پخشیدن (to diffuse).

گاهی نیز از برساختن فعل می‌پرهیزد، برای نمونه تاگ (دیس پهلوی تا) را به زیبایی برای clone برگزیده است ولی برای cloning تاگ‌سازی را پیش‌نهاده است. روشن است که تاگ‌سازی بهتر و بامعنی‌تر از شبیه‌سازی است ولی بهتر این بود که تاگیدن/تاگش را برگزیند. اگر ناآشنا یا ناجور به نظرتان می‌رسد به فعل اباگیدن (از اباگ/با) در زبان پهلوی نگاهی بیاندازید (جدول بند ‏۱۵).

می‌توان برای بسیاری از اسم‌ها و صفت‌ها فعل برساخت مانند: نویدن، نواندن، درازیدن/درازاندن (to elongate)، پهنیدن/پهناندن (to widen)، سیاهیدن/سیاهاندن (to darken)، سفیدیدن/سفیداندن (to whiten)، سرخیدن (to redden), بزرگیدن/بزرگاندن (enlarge)، تاریکیدن (to darken)، روشنیدن (to brighten)، دیسیدن (to form)، جفتیدن (to couple)، واجفتیدن (to decouple)، سوکیدن، جشنیدن، پندیدن و ….

در زبان پهلوی هم این روش دنبال می‌شده. نمونه‌های زیر توان شگفت‌انگیز زایش زبانی را نشان می‌دهد:

از اسم (مرگیدن/مرگاندن)، صفت (نزاریدن/نزاراندن)، پیشوند (همیدن)، حرف اضافه (اباگیدن)، قید (فرودیدن) و حتا اسم مصدر[۲۵] فعل برساخته ‌شده است که شوربختانه امروز هیچ نشانی از آن زایندگی به چشم نمی‌خورد.

با نمونه‌های برشمرده می‌توان فهمید برخورد با یک زبان سامی چه بر سر زبان هند و اروپایی پارسی آورده است و چه بلایی بر سر توان زایش آن آورده است. واژگان با معنی کامگارش (از کام+گار+ایدن)، بیرونش (از بیرون+ایدن)، پیداگش (از پیداگ+ایدن) و … را وانهاده و واژگان بیگانه‌ی “موفقیت”، “خروج”، “ظهور” را برگزیده‌ایم!

۱۳- بازنگری و بهکرد واژگان

بازنگری و بهکرد واژگانی که از سوی مردم یا نهادهای علمی پذیرفته نشده‌اند. برای نمونه اگر دیدیم پس از چند سال هنوز “لت لمسی”[۲۶] برای touchpad پذیرفته نشده است بدانیم که مشکلی وجود دارد و واژه‌ی دیگری پیش‌نهیم. اگرچه در نگاه نخست می‌توان حدسید که چنین واژه‌ای پس از چند سده هم پذیرفته نمی‌شود. در واژگان پیشنهادی فرهنگستان در گروه‌های مختلف واژه‌گزینی ناهمگونی محسوسی دیده می‌شود که به نظر می‌رسد برخی از گروه‌های فرهنگستان (مانند زیست شناسی و پزشکی) بسیار پیشروتر و روشمندانه‌تر از دیگر گروه‌ها عمل می‌کنند.

یادمان باشد هیچگاه برای برابرسازی واژگان بیگانه دیر نیست و نباید بدلیل رایج و متداول شدن یک واژه‌ی بیگانه، حکم بر پذیرفتن قطعی آن واژه بدهیم. بسیاری از واژگان پذیرفته‌ی امروز، در واقع واژگان نوساخته‌ی ناپذیرفتنی دیروز بوده‌اند (پزشک، پرستار، بیمارستان، درمانگاه و …). حتا اگر واژگان پیشنهادی به سرعت میان مردم رایج نشود، دست‌کم در نوشته‌ها و رسانه‌های رسمی بکار برده می‌شوند (کالابرگ، رزمایش، بالگرد، پیامک، شهرآورد، رایانامه، راهبرد و … ). برای برخی از واژگان نیز در گام نخست ممکن است برابر کوتاه و رسایی یافته نشود مانند “کلمه‌عبور/رمزعبور” (password)، “قمرمصنوعی” (satellite)، “آنتی‌بیوتیک”، “تکامل”، “ماساژ”، “کروموزوم”، “کلون”، “سندروم”، “استعلایی/متعالی (transcendental)”، “جزر و مد”، “ماورالنهر” و … ولی پس از سال‌ها واژگان ساده، رسا و فارسی “گذرواژه[۲۷]“، “ماهواره”، “پادزیست”، “فَرگشت”، “ورزمان”، “فامتَن”، “تاگ[۲۸]“، “نشانگان”، “ترافرازنده[۲۹]“، “کشند”، “فرارود” ساخته شده و کم‌کم جای برابرهای نادرست پیشین را می‌گیرند. این روند فرگشتیک در زبان‌های دیگر هم رخ داده است چنانچه واژگان “آنالوطیقا”، “متافوسیقا”، “ابوذقطیقایی”، “اریثماطیقی”، “استاطیقا” و … از سال‌های نخست ترجمه از یونانی به تازی در سال‌های پسین جای خود را به “تحلیل”، “ماوراالطبیعه” و “حساب”، “یقینی”،”حسیات” … دادند.

به یادآوریم که از “حق‌الزحمه”، “قوس‌ و قزخ”، “معرفه الارض”، “میزان الضغطه”، “پاسپورت”، “احصائیه”، “جهاز هاضمه”و … آغاز کردیم و به “دستمزد”، “رنگین‌کمان”، “زمین‌شناسی”، “فشارسنج”، “گذرنامه”، “آمار”، “دستگاه گوارش” و … رسیده‌ایم.

یادمان نرود که روزگاری حتا رییس فرهنگستان شادروان محمدعلی فروغی دانشور فرهیخته “مزید مقدم” و “مزید موخر” را به “پیشوند” و “پسوند” ترجیح می‌داده! و صادق هدایت نویسنده‌ی برجسته و ملی‌گرا واژگان فرهنگستان (که بیش از ۸۰ درسد آنها امروزه بر زبان مردم جاریست) را مسخره می‌کرده! پس، از نام‌ها و چهره‌ها نهراسیم که پرآوازه‌تر و فرزانه‌تر از فردوسی پاکزاد نیستند، از کنایه‌ها و ریشخندها و ژست‌های روشنفکرانه نترسیم و به هدف والای زبان علمی فارسی بیاندیشیم و بس! همچنانکه فردوسی یک تنه ایستاد و شاهکاری آفرید که از باد و باران نیابد گزند. حتا پیکر او را پس از مرگ به گورستان مسلمانان توس راه ندادند (به گناه ستایش از ایران!) و امروز از شهر توس چه بازمانده است جز آرامگاه فردوسی؟!

۱۴- واژه‌سازی مکانیکی

برخی واژگان پیشنهادی نیز با ذهن سنتی و اندیشه‌ی فروبسته‌ی برخی اندیشه‌وران سازگار نمی‌افتد و با برچسب “مکانیکی” کنار نهاده می‌شوند. دانسته نیست چگونه واژه‌ی “دژگواری” (dyspepsia) را ارگانیک می‌دانند ولی “نپاهش” (observation) را مکانیکی می‌دانند؟! با کدام سنجه‌ی علمی برخی واژگان پیشنهادی را رد می‌کنند؟ هر دو واژه یک پیشوند باستانی دارند (دژ ، ن) و یک فعل زنده‌ی پارسی. چگونه است که پَرناوش (circumnavigation)، پَرگشت (circumvolution) و پروشتن (to circumscribe)، مکانیکی‌اند اما “پَرستیدن” و “پَرآکندن” ارگانیک؟ شگفت‌تر اینکه ساخت مکانیکی واژه را برای علوم تجربی روا دانسته‌اند ولی برای علوم فلسفی نه! “استحاله”، “جدلی الطرفین”، “علی الاطلاق”، “مانعه الجمع”، “مکتفی بالذات”، “بدیهی بالذات” پذیرفتنی هستند ولی “ترادیسی”، “خود‌بسنده”، “خودآشکار” مکانیکی و ناپذیرفتنی! اتفاقا مهمترین فلسفه ی وجودی فعل‌های برساخته پیش‌گفته در زبان پهلوی (بند ‏۱۵)، تبیین زبان علمی، فلسفی و دینی بوده است نه تغییر گفتار مردم.

البته استدلال درستی که در این زمینه می‌شود این است که بند ناف این واژگان نوساخته از زبان مرجع بریده نشده است. نکته اینجاست که بیشتر واژگان پیشنهادی (بویژه واژگان علمی) همین گونه‌اند و یک دوره‌ی گذر را باید برای جاافتادن و مستقل شدن از زبان مرجع طی کنند و برای رسیدن به هدف زبان علمی فارسی چاره‌ای جز این نیست. زبان انگلیسی و فرانسه هم همین راه را پیموده‌اند و بند ناف خود را دو روزه از لاتین و یونانی نبریده‌اند.

نتیجه ‌گیری

گفتیم ورود هر واژه منجر به ورود واژگان بسیاری به زبان می‌شود و این واژگان نوآمده کم کم واژگان اصیل پارسیک را به کنار رانده و جای آنها را خواهند گرفت. همچنین وام‌گیری ساختار زبان را نیز می‌دگراند و این دگرش‌ها خود باعث ورود بیشتر واژگان بیگانه می‌شود. هر چه زبان از اصل خود دورتر می‌شود و به ساختار زبان بیگانه خو می‌گیرد، آمادگی بیشتری برای پذیرفتن واژگان بیگانه می‌یابد و این هم‌افزایی شوم به مرگ زبان می‌انجامد. دوم اینکه، واژگان بیگانه ساختار آواییک زبان را نیز می‌دگراند و هر چه ساختار آواییک زبان بیشتر می‌دگرد، از واژگان خودی دورتر و به واژگان بیگانه خو می‌گیرد (هم‌افزایی شوم دوم).

زبان پارسیک به همراه نیاگان (پارسی میانه، پهلوی و اوستایی) و خواهرانش (گیلکی، کردی، بلوچی و ..) دربردارنده‌ی مجموعه‌ای غنی از روش‌های واژه‌سازی است و تقریبا نیازی به وام‌واژه‌ها و روش‌های زبان‌های بیگانه ندارد. باید این واقعیت را بپذیریم که زبان‌های بیگانه جز محدودیت و ناتوانی برای زبان ما ارمغانی نداشته‌اند. ما اگر می‌خواهیم پیشرفت علمی و فرهنگی داشته باشیم، باید بتوانیم به زبان خود علم تولید کنیم و می‌بایست تا می‌توانیم به اصل زبانیک خویش بازگردیم و از آنجا که زبان پارسی با زبان‌های علمی روز دنیا هم‌خانواده و هم‌ساختار است می‌توان امیدوار بود که بازگشت به اصل زبان پارسیک تا حد زیادی ما را از این پریشانی‌ها و آشفتگی‌های زبانیک برهاند. برخورد زبان پارسی با زبان‌های سامی به فراموش شدن بسیاری از توانایی‌های پارسی انجامید، ولی اندرکنش امروز زبان پارسی با زبان‌های علمی روز دنیا می‌تواند سازنده‌ باشد. هم‌خانوادگی و همریشگی این زبان‌ها با پارسی ما را واداشته است به زنده کردن بخش‌های فراموش شده ی زبانمان و ما را برانگیزانده است برای بازساختن یک زبان پرتوان علمی.

بازبردها

۱- داریوش آشوری، زبان باز

۲- داریوش آشوری، بازاندیشی زبان فارسی

۳- پروفسور حیدری ملایری، فرهنگ ریشه شناختی اخترشناسی و اخترفیزیک

۴- محمد حیدری ملایری، بحثی درباره‌ی صرف فعل در زبان علمی فارسی

۵- فرهنگستان زبان و ادب پارسی، اصول و ضوابط واژه‌گزینی‌

۶- فرهنگستان زبان ایران، برابرهای فارسی پیشنهادی گروه‌های واژه‌گزینی

۷- یدالله منصوری، بررسی ساختار فعل‌های برساخته در فارسی میانه و دری

۸- دفتر ششم واژگان مصوب فرهنگستان

۹- دفتر هفتم واژگان مصوب فرهنگستان

۱۰- محمد حیدری ملایری، با خشت و گل نمی‌توان آسمان خراش ساخت

۱۱- جدول دروس اصلی و تخصصی الزامی مهندسی زلزله

۱۲- لیست دروس مهندسی ژئوتکنیک٫ دانشگاه شریف

۱۳- وبگاه شهربراز

[۱] چو افراسیابش به هامون بدید شگفتید از آن کودک نورسید (فردوسی)

[۲] چو دیده دید و دل از دست رفت و چاره نماند نه دل ز مهر شکیبد نه دیده از دیدار. (سعدی)

[۳] میرزا ملکم خان در مقدمه‌ی گلستان سعدی می‌گوید: برای فهمیدن نوشته‌ای به زبان‌های غربی باید آنرا خواند در حالیکه برای خواندن نوشته‌ای به فارسی باید آنرا نخست فهمید! اگر چه اشاره‌ی او بیشتر به کاستی‌های خط بوده است اما این کاستی‌ها در عرصه‌ی زبان هم دیده می‌شود.

[۴] پیشنهاد آقای آشوری برای استفاده از دو نشانه‌ی متفاوت ی و ی برای صفت و اسم نکره.

[۵] این پسوند امروزه در واژگان کهن چنگال، گودال، دنبال، پوشال، پیخال و واژگان نوساخته‌ی پیچال (labyrinth)، سنگال، تختال، برخال (fractal)، نگارال (graftal) و … دیده می‌شود.

[۶] البته جای خوشبختی است که فرهنگستان با تصویب “خوارزمیک” برای “الگوریتمیک” حداقل “ایک” را به رسمیت شناخته است.

[۷] حتا برای ساخت اسم هم “ی” افزوده نمی‌شده بلکه “ih” افزوده می‌شود. مانند بندگی (bandagih)، آزادگی (āzātakih) ، پزشکی (bijashkih ) و پیروزی ( piruzih) و…

[۸] ترامون به معنی diameter (مانند پیرامون به معنی perimeter)

[۹] به معنی راست و مستقیم در واژگان اردی‌بهشت، اردستان، اردبیل و …

[۱۰] biometry

[۱۱] biofog

[۱۲] biospecies

[۱۳] biomass

[۱۴] Biocoenose

[۱۵] داوطلب

[۱۶] Self-interested، self-absorbed، self-regarding

[۱۷] daršamidan

[۱۸] پیشوند ana به معنی up، back again، throughout، against

[۱۹] rombidan

[۲۰] ešāndan

[۲۱] این پیشوند در واژگان “امرداد” ، “انوش”، “آناهید/آناهیتا”، “آوردن” … نیز بصورت مرده بازمانده است.

[۲۲] هم ‌معنی Eu [Greek]

[۲۳] هم‌ معنی [Greek] Dys

[۲۴] از واژگان نوساخته‌ی زیبا و رسای مصوب فرهنگستان زبان معادل eutrophication

[۲۵] برساختن فعل ogrāyeŝnigistan از اسم مصدر ogrāyeŝn (گرایش)- دینکرد

[۲۶] تصویب فرهنگستان، دفتر ششم

[۲۷] چنانچه امروزه یک و نیم میلیون مورد در Google برای گذرواژه یافته می‌شود.

[۲۸] Clone

[۲۹] پیشنهاد شمس الدین ادیب سلطانی

برچسب‌ها: زبان پارسیک، ع.پارسا، فارسی باستان، وام‌واژه، واژه‌سازی، واژه‌های برنهادۀ فرهنگستان، واژه‌های قرضی، واژه‌گزینی، گروه واژه‌گزینی فرهنگستان زبان و ادب فارسی

Inequality and Development

2010-03-07T18:51:00.003-05:00

Economic and social systems respond differently than thermodynamic systems to inequality. When there is an uneven distribution of temperature in a thermodynamical system, what usually happens is that heat flows from the hotter regions to colder regions and in time you have an even distribution of temperature. That is if you don't have a source of heat adding energy to a point maintaining such a state of inequilibrium.

Economic systems do not behave in this way. If you allow an economic system to freely operate without intervention ( Leissez Faire) What happens normally is that the rich will keep getting richer and the poor will keep getting poorer until at some point, either the entire system comes to halt (recession or depression) or the rich will pack up and go somewhere else and leave the poor in destitute.

That's just common sense, you don't have to be an economist to see that. Money give you leverage, which you can use to make more of it and the whole process continues, until the social structure that allows you to conduct the operation falls apart.

In a healthy society with a healthy economic system, the rich, the employed, the educated, the healthy and the young, pay for the poor, the unemployed, uneducated and unhealthy. As a result the lower strata of the society get a chance to move to higher strata. Now no one likes to work and give money to someone else. People have to sit together and contemplate the consequences of not collaborating on an efficient and effective wealth sharing or wealth distribution design.

If the higher class people refuse to take responsibility for the well being of the system that allowed them to reach their more favorable status, there are moral and social consequences. The social consequences is that the better off people will have to travel on crumbling roads, mal functioning public transportation, send their kids to sub standard schools and live in a shameful society, where the circle of their friends and familiar people becomes more and more limited.

A successful society is one that reaches a national agreement on how to take care of each other, then a government becomes the vehicle and the conduit to accomplish this task.

How many countries you know that operates in the above fashion? May be some small European countries, I'd say, beyond that can't really think of an example.

This enormous challenge provides an enormous opportunity. Administrative systems don't have an inherent superiority, they have to be judged based on what they achieve. If Democracy and democratic institutions do not achieve a better quality of life for their people, then they have failed no exception can be made.

There are four systems that have to be developed for a society to operate. An Administrative system, A Financial system, an Industrial/Agricultural system and a Judicial System.

If these four systems operate optimally allowing commerce, production, a social life to go along in tandem turning raw materials, time and energy into products and services and then recycling and restoring the results, the society will start on its path to development. If these systems do not function you have a non-functioning society and every one will suffer, ultimately even the rich.

2010-02-28T01:36:00.001-05:00

بوی باران، بوی سبزه، بوی خاک

شاخه های شسته، باران خورده، پاک

آسمان آبی و ابر سپید

برگ های سبز بید

عطر نرگس، رقص باد

نغمه شوق پرستوهای شاد

خلوت گرم کبوترهای مست ...

نرم نرمک می رسد اینک بهار

خوش به حال روزگار!

خوش به حال چشمه ها و دشت ها

خوش به حال دانه ها و سبزه ها

خوش به حال غنچه های نیمه باز

خوش به حال دختر میخک -که می خندد به ناز -

خوش به حال جام لبریز از شراب

خوش به حال آفتاب

ای دل من، گرچه در این روزگار

جامه رنگین نمی پوشی به کام

باده رنگین نمی بینی به جام

نقل و سبزه در میان سفره نیست

جامت، از آن می که می باید تهی است

ای دریغ از تو اگر چون گل نرقصی با نسیم!

ای دریغ از من اگر مستم نسازد آفتاب

ای دریغ از ما اگر کامی نگیریم از بهار

گر نکوبی شیشه غم را به سنگ

هفت رنگش می شود هفتاد رنگ!

از : فریدون مشیری

The Civilizations' Quest for Domination

2009-12-02T22:14:00.003-05:00

Make no mistake about it! There is a war. Though the warriors may not know that they are warring. This war is being fought between two classes of civilizations and by their creations, their number, their collective value and their contributions to enriching and improving humanity. There is no ultimate winner but in the short run the Eastern civilization seem to be all but defeated, lost and confused. But the civilizations of the east have all the necessary elements of winning. The West has provided the medium, and some tangentially important materials. But the East has not yet stood up for its rightful place in the history of 'now' and present.

In spite of all the talks of China and India, no new grounds have been broken here. The West has provided all the tools and China has provided the cheap labor and has dutifully imitated every thing that the West has done. The damage that this has caused and will cause to the limited resources of the planet, is uncountable.

The needs of people have to be met, that there is no doubt in. The capitalistic system has reduced every thing and any thing to one thing and one thing only, money. The concepts of trade , market, money, wealth accumulation and financing are very old concepts. Persians pioneered the invention of the banking system and financing. The word 'check' is a distortion of the word 'shah' from the Persian word for 'King'.

A new socio-economic order and a new financing scheme must be developed and the East has to stand up and get counted.

The Sun indeed rises from the east. It must happen now.

Mentality of Undevelopment

2009-11-07T23:09:00.000-05:00

I am interested in knowing what causes a defeated, decimated, burned to the ground (literally) nation to rise up from ashes and re-industrialize to a phenomenal state and the other to stall and keep spinning its wheels arguing over childish stupid things for decades.

I am convinced that its in a certain mentality that a nation assumes. It becomes part of their national identity. It becomes how they see themselves and their place in the world. I am not talking about slogans issued from the pulpit or tribune. I am talking about what people talk about and believe in their unconsciously held system of believes.

Let me start with this, if your nation has a good size, that is something of the order of tens of millions, there is no reason why your nation shouldn't be able to develop to the same level of any developed country. Forget about "comparative advantage." To see how absurd it is to insist that countries have to stick to their comparative advantage think about US. What was the comparative advantage of US in 1800s? You must have heard the phrase that says "cotton is the king" that was US comparative advantage. If US would have followed that principle, its main exports today would have been corn, cotton and other commodities.

That brings us to what mentality would keep you poor and underdeveloped, here is my 2 cents on the subject.

Follower mentality: the idea that we have to follow others, leaders of the field in every thing, the idea that there is something wrong with trying something yourself, something immature about trying to build something yourself, go to lab and sweat and curse until you get it to work. That's what keeps you behind, not trying yourself, makes you dependent.

Mercantile Mentality: It's always easier to buy low and sell high, and make a buck, that's all right, but if your economy is based on import/export, your economy will be linked to producers and consumers. If you get used to the easy work of trading, you can pretend you are developed but no one will take you seriously.

Victim hood: True, the main reason that a lot of countries are under developed is the policies of imperial powers of 16th to 20th century. It is again easier to say we will never develop because they made sure we won't. you must try, you must think, you must find a way.

Blaming : The is a bis theme, blaming this or that. "We never develop because we have oil" No ! this is your stupidity talking. Oil is not a curse, diamond is not a curse, gold is not your curse. Stop blaming other things. You have to learn to build things and satisfy your needs. Work makes wealth, wealth brings development. You don't want to start thinking about working, because it is easier to blame it on other things.

Language : You might not think this is important, but I think it is. I think, using english language and not try to find domestic equivalent, makes you think that every development must come from an english speaking language, in turn, it makes you think that your country would never accomplish any thing. Languages are not the same in their expressive power, but I think, it is a sad failure of imagination if we think that your language being Farsi, or whatever it is does not have the capacity to express new things. When automobile industry came to Iran, normal mechanics with high school education built a lot of words for their day to day use. Some of the Ivory tower thinkers of other fields, thought it beneath themselves to do the same.

Disrespecting your common people and their culture: Stop saying that our culture is such that it prevents development, I kept hearing this nonsense when I was in Iran. Until I came to US, and figured that things are not that different culturally, in fact in some areas, I dare say, I found americans much much less culturally developed that my own fellow Iranians. Your culture is fine. Stop blaming the culture. Have respect for common people, for the shoe shiner, for the bus driver, remember he would have been as educated as you, if someone would have put him through all the school years and paid for his expenses.
Improvement of his quality of life is the only good reason behind development.

Nearsightedness: Thinking about a quick buck, would ensure that your children will live in the same country that you grew up in. Think far and wide. The methods by which the world has developed can not work any more. Sustainable development must be engineered from start. you have to think 20-30 years down the road and build things up to support and sustain the development.

These are some of the things I have thought about in these last years. I'll update you if I thought of something else. But these are already hard enough to overcome.

Having the right kind of intelligence.

2009-11-04T23:23:00.002-05:00

It has been said that Clinton was a clever politician and Bush was not so clever. I don't know what their IQ are, but what I want to say, is that sometimes it may not matter.

Physics PhDs are known to be smart so are Mathematics PhD's. That doesn't mean that they would be successful in doing every thing. There are certain tasks that need a special kind of intelligence.

I have seen very smart people, who are not as successful as we think they should be. Not every Harvard graduate ends up being an accomplished person.

I think, for the most part, I.Q. has been oversold. People who do good at school, sometimes do terribly awful in their professional life and vice versa.

The society at large, in my opinion would do well to avoid glorifying students with straight As, and move toward a situation, where most people can get a couple of shots at success in their first 30 years of life, and then toward open avenues.

Let people have access to resources, books, classes, internet, if it is at all possible, let people have a modicum of life sustaining resources, (food, shelter, clothing) and let them be free of the acute need to support themselves, consider it an investment of sort in human capital.

Life is complicated, it is not wise to think that every problem can be solved by throwing a bunch of smart people at it, or money or any one thing. Don't just stick to a hammer, not every thing is a nail.

An advanced society needs to have a large and diversified toolbox and a lively environment for debate. A Dynamic market of ideas, a society needs to take risk with its own people, let them have a sandbox and make a mess. The benefit of such an approach, in my opinion is much much more than its supposed risks and costs.

People have to show themselves in action and for some, it takes a bit of a time to show their talent. But I think it's absolutely necessary for the society to have the forethought and long vision of allowing people to experiment with many things and find the spot at which they will be creative.

I believe a large portion of people can be very productive, every thing requires a special kind of intelligence and if we let people find what they are good at, we will be employing the right kind of intelligence for the right kind of problem.

Under such circumstances, the overall productivity of the nation will be maximized and the well being of its people will be promoted at the minimum cost.

Geometry, Universe and Other Related Stories.

2009-10-03T14:52:00.001-05:00

A Model of Universe that is purely geometrical, is bound to be purely deterministic. That is because, If every "thing" is supposed to be modeled after a feature of spacetime, then it necessarily follows that, such feature is already an inse...parable part of spacetime continuum and therefore such a model is purely deterministic.
If an event that at the current time is believed to have a chance of happening, happens at a later time, then that event has always been a part of space time continuum, and its occurrence has always been certain. That certainty has not been part of our knowledge, but that is because we are truly three dimensional systems, bound to constantly move in the fourth dimension without having any choice as to whether or not our fourth coordinate changes or as to what direction or with what rate it should change.
Therefore it follows that any model of universe that is purely geometrical must include a mechanism for the continues and global change of fourth coordinate.

Realizing Talents.

2009-03-21T01:36:00.001-05:00

When I was in Iran, we used to hear about people like Prof. Javan, or Vafa or the talented Iranians who came to US years ago and succeeded.
We used to think that US and by extension the entire western capitalistic world, is just such a place, a place that you can come and succeed ! a place that appreciates talent and does every thing and any thing for that talent to be recognized. A place that makes every thing available for you, so that you can achieve your potential.

The forgone conclusion was then, that Iran is definitely not such a place. Iran was suffocating, Every body simply assumed. If you are in Iran and you are talented you will never succeed, no body appreciates you and no body cares and if you talk too much, you will find yourself in a prison and you will be either killed or crushed.

The fish in the tranquil waters, wanted to step out and see the world. The fish wanted to fly, just spread her wings and fly away.

The problem is that this picture was partially wrong, and partially right, it was half-truth, and half-illusion.

When all you have had all your life, is a blurred vision, you don't know how things are supposed to look. People who have had sharp vision all their lives, don't know what a blurred vision feels like. when all you have had, the entire time was a broken TV, you don't know how a working TV functions. Even if your TV is showing something right, you still can not appreciate that fact. If your life has only shades of one color, you never know about others.

It is important to travel and to see other places and other systems, other customs, other people. Your mind automatically starts working and comparing, you start asking questions. What do they have that we don't? What do we have that they don't? What did they do that we didn't? Was it good? Do we want to have that? Do we want our society to look like this ? So, this is important.

But on the topic of helping talents blossom, I came to a conclusion many years ago and that was that, you have to build an environment for all sorts of people. You never design a system that only works for one group of people with one sort of disposition, you build the whole thing from ground up with the idea that every one is talented in his or her own way, and every one has to have the opportunity to see all things that are possible for him or her.

The most efficient system of administration is the most possibly open minded one. Not every one would like to be an engineer or a physician, some body wants to paint, some one wants to study philosophy (hopefully not a big portion) and some one wants to write poetry. Building such a system is not easy, and it is not enough to just open the flood gate and let every one in, that is probably necessary but insufficient.

Those of us who left our motherland, have to ask ourselves a question. Were we right to assume that the western world is a place that would appreciate talents and allow them to grow ? Were we right to leave our country? Should we stay here for the rest of our lives? My answers to the first two questions are that we were right to think that way, we were also wrong to think in that particular way without qualification.

You should have no illusion, that as long as a society is built upon one paramount and over-arching principle such a society can not fulfill human's thirst for creativity and growth. Some of us, a very small fraction, will find that to an extent which is better than what we had back in Iran, and far less than what we thought we would have, or should, we will be satisfied. For the rest of us, what we make out of ourselves and what we learn about ourselves and about this society is the most valuable idea that we can come away with. For some people, a society that works based on a principle that money and material wealth for yourself is the only thing that matters and you are only as valuable as the amount of wealth that you make for yourself or for your employers,such a society, can be as limiting for human creative faculties as any fascist society.

Failing to appreciate man's hunger for creativity for meaningful and significant contribution to society has brought us to despair. The most important role that a government of people can fulfill is to tend to that endless spirit.

I am convinced that the entire path of evolution of society can be re-paved and re-mapped with this fundamental idea, that people need meaning in their lives, they need to be appreciated not only for the role they play in contributing to another lucky person's quest for amassing wealth, but also for the role that they can play, and the role that they want to play in creating a world where their ideas have contributed to every one's happiness and well-being.

The world is a big place, there is room for every one's talent, be it mathematics, or singing, building bridges or dolls, dancing or designing circuit boards. We need a system built around this. Built around realizing talents, in every conceivable way.

On Slumdogs and Smiles

2009-02-16T00:55:00.002-05:00

India is in the news and not because of call centers and IITs or its stock market or economic growth but in spite of them.

I was watching Mohammad Yonus on c-span in which he posited that "Poverty is an artificial state imposed on people by the system"

In the time and age we are living in, this is perhaps true more than any other time. I don't have all the answers, I don't know what India should do to eradicate poverty, but I am not entirely certain that the path India is on right now leads to that very goal. The top-down economy of boosting the rich in the hope that something would tickle down after the second coming of jesus christ (or who ever that is supposed to come and save us from this unmitigated disaster) has been working only for a small slice of the society and even then at a potentially catastrophic cost of depleting earth resources for feeding a hungry planet with billions of poeple in abject poverty.

The leftist government of India, failed to raise standard of living for any one, I have heard that the problem was mainly because there was a lot of corruption. How is it that central management of economy succeeds spectacularly in Japan and South Korea but fails in India, even thought India has a number of top notch schools and companies, even though not enough ?

A new paradigm for micro-economic model based on a new philosophy for industrial production must be brought in. It must be developed with a focused attention on the people, not the ellite.

The new technology should be based on new realities of the world we're living in. The old technolgoies of mass production are decendents of the Industrial revolution era, and are not adequate to promote economic prosperity in this new age.

The new philosphy must be cased on empowering the individual craftman and allowing him to bring his vision to market using a custom made effective force multiplier that allow him or her to minimize manual work while maximize creativity and innovation there by maximizing his or her productivity.

Great Depression II

2009-02-11T00:29:00.003-05:00

Economy is not an exact science. It never was. Applied Mathematicians have built elegant theories and models. Forecasting has become a vast industry. Although it was not too hard to see that there is an economic crisis in the making the oracles of financial industry and economy, all but few, failed to see it coming. The ones who did see, failed to communicate the depth of crisis, if they ever appreciated the enormity of the disaster. For a very long time, many predicted a gargantuan disaster in coming, this was not what they foresaw. Many people thought that the US government financial obligations will not be met in the future and this is going to be the genesis of a catastrophe. However as long as US economy was growing at a respectable pace, the government seemed to have no problem servicing its debt. The problem happened when US economy started to slow down, in the late months of 2007 and the full scale of the crisis became clear at the end of 2008.

The world's capacity for producing goods and services has long surpassed the real needs of the world's affluent population, the ones who have the money to pay for those goods and services. The World's richest countries stubbornly refused to invest in the development of the poor countries, worse, These countries headed by US, went to extraordinary lengths to prevent any improvement in the living standards and working conditions of the world's poor. The need for keeping economic growth apace, was satisfied for a long time by inducing the customers to borrow. Massive domestic and global debt was accrued, especially in US.

As Americans spent, the world came to rely on US customers, having denied the poor economic growth and development, there was no other market vast and voracious enough to be able to consume the goods and products produced in Japan, China, India, and some other countries.

The stock market bubble of 2000 imploded causing all the liquidity to be moved to housing and real estate as a safe haven. Banks got into action and created a vast new industry based on pushing US population to borrow more money. With the burst of housing bubble, people were left unable to borrow money.

Borrowing was the cash cow, the gift that kept giving for years, when borrowing stopped, people stopped buying. When people stopped buying the economy of consumption by the world's affluent stopped working. Companies raced to the bottom and started laying off their workers, shooting themselves in the foot. Some of the companies that were laying off workers had cash and could borrow, in the traditional myopia of corporate culture, they decided that laying off workers is a better way to raise money and make a profit.

For decades the world's richest countries refused to raise the level of salaries paid, in US salaries and wages have been stagnating for decades.

If you are not a real participant in the economy, if your role is to work to produce the goods and spend your salary in consuming what you have produced, you don't matter. The chieftains of industry became handsomely wealthy. Now that we can no longer spend, they would simply take their money and run.

The Industrial revolution and relentless inflation of bank notes and currencies along with the rise of Public Relation and advertising industry has completely undermined the supply and demand rules of the economy. For a very long time, the Market economy has been unable to function by naturally matching real supplies and real demands.

The chickens have come to roost.

Have a nice day.

Hope

2009-02-04T00:26:00.002-05:00

So Iran's lunch of a small satellite called Omid, went without a hitch, and that little thing is now orbiting the earth, at an elliptical orbit with apogees of 322 km and perigees of 242 km, once every 90 minutes. So what does it mean for the nation of Iran.

First it is a milestone, it is important for our confidence, and sense of self-esteem, this however can not be fully realized. The government kept the name of mission chiefs secret, the lunch location secret, the principal designers and the team that worked to make the satellite secret. Every thing was kept in complete airtight confidence. Iranians don't trust their government (no one really should, if you do trust your government you should get your head examined) so how are they supposed to know that the people who designed tested, built and launched this satellite were or weren't Iranians ? Keep in mind that I am not saying that this is so, I am actually pretty confident that they did it, but for this success to translate in to a higher confidence it has to be publicized properly and people has to feel that this is a success of their own. Keeping every thing secret doesn't really help. They should have worked on public relation aspect much better.

Second, Just because you can launch a satellite does not mean you are now an industrial nation. This is really good, and I am happy they did it, but people can't eat the satellite nor can they live in it. We need high paying jobs, we need growth and development and technological know-how that enables us to make goods and take care of our needs. China, Russia and India all achieved launch capabilities while massive number of their people lived in abject poverty. While South Korea didn't go for space technology and yet became the 11th wealthiest nation on earth and all that with an area of 9400 sq km, True US financing and protection helped, but you have to give it to them. Let's hope that lessons learned here can be applied in more practical technologies like semi-conductor technologies.

Third, It appears to me that Iran is determined to follow the Chinese pre-high growth model. The high growth of China was built on the back of millions of low wage workers and a trade policy that allowed Western companies have their goods built in by those low wage laborers, without being taxed substantially and to keep their lisences and protections intact. We can't do that, for the simple reason that we don't have a one billion strong army of hungry starving people ready to work long hours for peanuts. Nor should we pursue any policy remotely resembling that of chinese, for the obvious reason that is inhumane exploitation of human misery. This is wrong.

What we must do is to revolutionize how we manage our economy. The Government must provide information, guidance, security, training, financing, protection and hands-off management of resources and people, by constantly shifting people's economic activities from low yield, low profit regime to high yield, high profit corridore and shifting a portion of that profit from high earning, high income levels, back to low earning low income levels of population. That way, peoples become capable of manufacturing goods and services at the same time that they become capable of consuming and purchasing them. This will create a balanced economy that can sustain itself without massive national expenditure. This can not be achieved by launching a satellite, This must be achieved by compeltely changing how we think about economic management and planning.

It's about people.

Overcoming Despair

2009-01-08T20:54:00.002-05:00

You can defeat armies. You can take cities. You can amass wealth, or stand against rising waters. You might resolve to run in the face of pouring rain or sail in the eye of storm. There is a way to do all these and more, but How do you get through a nation that has given up on itself? How do you penetrate layers of despair one on top of the other, thick and strong. How do you poke a hole in a curtain that has not seen the light of day for hundreds of years and let the sun shine through.

How do you find that sweet spot in the soul of nation that is burning with eternal flame and pour gasoline on it, and set the spirit of an entire nation ablaze ? How ? How do you get the bells to sound so loud and with such a frequency that the whole nation resonates with you and rise up to dance? To dance one more time with the music of cosmos. To stand on its two feet and say, I exist. I am a legend. I am history, I am geography. I am now, I AM.

How do you get every one to channel their forces into the same channel and focus their energies onto the same spot, until that channel explodes and that spot burns right through?

The Power is in the numbers. Governments know that. Systems of power and domination have devised ways, matriculate processes to dominate a population of superior number and resources. The first rule of thumb is to divide them so that they can't cooperate and coordinate. That requires total information dominance. The ability of any one person to contact and communicate a large group of people at once, is a frightening thing. Every time that a large group of people listen to one person, that one person can take the role of coordinator. Coordination, Organization and Cooperation are dangerous words. But their danger is not intrinsic. That's why Systems of power allow organizations as long as those organizations can be manipulated or rendered useless.

The second rule of thumb is to achieve total psychological dominance. That means you have to have the power to immerse the population in a psychological fluid that permeates your entire environment. You have to saturate the airways, and all channels of information, to the point that people eat, drink and breath the stuff, to the point that they go to bed with them and get up with them. The power to shape opinion. that's an awesome power.

The third step is to destroy the will of your people to even attempt at standing up and you do that by instilling fear. You send somebody to the house of your adversary and you have his entire family murdered, you kill women and children and their dogs too, and you make it as horrific as you can. By doing so you increase the risk of any attempt at resistance to such level, that you kill the intent and destroy the determination of your enemy.

So to re-cap, Prevent cooperation, Achieve domination of information, psychology and shaping opinion, and just to be sure Demoralize your enemy by instilling fear thereby destroying intent.

When you achieved all three, you will create despair. A nation that looses hope, looses every thing, then it doesn't matter what you do. They won't do any thing, even if you lose domination. You can be as hapless and defenseless, once despair has set in, you are only required to keep the perception of power.

Despair is the most effective weapon of all. All else are means to this end. To overcome the power that destroying you, You have to confront, engage and destroy Despair. The key to a successful campaign of liberation is to overcome despair. And to do that, you have to go back to basic. You have to undo what has been done.

Remember for you to win, They have to loose once, But for you to loose, they have to win every time. No body can win every time, No body.

"Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate"

2008-12-11T22:12:00.002-05:00

Sometimes you arrive at a point that all roads turn to be circular, all gates seem to be locked and if not they open to nothing but another circular road, dead end or another locked door.

It's okay, I gave it my best shot. My enemies won the day.

C o n s e q u e n c e s !

2008-06-28T11:13:00.004-05:00

We're living in a world that past actions can not be judged based on what their consequences are now. Before one makes a decision on doing any thing, one has to judge his or her decision based not only on its perceived or intended consequences but on "likely" albeit unintended consequences.

The standard of morality must not be so low as to afford a person the comfort of taking refuge in the "unintended consequences" excuse.

"Oh My god, I didn't intend for this to happen" NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

You knew that the chances are high, in fact you were almost certain that this will happen.
Yet you did it.

One message, one song, one thought, one word, one moment can bring days and days of excruciating pain upon someone, some family, some region, or some nation.

Upholding oneself to standards of morality is not easy. But at the end of the day, you want to be able to look at yourself in the mirror and say to yourself, "this person did not take any action to break any heart, destroy any life, bring pain upon any person who didn't deserve it, caused no harm, helped his family friends and strangers and made the world a better place"

One of my friends told me once, People who tried to make this world heaven for others, deserve to go to heaven in the other world, the one after this, People who made this world a living hell for people, deserve to go to hell in the world to come.

and it made a lot of sense to me. This life is our only and once-in-the-eternity opportunity to prove we're worth our existence in it.

Even these words that I write and post to the outside world have consequences. intended and unintended. The least of which is that they place a higher burden on me that any body else.

They raise the bar on me, Because if tomorrow, I am dragged out to the platform and asked why I did what I did, I can no longer plead ignorance. here I am giving out proof that I knew and I understood and I noticed.

God save me !

Wishes for Heaven !

2007-06-07T22:03:00.000-05:00

I hope heaven has breathtaking scenes. I hope it has oceans that are shallow and calm.
I hope it has rivers that flow but look as if they are still. I hope paradise has trees that are
tall yet have only thin shadows. I hope heaven is full. Full of people who understand each other
and are in perfect harmony with each other.

I hope heaven only beautiful people live in heaven and I hope in heaven no one would
say no to you. I hope heaven is just like they said it is, No, I hope heaven is better than
what they said. I hope in heaven every one is listened to and no one is misunderstood.

I hope heaven is interesting and every day in a different way. I hope in heaven every desire
is instantly full filled. I hope heaven is beautiful and is home to beautiful people.

Happiness

2007-05-12T00:47:00.000-05:00

If happiness is having what you wanted to have, then I am on the verge of being happy.
I travelled across oceans to have this, and I have it now, no one can take it away from me !
I earned it by the virtue of my determination. They threw at me every thing they've got,
and I took them all and then said, "What else you've got ?"

I keep thanking God, since I believe he directly intervened to make things favourable to me.
He made this happen !

Today I stand a free man, looking over the horizon, wondering, having conqured the
biggest challenge of my life, what else I can do if I work hard at it?

I am going to put together the pieces of my shattered life and I am going to give my
body a chance to re-group and re-vitalize itself.

But there is one piece of the puzzle that is missing. I am happy but I won't be truly happy,
if I am the only one who is happy, I have to create happiness to be happy, I have to share
this happiness with someone, Sure I am sharing it with my family, Not Enough Though!
The More the Merrier,

I proved myself to be a relentless fighter, to fight to the bitter end and to achieve my objective.

It was tough for sure, but I wouldn't have it any other way.

I did what I came to this country to do.

Today, I stand tall.

It is not Enough though. I am already looking for bigger challenges.

Stay Tuned. I have just begun.

l o v e

2007-05-11T07:25:00.000-05:00

The exhilaration of having someone who loves you as much as you love that person, is irresistible. It's a feeling like no other. You know in your heart that you shall lay your body a-front to shield that person from every undesirable element whether it comes from heavens or from earth or beneath it.
It's ecstasy it's alchemy. It turns wicked tired, pointless souls into agents of good (hopefully good). It's a force that drag a worn out human body over thousands of miles and tens of years.
YET such an absolutely beautiful thing is rare and the chance of having one is slim to none.
so rare in fact that fake copies are abound and the thirst and hunger for the real deal has reached a degree of despair unheard of in the annals of human history.

On Wage Slavery, Control & Production Mentality.

2007-03-24T00:23:00.001-05:00

The society we're living in is NOT free and it will never be. The only thing in an industrialized
country like US that is different from a country like IRAN, is that there is a large amount of
propaganda and brain-washing that is going on.

You get constantly infuriated by the continuous and non-stop insult to your intelligence.
They keep telling you that you are important for them that you are appreciated that you
have no better option that you should do this or that because this famous or rich guy does it.
That the government is right no matter what. That although you have "freedom of speech"
you should never use it, because it is not appropriate, unless of course you are using it, in
a certain capacity that provides for MONEY for you or your employers.

The reporters have the freedom, unless they say something that could potentially hurt
their employer's bottomline, the comedians have it, because hey, it won't hurt any one
and it would make money for the networks.

Cursing is bad, unless you do it on TV or a movie, that is you can't curse unless, your
cursing could make somebody enormous MONEY. Then you can curse as much as you
want, unless it turns out that your cursing is loosing somebody MONEY in which case
you must cease and desist.

If you happen to possess a certain degree of intellect beyond what a circus animal has,
meaning if you are clever enough not to fall for "conditioning your behavior by carrot-and-
stick approach, if you are clever enough not to be patronized and not to swallow the
propaganda and deception then you are bad, very bad. You will be isolated, you will be
treated with contempt, you will be treated as someone who is not a team-player, you are
a trouble-maker, you are an un-american, anti-american, enemy appeaser.

If you care for all human beings, whether they are jew, muslim or christian or even
agnostic or athiest, then you are a moral relativist, Nazi appologist, holocaust denier,
anti-semite, rabid enemy of god or Allah, source of corruption on earth, traitor, enemy comforter and blah blah.

Lies are coming out from the liers who tell them without remorse or regret.

Well, I tell you what, I will never let them control my mind, I will go to my grave
a lonely, poor, misunderstood man, having never relinquished my moral integrity
or my intelligence.

Whoever you are, you can never tell me to do what I don't believe in.

I am not going to be enslaved just because I am a paid worker.
I sleep on the streets, if I have to. Like a wild bird, who would never feel sorry for itself.
who would never accept the confinement of a cage for prepared food, who would never
be painted in any color but the color he was born with.

If you give me money you are entitled to get service from me
I will work after-hours, before hours, late in night, weekend and weekdays to get your work
done to your satisfaction and if I can't I will return your money to you and apologize.
I will respect whoever that works with me and if I make a mistake and offend any one,
I will apologize to whoever he or she is. THIS is my work ethics.
your concerns about how I spend my lunch time or whether or not I talk politics
in my lunch break, is NOT part of my work ethics and I will not be terribly concerned
about that.

Attempts to make me work in absolute unrelenting uniformity will fail, to my detriment
I suppose. I am not an automaton, and I will refuse to be one.
I am not a school child, and I will refuse to act like one.
I am not a wage slave, I am an intelligent human being, and I demand to be treated like one.

When I was born, I was born a free human being.
I intend to die as one.

Time for a better world & happy new year

2007-03-15T22:31:00.000-05:00

The Nature has turned a page, whether you are in Northern hemisphere or Southern.

I'd say the most important mission of any human being is to contribute to the making
of a better world.

A world free of repression, a world free of unnecessary pain, a world free of cruelty.

If you believe in this, really believe in this you will stop being cruel to people around you.
you would start thinking, how would I want to be treated.

Do you want to be lied to? Do you want people to spread slander and lies about you behind your back?

Do you want your house to be demolished ? you land taken away from you, your loved ones
to be killed or bombed or burned or raped or tortured ?

Do You?

Then stand against it, And For heaven's sakes, BE HONEST.
Do not selectively practice humanitarian intervention.
If it is wrong in Darfur, then it's wrong
in Palestine, then it's wrong in Iraq, and Chechnia.

We need to polish our sense of morality. We need to understand, absorb and internalize
"the principle of universality". This is going to save us all. If we throughly from the depth of
our heart and soul, practice what we so readily preach, If we stand on our word and our
promise and our commitments and our decisions, even when it's painful and hard for us,
then we have saved ourselves and we have turned one small part of this world to a
a better, brighter and more beautiful place.

You start from yourself, your family and your friends, your fellow countrymen and women,
and you extend that to every one. e v e r y o n e !

But remember to be practical, you have to pick your battles, you pick the ones, you can win
and the ones that winning is most effective in reducing pain and suffering.
At the same time, I keep in mind, I am responsible for my own actions and the actions of the government that is being run
with my tax money. I am responsible for my decisions and my words.
To the extent that I am privileged, I have moral responsibility.

Don't expect any one to appreciate you ! People will hurt you, It's a fact of life.

Some of them will lie, cheat and steal, and when they are caught with their hands
in your friend's pocket, they will scream thief thief, pointing at you.

Some of them will insult your intelligence and steal every last sweatness out of your life,
Some of them may defame you, behind your back, and spread slander about you, all
for a moment worth of stupid pleasure.

How should one respond to such cruelty ? well, in my humble opinion
It depends,
Sometimes it's beneath one's dignity to respond to foolishness.
Sometimes you have to go out all guns blazing, and fight to the very last drop of
your blood, and sometimes you just have to walk away.

If it's dignified to walk away, then w a l k a w a y.

Take your pain and stuff it into your back-bag, throw it on your shoulder,
wipe your teardrops from your face, stand tall, chest forward and take the open road
and remember, It doesn't matter.

There are some people who want to take this world and turn in to an ugly and disgusting
place, I will fight them if I have to to, but I prefer to just mind my own business.

and what I want to do, is to contribute to the making of a better world.

Listen every body, It's a new year, It's time for a better world,

A better world for you,
A better world for me,
and a better for world for every one,

e v e r y o n e.

Death

2007-03-13T21:59:00.000-05:00

I want to die under clear blue sky.
from a bullet wound,
A bullet shot out of some body's gun,
someone who hated me,
because of something good I did.

I want to go to my grave,
knowing I never lied for my good
never broke a promise that I gave.
never saw something bad that I didn't stand against.
never saw something good that I didn't pursued.

Even when they loose the war they still claim victory and (make a bad movie about it too! )

2007-03-08T00:59:00.000-05:00

They never give it up, do they?
First it was Alexander, then '300' . They never show Persians in a good light.
They never make a movie about Cyrus's triumphant entry to Babylon. They never create
a movie about How Persians dominated most of Greek islands without war, and just with
Diplomacy. They never make a movie about How Darius build the suez canal, 2000 years
before there ever was such canal.

Granted this movie is going to be forgotten too, in a couple of months. But it's their triumphalism
and our modesty and humility in the face of a propaganda campaign that makes me angry.
That's the real reason why Persians are understandably angry. They're about 100 years late, in that anger, or perhaps 400 years, depending how you determine the exact time, that our falling behind, started. But they are angry and they have signed this petition AND this one with their broken english from all parts of the world to register their anger.
The Battle of Thermopolayee was a stupid act by Spartans. What did they expect?
Did they expect that Persians would offer their necks to their enemies so that
they can chop it off ? Of course the Persian army killed all of them!

That being said, Xerxes, (خشایار؟ ) was an incompetent idiot, Persia lost Egypt too under his reign.

China has waken up after a couple of centuries of bad luck !
India boasts about being a super power, openly enriches uranium and builds and tests
a nuclear weapon, while is stuck in a land dispute with its nuclear powered neighbor.

and Iran, that oldest of multi-national empires and world powers, what does she get ?

At one time, the biggest Philosophers and scientists were Razi, Aveecina and Farabi.
All three were PERSIAN. Not arab, not Muslim Persian.

(Do we call Isac Newton a Catholic Scientist? Or do we call him a British Scientist ? )

Razi was born in Ray a small city near where Tehran is now, Farabi was born in Farab,
solidly in Iranian territory, and Aveecina was born in North East of Iran and is burried
in Hamadan.

Kharizmi's parents were born in Khawrizm which is also in North East of Iran.

When we Iranians are going to wake up?

When are we going to realize, they are taking every thing away from us?

What Occupied Islands ? Iran withdrew from the Islands to leave the matter as a "status quo" It was a "time out" declared, no one was supposed to flag the islands. Then the Sheikh of
Sharjah, moved in. It was a violation of "Status quo" Since the Sheikh of Sharjah, violated the
status quo, he and his companions were forced out.
I am certainly not going to loose sleep over that.

I'd say Iran Liberated the Islands from Occupation of Arabs.

So they are "Liberated Islands"

Persian Gulf, was called Persian Gulf, before Arabs could have any appreciable presence.

'300' Spartans, were slaughtered by the Persian Army.
I'd say Fine By me.

To my Arab friends: We are not your problem, and we are not the solution either.

Get off of our back !

Freedom

2007-03-05T18:03:00.000-05:00

We must move toward freedom. Toward a society when no compulsion is needed and none is applied. It perhaps requires patience and education. But more than that it requires technology.
I am fairly optimistic that society of the future would be one that at least partly is free from all
forms of tyranny.

In a free society, you don't work for money. You work to create wonderful things. All the repetitive tasks will be done by machines. Every one has his own company.
There is no need for a multi-national company to produce for example cars.
Every one can have a car manufacturing company. Robats and computers increase the productivity to such extent that huge conglomerates are unneccessary. It is beginning to look like that in some branches of industry already. For example Music production.
Technology has decreased the cost of multi-track recording systems and Internet has made it easy to publish your work. The grip of huge conglomerates is coming loose.

It will take a long time, but any nation that takes the leading role in ushering such age, will be looked at as a model nation. Japanease are well suited to assume that role, but they seem to have a very rigidly casted society.

Iranians are free-spirited, I noticed that it is very difficult in Iran to enforce laws. Most of them think in anarchist terms. They believe that Government has to provide for them, and not to
limit their personal freedom. If a certain behavior is harmful to society, you can always hope that education will convince the vast majority of the society to refrain from such activity.
For a government to have any credibility as an educator, It has to practice honesty.
This does not mean that there should be no secrecy. Any government has enemies.
But an honest government does not use legitimate security concerns as tools of repression and
propaganda.
Is it possible to govern with honesty? I am not sure, but I think you can not have a free society unless you have an honest government.

Freedom is absolutely beautiful. But Would people live with respect and dignity if they are left alone ? Let's hope so !

If you want a WAR, Then you will get one.

2007-02-14T01:10:00.000-05:00

Dick Cheaney and his AEI co-horts have their bellies filled from Iraqi blood.
Blood is dripping from their fingers as they sit down to talk about tomorrows feast.

the flesh of Iraqi children is on the BBQ to be roasted.

Their safes full of green and their mouthes full of red.

They grin as they watch the carnage that Iraq is, with exuberant satisfaction.
As Henry Kissinger said, "Let them kill each other"

Murder and Mayham, is their specialty.

Now with their mouthes watering they are looking at Iran. More blood and more bloodshed.

Do you want a WAR, My WOLFowitz, Mr. "Bomb Iran" Mr. Mustash,
Mr "45 Minutes" D o y o u w a n t a w a r ?

YOU WILL GET A WAR. But beware, this time you might get drowned in blood.
Do you know how to swim specially when blood gets sticky.

so they killed saddam

2007-01-03T02:10:00.000-05:00

So they killed saddam. The whole thing resembled a mob lynching someone, rather than carrying out justice. As far as justice, it was as remote from justice as it could have been.
Both in spirit and meaning and also on the surface.

Saddam was responsible for death and suffering of perhaps a million iranian, countless kurds,
tens of thousands of Shiats, and perhaps numerous sunnis. Every body suffered to some extent,
but people of Iraq are in such desperate time that, it's quite likely that they consider, Saddam's era a particularly "good one".

His execution served no purpose but quenching the thirst for another death.
He also took with himself the secrets that could expose powers to be to his grave..
His death would create more bloodshed and more pain.

Which brings up an interesting question, can a decent society administer death penalty, carried out by state and still stay a decent society ?

I used to support death penalty and "eye for an eye" argument, I am beginning to lean on an anti-death penalty argument.

I say instead of condemning a criminal to death, the society has to condemn him to "life".

A society operates by collaboration between all people, first of all, A crime should not be viewed in total isolation from the conditions that prepared the ground for that crime.
second the state must be deprived from the authority to perpetrate violence.

There are a lot of other considerations, but books can be written on the subject and I want to go to bed.

Saddam died, but I can tell the name of a couple more guys that perhaps were more deserving of being hanged that him. They died in peace, with their loved ones around them.

This world is inherently unjust. Any attempt of achieving justice can at best only be partially successful.

2006-11-16T22:06:00.000-05:00

sometimes I just want to do something creative, but I don't want to get sucked in it and spent hours struggling with it. I often can't find that piece of creative thing to do and it's really annoying.

Because the thought of letting go is unbearable.

2006-10-15T22:35:00.000-05:00

When you fight all your life, to achieve one goal and to realize one dream, what would you do
if all of your efforts fail ?

By now, this struggle defines me and makes me who I am.

If I let go, then I am not going to be the same. I am not comfortable being any thing other than what I am now, despite the fact that it's not easy being me.

I have to keep on doing what I've been doing all my life, trying !
I have to keep trying, because ... well,

because the thought of letting go is unbearable.

Moshe Dyan !

2006-09-04T00:31:00.000-05:00

"We came here to a country that was populated by Arabs and we are building here a Hebrew, a Jewish state; instead of the Arab villages, Jewish villages were established. You even do not know the names of those villages, and I do not blame you because these villages no longer exist. There is not a single Jewish settlement that was not established in the place of a former Arab Village."
—Moshe Dyan, March 19, 1969, speech at the Technion in Haifa, "Israel" quoted in Haaretz, April 4, 1969. (385 villages have been destroyed within pre-1967 Israel...)

Development: How Persians Did It?

2006-07-19T22:20:00.000-05:00

The most important asset that can help with developing a country is productive people, the second most important asset is of course money.
3000 years ago Persians developed persia from a tribal society, to the center of civilization, a place called by Alexander-era historicans the land of "thousand cities". How did they do it?
Well they hired artisans and skilled workers from other places and "paid" them to build subtraenian canals to bring water from lands at the foot of mountains to the desert and to build other infrastructures. Those workers being treated well, stayed in persia and thought persians how to build things.

Incidentally this is how the United States developed. Historically calamity and misery (eg. Irish Famine, Religious hostilities in Europe and other things ) brought skilled workers, farmers scientists and authors from other parts of the world to US.

Can Persians do it again?

Well, it is kind of hard, to bring people to Iran when Iranian skilled workers themselves are fleeing the country in thousands. But may be If the attitudes change we can bring back our own work force after they have been seasoned and become experienced. If they have become rich then it's even better, With changing attitudes we bring the two most important factors of developement into the place that needs developing.
But we can't do that if we keep frightenning people with empty rhetorics.
Ultimately if Iran's economy is kept independent and isolated from the globalized economy, there is a chance that Iran can see the daylight, If and when there is a global calamity.
There is a belief that there exists a massive imbalance in the world economy.
This imbalance concerns the US twin deficit and also the size of speculative economy (investment and financial services) in the world.

Any how The point is we can do it again, but we need to revolutionize the way we do business in Iran.

What's wrong with the world ?

2006-05-17T22:05:00.000-05:00

What's wrong with the world ? Why doesn't any body stay at one place any more?
Why do people say things they don't believe in? Why do people loose their belief their emotions, their faith? Why do people make promises they don't intend to keep?
Why do people feel a certain way today and feel completely opposite to that the next?

Why don't people stay true to their word to their heart and to their feelings?

I never asked for too much. I only asked to share an hour, to share a place as small as palm of hand. Is it too much to ask?

I didn't ask for clouds to be nailed to sky. I only asked for the tree to stay at the same place.
I didn't ask for water to stay blue. I only asked for blood to stay red.
I didn't ask for the leaf to stay green but only if I could keep the sky the same color.

What am I going to do now? What am I going to believe in?

Can somebody tell me if a red rose is red? Can someone tell me If I see the moon to be white tonight, Can I still expect it to be white tomorrow night? and the night after that?

It is easier to ly down on a bench and ask yourself if it is worth it to ever get up.

Here is a problem, For How long a happy guy would be free falling happily after jumping of the roof top of a 16 story building? (Hint: It doesn't matter how heavy he is)

Answer: Eternity.

The Idea of Depth.

2006-03-01T03:52:00.000-05:00

An important point is the idea of depth. The world around us, wheather the human affair world, or the material world, is enormously complicated. It is however enormously well organized. One of the ways that the world has organized itself, is in layers. The true nature of the world has a layer-wise organization to it. There is a sensorial layer, that is the part of the world that we sense. then there is cognizant layer. that is a simple picture which our brain puts together and it is the way every human understands what's around it. But then there are layers after layers of truth. Human beings, at least the interesting ones, are not simple. Even the ones that we tend to think of as shallow and trivial are not as simple and as trivial as we may think of them.

Sometimes people hear that this or that person committed suicide and it just comes as a shock to them. It then turns out that the person they thought they knew had some amazing aspects to his/her personality.

If we just sit down and think about all the ways that the world has been structured, we will be awed at how amazing this world really is.

We must, absolutely must keep in mind, that there just might be more to this thing or this person that meets the eye. Sometimes it is just what it seems to be. well, bad luck I guess, shallow people and shallow things happen to. But every once a while you can find something deep about universe.

Like my advisor told me, "Dig Deeper"

Destination, Meaning and Reason

2006-02-26T03:46:00.001-05:00

Does every event have to happen for a reason? Does every journey have to have a destination? Should every thing have a meaning?

I don't know if every event has to have a reason, but If it is important and if it happens to me, It would cause me great pain if it turns out that there was no reason for it.

I don't know if every journey should have a destination, but I personally won't take one that doesn't.

I don't know if every thing should have a meaning, but if it doesn't I don't want to have any thing to do with it.

Things should make sense. Sometimes things don't make sense to me, but it doesn't mean that it is meaningless.

Sometimes it takes time for them to make sense, a lifetime perhaps, but some time, some how and some where things have to start to make sense.

My life would be enormously painful and unlivable if things in my life don't make sense.

I set out on a journey some 20 years ago. I defined a reachable destination. I didn't want to be a rock star, I didn't want to be a president. I just wanted to be a scientist.

I am getting tantalizingly close to that goal. But I set out on another mission, I wanted to find
someone that I can truly love. Someone I can share my heart, my feelings, my thoughts and my life with. Someone I can take care of and some one who takes care of my heart.

Last year at around these days, I thought I found her. This was one of those moments that I felt God answered my prayers personally. p e r s o n a l l y !

The only thing I asked her was to stick around, talk to me from a distance,every once a while. Hey wave your hand. Read a story, tell a story. Make me feel loved. Not just another casual friend that doesn't mean any thing. I care about you, you care about me.

I was waiting to see what happens. And I thought to myself, if it goes like this, one day I am going to tell her this:

Girl, you're on a journey and I am on a journey. One day God looked down at earth and saw us going on different roads toward the same destination. He smiled and brought us together.
Today I am stretching my hand toward you. If you choose to take my hand, we'll go on together from now on. We laugh together, we cry together, we live together. We share our lives, our goals our dreams, our friends, our family, our friendships, our pain and our joy.
You can lean on me when your burden is heavy, you would take my hand when I am falling. If it is cold I take you in my arms and the world will warm up forever. If it is dark, you look at sky and the heaven will shine forever. There may never be a time like this moment in our lives.
Your happiness is my happiness, your mission is my mission, your friends are my friends, your family is my family your career is my passion. I can't gaurantee that it would be easy but I can promise if we don't do this, our lives will never be as rich, our moments will never be as long, our careers will never be as satisfying and we will never see happiness the way we can see it together.Take my hand and let us go, there is so much life to live, so many places to go, so many songs to sing, so many dances, so many chances to take. let's go my friend. let's do it together.
None of us has any thing to loose and Both of us have every thing to gain. Today is our day.

But Daemons of darkness rebelled, cold winds blew, sky fell on earth. The Coallision of anti-relocation league had its first meeting. New vistas in science opened up.
The World got in line to destroy my vision, shatter my dreams and burn my house down.

What was the purpose of all that I endured? What was the meaning of all that she said? What was the real destination?

When she came to my life, every thing started to make sense, when she left my life, every thing ceased to make any sense. In effect, at the end of the day, She made my life meaningless, pointless and nonsensical.

Is there something down the horizon that I just can't see?
Am I just too impatient to make sense out of things?
If I just adopt a wait'n see attitude would things start to make sense again?

Or is it all over now, once and for all, just like this, without
destination, meaning or reason. Illogical, unreasonable, vague, cold and dark, eternally painful to the day that I die.
Every day hopeless, every day without end.

I often ask myself, why did she come? Why did she do what she did? Why did she say what she said?

She didn't abandon me! she abandoned every thing she said she believed in. You can abandon a person. That's no big deal. But How can you abandon what gives meaning to your life? You can't do that! What kind of a life you would live then? A meaningless life. What's the point of doing some thing like that?

Money doesn't make things purposeful, You can do things to survive, that's permissible in any philosophy. But when there is every reason to believe that Life will go on, nevertheless, why then change something that there is nothing wrong with it. Being able to go to Parties doesn't make wrong right. Hardship doesn't turn what's right into wrong.

Why should I be the only one who believes in these things?

Destination, Meaning and Reason

2006-02-26T03:46:00.000-05:00

2006-01-29T17:34:00.000-05:00

If I make one more person happy, may be, just may be, I earn the right to happiness.

Alleys and Walls

2006-01-12T15:48:00.000-05:00

Here People build alleys. Houses are connected. Wall to Wall. Yet they are all different, each house or apartment has its own design. No one seems to be obssesed with wide open spaces. Here They don't believe in spaces. They believe in narrow alleys that bring people closer. They believe in thin
walls. But walls here are not walls. They are vertical bridges. they are built to connect not to separate. Here you ask some one you don't know, what does he/she do? or Where does he/she coming from. Here, People don't want to be millionairs. They just want to raise their kids.
They have talk shows here too. But instead of discussion the bedroom stories of some actor or actress, they discuss important problems, Physicians, Artists, Thinkers, come and talk about ideas.
Like the song says: "Sometimes you wanna go where every body knows your name,and they always glad you came."

It has been snowing for three days! It is pretty. Every where is white, Cars are not afraid of snow any more. Even though their tires skid and skid and roll, hopelessly without moving them ahead.

I asked someone in an office supply store if he has a laser pointer. He told me that Authorities, banned them, since people kept using them in harmful ways.

No lawsuit is needed. The authorities did what they were paid to do.
Of course Over there, they are doing the same. It is just that, poeple arent' the ones who
are paying them. The ones that do, get what they pay for.

خانه

2006-01-09T15:08:00.000-05:00

خانه جایی است که همسایه من
دیوار به دیوار منش بینشیند
که خیابان هیچ جا زیادی پهن نیسیت
نه بارانش دلگیر
نه زمستان تاریک
نه گرمایش سوزان
خانه جایی است که کسی غریبه نیست
هر کسی اشنایی است
هرکسی نام تو را می داند
خانه جایی است که اگر
از کسی پرسیدی
که چه احوال چه اوضاع و خبر
هرکسی را خبری از جایی است
کار هر کس به همه مربوط است
دست من یاور توست
چشم تو باور من
خانه زیباست
ار چه زیر قدم خاک و گل آلود زمان
صورتش را به غبار آلودند
از چه رفتند و چه بودند
من نگفتم شاید
نسترن های شکوفان دم صبح
با سحر آسودند

Capitalism And Free Market ?

2005-12-20T22:18:00.000-05:00

It has been said that Capitalism and the principles of free market are arguably the only way to economical growth.
As I understand the liberalization of economy is the corner stone of capitalism. It is my understanding that this means that governments relinquish their control of the forces or market and allow the market to function with out interference and freely according to the principles of supply and demand.
On the surface it seems to be such a wonderful idea. If there is demand for a certain good or servives, supply will come through to accomodate the price will go down as a result of excess of supply, the demand will taper off. And market achieves equilibrium and every one is happy.
there are two places that this can happen, one is in a hot tub, and second is in disney land on silver screen.

In reality this scenario almost never works. The reason is rudimentary. Economy is not and has never been an exact science. It is in the domain of "humanities" because market is made of people who make decisions. The idealized economical models work on the assumption that human beings by nature, are rational machines. They function in a manner that can maximize the profit to themselves while minimizing loss and risk.

This assumption can break down in a variety of ways. One of those ways is information. If a person doesn't know that a certain action can help him earn more, or worse believes mistakenly that a certain action will do him good, or wrongfully thinks that it does it harm, that person will act in a way which may not be to his advantage.

There are all sorts of ways that the principle will be violated. But it is a fact known that markets fail in a variety of situations.

A physical system achieves equilibrium when a large fraction of the members of the system achieve a certain equal state. In an economical system one could believe that if the market is left to its own, certain wealth distribution will take place, and at the end of the day, a large portion of the society have more or less equal income. Furthermore concentration of wealth will reduce dramatically. That sort of fairy tale almost never happens. It is a proven historical fact, that markets that are left to their own, almost invariably lead to massive failure and gigantic concentration of wealth. The experiment with free market economies has been abandoned since its carastrophic failure in 1700.

Today there is no economical system which is free of government regulation, oversight and management. Particularly, it is important to stress that NO post-WWII goverment has achieved significant economical growth without central managment of the national economy.

For example, The entire japanease economy was tightly and meticulusly managed and controlled by the Ministry of Industray and Trade. (SEE Chalmer Johnson's works)

The United States is always mentioned as an example of free market economy.
Examination of the facts, shows that this is a patent lie. No sector of american economy has experienced growth without Government intervention. Particulalry high tech.

The transition from an agricultural society to an industrial one, was done with direct managment by government planners. The first customers of new products, (e.g. computers, planes and jets, etc etc.) has always been the government. New technology has always been developed either in government funded labs or with public funds. If the technology has been developed in a private industry lab, the technical know-how and the basis has been acquired in
publicly funded institutions.

More on this later.

IRAQ IS DESTROYED. Mission accomplished!

2005-08-22T15:46:00.000-05:00

It goes without saying that today's Iraq is far worse than Iraq of Saddam.
Aside from bombings aginast American occupying forces, there is a lot
of revenge killing. Robert Fisk has witnessed the carnage first hand. According to Geneva conventions, an occupying force is responsible for the well being of the people of the country it is occupying. Today US is effectively occupying Iraq. The fictitious hand over of sovereignty could have been a manouver to escape the responsibilities of an occupying force.

Today more than 100,000 iraqis lay dead and countless of them injured and left disabled
and disfigured. The US and UK governments and by extension their people are responsible for the carnage in Iraq.

If the mission was to destroy an oil-rich middle eastern country to inject american bases and troops at the heart of the middle east, then Mission accomplished.

Iraq lays in ruin. 9000 years of history is vanished.

Somewhere in Iraq, somebody's son is dead, somebody's father is missing, somebody's borther is beheaded. Human beings continue to die.

When George Bush was asked why he has spent two hours biking, he said:
"I have to get on with my life!"

So do the 25 million iraqis, so did the tens of thousands of the dead.
But thanks to GW's imperial ambitions, they will never get to get on with their lives.

Nostalgia

2005-07-10T22:22:00.000-05:00

when you come here, pretty soon, you get nostalgic. It never goes away. It just doesn't matter what yo do. You can try to make your environment look and feel like what it used to.
It will never work. You will never succeed. You know you don't belong in here and it doesn't matter how good your english is. It doesn't matter if you dress like people here or do what they do, talk like they talk, walk like they walk.

Nothing can take the place of the real thing. Lookalikes and makebelieves don't work.
You can never feel at home unless you are at home.

There is no good reason why an Iranian shouldn't live in Iran. Iran is where I was born, my father was born there, so was my mother. So was their father and mother. One of my grand fathers, I am sure fought at some war to defend Iran. One of my distant cousins died so that I have a country called Iran.

My parents taught me to speak farsi. My teachers taught me to write farsi and to read farsi.

I learned to read Persian poems.

My ancestors were born in Iran, they lived in Iran, they died in Iran.
My parents paid taxes to the Iranian government.
My brother and cousin fought to defend Iran.

Whatever oppourtunities are in Iran, I have a right to have a share.
In my country,I have a right to believe in whatever I want to believe and I have a right to live my life the way I see it fit, just as long as my lifestyle doesn't harm the society I live in.

Iran is where home is. Home is not a place. Home is an idea. Home is something that is related to feelings, to memories and to an identity. Home is not only about Geography, it is also
about History.

No one should give up on his or her home. You only have one, and it is irreplaceable.

If the situation is tough to make a living, You have to do your best to contribute to the making of a better Iran. That could mean going abroad to get the neccessary tools, insight and equipment.

Am I practicing what I am preaching ? After all talk is cheap and easy.

I am right now, powerless. I am like a boat caught up in the storm in the middle of ocean.

I don't know where this life will take me. I just don't know.

Back to Iran!

2005-06-30T04:46:00.000-05:00

Whatever you think about Iran, the election or any thing that has happened, you must agree overthrow of a regime through foreigne sabotage is illegal. The Nurember tribunal descrcibed the act of initiation of war as the supreme international crime from which every other crime will follow.
Aside from that, The idea that a foreigne government acts in any thing but its own interests, is absurd and certainly without historical precedence.

Scott Ritter has been talking about the war that the United States of America is conducting againt the govenment of Iran.

The armed forces of the United States of America have repeatedly invaded Iranian air space.
The US doesn not allow any aircraft to get even close to its airspace. Have these acts been perpetrated against the US, the country that flights were originated from would have been incinirated by now.

The United States is pursuing a policy which could throw the entire middle east AND central asia into an inferno of instability. If this policy succeeds millions of innocent people will suffer.
It is the responsiblity of any decent human being to prevent this from happening.

Whoever is in charge of Iran's security and territorial integrity (presumably the people of Iran, but represented by the government of Islamic Republic ) MUST issue a stern warnning to all neighboring countries that if any country allows its territory to be used to mount a military operation against our country, Such country has, in effect, declared war on us.

They must use backdoor diplomacy to inform americans that Iran will not stay quiet if and when a military campaigne is waged against her. They must tell them that if Iran can't sell oil to
provide for its citizens, then no other country in the middle east and central asia should be able to do so. That we reserve the right to target and destroy any and all potential sites that could be used to mount military operation.

For some reason Iranians are very quiet. I for one don't understand that while the danger is real and perhaps imminent, why official authorities who are in charge of the defence and the national security of the Iranian motherland aren't making any noise about it.

Whatever happens I am sure that If Iran is attacked, Iran will be defended. Iranians have not forgoten the 1953 CIA backed coup-det-tat. They haven't forgotten the generocity of americans toward the butcher of baghdad. They are not born yesterday. Persians have been around two millenia or three, depending on how you look at it. They know no one cares if their sons and doughters langiush in prisons, or if they starve to death. Certainly no one in Pentagone or Whitehouse.

I just hope Iranian officials make it very clear to their american counterparts that they will make sure any military offensive against our motherland is going to be very very costly. Not only for the US but for Europe, the middle east, the cental asian countries and by extension to the world.

Aside from that there is nothing I can do!

Life is not meaningless!!

2005-06-13T19:56:00.000-05:00

When you come of age, sometimes you ask yourself what is the meaning of my life?
Millions of people have tried to answer this question. The presumption is always that
there is a unique meaning for the human life on earth.

There has been a few years that I have found a new answer to this very old question.

Life in and out of itself has no meaning. Life for us human beings, is a time we
spend. It is a time duration, it begins not at birth, but at the moment that we
realize we have choices and those choices have consequences.
It ends when we don't have any more choices.

So the question is what should a human being spend his life on? Of course part of our lives is spent trying to sustain that very life. But even in that part, we have choices to make.

The real question should be why are we given this opportunity ? What are we supposed to do with it?

Now for a moment assume we know that we are here on this planet to accomplish a certain mission.

If we refuse to commit ourselves to carrying out our mission, then our lives become pointless. It is a pretty straithforward concept. If I give you a book and you don't read it. Then existence of that book in your bookself is meaningless. The book is there to be read. If it is not read, it is there for no reason and so its mere existence is meaningless.

So it is of utmost importance that we as indivisual human beings recognize our mission and is also important that we make our choices so that we take all the steps neccessary to accomplishing our mission.

Let's view life as a vast desert with one road on it. The road is not paved or marked, but it nevertheless exists and there are signs which can help us find it.

We must find this road and take it. Then life has a destination and therefore has a meaning. Our mission then is to find the road and take it and don't get off that road until we arrive at our destination.

Now the problem is we don't know where the road is and we don't know where is it supposed to take us to. Assuming there is such a road.

What can help us? Philosophy, Science, Religion, just our collective minds.

I believe religion in general has provided some answers. But the lessons have been
so much covered in abuse and misuse of the terms, that the entire enterprise has turned into a very dark and vague and at times malicious and confusing complex.

I believe the road is supposed to take us to a higher level of being.

What is the highest level of being ?

I believe the highest level of conscience and willful being is a being that
is perfect and infinite.

This being we call God.

All aware, all encompasing, all powerful, all knowlegeable, all ...

All the positive attributes that we come to like and appreciate he has.

I believe we want to be God. And therefore the guiding light is on.
Go toward the perfection.

But we won't be able to do that, if don't destroy or fix the imperfections.
that's where the road comes in.

Every one has a road in front of him orher. This road is specifically tailored to his/her abilities and is intended to take this one man/woman to the destination.

We can refuse to take the road, in that case we will just be alive, but our lives
will have no meaning. We have then made a decision not to live a meaningful life,
and it's no body's fault.

شرر

2005-04-08T09:39:00.000-05:00

دلم از آتش چشمش تقاضاي شرر دارد	خدا سرد است اين خانه و ميدانم خبر دارد
و يا چون ميکشمي آهي دلم اين ديده تر دارد	چرا من تلخکامم در زمان عشق شيرينت
چه خوش ار ناخن شوقم ز عشقت پرده بردارد	لب عطشان و سوزغم من سرگشته و صحرا
ازيرا اشک خونينم رفاقت با سحر دارد	ضميرم پرشد از نقشي که گل با آب مي سازد
چه مي خواهد ز جنگل يا چه در کوه و کمر دارد	مرا انگشت حسرت در دهان کين آهوي مشکين
سرشکم خوب قيمت کن به جوف نقره زر دارد	طلايي گشته اشک من طلايه دار اندوهت
در اين هنگامه حايل شو به لطفت دل نظر دارد	تلاقي کرده راهم با نسيم صبح بي تابي
و من مي دانم اين نکته که اين پيمان ثمردارد	تباتي کرده با سوز دل من سوز اين سرما

On Being a Nonconformist

2005-03-30T00:00:00.000-05:00

What's my problem? I don't have any! I have opinions ! some of them are informed and analytic. Some are aesthetic. And some perhaps are down right wrong.
It goes without saying that there is a tendency in people of any society (including professional societies) to act in a similar manner and to follow certain norms.
When a person tries to define his/her own identity out of a sudden all hell breaks loose. In societies with strong and historical solidarity, (like Iran and most eastern places) Other people may try to exert friendly pressure to bring one in the line.

I believe some cultural values and traditions must be oberved. Otherwise the community looses it's identity and desolves into nothingness. Once time-tested values are abandoned, the members are ready to be influenced, exploited and transformed.

But then there are other things. I reject conformism when it is not harmful to the socio-cultural values.

In intellectual societies conformism is often equivalent to surrendering to dogma.
No intellectual can live with honesty and integrity if he/she abandones certain principles. Objectivity and demanding evidence and subjecting arguments to reason and analysis are some of these. Any norm in any professional/intellectual society that does not adhere to simple principles of this sort must be broken and new norms must be established.

There are subtle forms of coercing people into conforming. Like Boycotting or isolation. I simply do not submit to unreasonable pressure. No one can dictate to me
what I should belive in or how I should arrange my priorities.
I simply will not make any decision on the basis of the opinions of others. Whatever they may be. I would however change any aspect of my life that can be argued to be undesireable, based on some sort of criteria of desirablitity which is acceptable to me.

I am the captain of my ship. I'll take it any where I want to. If it is needed
through the troubled waters. I am in charge of this situation. To the extent that
I am in control, the situation will be handled accoring to my believes, principles and capabilities.
Cheers

شب تابستانی

2005-03-29T00:24:00.001-05:00

شب تابستانی

گرم و آرام ولی دیده ما بارانی

در شگفتم آیا توهمه
راز مرا میدانی

من نمی دانم اکر قطره شبنم می سوخت
واگر غنچه احساس تو هم ، یک شبه پرپر می شد

درس دیروز مرا بود کسی
که تو را می آموخت
من نمیدانم اگر ماه شبی می نالید
چرا صبح براین حوض صفا اشک چکید

و مرا آینه روی همه پاک درید
چشم بارانی من
چه جوابی می داد
من کجا می دانم
که چرا اشک ستاره دو سه روزی کم شد
که چرا زانوی طاقت من هم خم شد
یا چرا غصه ما، سبب خجلت هر ماتم شد

کاش می دانستم
قاصدک صبح بهاری به کجا پر زد و رفت
چه کسی بود که بر خانه ما در زدو رفت
من نبودم وقتی ، خنده ات از دل مغموم صفا سر زد و رفت
شب تابستانی
گرم و آرام ولی دیده ما بارانی
من در این حسرت دیرینه همه می سوزم
از کجا تو همه راز مرا می دانی
کاش می دانستم
تو کجا بودی وقتی
شب من جان می داد
دل ما، دوسه پیمانه محبت ، وه چه ارزان می داد
هر کسی چیزی داشت، به گدایی چون من ، خوب و آسان می داد
کاش می دانستم
که تو نزدیک گل نسترنی مسکن و منزل داری
که تو یک رود پر از مهر و صفا را همه در دل داری
من نمی پرسیدم
به کجا می روی ای دوست چه مشکل داری
------------------
از ندانستن این ها
دل ما می شکند
هر شبی هر سحری
آینه مهر و صفا می شکند
آه از این شیشه طاقت ، آه از این طاق وفا
که به هر باد جفا برسر ما می شکند
این چه قفلی است که بر لب زده ای دوست بگو
هر چه کردیم مگر با همه کوشش این خلق خدا می شکند

گر چه من می دانم
تو چه خوشحالی و مسرور که هر صبح و شبی
دل مظلوم و به غم بسته ما می شکند
آه از این خنده تو

دل ما را به خدا می شکند

حق انتشار و رونوشت برای سازنده پیمانه محفوظ است

June 99

The Ravings of a Lunatic, Episode II, Year 2205

2005-03-25T12:53:00.000-05:00

You have to forgive me! I didn't get much sleep
last night, I am on sping break.
I'd like to make some predictions about Year 2205
this is if there is still a planet earth which is inhabitable for human beings around that time.
I think in the year 2205, money will not exist, you can walk into
any "store" and take any thing you want, all you have to do
is to register and for non-parishable items, you should say if you want
to "own" it or you plan to return it for somebody else's use at such a date.
there is "owenership" by the virtue of a social contaract. If someone wants to own more than a certain amount, (agreed by a 75 per cent majority) he has to do some unpleasant amount of work, like working at the waste disposal place. The rest of the unpleasantness is taken care of by programmable robots.
Since there is "ownership" there will be thieves and murderers. After due process, They will be sent to an island which is also a place to dump nuclear waste.
People marry at 16 and die of natural causes at around 60.
That's because human beings by then will discover that it is futile to
prevent death and their effort is focused on improving
the quality of life. Ah there is plenty of pain killer around with
little or no side effect. So overall I predict that life will be good on 2205.

Ravings of a Lunatic, Tax and Blood Money and other Stories

2005-03-25T12:49:00.001-05:00

"the government" is a murderer and a plunderer
whatever comfort we have is obtained by destroying life and
property, starting with natives then blacks then, the latin americans
then japs then middle easterners, and on and on.
not to mention the wageslavery routinely imposed on third world countries.
it's all blood tainted money. misery striken money, life anhilating money.
paying taxes to this government whoes military budget is bloating
while the budget for social services and public relief and welfare is being
cut is equivalent to being accessory to crime and complisant to
an unoffficial war declared against the poor and the disenfranchised.
the 2005 budget is plain textbook class warfare. The tax code is arranged to siphone money and wealth out of the pockets of middle class, ( the plainly poor class has fallen beyound a level to the extent that they are disqualified for exploitation, they are now simply disposed of) into the bank accounts of the ellite. with the propagandists telling us that "that something is going to trickle down sometime after the second coming of Jesus" there are reports that american warships are headed to persian gulf so I am being forced to pay for the bullets that would kill and maime
my brother. did you know that Islamic Republic used to do that?
after executing the political dissidents they used to charge the relatives
for the bullets, now this government is doing the same to me
except that I am not a political dissident!
my crime is to be born in a third world country.

Ravings of a Lunatic, Tax and Blood Money and other Stories

2005-03-25T12:49:00.000-05:00

A Quote!

2004-12-04T00:42:00.000-05:00

If you assume that there is no hope, you guarantee that there will be no hope. If you assume that there is an instinct for freedom, there are opportunities to change things, etc., there's a chance to contribute to the making of a better world. That's your choice."

Noam Chomsky

In

ThirdWorld Traveler

THE POWER OF POSITIVE PERSPECTIVE

2004-11-28T17:31:00.000-05:00

I am still working and studying to write further about persian history. meanwhile let me explain why I am doing this.
There has been never a drastic change in a society, created by the people of that society, where, no positive future has been talked about.
We know the situation in Iran is not the rosy picture they want us to belive. But what's the alternative. Why change? Here is why?
THE POSSIBILITIES OF AN IRAN WHICH IS TRULY FREE ARE UNLIMITED!
The opposition has been talking about all the bad things that this regime has done.
No one in Iran needs to be lectured about that. I spent most of my adult life in Iran, we all felt it. What we need is positive points.
Iran has been isolated and has been under economical sanction. Yet Iranians (and not the machinery of Islamic Republic) have protected the integrity of the homeland.
With a free Iran and a general amnesty all Iranians can participate. Here is my prediction: (the pessimists can ignore the rest of this article)
At one point, Iranians will wakeup and unite for freedom. We will insist that the current body of executive branch of the government must stay active. However Khamenei or whoever is the spiritual leader and his determined substitute must leave tehran immediately. The army must go to it's baracks outside the city or move to border areas in full general alert status. We will have a general election for the first people congress of Iran. We will have functioning government within a year. The most important part is that Iran will be rulled by Iranians, irrespective of their religious believes. Unified yet diverse. Motivated by the dream that every Iranian can contribute and every Iranian can benefit to and from what Iran has to offer.
The role of government will be clearified. The government is not the "moral police". It is not the "fashion police". It is not an apparatus to insure benefits of an ellite few. whether they are psuedo-religious or "loyal royalist". Iranian government will not be a facade for a "Mafia Opperation". It will be and will do what Iranian people want it to be and to do. Under the leadership of such a government, capitol will flow to the country as Iranians all over the world come back to contribute to the growth of Iran. We will achieve a double digit growth within a few years. Iranian standard of life will improve dramatically.
IRAN WILL SHED HER SHACKLES AND WILL FLY OUT OF HER ASHES LIKE THE PHOENIX SHE IS.
It is important that we all believe that this is possible. It is important that we get together to make this happen. Sure there will be enormous amount of obstacles. particularly the people whose current survival depends on mainting the staus quo, will resist. Sometimes we are going to have to take smart steps. Sometimes we have to compromise. But we must hold this picture close to our minds and hearts, and work to make it happen to within one generation.
The alternative is the dark, damp and horrible picture that the opposition is puting out.

پیمانه

My Freedom, Your Freedom, Our Freedom

تحول «نافرجام» موسيقي ايران زمين

The Importance of Language

به ایرانیان زار وگریان شدم

Re-enforcing Rigidity

The Selfishness Trap

باز هم بگوییم

The Threat of Independent Development

بازدیسی زبان فارسی

وقتی این مقاله را در

http://persianlanguage.ir/articles/920

دیدم به خود گفتم جانا سخن از زبان ما میگویی

این طرز فکر و این راه و روش هست که ما را به خاک بیچارگی و بدبختی نشانده نه اسلام نه دین .این که ما در برابر اینها دریوزگی پیش گرفته ایم بزرگترین عامل شکست پی درپی ماست.

از آن روزی که ما برتری بیگانه را بر خود پذیرفتیم بدبختی و تیره روزی مان آغاز شد و از همان روز در سرازیری سقوط و بیچارگی می غلطیم

خواهشمند است مقاله زیر را بخوانید .

بازدیسی زبان پارسی

Inequality and Development

The Civilizations' Quest for Domination

Mentality of Undevelopment

Having the right kind of intelligence.

Geometry, Universe and Other Related Stories.

Realizing Talents.

On Slumdogs and Smiles

Great Depression II

Hope

Overcoming Despair

"Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate"

C o n s e q u e n c e s !

Wishes for Heaven !

Happiness

l o v e

On Wage Slavery, Control & Production Mentality.

Time for a better world & happy new year

Death

Even when they loose the war they still claim victory and (make a bad movie about it too! )

Freedom

If you want a WAR, Then you will get one.

so they killed saddam

Because the thought of letting go is unbearable.

Moshe Dyan !

Development: How Persians Did It?

What's wrong with the world ?

The Idea of Depth.

Destination, Meaning and Reason

Destination, Meaning and Reason

Alleys and Walls

خانه

Capitalism And Free Market ?

IRAQ IS DESTROYED. Mission accomplished!

Nostalgia

Back to Iran!

Life is not meaningless!!

شرر

On Being a Nonconformist

شب تابستانی

The Ravings of a Lunatic, Episode II, Year 2205

Ravings of a Lunatic, Tax and Blood Money and other Stories

Ravings of a Lunatic, Tax and Blood Money and other Stories

A Quote!

If you assume that there is no hope, you guarantee that there will be no hope. If you assume that there is an instinct for freedom, there are opportunities to change things, etc., there's a chance to contribute to the making of a better world. That's your choice."

Noam Chomsky In ThirdWorld Traveler

THE POWER OF POSITIVE PERSPECTIVE

Noam Chomsky

In

ThirdWorld Traveler