Island of birth : is its infinitesimality of any importance on one's wellbeing?
I recall my childhood days, reciting, a sentence that ...'an island is a piece of land surrounded by water'. So from a moral cultural perspective, can the description of a place of one's birth have severe implications on their folks emotionally, psychological well being, in terms of its infinitesimal square area?
A friend informed me that a large island, has now been declared too large to be called an island.
Listening to a radio discussion last week, a guest speaker refer to the UK as a 'tiny island' - and of course, I thought if the UK is described as 'our tiny island' - how would he describe some of the very small islands in say the Caribbean or Pacific region etc
So, should the descriptive definition of very small islands be changed, for example, I was born on a island that I can describe only as being infinitesimal, in other words, exceedingly small - but if Grenada is larger than say, Nevis, then how would I describe the island, in comparison. I could say, I was born on an infinitesimal island but Nevis is even more infinitesimal than the island where I was born or I was born on an island with a greater infinitesimal square area than Nevis whose infinitesimal area is lesser. What is the impact of being born on a island of greater or lesser infinitesimality?
Folks, I think I will have a quiet lie down after gulping down a glass of freshly pulped mango juice....
Re: Island of birth : is its infinitesimality of any importance on one's wellbeing?
Lady G, you asked>>>>>>>>......can the description of a place of one's birth have severe implications on their folks emotionally, psychological well being, in terms of its infinitesimal square area?....<<<<<<
Noted Indo Trinbagonian Laureate and Noble Prize winner V.S. Niapaul, in one of his more loathing remarks on the country of his birth, once commented that "small economies (as in the case of small island nations) breeds small minds". And although there may be some truth to that comment -_disparaging as it may be_ it implies that "small mindedness" and its political, cultural, psychological and socio- economic impact is a permanent state of the individual and leaves no room for the growth factor to be had in light of education and new technology.
Similarly, I will argue that "smallness /infinitesimal description" of one's country is only as permanent as size dictates but has very little impact on the individual (being guarded with the use of my phraseology here) that can be qualified as 'severe implications'. I can certainly see some restrictions due to economic affordability that can limit the individual'seconomic and educational potential if he or she remains in that environment but that is to the extent of the emotional and psychological impact.
It is also worthy to note that the gap between big and small has norrowed tremendously because of technology. For example, a Doctor in Grenada or Barbados can direct a surgical operation in the US, Canada or England and vise-versa. So to the extent that smallness will continue to remain small, the perception of the individual can be grandiose.
Another Noble Prize winner and world renowned Economist, Sir. Arthur Lewis hailed from St. Lucia.
But please indulge us with your opinion. We can certainly benefit from a learning moment.
