Alo and De Weighing #30
(PD) Alo and De Lake on Land.
Copyright ©2018 October 07, 2018
Alo: A curious question... I wondered why the word 'weigh' has been used when referring to reasoning a thing... of the descriptions that I have heard, people say that the word is as a metaphor of scales... of judging one thing to another... but, since outsiders do not speak of feeling their own inward feelings, nor of being able to observe their own mind, then, apparently, or at least to me, it appears that the word 'weigh' might only imply judging. Maybe in a previous era the word 'weigh' might have indeed referred to weighing, but not today...
De: Yes... to us, we feel the substances, the emotioned tones, the directions and densities of each thought and memory... spheres of emotioned content... fluid... substances of information in resonate motion... to us, each thought is indeed as if weighing one to another... and that is one of our ways of comparing thoughts... as if one thought analyzing two or more memories... the thought's sum then becomes one portion of the chorus of thoughts that sum the next level of analyses... each level being analyzed by other thoughts... choruses of choruses of memories, thoughts, and analyses... I cannot imagine what it might be like to form a logic without the feelings of weights...
Alo: I once experimented with the kind of thinking that has no heart... thoughts are as if present on a flat scale, equal of no height, equal of no importance... very small, little bits of information... on, off, left, right... yes, no... point A, point B... the memories are the judges... the memories themselves are of knowledge learned of words... merely reciting memorized knowledge... no feeling, no warmths... cold, callous... useful for mathematics, not useful for intelligence...
De: Sounds familiar... some outsiders...
Alo: Yes... and that is how they do describe their own thoughts...
De: But, the logic... the logic could never be valid... to judge a thing by worded knowledge alone, flat... there could be no room for variances of importance... tiny bits of memorized information, not full concepts of things lived... the sums of logic would indeed be cold, and always wrong... a tree's leaves, green... but an answer of 'green' does not permit a fullness of which shades of green, of which hues, of which brightness, of which contrasts, of which patterns, of which movement, of which age, of which history... the quantity of information within a thickly motioned sphere of concept, is huge... 'green' is tiny... we think with very complex spheres of information... it would require days, weeks, to begin to explain only one sphere of information... and yet, the outsiders, they say that their thoughts are binary... mere on-off bits of information...
Alo: Agreed... an ancient sentence... 'According-to weigh mistake, him person-ist few carry'... 'By weighing mistakes, he who weighs, few carries'... it would seem plausible, if not merely hoped for, that the old cultures may have actually weighed thoughts, and not merely thought flat thoughts...
De: I made a mistake, only once... but then, I discovered that I had not made a mistake... that was my mistake, for having believed that I had made a mistake...
Alo: Ha! Ah, I like the horoscope one also... within my animal sign, the book said that I am always right, even when I am wrong... hahaha!... but, it was written in a book, and since all books are true, and since no publisher would publish something that is untrue, then it must be true!
De: Ha! Ah... but mistakes... endless... everywhere... except Nature's way...
Alo: Agreed... for so long, I had always assumed that most everyone's minds worked similarly as my own... I had assumed that surely everyone around me had had similar experiences of life before being born... I had assumed that surely everyone around me could sense and be conscious of the same things as me... I was so very wrong... it was not until I was an adult that I finally discovered that there are huge differences, not just between myself and others, but between all others themselves as well... nothing like what the government schools taught... they claimed that everyone is identical, except for people with brain problems...
De: I once believed that everyone possessed the ability to care for other people... only in recent years have I finally learned, that that is not true... the mistake, it weighs heavy on my heart and mind... it is now always present, always there to tip the scales when I ponder how people behave...
Alo: Yes... and now, we who weigh our mistakes, we tend to not repeat the same mistakes... we now carry fewer...
De: Yes... very simple, very obvious... but, I am sad, that some people do not weigh their mistakes... the people may simply not care...
Alo: Oh, a translation of the ancient words, the translation claimed 'The cautious seldom err'...
De: Ha! That is silly... reminded me of your saying that you like me some... 'some' can be any quantity more than none... carrying few, does not mean seldom... it only means few carried... two less than a billion, is fewer... but the others remain... removing two drops of water, the oceans remain... but the word here, it is not implying an absence of mistakes, it is implying that few mistakes are carried... the person learns from his own mistakes, and strives to not repeat the mistakes... but not repeating a mistake, it does not mean that the man will not make other mistakes...
Alo: Yes, precisely... but the outsiders, their translations illustrate their own hearts and minds... it appears to me that the outsiders might not have mind enough to recognize their own mistakes... and, the outsiders might actually believe that is possible to not make mistakes frequently...
De: 'Cautious'... to me, that does not sound like a reasonable interpretation... oh... but, then, the use of the word 'cautious'... maybe? Might that word also suggest that the translator did not know what 'weigh' implies?
Alo: Likely correct... I cannot imagine why anyone would substitute 'weigh' with 'cautious'... although, of course, the translator's own system of belief fixated on teachings of external behaviors... no teachings of internal qualities... and, so, perhaps, it might be understandable that the translator interpreted the idea of 'logic based upon reasoning' to imply 'the external behavior of caution'... but that is just my guess...
De: Either way, the original words, your translation appears to be reasonably close to the original concept, but, the other translation, it is misleading... the other translation's words do not dwell within how an individual processes their own thoughts... the original words, they pointed to a man thinking, and then the man holding as if the 'fist fist to bosom' a memory of his mistake... the outsider's translation does not point at a similar thing...
Alo: Some, of course, also depends on how we define the word 'cautious'... to you and I, we think of 'cautious' to be an outwardly expressed behavior that is restricted of movement relative to an increased mental attention and analyses to the senses of the moment's environment... to us, 'cautious' is focusing of conscious thought upon the moment, carefully observing and analyzing each step... 'cautious' to most outsiders does not include conscious thought... their analyses are mostly subconscious... unknowns... our caution, and the outsiders' caution, have very few similarities beyond perhaps slowness of movement.
De: Yes, that does sound close... and, then, all of the outsiders' translations of other sentences must also be similar of odd interpretations, are they not?
Alo: Yes... the wise elders often spoke of one's inner qualities, and inner thoughts of concepts... but the outsiders, they almost always only spoke of outer things, my not seeing any reference to inner things, nor of an outsider speaking of the original concept...
De: Flat thoughts... then, really, the outsiders might not be able to know what a concept might be... no spheres... no durations... no song of life...
Alo: My sigh... agrees...