i wonder how and where superstitions are generated, it's really funny the way people believe those anecdotal facts. for instance if an absentee is a subject matter of a discussion and S/He suddenly appears, the western says "it speak of the devil", in my culture they believe it ascertained S/He is not a bastard while a malaysian told me to them it means S/He will live long.... (^^^) :P

WHO ARE YOU ?

I am always baffled and sometimes entirely lost whenever I try to comprehend some thoughtful quotes about “knowing oneself”. It makes me wonder again and again what is it I have to know in myself or about myself, I often curiously ask myself is it my characters, my attitude, my behavior, or my destiny?, What are the actual differences within them? Which of these do I actually design myself? These questions always lead me to more other questions than answers. I doubt it, if those metaphysical features that make up my personality are the reasons why some people hate and why some like me, and why I hate some people and why I like some people. I guess they are not, because these features are too abstract and the fact that there is no correct perceptive skills or a universal systematic measurement to comprehend or measure such abstract properties. Therefore, it would be unreasonable to believe people’s judgments on my personality or for anyone to believe my judgment on their personality, because everyone is actually seeing through a self-constructed paradigm/lens. And you know what a lens sees is determined by how it is twisted (I know that because I use to have a DSLR camera). Consistently, Jamaica Kincaid wrote in “Autobiography of my Mother” and I quote; …who you are is a mystery that nobody can answer not even you… So why should I make myself a victim of other people’s opinion, their opinion is created by them and for them, it is never for me.    

I’m Intelligent, I’m Beautiful and that’s why I SMILE

Psychologists and philosophers unanimously believe humans are the simplest but sensitive social animals, thus primitively known to be sensitive of their mental and physical qualifications. From a psychological standpoint, that is why all our endeavors directly or indirectly relay our mental capabilities and mirrors our physical appearance. Possibly, not all intelligent people are beautiful, but arguably intelligent people are beautiful when they smile and beautiful people are intelligent people when they smile too. That is to prove the fact that SMILE beautifies you, even if you are not originally. Additionally, science has proved that the more you smile the more positive reactions others will give you. Invariably, positive reactions signify your intelligence. Now the reasons why intelligent and beautiful people smile “it’s not rocket science” -and if it is- I can tell you it is because they don’t want to show people that they are ugly or unintelligent. Am sure you will want people to see you that way too, if so you can start making SMILE your daily outfit!!! Apart from the fact that smiling is one of the easiest and healthiest thing to do, – even tight-lipped stretched horizontally is a smile- believe me on this; He Who Laughs Lasts!!!...

I may not know what it is, but it’s not CULTUR...

Advertising and Public Relations: Imay not know what it is, but it’s not  

CULTUR...: I may not know what it is, but it’s not     CULTURE and not RELIGION!!! The philosophical method of reasoning and thinking could be ...

I may not know what it is, but it’s not    

CULTURE and not RELIGION!!!

The philosophical method of reasoning and thinking could be interesting, convincing and confusing. It is interesting because of the way philosophers define human reasoning, they behold that humanly believe and credence must be a result of “reasonable” justifications and rationalizations. Conceptually, the sensibility and reasonability of any concept is pertinent to some subjective peculiarity. To them, there are some arbitrary or primitive characteristics of human nature and culture that inform what is reasonable and what is sensible.

It is convincing, as according to postmodernism theorists, they are of the opinion that there is no single approach to any definition, believe or truth. Human beings believe anything that appeal or harmonize to their historic, cultural, social and religious standpoints and sometimes anything that conform to their demographic features. For instance, it might be so difficult to justify washing the private part after urinating to a Non-Muslim, reasonably because s/he does not have an Islamic background or does not subscribe to the Islamic rationality. So philosophically human being can only believe what is related to their culture.

And it is confusing because philosophers do not have a unanimous way to define culture, but most often, they opine that culture is an identical way of living that historically link or connect a group of people, while religion is categorized as an element of culture and often described as a way of life. Which interpretatively means culture is the mother of everyone’s idiosyncratic and peculiar way of life. Therefore, our religion, society, norms and language are facets or derivatives or our culture which is supposedly said to be the connection between us, just like language can also be. Ostensibly, the connection between culture and religion does not need arguing because of the way they can perfectly intertwine. Sometimes it can be difficult to exemplify by separating some features of culture from religion.

But still, I insist that even with the ostensible and philosophically proved connection between religion and culture, they may not be the correct way of human life or the apt guidance of human behavior. It is unfortunate that I may not have theoretical back up to support why, but because philosophically, everyone’s believe should base on his/her rationality, I can enjoy that notion to question some of the sarcastic stance that may not conform with the justification of culture being an element of religion or culture and religion being the systematic guide to everyone’s behavior (way of life). At least if culture is not an institutionalized concept like religion, religion-the element of culture- is an institutionalized concept with unique and distinctive jurisprudence, teachings and virtues peculiar to the type of the religion (such as; Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, and so on). All universal cultures and religions guide their flowers differently as according to the grounding spiritual ideology of that religion or the historic progression of the culture. But in actuality, human beings have succeeded in contorting the good will of these religion and culture to their own convenience, and that is why religion has now become a dreaded word, and often avoided in peaceful settings. Consistently, the fact that two different people may have the same cultural background, they are supposed to behave identically but it possible they don’t and the fact that A and B are followers of the same religion doesn't mean they behave the same way. I strongly believe every individual singly define his/her way of life that can be different from the postulations of religion and culture. On this, I can’t say philosophers are wrong with their definition of culture and religion, but I believe they should be a refurbishment to their definition. Especially if considering the conceptual flaws that the definition of religion being human way of life has caused to this present world. Because the real interpretation of the aforesaid definition is that genocide is a real teachings of Christianity, or there is a chapter in the Islamic holy book that actually condole insurgence and terrorism, or as if slaughtering of humans is the true Buddhism. And if this philosophical view is not refurbish, it will only continue to give room for stereotyping of other peoples’ cultures and religions, racism will continue to grow viral, discrimination and ethnocentrism will eternally prevail and religious bigotry will forever govern the world’s commentary on some people selfish cruelty and violence. Convincingly, as according to the postmodernism way of thinking, what I personally believe is that most human culture and religion often denounce harming, forbid killing of innocents, refute cheating, condemn stealing and so on, and not always guide anyone to the devilish and satanic behaviors that are universally rampant among people of distinct cultures and religion nowadays. - Raji Ridwan Adetunji (2013). 

IT’S ALL OUR FAULT

Yes I mean it, it is our fault! We the dwellers of the digital century; the owners of the global village; the occupants of the post-modern world (in a social science parlance) are to be blamed. You should all sincerely agree with me that our societies are identically doomed. Both the young and the old among us now difficultly struggle to overcome numerous societal threats that are actually our handiwork  It is almost impossible to cite a living society of nowadays that is not presently witnessing an economic chaos, civilian riots, religious bigotry and prejudice, ethnic or racial oppression  governmental flaws and dubiousness, or intentional massacres of innocents, that is to name few among other severity maiming our societal development.  Surprisingly, looking back to the annals of history among all centuries lived by human, we are actually the most highly equipped with all the developmental and constructive tools ever available to human existence, for instance; our technological innovations is at the pace of light movement, philosophical theories never stop thrusting to perfect our social interactions, knowledge is easily acquired through convenient virtual learning ubiquity, polity had grown modernly mature in simultaneous with world populace minds and dauntless exposures. It is shameful and disheartening that these aforesaid tools are in essence useless and powerless in mitigating and trivializing our present societal troubles. They have failed to provide us the needed sternness and arsenal to combat these globally invading challenges. Or, I rather say we have acquired the best of these tools, but failed to use them astutely. It is a shame that our pole-tall educations, excessive technologies, and modernized politics are not enough for us to build a truthful, trustworthy, nonracial, religious, moral, peaceful, war-less and diligent society. It is as if to say, the more will progress in our innovations, modernization and globalization of our knowledge, politics, religion, cultures, and other backbones of human existence, their intrinsic essence and usefulness fade off. Or to say the utilitarian of these tools have been washed off as they are chronologically and anthropologically passed down to us. But I insist, as I believe nothing as wrong with the functionalists of those humanly constructive tools, it is we that have intentionally chosen to misuse them in order to achieve our own ill-fated, mischievous and malicious purposes. 

Raji Ridwan Adetunji- 

5Cs in creating an Effective Product Image

(1) Corporate  (2) Creative  (3) Critic (4) Commercial (5) Catchy

Actually, one of the main goal of advertisers and advertising agencies is to create and produce a remarkable product image, among other advertising aims and objectives. here i will like to discuss how each of these aforementioned criteria is important to be considered in all the systematic stage of product imaging. in the quest of doing that, it is ideal to define product image itself in a lay man language. Product Image is an interchangeable term with Product Branding, which means any thing; symbol, name, design, or mark that distinguish a product or service amid its competitors; when any of this thing is sighted or heard it is easily and directly related to the product or service. In this case, product imaging and branding is an abstract concept, thus it is difficult to describe, tricky in developing but fruitful if effective. for the advertisers and corporate practitioners that aims developing an effective product image must include all  of the these criteria (corporate, creative, critic, commercial and catchy). in developing a particular product image, it must be directed and monitored to meet all of the listed concepts.

(1) corporate: the design, symbols, or any concept it maybe must be corporate enough, being corporate means while looking or accessing the image it will defiantly addressed the product or service. a soap manufacturing company for instance, would not logically use an hammer or a spanner for their company logo. any design, image, word, address or slogan must correlate with either the users of the product or the the usage of the product itself.

(2) Creative: creativity in my own term, i say it what bring science and art together. creativity enliven science and make science more enticing. the science of attracting people with a particular concept must behest creativity. the creativity of developing a product image is the act of representation, or interpretation. it is well describe how advertisers used something distinct but related to a particular product to describe or represent the product and logically stands for it.

(3) Critic: before making the imaging or branding commercial advertisers must expose the work to different expertise to critique the work to make it professionally accepted. this is a normal doing in commercialization.

(4) Commercial: commercial is the act of making the imaging available to all. make it a personal property and exposed to all customers and audiences. for a product it must be placed in the product park, for service it can even be called the service as a whole.

(5) Catchy: this is the artistic part of the criteria, it has to be catchy, though corporate but catchy and interesting. this would be the handy work of the requested creativity.