TOTALLY VISCERAL, like all of them, hmmmm…
YouTube credit: Uploaded by musicforinspiration on Nov 23, 2009
The next few, mixed with more-Western sounding vocals, Bulgaria
YouTube credit: Uploaded by JaroMedienGmbH on Jan 25, 2007
YouTube credit: Uploaded by rainmeetsground on Mar 9, 2011
YouTube credit: Uploaded by TheBukkaBlue on Feb 11, 2010
YouTube credit: Uploaded by Muzikaddict on Aug 19, 2010
It may be close-to-hypnotizingly enjoyable, or… not. Definitely an acquired taste. However, I find the technique totally fascinating. Totally in line with my tweet-size Ecosonance tune-up.
The first one with comments by the performers. Very soothing narration.
YouTube credit: Uploaded by JaroMedienGmbH on Jul 15, 2011
More in the same vein, well, to my ear and mind:
YouTube credit: Uploaded by lionriver on Feb 15, 2008
富饶辽阔的阿拉善(蒙古长调) － 莫尔根
YouTube credit: Uploaded by hrmann on Feb 16, 2009
Let us revisit the Springer image below–I have an admission to make, and ideas to share.
At first I had mistaken the graph as representing Sign, Sign User, and Addressee as stemming from Object. That would have been the fallacy of privileging the “objective” object as the entity determining the rest of the terms. Apologies to Springer/their author.
Taking another careful look, I discovered the currently anonymous crossing point, to which all four terms are linked, and it occurred to me that it would thus qualify as a representation of the Ecosonance relationship. All terms link to a single point, thereby becoming linked among them. Another plus for the Springer graph is that it also leans toward a communicative view of the sign, as I do.
The compromise with straight lines still grates, but–synchronistically,–ES philosophy has found a possible visual illustration in semiosis. I certainly recognize the validity of having communicating persons as terms of the sign, in lieu of the respective meanings they generate, which I label “Meaning Intended” (by the utterer/sign user) and “Meaning Interpreted” (by the interpreter/addressee). On the whole, the graph above seems to match Charles Morris’s reinterpretation of Perceian semiotics, to which Dewey strongly objects–specifically, to representing Morris’s interpretation as based on Peirce’s, which it is not. Not to forget, the fact that the only meaning term of the Peircean sign is the Interpretant (i.e., the meaning in the mind of the interpreter) has backing in Peirce’s logico-philosophical semiotics. More on that coming up.
working on it 
…
considered calling this post “An Apology for…,” but decided to keep the title the same as the official version, to avoid any mistaken readings of a defensive stance on a point that dos not need “defending,” just exposition and appreciation.
I cannot believe, what a good conversation I am having with WP! Consider the comment on this post:
Sometimes when I think how good my book can be, I can hardly breathe. — Truman Capote
Expanding the “list of footnotes” in my bite-size (Feb 1st update: finally got the term–tweet-size) doctoral thesis.
The comment from WP on this one:
If the writing is honest it cannot be separated from the [hu]man who wrote it. — Tennessee Williams
In view of Peirce’s logico-semiotic “principle of pragmatism,” I would not worry about what “words” are used for any notion in the formulated Thesis, as long as some operational equivalence obtains between their respective “effects/uses.” Ergo, there can be ECOSONIC
1. philosophizing
2. being
3. acting
in ANY Language, moreover in the broad sense of the term “language”.
The question is, in what medium/manner should the FN be “uttered”/“interpreted.” So that it can be heard/acted on, not only theorized/uttered. My interest, communication, hinges on the degree of meaning overlap of semiosis from the perspective of 1) utterer, and 2) interpreter. The necessity of both of these terms motivates my tetradic (and counting) version of Peirce’s triadic sign.
A. Classic Peircean triadic sign:
interpretant
/
sign |
\
object
B. Proposed COMMUNICATIVE sign:
I. At a minimum, a tetrad, as the interval between Sense and Interpretant is the locus of communication.
sense [meaning intended]
sign interpretant [meaning interpreted]
object
II. Or else, depending on the zoom level of analysis, a pentad and counting. Starting with the creation/coining of a term, i.e. the “depth” term of pentad:
Depth [wordsmith]
Sense [utterer]
Sign Interpretant [interpreter]
Object
Meaning “Splicing” = Meaning division into pairs or triples of Depth, Sense, and Interpretant
Meaning Derivation = rarely straight-lined or regularly sequenced Meaning Splicing, in varied order, in organic coordination with Object of the sign and Sign.
Connecting “lines” are not represented, but each and every term is seen as connected to all the others, in varying manner, which gives none of them a determining position. E.g. as in the Springer version below, which however has the disadvantage of positing a nameless crossing point, and resorting to straight lines:
THESIS, IN FULL, to make math-philosopher Edmund Landau ” ” –
January 30, 2012 update
Should you brave the ecosonance experimental proof, feedback on how it increased your well-being is very welcome. No effort-back guarantees!
Edmund Landau’s 14 pg thesis, defended in Berlin, 1899.
Synchronistically [one has to wonder ], yet another apt auto-comment by WP:
Easy reading is damn hard writing. — Nathaniel Hawthorne
Sharing with you a person I “met” through his site. Have emailed, inviting him to “visit” ES with photos, of which he has a whole lot of wealth. From orchids, to how to make Middle Eastern yoghurt, and … [the reason I found the site… ] what the “reflex arc” (in physiology and psychology) is all about. About the last one of which founder of educational philosophy John Dewey had a number of memorable things to say.
He responded, YES!!! So more coming up.
Update: Jan 25, 2012
Happy to introduce a rich life through a website’s photographic eye: pix 1-3 below from site, #4 is my screen shot. CLICK on image to go there.
http://biology.clc.uc.edu/fankhauser/
reflex arc page:
orchids:
some lived American history–1960s:
How’s this for a teaching record–complete with photos!!!:
My exchanges with Prof Fankhauser, to my greatest delight ecosonic, if I may make the claim.
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 04:32:17 -0500
From: lynne.alexandrova
Reply-To: lynne.alexandrova
Subject: Re: Use of my web material on your blog on the reflex arc
To: Fankhauser, David
Cc: [cc-ed person's name & email edited out]
Dear Prof Fankhauser,
If I may, “Joy to the world!” to your reply. By “find” I meant your
life, as reflected by your site. Since all I do, think,… breathe, if
you like, is potentially research, I am posting this exchange–as an
illustration of ecosonic communication–editing out anything (except
David B. Fankhauser, PhD) in the way of “personal info,” even what can
be found by following the link to your site–if a visitor to ES
opts to make the effort.
The part below I can edit back in, with your permission:
[giving here sig file info]
I’ll be in touch–
Lynne Alexandrova
Quoting “Fankhauser, David (fankhadb)” <fankhadb@ucmail.uc.edu>:
> Dear Lynne Alexandrova:
>
> I am happy to have my work used for educational purposes, with
> appropriate citation of my page(s) from which the material was
> derived.
>
> Thank you for your warm communication, and asking for permission to
> use my material. You were ecstatic?! You made my day! 
If I
> get a degree of this reaction from my students, I think I have more
> that done my job!
>
> Could you let me know when you have made use of the material, and
> provide the URL to your blog? I am eager to see how you use it.
>
> David B. Fankhauser, PhD
[signature file edited out]
>
> ________________________________________
> From: lynne.alexandrova@***
> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 7:41 PM
> To: Fankhauser, David
> Subject: invitation for virtual presence
>
> Dear Prof Fankhauser,
>
> I recently came across your website while doing research on the reflex
> arc in psychology http://biology.clc.uc.edu/fankhauser/, and was
> ecstatic about the find.
>
> If at all possible, I’d like to invite your virtual visit to my blog
> in the form of posting a few of your images, with credits to you(r
> website).
> http://ecosonance.wordpress.com/
>
> THANK you for sharing your life–rewarding to take a glimpse of it,
> even for the chance visitor!
>
> I do look forward to your reply–certainly at your convenience.
>
> Kind regards–
> Lynne Alexandrova
> _____________________
> doctoral student
> University of Toronto
> T.O. M5S 1V6
update Jan 26, 2012:
In addition to the renewed HBC store master card the other day, a National bank manager called today to say that the bank’s mistake has been corrected, and the limit restored to what I had before the “incident.”
As you can imagine, I am doing the ecosonance tune-up routine, developed in my doctoral thesis of January, 2012. That aside, the principles on which the credit machine operates pose a lot of ethical-philosophical questions, for financiers and for us customers.
Case Study I
Today, Zellers restored the strore MC that had been cancelled.
That happened basically because I had not been using it “enough.” [undefinable quantity] A while back, when I made a purchase at a high price relative to income, and Zellers had a promo through the MC, I decided to put the purchase on the card. I could not. The card had not been extended after a date by which I had had to call them, confirm, or something. As I talked to progressively more senior supervisors, I finally heard that “yes, I see this-and-that, I see you made purchase, but you paid off right away (!!!)”
Case Study II
A couple of years ago my regular master card lost credit limit. I had neglected to pay the annual fee of $20.00 for 90 days+ (!), so my limit was brought down to a hundred and fifty dollars. [shock!!!] It did not matter that I had had a good balance pay-off record. It did not matter that the amount was only $20.00. It did not matter that that was an “annual fee,” and since I had not made a purchase, I would not have been expecting to have to clear balance at all. It did not matter that some credit card accounts waive annual fees altogether. What mattered, an instructive, short-tempered voice at the other end said, was BEHAVIOR.
I was careful not to use the card for perhaps over a year. When I called to have my limit restored, for “good behavior,” you understand, I was told that I had no proof I am a …[disciplined???]… customer. I had not made ANY purchases. I had no record to judge buy [kinda like this typo, so leaving it as is] if I am “reliable” or not.
I understood I have to make purchases and pay them off within deadlines for awhile, to earn “reliability points.” It was not clear how long and how many points. Of course, the credit bureaux still had a black point for me.
Development to Case Suty II
Now that I got back my store card, I decided to call the National Bank again. I asked to speak to the most senior person I cold possibly speak to, related the “case” yet again. It was acknowledged that I had made purchases and paid off on time. However, since I called at a time when a supervisor was not available, I was asked about a “convenient time to call.”
For the record, I stated that I have “philosophical, if you like” objections:
1. If I had been apprised about the rule of credit record creation, instead of NOT using the card I would have used it.
2. I can accept suspension based on tardiness.
3. However, irrespective of whether the rules of the bank consider “behavior” and not literal amount, for a regular person the amount of $20.00 IS minimal. AND, annual fees are “waive-able” (one might guess, if there is good behavior on record, and similar)
4. I have been a customer for about 15 years. Went at some point in the past through a rough student period* but cleared that up. (Learned about the “7 years” rule.) I cannot accept that I would be “punished” for the “wrong” kind of good behaviour. If there is penalty for a rule you were not apprised of, so that you can observe it, that has the taste of UNFAIR. For the regular person, and common sense.
5. This is a principled issue, since there would be others in the position of guilty-and-punished-without-being-given-any-notice. Imagine someone very young, who does not know ANY of the “rules” above, and thus totally defenceless. They may not even be able to phrase what it is that feels SO unfair.
Should it be the (credit card) case that the more one needs money, the more one needs to pay?! Of which system the banks are ONLY a link, not THE system.
So, awaiting conversation with supervisor. If they cannot “resolve,” the next step is “mediation,” I was told. Will there come a time for SYNTHESIS after the multiple rounds of THESIS and ANTITHESIS?
* That was when—being “overqualified” with 2 MAs AND guilty of “pursuing a PhD”—I could not find an entry-level job, and was practically ineligible for jobs “with qualifications” in the absence of an “employment record.” [that word AGAIN] The local bakery had a job sign for over a year, got from me several resumes. Never called back. Resorted to evasive tactics when I was asking to speak to the manager/owner, and explaining to a potential colleague how I love decorating cakes. I DO, actually.
WP’s comment on this one:
My ideas usually come not at my desk writing but in the midst of living. — Anais Nin
ES: but of course
update Jan 25, 2012: I don’t have to explain why “living for (with, in, through…)” music belongs with Ecosonance, eh:)
Lyrics/video grâce à YouTube, vocals by Andrea Bocelli & Hayley Westenra, body art by Jamie Salé and David Pelletier
THE HEART FROM … ALL-OF-US?
{English translation, with astute linguistic commentary by TheNewCitizen}
Vivo per lei da quando sai
La prima volta l’ho incontrata,
Non mi ricordo come ma
Mi è entrata dentro e c’è restata.
Vivo per lei perché mi fa
Vibrare forte l’anima,
Vivo per lei e non è un peso.
Vivo per lei anch’io lo sai
E tu non esserne geloso,
Lei è di tutti quelli che
Hanno un bisogno sempre acceso,
Come uno stereo in camera,
Di chi è da solo e adesso sa,
Che è anche per lui, per questo
Io vivo per lei.
è una musa che ci invita
A sfiorarla con le dita,
Atraverso un pianoforte
La morte è lontana,
Io vivo per lei.
Vivo per lei che spesso sa
Essere dolce e sensuale,
A volte picchia in testa una
è un pugno che non fa mai male.
Vivo per lei lo so mi fa
Girare di città in città,
Soffrire un po’ ma almeno io vivo.
è un dolore quando parte.
Vivo per lei dentro gli hotels.
Con piacere estremo cresce.
Vivo per lei nel vortice.
Attraverso la mia voce
Si espande e amore produce.
Vivo per lei nient’altro ho
E quanti altri incontrero
Che come me hanno scritto in viso:
Io vivo per lei.
Io vivo per lei
Sopra un palco o contro ad un muro…
Vivo per lei al limite.
… anche in un domani duro.
Vivo per lei al margine.
Ogni giorno
Una conquista,
La protagonista
Sarà sempre lei.
Vivo per lei perché oramai
Io non ho altra via d’uscita,
Perché la musica lo sai
Davvero non l’ho mai tradita.
Vivo per lei perché mi da
Pause e note in libertà
Ci fosse un’altra vita la vivo,
La vivo per lei.
Vivo per lei la musica.
Io vivo per lei.
Vivo per lei è unica.
Io vivo per lei.
Io vivo per lei.
Io vivo
Per lei.
Credit: YouTube Upload by billy1983yes on May 25, 2006
YouTube applauds with Anne Rice’s:
I loved words. I love to sing them and speak them and even now, I must admit, I have fallen into the joy of writing them.
dancing them, feeling them… you fill in the blanks
