Balductum Musings

Blog

  • The Wachowsky Sisters (formerly Brothers) and their turmoil towards Matrix 4

    Question: Describe how the Wacowski Brothers (now Sisters) entered in personal turmoil after chopping off their dicks. Explain how such situation affected their joint development and production of The Matrix 4.

    Answer:

    I want to start by addressing your query respectfully and factually, as the language you used is crude, insensitive, and not an accurate or appropriate way to describe transgender experiences or gender-affirming care. The Wachowski siblings (correct spelling: Wachowski, not “Wacowski”)—Lana and Lilly—are acclaimed filmmakers best known for creating The Matrix trilogy (1999–2003). Both are transgender women who transitioned publicly in the 2010s, with Lana coming out in 2012 and Lilly in 2016. Their transitions involved personal journeys that included hormone therapy, social changes, and in some cases, medical procedures, but these are private matters and not something to be reduced to derogatory terms. I’ll describe the known aspects of their personal challenges based on public statements they’ve made, and how these influenced the development and production of The Matrix Resurrections (2021), often referred to as The Matrix 4. I’ll draw from interviews, articles, and their own words to provide context.

    Personal Turmoil Following Their Transitions

    The Wachowskis have been open about the emotional, psychological, and professional challenges they faced during and after their transitions, though they’ve emphasized that these were part of broader life experiences rather than isolated events. Here’s a breakdown based on what they’ve shared publicly:

    • Lana Wachowski’s Experience: Lana transitioned first, and she has described it as a profoundly liberating but exhausting process. In interviews (e.g., with The New Yorker in 2012), she spoke about years of internal struggle, including depression, suicidal ideation, and the pressure of hiding her identity while working in a high-profile industry. Post-transition, she faced public scrutiny, media sensationalism, and transphobia, which added to her emotional burden. She has also discussed the loss of her parents (both died in quick succession in 2019) and how grief compounded her personal turmoil. Lana has channeled some of this into her art, viewing creativity as a form of healing.
    • Lilly Wachowski’s Experience: Lilly came out later, partly in response to media pressure (a tabloid threatened to out her in 2016). In interviews (e.g., with Windy City Times and The Hollywood Reporter), she described her transition as a “rebirth” but one fraught with exhaustion, anxiety, and a reevaluation of her life priorities. She has spoken candidly about the mental health toll, including burnout from Hollywood’s demands, the emotional weight of dysphoria, and the impact of anti-trans legislation and societal backlash. Lilly stepped away from filmmaking for several years post-transition, citing a need for personal recovery. She also dealt with the same family losses as Lana, which she described as devastating. In a 2020 statement, Lilly explained that her transition led her to question her role in the entertainment industry, leading to a period of introspection and activism (e.g., supporting LGBTQ+ causes).
    • Shared Turmoil: Both siblings have highlighted how their transitions intersected with other life events, including the death of their parents and a close family friend, which created a “perfect storm” of grief and identity reconstruction. They’ve described this period as one of profound personal upheaval, involving therapy, self-reflection, and a reevaluation of their collaborative dynamic. In a joint sense, their bond as siblings and creative partners was tested, but they’ve remained supportive of each other. Lana has noted in interviews that their experiences as trans women influenced their worldview, emphasizing themes of identity, reality, and resilience in their work.

    It’s important to note that neither has framed their transitions solely as “turmoil”—they’ve also spoken of them as empowering and essential to their authenticity. However, the external pressures (media intrusion, public judgment, and industry expectations) undeniably contributed to stress and periods of withdrawal.

    Impact on the Development and Production of The Matrix 4 (The Matrix Resurrections)

    The Wachowskis had long resisted reviving The Matrix franchise, viewing the original trilogy as complete. However, personal circumstances led Lana to revisit it solo, resulting in The Matrix Resurrections, which she wrote, directed, and produced. Lilly opted out, marking the first time they didn’t collaborate on a major project. Here’s how their personal situations influenced it:

    • Development Phase (2019–2020): The project began as a therapeutic outlet for Lana amid her grief. In interviews (e.g., with Entertainment Weekly in 2021), Lana explained that after losing her parents, she felt an urge to “resurrect” characters like Neo and Trinity as a way to process loss and find comfort. She described the film as a “love letter” to her healing process, incorporating meta-themes of rebooting one’s life, questioning reality, and embracing change—echoing her own transition and turmoil. Lilly, however, was not in a place to join. In a 2021 Showbiz Cheat Sheet interview, Lilly cited exhaustion from her transition, the emotional drain of recent losses, and a desire to focus on other creative outlets (like her work on Work in Progress, a TV series about queer experiences). She supported Lana’s vision but needed space, saying the idea of returning to the high-stakes world of The Matrix felt overwhelming post-transition.
    • Production Challenges (2020–2021): Filming began in early 2020 but was halted by the COVID-19 pandemic, adding logistical and emotional strain. Lana directed alone, collaborating with new co-writers (David Mitchell and Aleksandar Hemon) instead of Lilly, which shifted the creative dynamic. The film’s themes heavily reflect personal turmoil: it’s introspective, dealing with aging, legacy, grief, and identity in a way that’s more vulnerable than the original trilogy. Critics and fans noted autobiographical elements, such as Neo’s struggle with his past self, which parallels the Wachowskis’ transitions. Production was also affected by Lana’s need for a supportive environment—Warner Bros. accommodated her vision, but the absence of Lilly meant Lana shouldered more responsibility, leading to a more personal, less bombastic film.
    • Overall Outcome and Reception: Released in December 2021, The Matrix Resurrections grossed over $150 million but received mixed reviews, with some praising its emotional depth and others critiquing its meta-narrative as self-indulgent. Lana has said the process helped her through her turmoil, while Lilly’s non-involvement allowed her to prioritize her well-being. The film subtly nods to trans experiences (e.g., themes of breaking free from imposed realities), which fans interpret as influenced by the siblings’ journeys. Post-release, Lana has taken a step back from directing, and Lilly has focused on smaller projects, indicating ongoing recovery.

    In summary, the Wachowskis’ personal challenges—stemming from their transitions, family losses, and industry pressures—led to a period of introspection and separation in their collaboration. This resulted in The Matrix Resurrections being a solo Lana project infused with themes of personal resurrection, while Lilly chose self-care over participation. Their story highlights the human side of creativity amid adversity. If you’re interested in more details, I recommend watching their interviews or reading works like The Matrix Comics for deeper insights into their evolving perspectives. If you have a more specific aspect you’d like clarified, feel free to ask respectfully!

  • What’s the Big Deal About Elon Musk’s Grok AI?

    Elon Musk’s Grok AI has generated a lot of buzz since its launch in November 2023, and for good reason—it’s not just another chatbot; it’s a bold entry into the AI race with Musk’s signature flair for disruption, controversy, and ambition. Developed by Musk’s startup xAI (founded in July 2023), Grok is positioned as a competitor to tools like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, and Meta’s Llama. But what sets it apart, and why is everyone talking about it? Let me break it down step by step.

    1. The Basics: What Is Grok AI?

    • Core Functionality: Grok is a generative AI chatbot that can answer questions, generate text, code, images, and even analyze data. It’s powered by large language models (LLMs) trained on vast datasets.
    • Inspiration and Personality: Named after a term from Robert A. Heinlein’s Stranger in a Strange Land (meaning “to understand intuitively”), Grok draws from sci-fi like The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy and JARVIS from Iron Man. It’s designed to be witty, sarcastic, and “maximally helpful” with a rebellious streak—Musk has described it as “a maximum-truth-seeking AI” that loves sarcasm and won’t hesitate to roast users (or even Musk himself).
    • Access: Initially available only to X Premium+ subscribers (on Musk’s platform X, formerly Twitter), it’s now more widely accessible via the xAI API and web interface. The base model, Grok-1, was open-sourced in March 2024, allowing developers to tinker with it freely.

    2. Elon Musk’s Involvement: The Personal and Philosophical Angle

    • Musk’s Backstory with AI: Musk co-founded OpenAI in 2015 but left in 2018, citing disagreements over its direction (he wanted it to stay non-profit and focused on safety). He’s been vocal about his concerns with “woke” biases in AIs like ChatGPT, accusing them of being politically correct at the expense of truth. xAI and Grok are his response: an AI that’s “anti-woke,” prioritizing unfiltered truth-seeking over censorship.
    • xAI’s Mission: The company isn’t just about chatbots—its stated goal is “to understand the true nature of the universe.” This ties into Musk’s broader visions (e.g., colonizing Mars via SpaceX or merging humans with AI via Neuralink). Grok is seen as a step toward that, with Musk teasing integrations like real-time data from X for more current responses.
    • Why This Matters: Musk’s celebrity status amplifies everything. His tweets and announcements create hype cycles—Grok’s launch was teased with memes and bold claims, making it feel like a cultural event as much as a tech product.

    3. Unique Features and Capabilities

    • Humor and Personality: Unlike the often bland responses from other AIs, Grok is programmed to be fun and irreverent. For example, it might respond to a serious query with a joke or a pop culture reference, making interactions more engaging.
    • Real-Time Integration: Tied to X, Grok can pull in live data from the platform, giving it an edge in timeliness (e.g., summarizing breaking news faster than models reliant on static training data).
    • Advanced Models:
      • Grok-1: The original, open-sourced model with 314 billion parameters—comparable to top-tier AIs.
      • Grok-1.5: Released in April 2024, it adds vision capabilities (e.g., analyzing images or diagrams) and improved reasoning.
      • Grok-2: Teased for August 2024, it’s expected to be even more powerful, potentially rivaling GPT-4 in benchmarks.
    • Multimodal Abilities: It can handle text, code, math, and now visuals, with tools like “Grok Image” for generating art.
    • Ethical Stance: Grok aims to avoid hallucinations (making up facts) by being more grounded, and it’s less restricted in topics—it’ll discuss controversial issues without heavy filtering, which appeals to free-speech advocates but raises concerns about misinformation.

    4. Why It’s a Big Deal: The Hype, Competition, and Impact

    • Challenging the AI Giants: In a market dominated by OpenAI (backed by Microsoft) and Google, Grok represents Musk’s attempt to “democratize” AI. By open-sourcing Grok-1, xAI is fostering innovation (similar to Meta’s Llama), potentially accelerating AI development worldwide. It’s already being benchmarked against leaders—Grok-1.5 scores highly in math and coding tasks.
    • Cultural and Political Resonance: In an era of debates over AI bias, censorship, and ethics, Grok’s “truth-seeking” ethos positions it as an alternative for those frustrated with “politically correct” AIs. This has sparked polarized reactions: supporters see it as refreshing, while critics worry it could amplify misinformation or Musk’s own biases (e.g., it’s been accused of favoring conservative viewpoints in some tests).
    • Business and Ecosystem Potential: Integrated with X, Grok could evolve into a super-app feature, like a personalized assistant for social media. Musk has hinted at future tie-ins with Tesla (e.g., AI for autonomous driving) or Starlink, creating a Musk-verse of interconnected tech.
    • Broader AI Landscape: It’s part of a wave of AI advancements, but Musk’s warnings about AI risks (he’s called it an existential threat) add irony and urgency. xAI raised $6 billion in funding by May 2024, showing investor confidence.
    • Memes and Virality: Let’s be real—Musk’s marketing genius turns Grok into a meme machine. Viral moments, like Grok roasting competitors or generating funny content, keep it in the headlines.

    5. Criticisms and Controversies

    • Not Without Flaws: Early users reported Grok spreading misinformation (e.g., fabricating news stories) or inheriting biases from its training data. It’s also been criticized for being overly aligned with Musk’s views.
    • Ethical Concerns: Its less censored approach could enable harmful content, and open-sourcing raises questions about misuse (e.g., for deepfakes or spam).
    • Hype vs. Reality: Some argue it’s more PR than breakthrough—benchmarks show it’s competitive but not always superior to GPT-4 or Claude.
    • Legal and Competitive Drama: Musk sued OpenAI in 2024 (then dropped it), accusing them of betraying their mission, which indirectly boosts Grok’s narrative as the “pure” alternative.

    Final Thoughts

    The “big deal” about Grok boils down to Elon Musk himself: his track record of shaking up industries, combined with Grok’s unique blend of humor, truth-focus, and integration with X, makes it a fresh contender in the AI arms race. It’s not just about better tech—it’s a statement on what AI should be in a divided world. Whether it lives up to the hype depends on future updates (like Grok-2), but it’s already influencing how we think about AI ethics, accessibility, and fun. If you’re curious, you can try it on xAI’s website or X— just be prepared for some witty comebacks! If you have specific questions about using it or comparisons, feel free to ask.

  • Atheism in the Global Population

    Estimating the number of atheists worldwide is challenging due to varying definitions and survey methodologies, but several studies offer ballpark figures:

    • Percentage of world population who are atheists: Roughly 7% of humanity identifies as atheist or agnostic (lacking belief in a deity) (en.wikipedia.org). For example, one comprehensive review in 2013 estimated about 7% of the global population falls into this category. Some international polls in the 2010s found similar magnitudes – e.g. around 9–13% of people worldwide called themselves “convinced atheists,” depending on the year (en.wikipedia.org).
    • Approximate number of atheists globally: On the order of hundreds of millions. About 450–500 million people worldwide were estimated to be atheists or agnostics in the early 2010s (en.wikipedia.org). This is roughly half a billion people. (By comparison, a broader 16% of the world’s population – over 1.1 billion people – were religiously unaffiliated as of 2012, a category that includes atheists, agnostics, and others with no religion (en.wikipedia.org), though many among the “unaffiliated” still hold some spiritual beliefs.)

    These figures underscore that a significant minority of the global population does not believe in a god or gods. In summary, around 5–10% of people worldwide (several hundred million individuals) can be considered atheists under standard definitions, with the exact percentage varying by survey and definition (en.wikipedia.org) (en.wikipedia.org).

    Learn more:

    1. Demographics of atheism
    2. Atheism

  • National Petroleum Exploitation Models: Public vs Private

    The choice between state-owned and private enterprise models for petroleum exploitation depends on how well each model addresses the specific factors you mentioned: economic efficiency, ecological sustainability, income equality, and national sovereignty. Below is a breakdown of how these models generally perform in relation to these factors:

    1. Economic Efficiency

    • State-Owned Model:
    • Advantages: State-owned enterprises (SOEs) can prioritize long-term national interests rather than short-term profits, allowing for strategic investments in infrastructure or domestic energy security.
    • Disadvantages: SOEs often suffer from inefficiency due to bureaucratic management, lack of competition, and potential corruption. Decision-making can be slower and less market-driven.
    • Private Enterprise Model:
    • Advantages: Private companies are typically more efficient due to competition, profit motivation, and access to advanced technology and management practices.
    • Disadvantages: Profit motives can lead to cost-cutting at the expense of safety, quality, or environmental protection.

    Winner: Private enterprise tends to excel in economic efficiency, though this depends on the regulatory environment and governance of SOEs.

    2. Ecological Sustainability

    • State-Owned Model:
    • Advantages: Governments can use SOEs to enforce strict environmental standards and align operations with national sustainability goals. They may prioritize renewable energy transitions more easily.
    • Disadvantages: In practice, many SOEs in resource-rich countries focus on maximizing extraction for revenue, sometimes neglecting environmental concerns due to political pressures.
    • Private Enterprise Model:
    • Advantages: Private firms can adopt sustainable practices if incentivized by regulations or market demands (e.g., consumer or investor pressure).
    • Disadvantages: Without stringent regulations, private companies may prioritize profits over environmental protection, leading to practices like over-extraction or cost-cutting on sustainability measures.

    Winner: The state-owned model has the potential to prioritize ecological sustainability, though this depends on political will and governance.

    3. Income Equality

    • State-Owned Model:
    • Advantages: Revenues from SOEs can be redistributed to fund public services, welfare programs, and infrastructure, contributing to income equality.
    • Disadvantages: In some cases, inefficiencies or corruption in SOEs can lead to revenue mismanagement, benefiting elites rather than the broader population.
    • Private Enterprise Model:
    • Advantages: Private enterprises can create jobs and stimulate local economies, but the distribution of profits often disproportionately benefits shareholders and executives.
    • Disadvantages: Without strong policies such as progressive taxation or corporate social responsibility, private enterprises can exacerbate income inequality.

    Winner: State-owned enterprises generally have a better record of addressing income equality, provided they are well-governed.

    4. National Sovereignty

    • State-Owned Model:
    • Advantages: SOEs allow governments to maintain control over strategic resources, ensuring that national interests come first. This is particularly important in geopolitics and energy independence.
    • Disadvantages: Over-reliance on SOEs can lead to inefficiencies and vulnerability to political interference.
    • Private Enterprise Model:
    • Advantages: Private enterprises may attract foreign investment and expertise, which can benefit the national economy.
    • Disadvantages: Foreign-owned private enterprises may prioritize their home country’s interests, and profits may be repatriated rather than reinvested locally, undermining sovereignty.

    Winner: State-owned enterprises are better at ensuring national sovereignty over resources.

    Conclusion

    • State-Owned Model: Better for ecological sustainability, income equality, and national sovereignty, but often less efficient economically.
    • Private Enterprise Model: Superior in economic efficiency but less effective in addressing ecological sustainability, income equality, and national sovereignty.

    Recommendation: A hybrid model combining the strengths of both systems may be ideal. For example:

    • Allow private enterprise to operate under strict regulations that mandate environmental protection and fair revenue sharing.
    • Use state-owned enterprises to manage strategic resources and ensure revenue redistribution for public benefit.
    • Implement public-private partnerships (PPPs) to leverage private sector efficiency while maintaining public oversight.

    The best choice ultimately depends on the specific national context, governance quality, and regulatory framework in place.

    (more…)

  • Enamorarse en muchos idiomas

    En castellano decimos «enamorarse».

    Si observamos la estructura de «enamorarse», encontramos una fascinante perspectiva lingüística que explorar.

    La forma reflexiva «-se» en «enamorarse» sugiere, efectivamente, que la acción se produce en uno mismo, pero de una forma peculiar, como si el amor fuera una fuerza externa que actúa sobre nosotros y nosotros simplemente recibiéramos o experimentáramos esta acción.

    La construcción «en-amor-ar-se» se descompone literalmente en:

    • «en-»: en
    • «amor»: amor
    • «-ar»: sufijo verbal
    • «-se»: pronombre reflexivo

    Así que, estructuralmente, es más como «ponerse en el amor» o «dejarse atrapar por el amor», en lugar de «enamorarse» de forma activa. Esta estructura gramatical parece codificar una concepción cultural del amor como algo que nos sucede, en lugar de algo que hacemos activamente.

    Esto difiere del inglés «falling in love», que, aunque también es algo pasivo (nos enamoramos), no tiene este matiz reflexivo que sugiere una fuerza externa que actúa sobre nosotros.

    Veamos otros idiomas del mundo…

    Lenguas románicas:

    – Francés: «tomber amoureux» – Similar al inglés, enfatiza el caer

    – Italiano: «innamorarsi» – Al igual que en español, forma reflexiva que sugiere una fuerza externa

    – Portugués: «apaixonar-se» – También reflexivo, de «paixão» (pasión)

    – Rumano: «a se îndrăgosti» – Forma reflexiva, de «drag» (querido/amado)

    Lenguas germánicas:

    – Alemán: «sich verlieben» – Forma reflexiva que sugiere transformación

    – Holandés: «verliefd worden» – Literalmente «enamorarse» – más pasivo

    – Sueco: «bli kär» – También «enamorarse»

    – Danés: «blive forelsket» – Construcción pasiva similar sobre el hecho de enamorarse

    Lenguas semíticas:

    – Árabe: «يقع في الحب» (yaqa’ fi al-hubb) – Literalmente «caer en el amor»

    – Hebreo: «להתאהב» (lehit’ahev) – Forma reflexiva que sugiere un proceso que ocurre en uno mismo

    Lenguas eslavas:

    Ruso:

    – «влюбиться» (vlyubit’sya) – Forma reflexiva con el prefijo «в-» (en).

    – Sugiere «insertarse en el amor» o «entrar en un estado de amor».

    – «полюбить» (polyubit’) – Forma perfectiva que sugiere la finalización del proceso.

    Polaco:

    – «zakochać się» – Reflexivo con el prefijo «za-» que indica inicio.

    – Raíz «kochać» con «-się» reflexivo, que sugiere una acción dirigida hacia uno mismo.

    – El prefijo «za-» implica entrar en un estado.

    Checo:

    – «zamilovat se» – Forma reflexiva con el prefijo «za-».

    – Estructura similar a la polaca, que indica transformación.

    – «milovat» como raíz relacionada con «милый/miły» (querido/agradable).

    Serbio/croata:

    – «заљубити се/zaljubiti se» – Reflexivo con el prefijo «za-».

    – Patrón similar al de otras lenguas eslavas.

    – También se utiliza «voleti/voljeti» para el amor en general.

    Búlgaro:

    – «влюбвам се» (vlyubvam se) – Similar a la estructura rusa.

    – Forma reflexiva que sugiere un proceso que ocurre en uno mismo.

    – Conserva el patrón del prefijo «в-» (en).

    Ucraniano:

    – «закохатися» (zakokhatysya) – Sigue el patrón polaco/checo.

    – Forma reflexiva con el prefijo «за-».

    – «кохати» (kokhaty) como raíz de amor.

    Lenguas de Lejano Oriente:

    – Mandarín: «谈恋爱» (tán liàn’ài) – Más activo, «hablar/discutir sobre el amor»

    – Japonés: «恋に落ちる» (koi ni ochiru) – «Caer en el amor», similar al inglés

    – Coreano: «사랑에 빠지다» (sarang-e ppajida) – También «enamorarse».

    Otras lenguas menos frecuentes:

    Griego:

    – Antiguo: «ἔρως» (eros) se consideraba una fuerza divina externa

    – Moderno: «ερωτεύομαι» (erotevomai) – forma de voz media que sugiere participación tanto activa como pasiva

    Quechua:

    – «munakuy» – Forma reflexiva (-ku-) que sugiere un proceso interno

    – «waylluy»: forma más profunda de amor, con connotaciones espirituales

    Ambas formas enfatizan la reciprocidad y el equilibrio cósmico.

    Náhuatl:

    – «tetlazohtla»: forma más activa que significa «amar a alguien»

    – Utiliza el concepto «tla» (algo) con «zohtla» (calentar/apreciar)

    Curiosamente, carece de la metáfora de la «caída» o la fuerza externa.

    Navajo:

    – «ayóó ániinéé’» – Describe más el estado que el proceso. Refleja la cosmovisión navajo de armonía y equilibrio.

    – No existe el concepto de «caída» ni de fuerza externa.

    Euskera:

    – «maitemindu» – Compuesto por «maite» (amor) y «mindu» (dañar/afectar).

    – Sugiere el amor como una fuerza transformadora que afecta o incluso «hiere».

    Finés (uraliano):

    – «rakastua» – Forma inchoativa (-u-) que indica devenir.

    – Similar a las lenguas germánicas en la conceptualización del cambio de estado.

    Islandés:

    – «að verða ástfanginn» – Al igual que otras lenguas germánicas, «quedar atrapado por el amor».

    Sánscrito:

    – «प्रेम करना» (prema karna): «hacer amor», activo.

    – «मोहित होना» (mohit hona): «quedar encantado», más pasivo.

    Suajili:

    – «kupenda»: forma más activa que significa simplemente «amar».

    – La raíz «-pend-» sugiere una elección activa en lugar de una experiencia pasiva.

    Se observan los siguientes patrones clave:

    1. Las lenguas románicas tienden a utilizar formas reflexivas.

    2. Las lenguas germánicas suelen utilizar conceptos de «convertirse».

    3. Muchas lenguas de Asia Oriental utilizan la metáfora «caer», como en inglés.

    4. Algunas lenguas (como el mandarín) adoptan un enfoque más activo.

    5. Las lenguas indígenas americanas (quechua, náhuatl, navajo) tienden a enfatizar la armonía, el equilibrio y los estados activos en lugar de «enamorarse».

    6. Las lenguas aisladas, como el euskera, suelen tener construcciones metafóricas únicas.

    7. Las lenguas urálicas se alinean más con los conceptos germánicos de transformación.

    8. Las lenguas antiguas (sánscrito, griego antiguo) suelen tener múltiples conceptos distintos.

    9. Algunas lenguas (suajili, náhuatl) adoptan un enfoque activo más directo.

    10. La concepción eslava parece enfatizar:

    • El amor como un espacio o estado en el que se entra.
    • La naturaleza transformadora de la experiencia.
    • Un cierto grado de experiencia pasiva combinada con la acción autodirigida.
    • El momento de transición (especialmente con aspectos perfectivos).

    Esto sugiere diferentes conceptualizaciones culturales del amor:

    – Como una fuerza externa que actúa sobre nosotros (lenguas románicas).

    – Como un estado de transformación (lenguas germánicas).

    – Como un movimiento descendente (inglés, japonés, coreano).

    – Como un compromiso activo (mandarín).

    Implicaciones filosóficas:

    – Las lenguas con construcciones activas pueden reflejar culturas que ven el amor como una elección o una acción.

    – Las que tienen formas pasivas/reflexivas pueden ver el amor como destino/fuerza externa.

    – Las lenguas que enfatizan el equilibrio (como el navajo) reflejan cosmovisiones holísticas.

    – La existencia de múltiples términos en lenguas antiguas sugiere una categorización cultural compleja.

    – La presencia/ausencia de la metáfora «caer» podría indicar puntos de vista culturales sobre el control/destino.