Commits

Shlomi Fish  committed 532e4aa

Convert 'Organum' to italics.

  • Participants
  • Parent commits 437ca69

Comments (0)

Files changed (1)

File English-Docbook/The-Enemy-English.db5.xml

   <para>“Yes! Yes!” said the commander excitedly. “To that precisely. In any case, accepting this equation places us in a dilemma. The reason for that is that it’s a complete contradiction of Aristotle’s famous treatise ‘Organum’ which states, among else, that: </para>
   <para>1. A is A.</para>
   <para>2. A is not not-A. </para>
-  <para>Thus, we fully deny the Organum, or at least don’t view it as indispensable.”</para>
-  <para>“In that case, it is excellent.”, I said to him. “I read the ‘Organum’ of Aristotle and although it is a very interesting document in the field of pure logic, I must say that I also had doubts about it. I’m very glad that the Organisation rejects it, because in my opinion this fact may facilitate its activity considerably. For instance, if A could be not-A then because the members of the Organisation are not the soldiers of the Enemy, they can in-fact be its soldiers. In my opinion, if you kill each other, you can save a lot of resources, because the Enemy would be right within your reach. Plus, there will not be a risk of any casualties, since all the men that can possibly get hurt will belong to the Enemy’s forces. The element of members risking their lives while infiltrating the Enemy’s lines will not exist either, nor will the possibility of the Enemy bombarding you.”</para>
+  <para>Thus, we fully deny the <emphasis>Organum</emphasis>, or at least don’t view it as indispensable.”</para>
+  <para>“In that case, it is excellent.”, I said to him. “I read the <emphasis>Organum</emphasis> of Aristotle and although it is a very interesting document in the field of pure logic, I must say that I also had doubts about it. I’m very glad that the Organisation rejects it, because in my opinion this fact may facilitate its activity considerably. For instance, if A could be not-A then because the members of the Organisation are not the soldiers of the Enemy, they can in-fact be its soldiers. In my opinion, if you kill each other, you can save a lot of resources, because the Enemy would be right within your reach. Plus, there will not be a risk of any casualties, since all the men that can possibly get hurt will belong to the Enemy’s forces. The element of members risking their lives while infiltrating the Enemy’s lines will not exist either, nor will the possibility of the Enemy bombarding you.”</para>
   <para>“Amazing!”, cried the commander as he stood up in excitement. “Why didn’t I think of that before? I’ll make sure your proposal is implemented right away, and I’ll inform all the other posts and the Organisation’s headquarters about it. It will be a turn-point in our war against the Enemy. I thank you, the ex-Member, you have definitely enlightened me.”</para>
   <para>“The pleasure is all mine, sir. Bye!”, I told him while rising from my chair.</para>
   <para>”Good bye to you, too.”, he said while barely interrupting the arrangements he started in order to implement my proposal.</para>
   <para>“And yet you yourself are doing it to us, even though you don’t need to do it for a long time!”</para>
   <para>The younger soldiers started to laugh maniacally until the commander turned his angry look towards them and they silenced. </para>
   <para>He returned to me, “In any case: it was not the handiwork of the soldiers of the Enemy’s army?”</para>
-  <para>“Not as long as they are defined according to Aristotle’s Organum.”</para>
+  <para>“Not as long as they are defined according to Aristotle’s <emphasis>Organum</emphasis>.”</para>
   <para>“O.K. You are free to go.”</para>
   <para>“Thank you.”</para>
   <para>And so they went away. It seemed to me like the soldiers continued to giggle or were at least smiling to themselves.</para>
   <para>After a few seconds, the senior officer started to speak: “I’m glad you agreed to come here, the ex-Member, because at the moment, we find ourselves in a very grave situation because of you. For years, the Organisation has operated with an extraordinary efficiency and methodology. As a matter of fact, it was one of our most efficient weapons for venting our anger against the Enemy. But now, you, you alone, have cast a heavy shadow on its future. </para>
   <para>I’m afraid that unless you find a way to work around your proposal, then the results will be catastrophic: not only for the Organisation but for all our other projects around the world, that are a model for harmfully and irrationally unloading bad feelings. Moreover, I’m afraid the proposal you suggested would have some consequences to our very reign here!</para>
   <para>So, the ex-Member, what do you have to say about it?”</para>
-  <para>“Look, ” I addressed him, “I take full responsibility over the proposal I gave you and its consequences. In my opinion, it is an excellent one, but since you, for some reason, don’t seem to also think so, I could help you find a way to bypass it. The first option is simply to accept Aristotle’s Organum.”</para>
+  <para>“Look, ” I addressed him, “I take full responsibility over the proposal I gave you and its consequences. In my opinion, it is an excellent one, but since you, for some reason, don’t seem to also think so, I could help you find a way to bypass it. The first option is simply to accept Aristotle’s <emphasis>Organum</emphasis>.”</para>
   <para>“I’m afraid it is impossible. It contradicts our law-book.”</para>
   <para>“Can I take a look at your law-book?”</para>
   <para>“Certainly.” And he ordered one of the other officers to fetch me their law-book. I opened the book and saw that the first act read as follows: </para>
   <para>Yet, the Supporter's country despises the Enemy, not because he hurt your people or holds part of your country, but out of ideological motives. Therefore, its interest is that the fighting against the Enemy will not be stopped at all. Moreover, even for the Occupier, the withdrawal from that territory will not change anything, and it will still want the fighting to go on.</para>
   <para>Thus, assuming the Enemy withdrew from that limited territory he's controlling at the moment, do you think the Organisation would continue its activity against the Enemy?”</para>
   <para>Undoubtedly, this was also a very good question. I thought about it a little and replied: “Look, it's not a small dilemma. On the one hand, it would be more difficult for them to get support for the actions from the civilians, unless they will manipulate the desire for revenge on the Enemy's past crimes. Still, both the Supporter and the Occupier, which now sanction the aggressive activity of the Organisation, will want the Organisation to keep on fighting out of their own motives.</para>
-  <para>As you may well remember, I met with those who are responsible on the Organisation's activity in the Supporter's government and I concluded that except for the fact that they reject Aristotle's Organum, they are very reasonable people. Therefore, I am forecasting that in such a case, they will take the reasonable decision. For people who reject the Organum, of course.”</para>
+  <para>As you may well remember, I met with those who are responsible on the Organisation's activity in the Supporter's government and I concluded that except for the fact that they reject Aristotle's <emphasis>Organum</emphasis>, they are very reasonable people. Therefore, I am forecasting that in such a case, they will take the reasonable decision. For people who reject the <emphasis>Organum</emphasis>, of course.”</para>
   <para>“That is, will continue to fight the Enemy?”, the physicist asked.</para>
-  <para>“Or vice versa. When the Organum is rejected, it's difficult to tell.”</para>
+  <para>“Or vice versa. When the <emphasis>Organum</emphasis> is rejected, it's difficult to tell.”</para>
   <para>“I'd like to ask the ex-Member a question.”, the physicist said.</para>
   <para>“Please do.”, the interviewer said to him.</para>
   <para>“Some of the actions of the Organisation were followed by bombardments of the air force of the Enemy's military, which were, at times, even very massive. These bombardments sometimes caused civilians of your people to get hurt. The Organisation knew in advance that such bombardments could come as response to its activity, and yet didn't stop it. In your opinion, can one say that the Organisation is responsible in killing its own people?”</para>
   <para>“Speaking of lack of logic: many told me that they found your behaviour very… ahem… unusual and your logic also seems to them to be very insane.”</para>
   <para>“I agree with them.” I replied to her. “Had I not already been insane, I would have long ago driven myself mad.”</para>
   <para>“Do you have any plans for the future?”</para>
-  <para>“Absolutely. I intend to publish a book with my memoirs from the last period. In my opinion, it will be one of the most revolutionary books since Aristotle's Organum, and I hope it will help lower the prestige of the last treatise. I noticed that the contents of this treatise receives an almost full consensus, even in the wide public, and this is despite the fact that most people had never read it. Doubtless, this treatise had an enormous conscious and subconscious effect since it was written - unjustifiably in my opinion - and I hope my book will help decrease it in considerably.”</para>
+  <para>“Absolutely. I intend to publish a book with my memoirs from the last period. In my opinion, it will be one of the most revolutionary books since Aristotle's <emphasis>Organum</emphasis>, and I hope it will help lower the prestige of the last treatise. I noticed that the contents of this treatise receives an almost full consensus, even in the wide public, and this is despite the fact that most people had never read it. Doubtless, this treatise had an enormous conscious and subconscious effect since it was written - unjustifiably in my opinion - and I hope my book will help decrease it in considerably.”</para>
   <para>“Tell me, the ex-Member, do you have any hobbies? What do you do in your spare time?”</para>
   <para>“Among the activities I do in my spare time I can list the following: finding closer and closer solutions to a set of differential equations from the second degree. I also deal in trying to understand the sentences I said in the past. Besides that, I planned a political simulator that forecast the two World Wars after I entered all the relevant data until the year 1000 AD.”</para>
   <para>“Do you have a computer at home?”</para>
   <chapter xml:id="interview_with_the_enemy">
       <info><title>Interviewing with the Enemy</title></info>
   <para>After I landed in the airport, I reserved a hotel room in one of the main cities in the Enemy's country and took a cab that went there. On the way I was able to see the view around, and despite the closeness to my country, it was much different from what was known to me. I'm not talking about the climate - the country was simply more developed. The economy of the Enemy's country is far from being perfect, but it is still considered to be one of the countries of the other part of the world.</para>
-  <para>After I got up in the morning, and started to tour it (with a direct intention to gather intelligence information), I noticed that the atmosphere there was not much different from what I remembered in my country. However, it bothered me that all the people I asked accepted Aristotle's Organum without a doubt. I assumed that that what would happen, but I hope the publication of my book will change this fact even there.</para>
+  <para>After I got up in the morning, and started to tour it (with a direct intention to gather intelligence information), I noticed that the atmosphere there was not much different from what I remembered in my country. However, it bothered me that all the people I asked accepted Aristotle's <emphasis>Organum</emphasis> without a doubt. I assumed that that what would happen, but I hope the publication of my book will change this fact even there.</para>
   <para>It was in the middle of that day when a black car stopped next to me and a man that wore sun-glasses came out from the seat next to the driver's seats. He said to me in a thick voice: “The ex-Member of the Organisation, in order to prevent unpleasantness, please enter and sit at the back seat of the car.”</para>
   <para>“Sir,” I replied, “, I have a natural tendency to create unpleasantness, but I am willing to suppress it for the while, and therefore, I'll cooperate.” I said that and entered the car through the back door which was already open. I saw that outside the car, the man that wore the sun-glasses, closed the back door and entered the car himself. The car drove away, and after a short drive stopped in front of a fortified building. </para>
   <para>I was instructed to get out of the car and after I exited from it, the guards in the entrance to the building let me and the man from the front in. He led me in a couple of hallways until we reached a door. The door opened into a window-less room, which had a desk inside. On one of its sides, sat a man, that I assumed was the investigator, and in its other side was a vacant chair. The man that escorted me, told me to sit there, and then closed the door in which we entered and sat down at a chair on the side.</para>
   <para>“That's not something that is derived from what I said either. Sometimes it just amazes me… ”</para>
   <para>But he did not stay to hear the rest of the sentence, but rose up and advanced towards the aisle. He probably identified me with confidence, or alternatively assumed I'm the only man in the world, who might answer in such a cryptic way. He hurried to the front of the hall where he spoke with some of the organisers of the study day. After they consulted between them quietly, one of them went on the stage and whispered something to the lecturer. The lecturer stopped lecturing, pondered for a moment and then said: “Gentlemen, I was informed right now that the ex-Member of the Organisation, that as we all know is visiting our country now, is at the moment present in this hall. Due to the important part he took in shaping the political status we are discussing today, I ask him to get on this stage and present us his opinion regarding the Organisation and the political state that prevails in the Country.”</para>
   <para>And so I rose and advanced toward the stage to the hand-clapping of the audience in the hall. After I went on the stage, the professor shook my hand, presented me with the microphone and went off the stage himself. I rose my hand to silence the hand-clapping, waited until they stopped and started to speak:</para>
-  <para>“Before I begin with my speech, I'd like to indicate that for the duration of the speech, I accept Aristotle's Organum. The reason for that is that otherwise I'll be able to prove any statement as well as its opposite statement. Therefore, since in this case all the possible statements are true, I could have finished the speech at this moment, since there's no use for me to prove them.</para>
+  <para>“Before I begin with my speech, I'd like to indicate that for the duration of the speech, I accept Aristotle's <emphasis>Organum</emphasis>. The reason for that is that otherwise I'll be able to prove any statement as well as its opposite statement. Therefore, since in this case all the possible statements are true, I could have finished the speech at this moment, since there's no use for me to prove them.</para>
   <para>As we all know, while the Occupier disabled the activity of all the other terrorist organisation that were active in my country for a long while, and the weaponry that they possessed was given to the army, the state of the Organisation had never been better. Why in that case does the Occupier gives him such a broad freedom of action? The reason for that is that the Organisation is not a national organisation in the full sense of the word or even in half its sense. In fact, it's an organisation that fulfils the philosophy of the Supporter, that strictly opposes the Enemy, but doesn't have an interest to struggle against the Occupier.</para>
   <para>If not for the desire of the Occupier to force the Enemy into a normalisation treaty, the Organisation wouldn't have survived in his current form either. Thus, out of being subordinate to an external political force, one can say that the Organisation is an alien corn in the political map of my country. But I, on my part, don't find any bad in the integration of foreign interests in local politics. Allow me to quote on the subject one of the most important people of our generation: 'Some say: 'Whatever you can do on your own, you can do best'. I disagree with them'.</para>
   <para>Because when you let others meddle in your own business, you slowly lose control on what you are doing and what happens to you. In a slow but methodical way, one loses track of his original intentions, one feels that one more and more doesn't understand why he's doing what he's doing… or for what or for whose sake you're doing it. And then he gets the feeling that nothing is under his responsibility, and that he is in fact a vassal of the external factor. And that is, from experience, the most liberating feeling in the world, which is accompanied by feeling a complete freedom from responsibility or from the need to decide the future on your own.</para>
   <para>Another issue that should be discussed is how much the members of the Organisation are willing to endanger themselves in their struggle against the Enemy. That same person, who is in my opinion one of the most influential men today, tends to say: 'A fearful and senseless person can take actions that only the bravest person will take, but he usually does not understand why he is taking them.'. Imagine a group of members of the Organisation who infiltrate the Enemy's lines in the hope of killing its soldiers. Such infiltration would be presented as fanatical by you and as full of courage by the Organisation itself. However, it should be remembered that behind every such ´fanatical´ action there is a hierarchy of commanders and sub-commanders, a line of comrades that support and encourage, a whole lot of national and ´ideological´ preachers who give flaming speeches against the Enemy (even though they, usually, are not involved in the physical activity against him), and a mass of citizens that support this activity and is content with it. All the weight of this pyramid is placed above the unit of the members of the Organisation that flies like a cork out of a bottle and walks towards its death. Taking all this scenario into consideration, the question being raised is how “fanatical” they really are.</para>
   <para>Naturally their decision did not involve much thought, at least not in the direction that they understand that they are walking towards their death. Or as the same great man once commented: 'If a terrorist stopped and took ten minutes to think about his actions, he would lose his sanity.'. I'm not saying the members of the Organisation are terrorists, but, in my opinion, this statement applies to them too.</para>
   <para>The question you are most concerned by is probably: what is going to happen in the northern border of your country. About that, allow me to quote that same influential person once more: 'I agree with the head mystics in our time. Despite the logical and practical difficulties, predicting an event, is apparently not so hard after the event had occurred.'</para>
-  <para>The possibility exists that the Supporter will understand that the Organisation is useless (at least objectively), and a waste of resources that are anyhow missing to the Supporter's country. Moreover, it causes the spoiling of the relationship between it and the countries of the second part of the world, that detest ´terrorists´, not to mention the big banks who hold his debts. As of today, the only obstacle that stops the Supporter from reaching this realisation is the fact that it rejects Aristotle's Organum.</para>
+  <para>The possibility exists that the Supporter will understand that the Organisation is useless (at least objectively), and a waste of resources that are anyhow missing to the Supporter's country. Moreover, it causes the spoiling of the relationship between it and the countries of the second part of the world, that detest ´terrorists´, not to mention the big banks who hold his debts. As of today, the only obstacle that stops the Supporter from reaching this realisation is the fact that it rejects Aristotle's <emphasis>Organum</emphasis>.</para>
   <para>Another possibility that your country have is to try to arrange economical sanctions on the Occupier, so it will stop the activity of the Organisation. However, heads of countries are not content to harm the economical activity of the countries by such sanctions, even if their trade with the Occupier is limited. As for large private corporations - it's hard for me to believe that one can convince enough of them to ostracise the Occupier enough for it to harm his economy in a significant way. Moreover, every company is afraid its competitors will take this opportunity to try and make a profit on its account.</para>
   <para>There is the option of withdrawing from the security zone. Yet, this action doesn't guarantee the cease of the military activity of the Organisation at all, and could bring to an escalation, because there will be a more realistic danger of harming the lives of citizens who live close to the border. The acceptance of my proposal could solve the problem for you. Still, there isn't a full guarantee that it will not be rejected if the heads of the Organisation will find a way to bypass it, and therefore you should not count on it.</para>
   <para>The most practical and fast way to terminate the activity of the Organisation is, perhaps, to sign a normalisation treaty with the Occupier. However, the Occupier has its own conditions, that if the Enemy accepts them, its security in the northern border will decrease significantly. Since the power of the Occupier is ten times greater than the Organisation's, one can understand why your country does not rejoice to sign a normalisation treaty with it, while accepting all the conditions that are inferred from it.</para>