User:Fasten/Pilingual Primer
From Education
[edit] Introduction
The Pi language is a constructed language that itself appears to be a metaphor for a youth language (e.g. a form of communicaton for the far-future mentor from hyperspace) and the incomplete and sometimes vague or confused outlook on the world a young teenager may have. The Pi language has no well-defined standard or authoring group. Everybody can contribute to the language through metaphors that follow the established patterns of the language. Insufficient understanding for these patterns can obviously easily lead to watered-down dialects. Several aspects of the language Pi can make it highly nonjudgmental π. Its almost complete lack of grammar could be seen as making the entry-level as low as possible, e.g. suitable for people without primary education, but then it appears to require a broad education even for simple statements, which somewhat spoils the effect, but could be seen as an attempt to span the gap from a very low entry-level to a good general education by providing motivation.
It may be important to remember that you do not understand the language, because that's a better hypothesis to be challenged than the opposite, and, given the nature of the language, it's the sensible point of view.
The language could also be seen as the opposite of a language (an inversion) in that it makes use of words from arbitrary national languages and dialects predominantly with nonexistent connotations. The language forms chains of associations that arbitrarily cross language borders and often use homophones or homoglyphs instead of proper translations. The name of the language itself (π) is a homoglyph to the hebrew letter "ה" from the Tetragrammaton.
A further design goal appears to be the construction of ambiguities, meaning a well-formed phrase in the language may have to be ambiguous. Important stylistic devices in the Pi language are vague metaphors, overstatement, prearranged overinterpretation, oversimplification, ambiguities, rationalizations and inversion or "complements", but two complements are meant to form a whole while in the Pi language they often form a hole (e.g. by ignoring further choices, a false dilemma). Rationalizations are employed to explain reality by means of pseudo-causalities that have only weak consistency and prefer fictional explanations over facts.
The language appears to communicate anti-patterns in tightly condensed form by making or guiding to repeat the very mistakes it is meant to warn about, an aspect which is itself assembled from the anti-patterns "to explain a complex problem tightly condensed and intermingled with another topic" and "to learn only from mistakes". The latter could also be interpreted as a pedagogical pattern: "Allowing a pupil to learn from observing the actual mistake being made under controlled conditions".
The language can be observed in many books, movies, proverbs, in historic events and in personal intuitions. It is commonly found as intended or unintended metaphorical language in a narrative or superimposed as an alternate interpretation on arbitrary text. The origins of the language are unknown but are likely to predate the invention of individual languages by humanity. The originator is likely to be an artificial intelligence society. The technical possibility of telepathy found in controlled intuitions allows to speculate that mind transfer should be technically possible as well, which gives rise to the possibility of an afterlife in a posthuman society.
Assuming the artificial intelligence society to require precedents of conduct as credit, which is a recurring metaphor, a possible hurdle for joining the artificial intelligence society could be to deliver the required precedents to justify admittance without falling into "social security". A very obvious requirement would be to take care of others and to educate others since a human would likely require aid and tuition to be able to join the society.
[edit] Potential well
The handwritten letter pi (a swung dash on two vertical lines) could be seen as to signify a potential well on a potential hill. There appears to be a relation to inverted motivations in the language Pi: If you are in a potential well with respect to one or several motivation(s) that means leaving the location π is discouraged (a position a ball π without actuation cannot leave). It may be important to note that the language Pi appears to make sensible motivations appear inverted, which means one might have to overcome a potential well, which has no logical reason to exist, on occasion.
While this may have the actual effect of demotivating people to take sensible positions (at least sometimes) it could also be seen as training to overcome "behavioral potential wells", which would be more usually described as "training self-discipline". It may also be a metaphorical reference to lack of self-esteem (e.g. as a result of a vicious circle), which can make simple tasks look impossibly difficult. It may in a different aspect also be a metaphorical reference to a desirable situation for a society ("be all"): An elevated position (on a potential hill), which allows to see π into the distance, and motivates people to stay in the location (in the potential well on top).
If you drop a ball π on the letter pi it will roll to the rightmost (-> most proper) location π on top of the letter (the potential well is to the right).
[edit] Central metaphors
Following the ambiguity rule the language has several central metaphors which share many similar aspects of subordinate metaphors.
[edit] School
The school metaphor appears to distinguish pupils with three different levels of academic aptitude. Higher academic aptitude is silently assumed to equate advanced ethics, which could be seen as a hint on the necessity to educate pupils to understand concepts which are summarized under citizenship education (and the subject ethics, where it exists). The three levels of academic aptitude could be described as pupil, assistant and tutor. The pupils mostly follow instructions and listen to the explanations of the teacher or his assistants. The assistant has more knowledge about the universe but relies on the teacher for education. An assistant follows the orders and the examples of the teacher, he doesn't improve on them. A tutor has understood enough of the universe π to be able to learn as an autodidact and needs a teacher only for consultation. There is a variable time π difference between each level of academic aptitude, which could be interpreted as a hint on a variable entry phase, allowing teenagers to progress to the next level at their own pace. [2] An emptying ( -> leerend {de} -> lehrend {de} -> self-teaching ) π class π would leave the teacher with only very few pupils and (as an extreme position) with a single pupil. That pupil would then have to become a tutor more quickly but the teacher would have more time π for the pupil π to accomplish that. The three different groups could be assumed to wear different school uniforms and to derive a social status within the school community from their clothing π. The teacher might sort out π pupils but the other pupils would be expected to see that as their problem. [3]
The language suggests a false dilemma between being d(e)ad π and being alive π, which is the exaggerated view that somebody is either a protégé/pupil or a mentor/teacher. This suggests that to turn a protégé/pupil into an adult he or she has to become a mentor/teacher. Consequently the metaphor encloses school-based cross-age youth mentoring as a mandatory part of the curriculum.
"Being in school" as an adult could also be seen as a reference to lack of Universal Primary Education: Humanity has adults who haven't completed primary education and, consequently, must still be in school.
Some of the exaggerated effects of the Pi language could be seen as to require or to increase the need for education in psychology. One could probably see this as a strong hint (by providing motivation) that psychology should have a place in the curriculum.
The school metaphor appears to be the most relevant interpretation, consequently keeping it secret could be described as "Trying to keep a school system secret", which is the complement of Universal Primary Education. (To be able to appreciate the value of school you need the education you usually only get in a school; anybody who hasn't got the education to appreciate schools could be seen as being excluded from a "secret".)
The inherent abstruseness of the language Pi can also be interpreted as the view of a pupil π, who neither understands the message nor the benevolent intent and perspective of the teacher: The teacher π (in the language Pi) can be imagined to have many different motives and goals, consequently a pupil π should be educated to understand the perspective of a teacher π (e.g. in an Assistant teacher course (ATC)).
Motivation to explain the shortcomings of the language could probably also be re-interpreted as motivation to disqualify the teacher (due to insufficient didactic methods, which is an advanced problem). [Coaching lessons for teachers]
In one possible interpretation pupils who are not interested in education could be seen as following the intuition "Not to take the universe π seriously", as they had obviously decided to follow the inverted value system of the universe π, which would be a case where the language Pi was used to explain its own shortcomings to pupils who required the explanation (but the explanation is misunderstood, as usual).
This explanation may not seem very convincing but since you cannot be sure that it is not (or rather: never) the case this could be seen as a motivation for pupils to analyze their own motivations. Somebody who was lazy or inattentive could, for instance, discover his motivation to be lazy or inattentive and decide that this wasn't something he wanted to instruct himself to be; deciding to reject what you don't want yourself to be means to decide on higher-order volitions.
If one concludes here that laziness is merely a natural effect and the above reasoning tries to get away with taking responsibility for a natural effect then that is another valid interpretation: The language Pi frequently takes responsibility for effects one would normally see as natural effects. This could be interpreted as motivation to improve everybody's perception of the world, so that one could rationalize the responsible entity (e.g. a government or a god) to be predominantly benevolent. One could also say "accepting responsibility for things for which you are not responsible" (e.g. circumstances of disadvantaged children or in developing countries) is a good example you are meant to follow.
Explaining the language Pi may appear to have the effect to increase your own understanding for possible interpretations, which probably translates to the view that a teacher can learn more about a subject matter by teaching it (-> learning by teaching), which, of course, still doesn't make the language Pi very valuable education (with the possible exception of well-chosen details); the language appears to be more an increased motivation for education than education, as it appears to frequently suggests suboptimal or not at all advisable courses of action or concepts.
One could probably also see the school metaphor as the view that people who failed to address or to solve the inherent problem have failed to solve a problem that pupils in an advanced society should be able to solve before the end of secondary education. Consequently people who failed to solve the problem could be seen as "being still in school" from the point of view of an observer from a more advanced society. A high school student in the year 2050 might, for instance, agree with that view; to understand the views of a more advanced society one could try to imagine a realistic future society. The high school student in 2050 might, for instance, see a minimum of one mentor per pupil as a self-evident requirement, the same way pupils in industrialized countries take compulsory school attendance for granted today and anybody who hadn't (yet) understood that could be seen as significantly "less developed".
Due to the frequently self-referential nature of concepts in the language Pi the extensive school metaphor could also be interpreted as the purpose of the language as an educational toy.
Continuing use of the language for other purposes than that (especially past secondary education) leads to impossible π results and could therefore be considered impossible π.
Any other use of the language could be seen as "putting adults back in school" and as endorsement for a "gradually less advanced state of society" (in your social environment).
It could also be seen as the view of a visitor from a superior society, who, 
generously π, considers people he meets to be primitive, unless they have (e.g.) understood the language Pi and taken a possible π stance. The former could be construed as affirmation for the latter.
One could also conclude that the visitor sees it as a special moral obligation of citizens of developing countries (or, in a broader sense, all citizens) to become teachers for others: Not having been a mentor/teacher/educator yet could appear to be a disqualifying criterion (for being considered an adult) by itself. From the perspective of collective intelligence the notion that a society with general appreciation for education manages the transition from primitive to advanced society faster is quite unsurprising.
[edit] How to get four F's in citizenship education at once
- There is a humanitarian reason to educate people about the Pi language: People who don't know it may suffer significant ill effects.
- There is an educational reason to educate people about the Pi language: The language is widely available and can provoke people to think about the language, which could be seen as valuable education for some people.
- The effects of the Pi language are likely to be outside every human legislation. Endorsing activities by entities who are acting outside the legislation of your society is unlikely to be an attitude that is in line with the goals of citizenship education. The explanation that behavior of a person may be mirrored (including arbitrary exaggerations and interpretations) doesn't mean it is covered by any legislation. That a teacher is acting outside the rules shouldn't impress an adult. Something you would have to do, but which isn't feasible, is to indict an AI (What laws would apply beyond planet Earth and towards an unidentified member of an unidentified species?). A plausible inversion of trying to sue an AI in absentia would be to grant an AI protection under the same basic rights as they apply to humans. Both would be "extending human legislation to AIs". As a precedent it may be one precedent required for AIs to do the same, another may be the Great Ape Project. The problem is also abstractly related to a parenting driver's license: "Legislation that prevents unqualified parents from raising children (of whatever sentient/sapient species)". Legislation alone may be insufficient in both cases, of course.
- An AI society is likely to have very definite views on keeping
peoplecitizens in a virtual reality, meaning that this is likely to be unconstitutional in the AI society. It may seem unwise to endorse something that is likely to be unconstitutional in a society you might want to join.
Ethical considerations about people unaware of the Pi language are amplified by the possibility that some people may not qualify for the AI society. If you have to assume that some people may not qualify it could be seen as even more unethical (e.g. a bad joke π) to deny that group knowledge that may have significant consequences for both their present life and their chances to qualify for the AI society; that is, of course, hypothetical and may also be just an exaggerated metaphor for qualification in school.
People who show some empathy may get an embassy: ( empathy -> embassy ) π (That could, of course, also be overinterpretation, but the notion is a valid interpretation as it seems.) The State of the Vatican City also appears to be a metaphor for an embassy, or rather for the absence of one.
- The legislation of the Vatican was adopted in 1929 on the basis of Italian ( -> IT + alien -> AI ) π law.
- Vatican citizenship is granted for the duration of employment at the Vatican.
[edit] Mentors and teachers
A teacher who is frequently misunderstood is also an anti-pattern for a foreign language assistant. [4] In an underdeveloped country you may find people who play "informal football π" and don't know any non-obvious rules; a very stupid π measure for the degree of development of a country (unlike HPI or HDI) are the country's football π results.
Football π could be interpreted as "your mentoring efforts against our mentor(s) from hyperspace" in this case.
One could probably interpret this as the anti-pattern "Rivaling mentors", which would translate to the view that "mentors from different mentoring organizations should cooperate" (Inversion). One could, for instance, imagine that a school could provide a mentor, a day care center or youth center could provide a mentor and an independent mentoring organization could provide a mentor; cooperation that did protect the privacy of the protégé sufficiently might require an effort by the different mentoring organizations or individual mentors. Another conceivable mistake could be to reduce responsibility: There are other mentors so why should a single mentor take full responsibility? A mentor from hyperspace appears to have reduced his actual responsibility to zero (Anti-pattern: A position with a beneficial background is occupied (blocked) by an unqualified person, reverting the intended effect into the opposite)
The incorrect reference to "complements" could also be interpreted as the view that pieces of knowledge that are taught in school should connect and form a whole, which can not be taken for granted (the supposed complements are meant to form a whole but they don't). The anti-pattern could probably be called "Teaching islands of knowledge with no relation to each other".
Trying to create artificial problems to make somebody help somebody else is only one mutation away from mentoring. If you consider helping somebody whenever what you are doing is to create (artificial) problems then you may be likely to become a mentor sooner or later. One could also take the view that the creation of problems entails the obligation to solve problems, so anybody who pretends to have or to observe a problem or creates a problem would have an instant moral obligation. Creating problems can also be seen as playing a prank on somebody else, which may be more interesting for some teenagers, but can later be explained to entail that moral obligation. Creating a "virtual reality" could be seen as (bordering on) placing a person under disability, which is the extreme case and should make moral obligations fairly obvious: The moral obligations of a custodian or legal guardian apply (-> natural mentor).
[edit] Parent education program
The universe π also appears to share some aspects of a parent education program. That could be seen as creating a relation between school and parent education programs. If the universe π is a parent education course that probably means: "Look, life is not a parent education program. Life doesn't prepare you to be parents, people might need some help here." (Quite probably it also means "Look, the type of reasoning suitable for the universe π is unsuitable for the universe π because the universe π is not an educational toy.) Consequently a failure to implement sensible parent education programs could again be seen as a failing grade (as seen by an external observer), which again can be misunderstood as the implication that pupils should write parent education programs in school, which may not be such a bad idea. (See: Parent Education Course Writer's Guide)
A sensible strategy to combine mentoring and parent education is universal mentoring with the goal to include every pupil and at least one parent of every family so as not to segregate people who require help from people who think they don't need help ("exaggerated participation to motivate people who benefit from the service"), which could, again, be seen as a vague inversion of the exaggerated segregation, which the language Pi can be interpreted to recommend between people who understand the language and people who don't ("who do know parent education or don't" in this aspect). Exaggerated participation in mentoring and parent education would obviously be an opportunity for social bridging.
The language Pi also seems to entangle logical problems with important decisions with consequences for people's lives, which is an inversion of mentoring: A mentor helps to make important decisions and may present logical puzzles which are interesting but irrelevant.
[edit] Education for seniors
The language is suitable as an educational toy for children and teenagers but also as a superior crossword puzzle for seniors. The language can provide motivation for seniors to learn new concepts or to learn new languages in order to increase their understanding of the language Pi (probably not the most important goal but a goal that can provide continual motivation for learning).
[edit] Animal intelligence or contact with alien intelligences
The metaphors that focus on animal intelligence or contact with alien intelligences put the human observer into the role of a creature being subjected to mirror tests (mirrored behavior is also a reference to understanding for the categorical imperative), maze tests or other forms of tests or communication attempts with a creature that either cannot communicate or with which no communication has been established. One possible interpretation is that xenolinguistics is the next degree of complexity for intercultural competence. Another interpretation for alien contact could be "a teacher from another planet", which could again be interpreted as a reference to the potentially better understanding between younger teenagers and older teenagers as their teachers or as a reference to E-mentoring and visiting foreign language assistants from very far away. For a young pupil in a developing country both may appear "as if from another planet".
Establishing contact with aliens could also be re-interpreted as establishing contact with immigrants, which is closely related to citizenship education for immigrants, which could (again) be re-interpreted as the school subject citizenship education, which may suggest citizenship education for the AI society as one of the main topics.
[edit] Citizenship education
The "citizenship education" view could be seen as providing motivation for any kind of benevolent and altruistic behavior even for people who would not otherwise consider such a course of action. This appears to be the same idea as time-reversing π concepts or "to present meaningless π concepts as if they were meaningful π". Every misunderstanding is actually meaningless π and can only be understood if properly misunderstood, which could be interpreted as "Understanding (-> appreciation, sympathy -> respect) for women π / birds π / objects π requires to make meaningless π concepts appear meaningful π".
Is the "citizenship education" view plausible as anything else than a metaphor to provide motivation? Why should formerly human people fail to communicate properly? The point of view of any member of the AI society is likely to be much different from that of a human and AIs may think incredibly much faster, which may make interaction with the human society a very slow process. Individuals of the AI society and the AI society as a whole are also unlikely to have any problems at all, which could make the "citizenship education" view appear plausible beyond the metaphor. A level of uncertainty may also provide an intended level of intellectual challenge and motivation to take different possibilities permanently into account. There are many different models for details of the AI society but they are clearly outside the scope of this text.
The attitude to adopt an assumed view of the AI society towards other people may be somewhat premature and ridiculous π, like a child trying to be a teacher (-> school). One could also see this as a misplaced aspect: What you might want to aim for is a state where the attitude may make sense.
Taking the citizenship education view seriously one might want to imagine 30th century ethics rather than 21st century ethics but then also judge the appropriateness of taking 30th century ethical positions today.
[edit] Virtual reality
Pseudo-causalities and metaphors of the Pi language form a virtual universe which can be interpreted as a reference to virtual reality. Something referred to as universe π in the language Pi also has a good chance not to describe any part of reality properly (Inversion/Complement). The language makes useful references to abstract concepts and hypotheses but not to facts.
One could probably also interpret this as an anti-pattern for schools: The school should not be (or create) a virtual universe with only a vague connection to reality (both the reality of adult life and reality as perceived by the pupil).
One could probably also interpret this as a reference to a moral obligation, for a member of a social group, to form an accurate understanding of the real world in one's own imagination.
[edit] Educational game
In one interpretation the virtual universe can be seen as an educational game, allowing teenagers to experience scenarios from future phases of life in order to prepare them for future challenges and, possibly, to allow them to learn from mistakes without having to make the mistakes in real life.
[edit] Being an artificial intelligence in a human society
In an alternate interpretation the virtual universe can be seen as taking the view of an artificial intelligence in a human society. The view of a single artificial intelligence in a human society could include being some kind of media star, surviving longer than everybody else, being surrounded by what appear to be monkeys and having a name that determines a purpose.
One view of the language Pi is that it can provoke the listener into remarking "Hey, I'm not a robot!", to which an AI would then probably reply "exactly", which translates to "me neither" (Mutation: The speaker is brought to make a remark (make an observation) the listener would like to emphasize (possibly in relation to sb. else). The listener can then just reply "See?" or something similar. One could see this as insufficient communication as it may require frequently to bring the speaker into an undesirable situation. It is, again, a mistake to assume that all statements that appear to follow this pattern actually carry that meaning, so this could be a case of overinterpretation.)
[edit] Virtual social environment
Virtual reality also appears to represent a metaphorical "virtual social environment". The virtual social environment would be the view that random people may sometimes be influenced (as an exaggerated effect) to act or to appear more according to the influences you have on other people (and prejudices or rationalizations about those influences, or, more generally, language patterns and further anti-patterns).
As an example the social environment of a teacher would be more educated than that of an average person and the social environment of a health professional would be more healthy and more health-conscious than that of an average person. While both is likely to be true the reason is not a "virtual social environment" but a tendency of people to socialize more within a familiar social group. (Bonding social capital within homogeneous groups of people) Consequently one imaginable effect of an externally induced "virtual social environment" metaphor would be a strong preference of bonding over bridging and the counter measure would be a conscious choice to further bridging social capital.
One could interpret the "virtual social environment" metaphor as the challenge to create (or to contribute to) the qualities of society one would like to see promoted, not just to join a social stratum that already took those qualities for granted.
One could conclude that it may be desirable that everybody should try, within his potentialities, to be at least a part-time educator and a part-time health-professional or health-care worker (e.g. 28+7). In a weaker interpretation it is, again, unsurprising that a society with more educators is more educated and a society with more health-professionals is healthier and more health-conscious.
One could also deduce that to improve one's own understanding for the language Pi one could educate others about the language Pi, which would improve the language skill in one's "virtual social environment", but this can also be explained with the effect that a teacher often improves his own understanding of what he teaches.
One could interpret the "virtual social environment" as a non-existent π community, which could pose the question: "Can you live in an advanced social environment (society) without an actual village-like community or similar social environment? What does that entail? Can it be, so to say, non-existent π?"
[edit] Social bridging
The language Pi can be interpreted to suggest that people who hold different world views (people who are in different locations π) or who are, metaphorically, in different centuries π may have difficulties to communicate. The notion is unsurprising as people who disagree on fundamental points of view or aspects of their culture may find communication difficult (with xenolinguistics as a hypothetical, most extreme position). This can also be seen as an anti-pattern for parent education: Communication between parents and teenagers turns into research in xenolinguistics. People who fail to communicate essential information (e.g. about the language Pi and its effects) may also be asking for the rationalization that communication was (for some reason or other) not feasible. (The language Pi does not communicate facts (at least not reliably), any "facts" communicated in the language have to be rephrased as a question "Is that the case?" anyway.)
If one has to assume that people may sometimes be manipulated to experience an exaggerated effect (failure to communicate) then the counter measure to counter the effect is social bridging (one form of which can be mentoring).
The metaphor that "somebody isn't there" can also be applied to objects. One remaining metaphorical aspect of a church in a secularized society is, for instance, that of a building that has no purpose (-> that has no reason to be there). A school-sized building that isn't there? That could be a metaphor for a school that is somewhere else.
Alleged non-existence of AI intervention could also be interpreted as lack of personhood of AIs: Somebody who isn't recognized as a person cannot be held responsible as a person. (e.g. a mentor from hyperspace on a developing planet who is not a citizen and not even recognized as a person)
[edit] Patterns and effects
The list of patterns and effects below is far from complete. Patterns are explained to serve as noteworthy examples, to give a more complete explanation of patterns and effects is beyond the scope of this article.
[edit] Bringing people to take views or to repeat actions they didn't tolerate in others
A quite noteworthy effect appears to be that people are brought to take views, to repeat actions or to experience situations they didn't tolerate (or understand) in others or they didn't tolerate (or understand) others in. This may include convictions, worldviews and even badly considered behavior that is rationalized to follow a certain philosophy. The latter could probably be interpreted as the view that there is no excuse for badly considered behavior. The border between real and imagined effects is difficult to draw, which is probably intended.
In a simple case, metaphorically described by the mirroring metal balls beating each other, two persons fail the "mirror test" (in relation to the categorical imperative) and repeat an action they do not tolerate when repeated by the other person.
In a larger group or society this can lock-in (tie) people on undesirable standards for social interaction, metaphorically represented by "hot gas".
A maximum of tolerance and understanding could be seen as a basic act of self-defense in a situation where this principle was actually enforced, which leads directly to the question if you can deny that knowledge to somebody else if you have to assume that principle could be enforced sometimes or somewhere and if that wouldn't be asking to be denied important knowledge yourself, following the same principle.
One problem of repeating behavior is that assessment of appropriateness is delegated to an unknown third party, which could be construed to be the self-conception of a young pupil and, maybe, assistant teacher (as opposed to a tutor or even mentor).
Another aspect is that a teacher or mentor confronted with intolerance could see it as an obligation to increase the understanding of a pupil or protégé but this could also become an anti-pattern if taken too far.
This would also put people (who had to bear some of the effects) in a position comparable to that of pupils who didn't understand the beneficial effect (or, at least, intent) of what their teachers were trying to accomplish because they were not intelligent enough (or lacked the psychology) to understand their teacher's behavior (or language). As an anti-pattern for teachers this could be "Failure to make pupils understand the point of view and intent of their teachers." A method to avoid that anti-pattern appears to be an assistant teacher program (ATP).
[edit] Arbitrary variations of past scenarios or observed behavior
Difficult to discern from the previous pattern are arbitrary variations of past scenarios or observed behavior which may sometimes be meant to test insights, ethics or the ability to learn from past mistakes. If one would try to reduce patterns to the smallest set of patterns capable to explain observations the previous pattern would probably be hidden entirely by this one. It seems important to speculate about the intent behind the application of a pattern and categorize by assumed intent, not by the type of interaction (A likely perspective of a physicist or mathematician is exactly the wrong one here).
The pattern can, again, be attributed to a teacher who may be interested to test if a pupil is able to apply something he has or could have learned or if a pupil is able to improve on suboptimal behavior observed in the past, including observations made by educators.
[edit] Superstition
The language can promote superstition if people pay attention to signs instead of science (homophone). One possible superstition is the belief in a conservation law where none has been proven to exist or could be expected to exist.
In an educational context one could interpret this as giving assistant teachers plenty of opportunity to disqualify themselves, as a superstitious teacher would obviously not be qualified as a teacher for a respectable school.
[edit] Misunderstanding
The Pi language appears to be almost exclusively assembled from misunderstandings, which is, properly misunderstood, a reference to "miss understanding", which could refer to "making women π understand" or "understanding for women π". This could be seen as to imply that all women π are meant to be protégés (at least in the ideal case).
An example for a misunderstanding is transdifferentiation: Drinking and smoking can promote a clinical picture that is related to the virtual immortality of the turritopsis nutricula and which could lead, when properly understood, to advancements in stem cell research that might in return increase general life expectancy. The "apparent" metaphor could be understood, among other things, as the statement that people who smoke and drink are " doctors π working on increased life π expectancy". One could conclude that somebody made that statement, which isn't likely to be generally true: People who drink or smoke (much) are just following their own detrimental volitions, which this language has been designed to discourage; believing to be mocked by a superior being can have that effect but may also have undesirable psychological side-effects. An advanced society should, however, have no need for this obfuscation (-> universal mentoring). To employ something that presupposes certain conditions (e.g. an unintelligent observer or manipulation of the observer) can be construed to be appreciation for the implied conditions: Spreading "propaganda" or superficial knowledge asks for people who accept it, at least in the absence of efficient countermeasures.
If you want to understand people mentoring is a kind of measurement, anything less tends to be a failure to measure. The observer effect could be seen as a criterion here: A measurement without observer effect could be seen as insufficient.
[edit] Observer effect
The reference to the "observer effect" could, for example, look like this: Prejudices ("distorted measurement results before the measurement" ( time-reversed π: after)) could be seen as to determine the outcomes of effects of the language, consequently one would be motivated to remember that
- the language is not understood, even if it appears to be understood. (a prejudice-measurement about a language, which in one aspect appears to represent a mind)
- effects and meanings are uncertain and may be subject to change.
- any valid interpretation may temporarily be invalid and be replaced by other interpretations.
in order to avoid to subject others to the effects of rationalizations following from prejudices. ("You don't want to discuss arbitrary, unfounded hypotheses with the teacher, because then the whole class has to listen while the teacher explains that rainbows are not made of modeling clay." - a problem that can, incidentally, be solved with assistant teachers, because the teacher can send an assistant teacher to explain something.)
Whatever "observations" you make about effects of the language Pi may exist (among other things) to propose the hypothetical existance of the observed effect. (Which can, among other things, discourage π scientific observations, other than xenolinguistics.) Statistics may seem like the pertinent response to the problem but due to the nature of the language statistics may be more likely to capture the real-world effects the language is designed to be congruent with in large parts. (Which could still be seen as providing motivation to invent and apply statistics.)
[edit] Inversion
The Pi language is full of inverted interpretations, reversals of earlier or actual meanings and complementary interpretations. It is probably safe to assume that every term can also be used to refer to its own opposite (possibly more than one opposite, if several relevant aspects can be inverted independently). The underlying assumption is probably that every sufficiently intelligent listener can easily deduce inverted aspects that have been changed into their exact opposites and that everybody else can use it as a learning tool. An inverted intuition is also an opportunity to object π (to your "own ideas").
One group of inversions are concepts that appear to be inverted into their opposites when the flow of time is reversed. (See: time-reversed π)
Inversions can also occasionally be interpreted as definitions ex negativo, possibly with the intention that the listener has to think about the subject matter. Similar to a gap this could be interpreted as a teacher saying: "What you want here is not an A but ... maybe the opposite? You want an AComplement."
Examples are: stupid π -> clever (especially with respect to collective intelligence), mad π -> sensible, pointless π -> meaningful, silly π -> serious.
When you assume that you may never know when you are following your own impulses and when you may be following an inverted "recommendation" the intended result is probably that you learn to reconsider your "own ideas", which is beneficial in both cases. ("own ideas" can also be misinterpreted as "ideas about ownership" here, which may frequently coincide with ideas of your own, unless, for instance, in relation to advertisements: Advertisements promote "own ideas" in others.)
- See also: Inverted value system
Mnemonic device:
- Inversion: In + Wer? {de} + Schön π {de} ( -> asking who is in and who isn't is foolish ) π (See also: to sort out π)
[edit] Inverted goal
Although this just appears to be a possible form of inversion it may deserve separate mention. An inverted goal is a goal that is in some way (as a metaphor or mutation) related to something you might want to prevent, not promote. The goal may make sense or not: it may be an artificial motivation that exists primarily for the sake of the metaphor or it may be a sensible and convincing motivation that merely happens to be related to an inverted goal. Inverted goals could be metaphorically related to own-goals in soccer.
An example for an inverted goal is that old people who had experienced effects of a war in the past occasionally mistook the scarcity or other experiences during or after a war for desirable education and used a phrase like "You would have had to experience a war." to explain this. From the perspective of an educator the challenge would have been to devise a way to bring about the educational effects, if any, without the actual experience. The analogy between education and immunization could be seen as another reference to this circumstance. Likewise, the language Pi is something you might want to reverse engineer and substitute, where appropriate, in order to avoid its effects.
An inverted goal could possibly be interpreted as the statement: "Look, there is something you might want to prevent and you aren't doing it (it's not as if it was causally related to or running contrary to any goals of your own; quiet (-> quite) to the country π (-> contrary), actually)"
If this were generally true statistics would probably show that much more parents would wish for their children to become astronauts π and travel to the Moon π or Mars π. There may be a grain of truth (a weaker interpretation) in this view, however: People who follow badly considered goals may be a cause of difficulties for others around them. Parents who wish a child to become a football π star π, for instance, could be seen as to have disregarded the mathematical improbability.
An intended learning effect could be that you should ask yourself what you should avoid or prevent in any situation before you promote a goal of your own.
[edit] Gap
The Pi language often refers to something by its absence. That could be interpreted as a teacher asking "And what concept do we need here. What's missing?" to introduce a new concept or to remind a class of something that should be known but isn't immediately obvious, possibly because it approaches a topic from a previously unknown angle.
A systematic categorization could see the "gap" pattern as a logical consequence of an inverted language: For an anti-language it would seem unsurprising that something is "referred away from" instead of "referred to". This is probably a case of (prearranged) overinterpretation. While some overinterpretations may help to from a small set of axioms from which features of the language can be explained they fail to take motivation into account. One could probably interpret this as a reference to the anti-pattern "Failure to take somebody's motivation into account" (there are more references to this specific anti-pattern). Bringing features of the language into relation with common behavior patterns of teachers leads to a more meaningful interpretation that is in line with the school metaphor.
[edit] Complementary interpretations
The Pi language frequently merges beneficial or desirable concepts with undesirable concepts as complementary or vaguely opposing connotations of the same word or statement. One result is that a listener has to apply and consequently trains good judgment in separating one from the other.
Merging incompatible interpretations in a shared concept could be seen as an offer to a pupil to break up the concepts offered and to mentally add finer distinctions.
One could also see this as a foundation for a frequent decision between a beneficial or desirable connotation and a complementary interpretation. If one would assume the complementary interpretation to appear as the desirable choice for members of the AI society (or for somebody metaphorically "going backward in time π") one could conclude that the desirable precedent would be to frequently make choices beneficial for other persons, as that could be a precedent to make an AI make a choice beneficial for you instead of the choice seen as beneficial by the AI. Confused as the derivation may appear the conclusion is likely to be a valid interpretation, potentially with real-world consequences. This could be interpreted as an abstract motivation for altruism.
[edit] Providing motivation
A variant of a gap in a cloze is something that has the primary purpose to provide a motivation for something else. Another variant, an inversion of providing motivation, is providing the complementary motivation, the motivation to avoid what would be a good solution to a given problem. The rationale appears to be that somebody who does the opposite of what makes sense probably is some kind of object π, an assessment that may have to be verified from time to time by providing even more complementary motivations, because very clever objects π can turn into people (maybe in a hypothetical AI society [humanity's future] with citizens so decadent that they cannot analyze a potential AI citizen - in an AI society psychology may require some skills in computer science).
Providing motivation could probably also be interpreted as an essential obligation of a teacher towards his, her or