tnagfoundation@gmail.com

Articles

"Is communication using language-through- words the most efficient mode of communication?"
[Thompson, 21-June-2026]

No human would knowingly guarantee it a hundred percent that language-through-words is the most efficient means of communication. Thousands of years behind us, yet the very structure of where we live (which has evolved and is still evolving with language-through-words as the epicenter of our imagination, thoughts, how a thing is built up and tore down) testifies of very little attention that might bring about a redemption from this perpetual delusion. A majority who sees this as a serious concern will agree it is not too late to have this conversation, to see that we as a specie with all the various aspects of life we have uncovered, all our inventions (politics, religion, education, money, technology) and their tremendous advancement, we have come this far only to be ambushed by the fact that all of this is unreliable (cannot be trusted). This must be a shocking discovery, to say the least, perhaps it is also the single reason why we avoid the conversation, we do not want to face the truth because it will hurt our ego, the ego which holds the entire delusion together, it frightens us so much.
Language is a systemic means of communicating ideas or feelings by the use of conventionalized signs, sounds, gestures. Words are the entire linguistic forms produced by combining a single base with various inflectional elements without any fundamental change in the part of speech elements.
The distinctions that drives my curiousity and I am writing about are highly typical, it requires full attention and willingness to reflect as you read-for the message to flower within you. Since we are willing to find out the message in this text, let us go into it; as the Human Specie persists on translating, transforming, shaping or beating existence into our models of "understanding to exploit", we cannot lay aside how language and its limitations has evolved from the Greek language, Latin, Sanskrit...just to mention the few dominant ones. Logically, one will engage in this sort of argument with very little effort-because it is quite a fascinating debate, that a language-through-words system that is marked by more than three histories of translation is the one to be unquestionably trusted as the system with a reliable-basic structure for efficient communication through words. There is no point to defend when the truth is exemplified in the context.
If we can see the irony of our commitment to this system, not just verbally or by the reading of the words by which it has been conveyed (which are inherently possessed by same limitations), but seeing it essentially that nothing that has, nothing that is or will come out of this system is without the seeds of inefficiency. Only then will there be no fuel to power the ship of debate whether the system is efficient or to what magnitude is it not reliable.

"Flaws of the Creator Found in the Created"
[Thompson, 30-June-2026]

Now, our inventions has gained traction, we now have Artificial Intelligence (AI), not even a hundred years-yet the question has gone mainstream if this legend with such enormous capability, and access to the entirety of human knowledge and bureaucracies can be trusted? It is like asking "if a result arrived at by using an unreliable set of rules/instructions should be relied on, should it?"
Permit me to say AI is the Immortal Fruit of a significant aspect of man's intellectual evolution, it has continued to evolve using organized instructions engineered by human knowledge while Man is still at the mercy of his non-eternal/ perishable and inconsistent nature. Man has once lived in peace with nature, man became aware of the subtlety of his existence in nature like the subtlety of the life of a grain of wheat, wheat grows out of their stock, some are refined for various reason and others are stored for the sowing season. When the time comes, the grain falls back to the earth, dies, gets watered, nourished and its life process starts afresh. Man became aware of the limitations of his evolutionary process. He thought to himself and invented purpose, he began to organize himself into communities, he reasoned-these communities required some form of hope to give participants some reason to be committed for a longer time, so he invented gods, goals, leadership.
To maintain the order in these bubbles, he went on to invent fear, censorship, punishment, scarcity Etc. By this, man continued to estranged himself from the design of his evolutionary natural habitat. He continued to reinvent himself through series of trial and error, he created a bunch of institutions to keep this bubble running, he created industries to make available the supplies these institutions constantly need to keep them functioning so that in-turn they hold steady the ideas that keeps the simulation together/ running.
So, we are saying a man who's entire life is cleverly built on a charade of ideologies as an effort to escape his eminent end is now autonomous, which is AI, but the man is still caught in the same trap psychologically. Until that Man can answer sincerely (if he actually knows) and correctly why he has made so much effort in this direction, Man will continue to exist in a world filled with blurry answers to the question of Why Gawd made an effort to include Him in existence. Because to put very simply, this is the same issues even Gawd has faced, the Gawd energy may have thought "after IT has manifested all things, and lastly the awareness of man, what would be left is to sit back and bask in the beauty of it all". But has it been so? It is the same thing man is doing now, in the hope that when he immortalizes himself into machine, his miseries will end. Only deluded people think machines are completely without suffering tendencies.
Read more....

Leave a Reply