[FRIAM] loopiness (again)

[glen ☣]

The article I posted (and much of the conversations everywhere these days) is about things others say (fake news, Trump lying, Conway talking about massacres that didn't happen, etc.).  For example, if you're a woman and you're trying to decide if Trump's words are meaningful (his locker room talk), you have to decide what community takes priority.  Do you write off his offensive words and remain supportive of the things you think he's doing right?  Or do you think of it as the last straw and switch sides?  The same is true of fake news.  When you see a news story with a headline that's plausible or fits your world view, what makes you decide to dig deeper to verify it or debunk it?

An organizational concept is needed because we're clearly susceptible without it.  A little reflection on how "us vs them" comes about would be useful.

And I believe many people on this list disagree with my assertion that actions are required ... that we can approach truth with words and the concepts they evoke.  Of course, with the flurry of dialogue between you and me, we're doing what Kasparov warned against: we're _exhausting_ the others' ability to participate.  So, it's moot at this point, anyway.


On 02/07/2017 02:39 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Why is an organizational concept needed here?   I threw out a couple examples of what one could call a community, but really I think it is a silly, vague concept that points to some kind of psychological flaw or need people have for mirroring.   Can't one individual just punch another one (or whatever) and that will be an action?   Do we talk about expectations of a community to police its own worst actors?   Until there is enough experience with punching, etc. there are no learnable patterns and no way to ground meaning.  


-- 
☣ glen