Even though neuroscience and psychiatry have shown great leaps of understanding in recent years, they are still far from fully explaining human mentality. Therefore, it should be nearly impossible for political scientists to reach a definitive conclusion.
To me, poli-sci books are hard to read, not only because of complicated analytical and theoretical logics but also because of my ambivalent feeling towards an undertaking of political scientists to apply dry and cold analyses to essentially human behaviour.
While called “science,” this discipline, like economics, appears to me an attempt to create theories that will fit into past examples, not to produce tools to predict actors’ behaviours.
*
But while reading the Lebow book, my mind wandered into the decision-making process that had made Prime Minister Miyazawa decide to issue the “Kono Statement.” Did he consider what implications, immediate and long-term, such a statement might have? Did he determine that the research of the matter was carried out in a convincing way to endorse the statement? Here, I read what the then Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary, Ishihara Nobuo, had to say in the interview with a Sankei reporter.Ishihara contends, “That statement contains the risk that we might have to admit the claim by those who started law suits that every case was by coercion. And we resigned to such a prospect.” Was it a political decision by Prime Minister Miyazawa? “Even though it was a statement issued by the chief cabinet secretary (Kono), it was done with the will of the prime minister. The responsibility is with the Miyazawa administration. Of course.” Ishihara makes it clear that the government did not anticipate at all that the statement would lead to compensation demands to it. It was improbable then that the Korean government would insist on such demands. He understands, “Once such a statement was issued, it creates a risk that it may be abused.”
As far as I know, Miyazawa has been keeping mum and Kono is defending himself without elaborating the process of the research and the fateful decision. Did they consider enough about possible ramifications that the statement might cause? Is there not an accountability issue here?
*
I like to look at beautiful handwriting, including calligraphy. This fascination, at least partly, stems from my reading habit. Reading a book printed in a fine font set is an enchanting experience. It doubles and trebles the joy of reading. I still remember the excitement that I felt when I pressed the keys of an NEC 98 computer in the office to write a simple letter and printed it for the first time. It was a primitive printout with insufficient dots. However, I felt like I created a book.Soon after that, I started learning ten-finger typing, which somehow I really enjoyed and only enhanced my interest in letters. The shape and form of each letter is a type of visual design and important to me, and, by extension, delight to even only look at each word, each phrase, each sentence, each paragraph and each book deepened.
This delight is not limited to printed letters, of course. When I come across a beautifully written signature for example, I am envious of anyone who keeps such a nice signature to himself, especially when it is produced with a fountain pen or calligraphy brush. The width of a fountain-pen tip is a factor that cannot be ignored. It should be finely balanced, not too sharp and not too wide.
*
When I was in my 20s, I would carry a paperback Random House with me. Whenever a word whose meaning I was not sure of came up, I would take out it from my bag and check the word. I also would look at other words in the same page and preceding or following page, building up my vocabulary. In a sense, I was reading a dictionary. This is something that one cannot do with an online dictionary.*
I happened to see a friend today and exchanged a few words with her. She looked fine. It was my first time in many days to talk to any friend in person.
No comments:
Post a Comment