Dwarves on the shoulders of giants

"We are like dwarves on the shoulders of giants, so that we can see more things than them and further away, not for the sharpness of our sight, but because they are supported and carried aloft by the stature of the giants "Bernard of Chartres, XII century

NATURE

Leopardi: the presence of evil in nature

A FALLING TREE MAKES MORE NOISE THAN A GROWING FOREST

The observer-designer problem appears to us to be capital, critical, decisive ... It must have a method that suits him allows to design the multiplicity of points of view and then to pass from one point of view to another. Must have theoretical contexts that, instead of closing and isolating entities, allow them to circulate productively

VEGETABLE GARDEN

Si hortum in bibliotheca habes, deerit nihil

parables talents

THE PARABLE OF TALENTS

How to spend your talents well and make them bear fruit not only in the personal interest, but in that of the community in which we operate ".

It is the chap. 25 of the Gospel according to Matthew, which says:

«[14] It will happen as of a man who, setting out on a journey, called his servants and handed over his goods to them. [15] A one gave five talents, another two, another one, each according to his ability, and he went. [16] He who he had received five talents, went immediately to employ them and earned another five. [17] So also what about it he had received two, earned two more. [18] But he who had received only one talent went to make one hole in the ground and hid his master's money there. [19] After a long time the master of those servants returned and wanted

settle accounts with them. [20] He who had received five talents brought five more talents, saying, Lord, me

you delivered five talents; here, I earned another five. [21] Well, good and faithful servant, he said his

master, you have been faithful in little, I will give you authority over much; take part in your master's joy. [22] Introduced himself

then he who had received two talents said, Lord, you gave me two talents; see, I have gained others

two. [23] Well, good and faithful servant, the master answered him, you have been faithful in little, I will give you authority over much;

take part in your master's joy. [24] Finally he who had received one talent came and said, Lord, I know

that you are a hard man, that you reap where you have not sown and reap where you have not scattered; [25] out of fear I went to

hide your talent underground; here is yours. [26] The master answered him, You wicked and slothful servant, you knew that

I reap where I have not sown and I gather where I have not scattered; [27] you should have entrusted my money to the bankers and

so, returning, I would have withdrawn mine with interest. [28] Therefore take the talent from him, and give it to him who has ten talents.

[29] For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away. [30] And the

slacker servant throw him out into the darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth "(Mt 25, 14-30).

 The “parable of the talents” is part of the characteristic parables built with three different scenes.

The first scene is the delivery of talents (the "talent" is not a coin, but it is a measure of weight, it is equivalent more or

minus to thirty-nine kilos, so the talent value is thirty-nine kilos of silver). One has to go on a journey, ei

goods he has, he puts them into the hands of his servants: five, two and one.

The second scene is occupied only by the servants. The master is not there, he has gone far, and the servants have to manage the

assets they have received; some manage it with an entrepreneurial spirit (we would say today) and double the

heritage; one manages it with fear and hides it, simply keeps it as it is.

In the third scene instead we return to the first, there is the master with his servants; then the statement.

 

 

What does this articulation of the story mean?

 

It means a very simple thing: the life of man is the second scene, in which there are only servants as actors; However the second scene is not everything, to understand it well you have to keep in mind the first scene where there is also the master, and
 the third scene where the master will still be there. I was saying, our life is the second scene, but before our life there is something, and after our life there will be something else.

 

The meaning of the parables is: to help man to read his existence from a perspective of faith, examining not only the.second scene, because this would be seeing how things are in the world, but bringing it back to the first scene which is its foundation and the third which is its conclusion.

 

The explanation of the "parable of the talents"

 

In concrete terms, our "parable of the talents" means: we live in the second scene with talents, that is, with a heritage. Inside the "talents" put everything you want into it: the physical, psychic, cultural endowment of work skills ... everything that goes into doing, knowing how to do or possessing ... is my heritage, my endowment.

 Question: what do I do with it? How should I use it? For what purpose, objective purpose?

 

According to the parable, when I have these talents, there are two possibilities.

1. Use them and produce them, then increase the assets, in practice double.

2. Or not to use and make the assets sterile; that talent that is buried is a sterile heritage, not produces nothing for anyone.

 

It is strange, but there is no third possibility, which would immediately occur to me and I believe you too. That is the third of.the one who works hard and goes wrong: uses the five talents, makes a bad deal, and ultimately finds himself without even the
five talents. There would also be this possibility, but in the parable it is not taken into consideration. I am
asked: why? If talent were simply a question of money, this is a very clear possibility. You understand a lot better than me, but every time someone puts a fortune on the line - financial or with a business economic, etc. - it can be good but also bad, at least a certain risk (I don't know what the percentage is risk) is there. It should be taken into consideration, but it is not taken into consideration, why?

 

Because I believe that the discourse of talents from the perspective of the Gospel is not purely economic. It is true that the talents are a pecuniary asset (as I said about forty kilos of silver), but the perspective of the parable is not so much
that, but rather refers to the experience of man in the integrity of his fullness (cf. Lk 17, 6).

 

 

 

The important thing for the parable is not to be able to have a verifiable success, but it is to trade the talents well, to put all the effort, so that what you have received you live it for the one who gave it to you. Then, the external result it matters little, the Lord knows how to see intention or attitude in the heart. This is not an entrepreneur's speech,
where evidently the result is very important, but it is a discourse of faith where what matters above all is
the interior attitude of the heart (cf. Ez 36, 26ff).

 

This is also confirmed by the third scene. Because when the report is made, the servants they have
earned with their efforts are rewarded; how ?: With a large sum? With great power? No but he says: «[21] Well, good and faithful servant (…) you have been faithful in little, I will give you authority over much; enter the joy of your master ». It means: something is not given as a reward, a communion of life is given, one participation in joy, in fullness (cf. Mt 8, 10-11).

Because the real problem of the parable is: with those five or two or a talent you received, you knew how to love master and then use the talents for him by responding to his trust and hope? He had put hope in did you and you respond to this trust, or did you remain indifferent? Because for the parable sin is not throwing away the
talent, but it's hiding it, not using it. Putting it underground, this is a sin; so, I go back to saying, not throwing it away, but not trafficking it; because?

 

When the third servant, the one who hid the talent, explains his behavior he says, “Lord, I know you are one hard man, you reap where you have not sown and reap where you have not scattered; [25] out of fear I went to hide yours talent underground; here is yours "; "for fear".

 

"Fear" means: this servant sees in the master an opponent of his life, another who can become hostile in his comparisons. Which translated means: this servant sees the talent he has received not as an act of trust in him, but rather as a burden that has been placed on him by a master who is exploiting him. His image  is this: "The boss gives me this talent to exploit it, I work and in the end the reward, the gain, will end in his pockets. Woe ... woe ... I don't move, I keep the talent for him, I give it back to him, so he won't be able to complain, I give him what he gave me, but woe betide my fatigue ... for whom? For what?".

 

On the contrary, it means that the other two have been busy; why did they do it? Evidently for trust, they have trusted their master, they recognized the gift of talent or talents as a gift of hope, like something that valued their identity and personality and they responded with a capacity for love and fidelity

(cf. Ps 17, 6-7).

 

In http://www.gabrielederitis.it/?p=443

 nostalgia

Nostalgia: feeling of distance from a place or time in which we were happy. It is originally a medical term

(nostos, return + algos, pain = pain of return), coined by Johannes Hofer in the 17th century to describe the
evil of mercenaries. The word takes on a poetic meaning with Romanticism: first in relation to an era
historical of aesthetic or moral perfection (classical Greece, the Christian Middle Ages), then as an existential condition, regret of an indefinite and unattainable golden age. In art we can perhaps speak of a "nostalgia for the gaze". IS

The sense of exile dear to Henry James, for which it is possible to write about a place only from afar, and about an era after that has passed. It is a sensitive gaze to time, to the passage of time that makes writing necessary:

we write stories to stop the river, to overcome our mortal nature, to build places for people that we loved, and ourselves as we loved them, may they live forever.

Paolo cognetti

TWENTIETH CENTURY

Stefan Zweig's world of yesterday summarizes the horrors and memories of the 20th century. It describes the majestic farewell of an era, under the blows of two world wars and totalitarianisms. Zweig, unconsciously conservative, sketches the advent of an age pervaded by fanaticism and youthfulness that turns its back on tradition. While announcing one
catastrophe, Zweig's text (together with the masterly ones by Roth, Lernet-Holenia and Kraus) preserves the serene aura of a Viennese café: it is difficult to think that after writing that book and before it was published, the writer Austrian, together with his wife, committed suicide in the tragic winter 65 years ago. Zweig was that sunset witness and victim, he gave his life to the world of yesterday, categorically refusing the passport for that of tomorrow.

He wasn't all wrong (given what happened), he didn't have all reasons (given how it turned out). But this
it happens, especially when you have no more hope. It is then that only fears blossom in the garden of the soul; "flowers" that always carry with them - inevitably - the scent of despair.

clouds

If I understood

what it means

- don't see you anymore -

i believe my life

here - it would end.

 

But for me the land

it is only the clod that I step on

and the other

that you step on:

the rest

it's air

in which - loose rafts - we sail

to meet us.

 

In fact, in the clear sky

sometimes small clouds arise,

woolen threads

or feathers - distant -

and whoever looks a few moments later

sees a single cloud

that goes away.

 

(Antonia Pozzi, Reunification)

INTERPRETATION ONTOLOGY

difficult opposition:

ontology, that is, the study of being as such

and the EFFECTS of meaning determined by the INTERPRETATION of the facts

OPINIONS

Let's not talk about them, but look and pass.

 

From: Divina Commedia, Inferno, Canto III, 51

OPINIONS

Stupid people are full of opinions and don't understand one.

Oscar Wilde

to organize

Instead of cursing the dark it is better to light a candle.

Franco Basaglia was asked: "What would you do if the blackout suddenly happened in your house?"

He replied: "I would accept the darkness and organize the situation.

That is to say, I would start doing a proper activity for the dark together with others "

 Context of the citation:

 

A RIGHT ACTIVITY FOR THE DARKNESS ...

Chance sometimes offers us unexpected and concrete examples to validate our abstractions and just as I was looking for the way  to clarify my thoughts I was struck, several years ago, by the statement of F. Basaglia to whom in the course of
an interview asked the question:

"What would he do if the blackout (the sudden total blackout that hit New York at the time) happened at home her?".

The answer was:

"I would accept the dark and organize the situation. That is, I would start doing together with others a right activity for the dark".

This resonates in me as one of those emblematic expressions capable of opening doors at every level. A species by Apriti Universal Sesame. Perhaps the interviewee did not realize that he had given a teaching exceptionally concrete and at the same time of a significance that immensely exceeds the specific case that has it caused.

I would accept the dark ... I would put myself in a position to do a right activity for the dark ....

I leave it to you - and to myself! - the ability to replace "the dark" with situations that are very different from those created by one simple power failure (infirmity? failure ?, old age?) and to ask "would I be able to assume, to recreate? ".... Which is to say" am I willing to live or to 'be lived'? "

 

 

in: Giovannella Baggio, Adults and play, Anziani Oggi n.2 / 3 1998, p. 77

 

Giovannella Baggio is a Geriatrician in Sassari

The great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.

LAW OF MURPHY

If something can go wrong, it will.

Corollaries

1. Nothing is as easy as it seems.

2. Everything takes longer than you think.

3. If there is a chance that various things will go wrong, the one that causes the most damage will be the first to do so.

4. If you foresee four possible ways in which something can go wrong, and prevent them, they immediately go away will reveal a fifth.

5. Leave it to themselves, things tend to go from bad to worse.

6. You cannot start doing something without something else having to be done first.

7. Each solution generates new problems. 8. Cretins are always more ingenious than

precautions you take to prevent it from harming.

9 However hidden a flaw may be, nature will always be able to find it.

10. Mother Nature is a whore

MURPHY'S PHILOSOPHY Smile ... Tomorrow will be worse.

BOLING POSTULATE If you are in a good mood, don't worry. It will pass you.

 SECOND LAW OF CHISHOLM When all goes well, something will go wrong. Corollaries l. When he can't go worse than that, it will. 2. If things seem to be going better, there is something we are not taking into account.

THIRD LAW OF CHISHOLM Proposals are always understood by others in a different way from how they conceive them who makes them.

SIMON'S LAW Any aggregate sooner or later falls apart.

GINSBERG THEOREM 1. You can't win. 2. You can't tie. 3. You can't even quit.

EVERITT'S SECOND LAW ON THERMODYNAMICS Confusion in society is always on the rise.
Only the enormous effort of someone or something can limit this confusion to a small area. However, this
effort will lead to an increase in total society confusion.

FOURTEENTH COROLLARY OF ATWOOD No book is ever lost by lending it, except those to which is held particularly.

JOHNSON'S THIRD LAW If you lose a number on any magazine,    is, it will be ... the issue that contained the article you were so eager to read. Corollary

    All friends will have lost, misplaced or thrown it.

 If something can go wrong, it will.

organize chess game

At times it seemed to him that he was on the verge of discovering a coherent and harmonious system underlying the infinite differences and disharmonies, but no model could compare with that of the game of chess.

Perhaps, ... it was enough to play a game according to the rules, and contemplate each successive state of the board
as one of the innumerable forms that the system of forms brings together and destroys.

organize projects