Homo Sapiens

There was a man, today, in my neighbourhood, who made me aware of the term homo sapiens. Ai made him understand aI saw there was an existence of adjective and noun, so to speak, in the term, and he told me this is the case also in French. The noun comes before the adjective. Ai have not checked this term earlier, so ai did, right away, by the help of my Latin Dictionary, written by Johanssen, Nygaard and Schreiner in 1921, and those “rektorer” knew Gothic letters, which aI don't, though internet does, and that dictionary is read through, that is verified, by doctor S. Panzerhielm Thomas, who, aI think, could not have been a panzerskalle.

Homo it says, means human being, in contrast to gods. Also, the word homo was used to connote “those people”. So, aI understand one by the word understood particularity, and that thing being alike. In my understanding, there must be a relation between “homo” and “humilis”, which means “low; little; simple; unimportant”, and the root must be “humus”, which is “earth; ground”. So, when that Roman emperor got the idea of calling himself Nemo, which is “ne (ho)mo”, that is “not homo”, he was either up to something, or he had completely taken off.

Sapiens is a form of sapio, meaning “taste”, as an adjective, that is, not tasteful, rather capable of tasting. “Sapiens”, so, was “rational; sensible; wise; high-minded”. So, one may ask if those Romans acknowledged apes as incidents of the “homo”. What else, one may ask. The answer is the human being having developed, and turned up, through the times. The not civilized man, in other words.

Ai am uncertain if one really can speak about nouns and adjectives in Roman. The case is that any word in Latin is “verbum”, so that the Romans understood something present working, by the term. When we see the term “homo sapiens” in this light, we get it the Romans saw a way of being by the mass. By the word popularity one may grasp what that was.

.·: † :·.

That neighbouring thing

There is a certain labour
which cannot be too hard.
That is to love your neighbour,
and lower, so, your guard.

As meant to be together,
we cannot just consume.
As upper and as nether
to spoil is to assume.

.·: † :·.

Blockheads

Blockheads are stupid. There is no doubt about it. The blockhead thinks, for instance, that either, whatever one does and says counts, or it counts when repeated. And, one has to choose what way to go. As if the term "alienation", Marx given, does not count, since he offered it only once, in his early writings. Or, when Marx wrote laws, as machinery, that is means, occur and are created when the need for those occurs, it counts, as said and done? Ai mean, what about being laid out? And, neither that makes choice, to be directed by. See the flower. The flower is vulnerable, soft, small, and easily destroyed. And a flower may count? Do you not agree?

.·: † :·.

Back to the origin

Ai wonder if the Sunday, made,
today is nothing, being grade.
Ai wonder if to steal is fine,
all animals, and on the line.

Ai wonder if the power got
is all, authorization not.
And if that way is way to go,
that Satan keen on being so.

That means, there is a back of worth.
A fundament, made up by earth.
And, anyone opposed to me
in fact is nothing, crap to be.

.·: † :·.