Longing for dictatorship, language laws, Dmitry Bykov, dreams of police freedom and social hierarchies. Spelling as a law of nature When you need more water than usual

I came across interesting discussions of Dmitry Bykov about language.

And the same thing, only in the form of text:

Spelling as a law of nature
The question of why literacy is needed is widely and passionately discussed. It would seem that today, when even a computer program is able to correct not only spelling, but also meaning, the average Russian does not need to know the countless and sometimes meaningless subtleties of his native spelling. I'm not talking about commas that are unlucky twice. At first, in the liberal nineties, they were placed anywhere or ignored altogether, claiming that this was an author's mark. Schoolchildren still widely use the unwritten rule: "If you don't know what to put, put a dash." No wonder it is called so - "a sign of despair." Then, in the stable zero, people began to fearfully play it safe and put commas where they were not needed at all. True, all this confusion with signs does not affect the meaning of the message. Why then write well?

I think this is something like those necessary conventions that replace our specific canine scent when sniffing. A somewhat developed interlocutor, having received an electronic message, identifies the author by a thousand little things: of course, he does not see the handwriting, unless the message came in a bottle, but a letter from a philologist containing spelling errors can be erased without finishing.

It is known that at the end of the war, the Germans, who used Russian labor, threatened to extort a special receipt from the Slavic slaves: "So-and-so treated me wonderfully and deserves indulgence." The soldiers-liberators, having occupied one of the suburbs of Berlin, read a letter proudly presented by the owner with a dozen gross errors, signed by a student of Moscow University. The extent of the author's sincerity became immediately apparent to them, and the philistine slave owner paid the price for his vile forethought.

Today we have almost no chance to quickly understand who is in front of us: the methods of disguise are cunning and numerous. You can imitate the mind, sociability, even, perhaps, intelligence. It is impossible to play only literacy - a refined form of politeness, the last identification mark of humble and memoryful people who respect the laws of language as the highest form of the laws of nature.
Dmitry Bykov, 276 words

What is it?
The cry of a yearning man, the cry of a man yearning for dictate, order, law.

This is a longing for the world of Modernity, for a world that sacredly believed in the natural laws of history, the laws of the development of society, Progress, the laws of human behavior, the laws of language, and so on.

This is a yearning for the law-forming foundations of the world, society, human behavior, language, etc.

This is a longing for the foundation, the solid foundation that humanity lost with the "death of God" and which it tried to gain by creating metaphysical pictures of the world, constructing the laws of natural development, dreaming of the world's absolute truth and pure natural man.

Everything would be fine, but in the 20th century these dreams turned into bloody orgy of totalitarian regimes.

The dictates of the natural laws of history, the laws of society, the laws of language, the laws of human behavior, etc. somehow easily turns into dictatorship and arbitrariness of individuals, parties, bureaucracies, etc.
And somehow these natural laws of history, the laws of society, the laws of language, etc., turn out to be unfair. to individuals, social groups, peoples, etc.
And somehow these natural laws of history, the laws of society, the laws of language, etc., are easily pronounced. individuals, social groups, nations to destruction.

And it would seem that it is time to forget about dreams of indisputable laws and immutable rules, it would be time to agree that the sign is arbitrary, and all social entities are constructed.

But, no, our poorly educated intellectuals are internally drawn to authoritarian models to the very worst. Pulls spontaneously, involuntarily, almost unconsciously. Our "liberal" will compose a couple of poems about freedom or something similar and blurt out something in the style of our old Kant about the need for police freedom.

Like, freedom is needed, but only within the framework of Progress and order. It seems that there should be freedom, but law and order (natural law and natural order -!) Limit it, and sometimes even nullify it.

Criticism (the same freedom-loving rhymes) seems to be something like a policeman who puts things in order and free-thinking with a club. " Denying this positive benefit of criticism is like saying that the police do not bring any positive benefit, since its main task is to prevent the violence of some citizens against others so that everyone can calmly and fearlessly go about their business."(Kant_Critique of Pure Reason).

That is, even through criticism, the dream of a police state shines through.

As the same old man Immanuel noted: Only such criticism can cut the roots of materialism, fatalism, atheism, disbelief in free thought…" (Critique of Pure Reason)
And we don’t need this fashion for ingenious postmodern freethinking in Russia, because, as our Kaliningrad philosopher wrote back in the 18th century: “... The spirit of solidity in Germany Russia did not die out, ... it was only for a short time drowned out by the fashionable manner of ingenious free-thinking…" (Critique of Pure Reason)

And, of course, this text is permeated with horror before the Mystery. Where without it.
The horror of an archaic creature lost in the chaos of signs, symbols, texts of the postmodern world. The horror of an archaic being before the openness of the world, society, man, text, sign, symbol.

And it is also a longing for the traditional world of hierarchies, the world of established symbolic systems, a world in which "who is who" is visible at a glance. It can be seen in clothing, in body movements, in language, in the presence of obvious well-known symbols of power, symbols of high status, etc.

This is a longing for the legal demonstration of one's status, which in the plebeian society of postmodernity looks like something absurd, comic.
But our society of demonstrated statuses has a dream. The dream of our bourgeoisie. The dream of our intellectuals. The dream of our right-wing "liberals".
This is not owl thinking. This is pre-modern, traditional, archaic thinking.
And these people forbid others to pick their noses!
And teach others to live literacy and freedom.

Literacy as knowledge of the rules of a language is not a property of consciousness, much less a property of the mind. This is a bodily property, automatic bodily skills, a certain habitus. Literacy as knowledge of the rules of the language is the result of a certain discipline of the body.

The longing for literacy is the longing for discipline, the longing for certain discipline techniques.

The desire to give knowledge of the rules of the language a special status is the desire to give a special status to the visible features of the body, the features of habitus.
This is the desire to make certain signs, symbols indicating a special status out of the features of the body, and the particularity of the status is usually directly related to the high status (interestingly, the use of the word "high" automatically writes me into the inhabitants-slave-owners or something similar?).

Simply put, this is the desire of a system in which a person is automatically given a high status only on the basis of certain properties of his body (the ability to write correctly).
It is the desire to give high status to certain bodily features that are inseparable from the habitus of a literate person.
And this status is immediately recognized.
And this status is immediately visible.
And this status immediately gives additional signs of intelligence, intelligence, kindness and other positive characteristics.
That is, the essential features of the body turn into status and frankly indicate a high status, and a high status automatically makes a good person.

But why do we need high status and positive characteristics?
Naive people. No need to lie.
And all this talk about literacy, intelligence, special status, etc. just a vulgar cover for one desire, the desire to enjoy your right to fly over other people:

But don't accuse anyone of lying.
For it is known:

Work on the text "Spelling as a law of nature"

1. Insert missing punctuation marks. Insert missing letters where necessary. Open the brackets to define continuous, separate or hyphenated spellings (highlight the inserts in any bright color other than red).
2. Write out examples from this text that illustrate the following rules (state the desired rule after each example!):
- A) Spelling of the separating b and b signs;

Spelling as a law of nature

The question of why literacy is needed is widely and passionately discussed. I'm not talking about commas that are unlucky twice. At first, in the liberal nineties, they were placed anywhere or ignored altogether, claiming that this was an author's mark. Schoolchildren still widely use the unwritten rule: "If you don't know what to put, put a dash." No wonder it is called so - "a sign of despair." Then, in the stable zero, people began to fearfully play it safe and put commas where they were not needed at all. True, all this confusion with signs does not affect the meaning of the message. Why then write well?

The soldiers-liberators, having occupied one of the suburbs of Berlin, read a letter proudly presented by the owner with a dozen gross errors, signed by a student of Moscow University. The extent of the author's sincerity became immediately apparent to them, and the philistine slave owner paid the price for his vile forethought.

2. A) Spelling of the separating b and b signs;

Computer - a separating b sign is written.

Dog - a separating b sign is written.

Presented - a separating sign is written.

Rule: before the prefix and after the letters in the root E, E, Yu, I, in other cases, a separating b sign is written.

B) Spelling of unstressed vowels in the root;

Liberal - spelled I.

Rule: unstressed unchecked vowels in the root of a word are checked by a spelling dictionary.

Straighten - in the root it is written a, because. the test word is edit.

Rule: it is necessary to choose such a test word so that the unstressed vowel sound is stressed.

C) Spelling of unchecked consonants in the root;

Russian - write SS

Russian - we write SS

Rule: dictionary word.

D) Spelling prefixes on s / s;

Countless - we write in the prefix C

Rule: if after prefixes on Z and C there is a deaf consonant sound, C is written in the prefix, if it is a voiced consonant, write Z.

E) Spelling is not with different parts of speech;

Not required - write separately.

If you don't know, write separately.

Does not affect - write separately.

Can't see - write separately

Rule: NOT with verbs is written separately.

Something - write together.

Rule: negative pronouns with NOT and NI are written together if there is no preposition between them.

Unwritten - write together.

Rule: participles are written together with NOT if there is no dependent word.

Necessary - write together.

Rule: NOT with adjectives is written together, if it can be replaced with a synonym: necessary.

Not in vain - written separately

Rule: Not with adverbs written separately

Do not finish reading - write separately

Rule: Not with a gerund is written separately.

Impossible - write together.

Rule: modal word with a prohibitive meaning, Not spelled together.

E) Spelling of prefixes pre / at;

Biased - spelled PRI

Rule: in some words, the meaning of prefixes is not clear enough, these words must be remembered.

G) Spelling of unpronounceable consonants in the root;

Biased - spelled in the root T.

Known - written in the root T

Rule: if there is an unpronounceable consonant at the root, you need to choose such a test word so that this consonant becomes a pronounced PASSION - PASSIONATELY.

G) Spelling not and neither with different parts of speech;

Something - it is written together.

Rule: an indefinite pronoun with a stressed prefix; pronominal words with a prefix NOT, which is stressed, are written together.

H) Spelling n and nn in different parts of speech;

Countless - spelled HH

Rule: in adjectives, educational with the help of the ENH suffix, write HH.

Senseless - spelled NN

Electronic - spelled HH

Sincerity - spelled HH

Numerous - spelled NN

Rule: With a double H, suffixes -enn-, -stvenn-, -onn- of adjectives formed from nouns are written.

Unwritten - spelled N

Rule: in verbal adjectives formed from participles and not having prefixes (except not) or dependent words, write N.

Frightened - spelled NN

Rule: in adverbs formed from adjectives, as many HH are written as in the adjective from which they are formed.

frightened - frightened

Signed - spelled HH

Rule: in full passive participles of the perfect form, with the prefix, write NN.

Confusion - spelled N

Rule: This is a noun formed from the adjective confused with the suffix -its-, it contains as many n as in the generating word. In the adjective confused, one H is written, because. it is formed from the imperfective verb to confuse, answering the question what to do? In adjectives formed from imperfective verbs, one N is written.

Presented - is written NN.

Rule: Passive past participle, formed from a perfective verb, therefore NN is written in the participle suffix.

Refined - spelled NN.

Humble - spelled NN.

Rule: In an adjective formed from a perfective verb, HH is written.

I) Continuous, separate, hyphenated spelling of different parts of speech;

First - an adverb, written together.

Rule: adverbs formed by combining a preposition and a noun are written together.

Why - adverb, spelled together.

Rule: adverbs formed by combining a preposition with interrogative and demonstrative pronouns are written together.

Any - the adverb is written with a hyphen

Rule: suffixes -something, -or, -something and prefix something with pronouns and adverbs are written with a hyphen.

Soldiers - liberators - application, written with a hyphen.

Rule: if a single agreed application and the noun it defines are common nouns, then a hyphen is placed between them.

No way - a pronoun, spelled together.

Rule: particles NOT and NI in pronominal negative adverbs are prefixes and are written together.

Average - written together.

Rule: Adjectives formed from the bases of the words of the relationship between which are of a subordinating nature are written together.

Everyman - slave owner - is written through -

Rule: A one-word appendix following the word being defined is written with a hyphen.

K) Spelling and / s after prefixes;

Simulate - after the prefix in the root, write Y.

Play - after the prefix in the root, write Y.

Rule: after prefixes ending in a consonant, instead of AND, it is written Y according to pronunciation, the exceptions are prefixes over - and inter -, and words with foreign prefixes countergame, disinfection.

L) Punctuation marks in a compound sentence;

A somewhat developed interlocutor, having received an electronic message, identifies the author by a thousand little things: of course, he does not see the handwriting, unless the message came in a bottle, but a letter from a philologist containing spelling errors can be erased without finishing.

Rule: in this compound sentence, two simple sentences, two grammatical bases, are separated from each other by a comma.

M) Punctuation marks in a complex sentence;

I'm not talking about commas that are unlucky twice.

The question of why literacy is needed is widely and passionately discussed.

It would seem that today, when even a computer program is able to correct not only spelling, but also meaning, the average Russian does not need to know the countless and sometimes meaningless subtleties of his native spelling.

Schoolchildren still widely use the unwritten rule: "If you don't know what to put, put a dash."

I think this is something like those necessary conventions that replace our specific canine scent when sniffing.

It is known that at the end of the war, the Germans, who used Russian labor, threatened to extort a special receipt from the Slavic slaves: "So-and-so treated me wonderfully and deserves indulgence."

Today we have almost no chance to quickly understand who is in front of us: the methods of disguise are cunning and numerous.

Rule: a complex sentence consists of a main and a subordinate clause, separated from each other by commas.

H) Punctuation marks in a non-union complex sentence;

Today we have almost no chance to quickly understand who is in front of us: the methods of disguise are cunning and numerous. You can imitate the mind, sociability, even, perhaps, intelligence.

Rule: When listing, a comma is placed between the parts of an union-free complex sentence.

O) Punctuation marks in a simple sentence with homogeneous members;

"So-and-so treated me wonderfully and deserves mercy."

Rule: if the homogeneous members of the sentence are separated by a single union AND no comma is placed between them.

P) Punctuation marks in a sentence with participial turnover;

A somewhat developed interlocutor, having received an electronic message, identifies the author by a thousand little things: of course, he does not see handwriting, unless the message came in a bottle, but a letter from a philologist containing spelling errors can be erased without finishing.

Rule: the participle turnover, standing after the defined word letter, is isolated from two sides.

It is known that at the end of the war, the Germans, who used Russian labor, threatened to extort a special receipt from the Slavic slaves: "So-and-so treated me wonderfully and deserves indulgence."

Rule: the participial turnover, standing after the word Germans being defined, is isolated from two sides.

The soldiers-liberators, having occupied one of the suburbs of Berlin, read a letter proudly presented by the owner with a dozen gross errors, signed by a student of Moscow University.

Rule: proudly presented by the owner - a definition expressed by a participial turnover, which is not isolated, since there is a letter in front of the word being defined.

It is impossible to play only literacy - a refined form of politeness, the last identification mark of humble and memoryful people who respect the laws of language as the highest form of the laws of nature.

Rule: a comma separates a separate definition, expressed by a participial phrase following the word being defined.

P) Punctuation marks in a sentence with a participle;

Rule: the circumstances expressed by the adverbial turnover are separated by commas.

C) Punctuation marks for isolated members of the sentence (introductory words, applications, etc.).

Rule: paired commas, highlighting the introductory word of course, indicating the degree of reliability of the message.

You can imitate the mind, sociability, even, perhaps, intelligence.

Rule: paired commas highlight the introductory word, perhaps with the meaning of a low degree of reliability of the message, the uncertainty of the speaker.

Rule: a comma after the introductory word, it would seem, indicating the degree of reliability of the message.

True, all this confusion with signs does not affect the meaning of the message.

Rule: a comma, after the introductory word, true, indicating the degree of reliability of the message.

I think this is something like those necessary conventions that replace our specific canine scent when sniffing.

Rule: a comma after the introductory word, I think, indicating the personal opinion of the author.

spelling prefix hyphen unstressed

Do an experiment: try asking people the question “Why?” Surprisingly, in most cases, you will hear the answer not to your question “Why?”, but to the question “Why?”:

- What for you left documentation on the table?
- That's why what to me need It was urgently leave.

- What for you offended?
- So after all Vasya very rough co me talking!

- What for you said Masha that she is always late?
- Well after all she's always true late!

Notice the difference? The question "Why?" was asked to find out what the person wanted to get as a result of his action. And, answering the question “Why?”, We were told about the events and circumstances that preceded the action, but not about the results or goals! They asked about the future, the answer was about the past.

Why is this happening?

Many of these questions are difficult to answer intelligently. And this in itself is already useful. It turns out that there is no need to be angry, there is no need to be upset, there is no need to shout at each other! And there may also be a realization that the action itself, at best, does not lead to any result at all, and often simply leads to an undesirable result.

Thus, instead of useless chatter and experiences, meaningful speech and actions appear.

Let's try again:

- Why did you leave the documents on the table?
- Because I needed to leave immediately.
- Not "Why?" But "Why?"
- Oh, right, there is no need! They might get lost! I'm going to put it in a folder.

This result, it seems, will please us more - we already see a meaningful useful action that will help avoid the loss of important documents.

- Why did you tell Masha that she is always late?
- Well, she's always late!
- Yes, but he said why, so that what happened?
- So that she knows that her lateness is visible to everyone!

In your performance, the question "Why?" can have different forms: it can sound like "For what purpose?", "For what?" (sometimes the great “And what?” sounds shorter and more understandable), “What should be the result?”. Ask yourself "Why am I doing this?", "Why am I saying this?", "Why am I feeling this?" - answer yourself to yourself - do your actions lead to the result you need? If suddenly not - what actions lead to the desired result?

Attention: narrow-minded and conflicting people can spoil even the question "Why?", turning it into an accusation. However, for them, what is “Why”, what is “Why” - they don’t really ask and don’t listen to your answers, it’s only important for them to express their dissatisfaction. We are not about them, right?

The question "Why?" - truly magical, check it out for yourself. It helps to switch from the causes of an act to its result, switches thoughts from the past to the future - and, in general, increases the awareness of words, thoughts and deeds.

With new discoveries to you!
With new, more conscious actions, thoughts and feelings!

Both questions are good in their own way. And deserve close attention! So.

"Why?"

The question "why" (it happened, I did it, etc.) helps to analyze the situation, draw the necessary conclusions for the future. To move on to the second question.

However, many people don't move on, they get stuck in the "why". And either continuously ask this question, or answer it. Answers are generated automatically, since the model is already rolled back.

Try to answer the question: "Why are you late?" Easily? Still would. The alarm clock didn't work... the traffic jam... my mother called at the wrong time... the phone ran out of power...

This does not mean that all answers are lies. They may also be true. Not in this case.

The question "why?" leads to degradation.

He leads us in the same circle of the same patterns.

"What for?"

The question "why?" leads to development and self-knowledge.

The same question, asked in a different way, gives us a lot of wonderful discoveries.

"Why are you late?" Weird question. But only at first glance.

"Why did you go to rest in this particular resort?"

"Because a cheap ticket turned up"- the answer is also correct.

"Then, in order not to think, not to strain, not to be tormented by a choice," is a much more interesting answer.

Then I learn about myself that I am lazy and passive in choosing.

And if "Because I've never been there"? Also good.

But better: "Because I want to see new places."

Then I learn about myself that I am inquisitive and eager for new experiences.

"Why did you quit this job?"

"Because the boss is a fool", - it is truth too.

"Then, in order not to solve problems of mutual understanding",- it is better.

"Then to find a more comfortable relationship for yourself,"- better.

Then I learn about myself that a comfortable relationship with the leader is a priority for me. More priority than salary, job location, etc. And this is neither good nor bad. It's just true. The truth about you.

Reactive and proactive behavior

The question "why?" and responses to it signify reactive behavior. "From" behavior.

Something happened and I react.

This is fine.

But to get stuck in this means to stop developing.

The question "why?" and responses to it signify proactive behavior. Behavior "to" or "for".

A small child picks up an object. If this object does not make sounds, what does the child do? It makes a knocking noise. This object on any surface. The child wants to make a sound. The child is proactive. He wants to be the cause of something, the creator of the phenomenon. For him, there is only the question "why?"

"Why are you knocking?" — "To be loud!"

Proactive behavior, behavior "why" - more conscious.

In this case, there is a gap between the stimulus and the response. And this is a space of free choice.

In the "why" case, there is no gap. There is no free choice. I am a slave to habits, patterns, circumstances, other people...

In such people, passive constructions and their analogues dominate in speech: “I have to”, “I have to”, “I have no choice”, “I was called”, “I was told”… an infinite number of variations.

The question "why?" requires awareness in any situation and with a projection for the future. Sometimes even very distant.

The question "why?" requires a goal orientation. Every action must correspond to the goal, otherwise the question "why?" will not have an answer and will turn into "why".

"Why are you into fitness?" - "To be in excellent physical shape by the age of 50!"

Question "Why are you into fitness?" somehow irrelevant...

"Why do you spend all your free time on the couch?"

"Because I'm too lazy to move"- though honestly, but wrong.

"Then, in order to turn into a wreck with excess weight and osteochondrosis by the age of 50, in order to have every reason to complain about health, whine and poison the lives of others,"— this is it.

Ask the question "why?" more often.

Be proactive.

Start by imagining the end result.

Many of us, especially schoolchildren and their parents, tirelessly wonder why we need to know history. What is the significance and relevance of studying the events of many years ago? However, there are many different reasons that indicate the need to study this subject, which is a combination of many other disciplines. Many arguments have already been made about the importance of history, but they are still relevant today. So I want to know everything and the website jokelist.ru helps me with this.

virtual time machine

Studying significant historical events and people is like traveling through time. History studies the past and the legacy of the past in the present. This is necessary in order to know how our modern world and the peoples of our planet became what we see them today, as well as how we evolved.

Many mysteries, frightening and intriguing, cease to be so mysterious as soon as the complex causes and events that led to them become clear. This explains why history is needed. When the common things that we share with people from the past are understood, as well as the differences in the present are realized, an awareness of our society, its present, past and future is formed.

Learning from mistakes

At the same time, history offers us something much more than the past events that led to the creation of the modern world. Why is history needed? It invites us to study the past and present of peoples and foreign states unknown to us, in which everything is arranged in a completely different way. Knowing what we share in common with people in the past, and along the way studying how much their life differs from ours in the present, we are able to turn the future for the better. We look back and see the consequences:

bloody wars;
revolutions and coups;
thoughtless attitude to nature;
great discoveries;
delusions and ignorance.

You can step on the same rake many times. What for? It is necessary to study history in order to extract mistakes from the past and prevent them in the future.

We adopt experience

In addition, history tries to understand the past lives of individuals and society as a whole, exploring all possible aspects of their reality. The diversity of human experience is explored: how much people differed in their ideas, beliefs and cultural practices, how widely their experience changed depending on time, nationality and social status, how much humanity fought with each other, inhabiting a common planet for us.

The experience of the past is colossal and invaluable. Its undeniable importance for future generations shows why history is needed. Think about the events, analyze them, “digest” the information, and only then, on the basis of the experience that has already taken place, understand the present, draw up an expedient and safe plan for the future.

General development

History analyzes the past, evaluating the complex web of reasons that help to understand the events and phenomena that are taking place in the modern world. She teaches analytical skills, critical thinking and logical analysis of situations, which is simply necessary when studying many school disciplines. History trains the memory and teaches how to process and perceive information correctly, helps develop the skills so necessary to look beyond the headlines of texts, ask the right questions and express your own opinion.

Raise Patriots

A healthy social atmosphere in the country, a full-fledged society and peace is the goal that all people in general and each individual state in particular strive for. It is impossible to evaluate everything with money and pay for everything. Therefore, the state rests not on businessmen, but on patrons, altruists and patriots. The whole world is based on them. History remembers them. Those who loved their country, who gave their lives for the happiness of others. These are fearless warriors, and selfless doctors, and talented scientists, and simply disinterested patriots of their people.

Why is history needed? Because it popularly tells each next generation about what it owes to its ancestors. We will find out what ideals our great-grandfathers lived by, what feats they performed. We understand how their lives have affected our present. Raising respect for the past with its reforms, struggles, victories and failures is the task of history.

Why study history?

Today is inseparable from yesterday. All people and peoples live in history: we speak languages that have come down to us from the distant past, we live in societies with complex cultures inherited from ancient times, we use technologies developed by our ancestors ... Thus, studying the relationship between past and present is undeniable basis for a good understanding of contemporary human existence. This explains why we need history, why and how important it is in our lives.

Acquaintance with the human past is the path to self-knowledge. History helps to understand the origins of modern social and political problems. It is the most important source for studying the characteristic behavior of people in various social conditions. History makes us realize that people in the past were not just "good" or "bad" but motivated in complex and conflicting ways, just as they are now.

The view of the world of each person is formed due to individual experience, as well as the experience of the society in which he lives. If we do not know the contemporary and historical experience of different cultures, then we cannot even hope to understand how people, societies or nations make decisions in the modern world.

The very essence

Historical knowledge is nothing more and nothing less than a carefully and critically constructed collective memory. It is memory that makes us human, and collective memory, that is, history, makes us society. Why know history? Yes, because without individual memory, a person will immediately lose his identity, will not know how to act when meeting other people. The same thing happens with collective memory, although its loss will not be noticeable so instantly.

However, memory cannot be frozen in time. Collective memory is gradually taking on a new meaning. Historians are constantly working to rethink the past by asking new questions, looking for new sources of information and analyzing old documents in order to gain new knowledge and experience to better understand the past and what is happening. History is constantly changing and expanding, as is our memory, helping us acquire new knowledge and skills to improve our lives….