The donkey analogy

Mar 14, 2010 Letters

Dear Editor,

Every harsh word should be used to describe the “logics” of a letter by Kamal Ramkarran (Kaieteur News, February 10) that justify his father’s (Mr. Ralph Ramkarran) disclosure that the Constitution makes facility for Guyanese who live outside to vote in national elections.

Two major absurdities reside in that letter and they are appalling as they are pathetic.

First is his contention that there was no motive for the disclosure. His father merely and mechanically pointed out a fact that exists.

Secondly, he gives what I consider the worst analogy in semantics, polemics, epistemology and everything else you can name to strengthen his argument. He wrote that if you say, “That is a donkey (Why donkey? Was Freud at work here?), then you merely pointed out a fact. It doesn’t mean you are interested in the donkey.

Let us discuss the second item first because in doing so, we would have answered the first logic. It was Sigmund Freud who made the great contribution to knowledge by arguing that action and motive can come apart at the conscious level, but action and motive never come apart at the sub-conscious realm (the ID), action and motive are inseparable.

Let me go further with this. At the conscious level, action and motive are always connected. When they come apart, neurosis or psychosis has stepped in. But even when this imbalance occurs in the EGO of the person, inside the ID, there is still the connection. An example should help:

A man goes into the head office of the GCC when there is no cricket in play and request to buy a purple dress. Immediately, the officials there know in that person, action and motive have come apart.

But inside his ID they are still connected. He once admired his friend’s wife at a cricket match long ago when she wore a purple dress and deep inside his sub-conscious he harbours emotions for her. He wants to have that moment again. This is Freud’s superb contribution to knowledge of the human mind.

So was there a motive for Ralph Ramkarran saying that overseas voting is in the Constitution? The answer is yes. And this is because everything has context. This is where the donkey example comes in.

No human being would say “that is a donkey” without a context. In Guyana, no two persons walking down the street would say; “there is a donkey.” This is because such an animal is very common place in Guyana. But the other would turn to his/her friend and say, “that is an orangutan.”

Why that person would point that out is because Guyana does not have orangutans and he/she wants the person to know what an orangutan is. We call that “context”. Many parents, including this writer, have used the very sentence Kamal Ramkarran published in his letter; “there is a donkey.” We have said that to our little baby when strolling in the Botanic Gardens.

The context is that we want our kid to know what a donkey is. It meant therefore that the action of pointing out the donkey had a motive, and the motive was to let your child know what type of animal is that

Mr. Kamal Ramkarran then is on an absurd argument when he made that analogy because everything has context.

If we accept the inevitability of Context, then that his father’s utterance about the constitutional right to vote for those who live abroad could be contextualized.

What Mr. Kamal Ramkarran could argue is that he didn’t see the conscious motive from his father but there has to be one. If he insists that there is none on his father’s part then this is serious business for a man who wants to be the President of Guyana.

Finally, no one should accept Mr. Kamal Ramkarran’s explanation because is it deceiving. His father is a person who wants to be the President of Guyana and whether at the conscious or subconscious level, he evaluated in his mind that there is a greater chance of him becoming president if he represents the PPP because overseas voting may favour the PPP.

I am elated, and I repeat, Elated that Mr. Ralph Ramkarran’s politics is being assessed by many today. Long ago, I stood alone in analysing his weaknesses and faults as a politician. They are now coming to the surface.

Let me say boldly, he is the last person on my list from all the parties who will contest for the presidency. This is not because of any emotional or personal reason. I have looked at many angles of this man’s political behaviour over the years and what I saw many did not see until now

Frederick Kissoon

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News