@Robusto There's something about venting idly against a vague threat out there that no one knows to describe exactly. Especially if, for 40 years, this process is repeated at every small talk, many random moments throughout the day.
After a while, the brain is convinced inquisitiveness is disbelief. The evidence is damning. I mean, every small talk?!
@CowperKettle oh that's mostly the same, more or less. Most Iranians were never really serious religious practitioners. In the past decade, people's attitude towards a dysfunctional government has shifted from "it's ours and our mess to clean up" to "the system is corrupt and irredeemable". The revolution was considered a 'people's' revolution, and upheaval was never considered before. Right now, the government is shunned by a lot of people, regardless of their political alignment.
Of course there's still the braindead crowd that gobbles up propaganda like candy, and they're still significant.
The sort of right-winger that maintains some level of integrity always believed in sacrificing the individual for the collective, as long as the governors kept their side of the bargain. And before the internet and satellite dishes I imagine it must really have been a blackhole, embezzlement and corruption being discreet. In the past decade, thanks to social media, they really couldn't contain the news. The scandals ripped through conviction and self-sacrifice.
Though of course, the regime is still considered pretty stable, since the sort of right-winger sheep that cheer every moron with a speech are still innocuously grazing with lowered heads. That and the fact that people are venting, and not quite at the Bastille rioting stage of disillusionment
Regarding religion, I might be wrong, but I actually think that, as I said, most Iranians were never that hardcore about worship. It was mostly opium for the people where it mattered. It was some degree of relief to imagine the oppressing Khan in hell. Just that, at least for the previous generation, it was much more socially desirable than this generation, to declare fervency in worship.
I dunno enough about other major religions to comment, but Islamic scripture always makes it look like the average Muslim is an alien with very odd habits, the spiritual guru. The monk that lives on top of the mountain. The average Muslim. So It think it's very easy, and profitable, to exaggerate how far removed from reality the average Muslim can be. And if we take that to be the standard for zealotry, most Iranians would never meet the bar.
So is it true that most of the Iranians still do bend and bow in the most ritualistic fashion, reciting words they don't have much feeling towards, passed down by the previous generation? Yes, absolutely. Do they tend to believe in pretty outdated, sometimes outrageous things? Yes, because like every other third world country with a distant language from English, they are and feel isolated. Do I think most Iranians are zealots, religious 'extremists', etc.? No, not at all.
> the Hanoverian king George I of Great Britain (reigned 1714–1727), who had no command of spoken English, communicated in Latin with his Prime Minister Robert Walpole,[9] who knew neither German nor French
425 million years ago, a very careless fish caught a virus. The fish was not following the antiviral measures. Not wearing a mask at all. The virus was a retrovirus, and it invaded the DNA of the poor fish, and turned into a retrotransposon. This retrotransposon affected the expression of other genes and a curious substance called myelin started forming around neuronal axons in the brains of the fish's progeny.
As a result of this, brains got bigger and bigger, and one day a fish went for a walk and never returned to the ocean.
And finally, 425 million years later, a group of descendants of that fish published a paper on arxive, describing their theory of the origins of myelin. It happened on 24 January 2022. biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.24.477350v1.full.pdf
@Mitch Hey thanks for humouring me with my question concerning because reasons. I really thought it was the other way around i.e. "because" alone to mean I have reasons I'm not telling, whereas I was reading "because reasons" as I have reasons which are too complicated so I don't want to explain.
I ask because you said the fact it's weird makes it attractive maybe, so I thought maybe the person was trying to make an inversion, like old language...
@Ti-culTi-caille In a native English accent the 's' goes more with the 'because' (whereas I suspect in French the 's', even though lexically part of 'because', gets pronounced as the start of the following syllable).
@Robusto For 'Because science' I don't feel anything elided... the 'because' is acting like a preposition and 'science' or 'reasons' is the full object of the prepositional phrase.
Language is so intricate, sometimes I wonder how come we understand each other beyond basic yes/no stuff. We don't all take the same path to reach that garden.
The point is, "because noun" is missing a component. The noun can stand on its own, I think, but coupled with because I feel it must be a complete statement with at least subject and predicate.
@Ti-culTi-caille Our language capability is just that good.
It's what separates us from other animals.
As John McWhorter notes, an animal may be able to tell you where there is a bit of roadkill, but it can't tell you what it felt about that yesterday.
@Robusto Language is a topic I like a lot, but sadly I wasn't trained in linguistics. Yet it was the only topic which seemingly fit my aptitudes when I was in high school, according to some 3 letters thingy program. I didn't even know what that was about back then.
In recent years it has become something of a trope to respond to a question with the stark reply "because noun. For example,
Q. Why can't we burn fossil fuels indefinitely?
A. Because science. [Short for something like "because science has shown this leads to catastrophic climate change.]
or
Q...
My expectation, based on past experience, is that we won't be satisfied with any answer, that people will just do google searches (not that a google search won't necessarily be satisfying, but that an answer here made of a google search won't be.
Also, I expect a close vote from EA because off-topic.
You know why it's off-topic?
Me neither.
@Robusto I find that animals try to communicate with you but are extremely frustrated because they don't have the words. They barely know how to point at things.
They look at the thing then look back at you. Then they do it again. "Look at this! Don't you get it? It's a thing!". It could be a dead edible thing or where some body pooped or peed a week ago.
The American Dialect Society has voted because as the Word of the Year owing to its increased use in phrases such as "because happy," "because sad," and "because bored." Since it takes an object, it might be thought of as a preposition, but (as in the third example) it sometimes takes a partici...
His answers are unsatisfying for a reason in the opposite direction...he posts abbreviated ideas that hint at an answer in a comment.
But I think it will be difficult to justify not closing as a dupe because the one I just linked says part of speech (it doesn't really address the full grammar difference between 'because noun' and 'because of 'noun'. Unless you update and clarify.
In recent years it has become something of a trope to respond to a question with the stark reply "because noun. For example,
Q. Why can't we burn fossil fuels indefinitely?
A. Because science. [Short for something like "because science has shown this leads to catastrophic climate change.]
or
Q...
English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…
English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…