[FRIAM] anthropological observations

[Prof David West]

It was not my intent to make any assertions, or claims. merely to offer completely subjective observations - "anecdotal data" as it were. Yes, there is a not-so-subliminal editorial slant behind the observations. But that slant is pretty obvious and quite familiar to those on the list:

 - I do not trust, and actually fear, government, especially the Federal Government
- I believe the danger of a 'dictatorship-of-the left' to be far greater than from the right, and that the clown in office is a trivial to non-existent threat.
- nothing posted, tweeted, published, aired — regardless of source — can be accepted at face value but must be deconstructed (including "scientific" material)
I have no expertise,, certainly no authority, but do fancy an aptitude for careful observation that may or may not be of value to anyone.

davew

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020, at 9:27 AM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:
> The problem doesn't lie with any one of Dave's questionable assertions. 
> The problem lies with his narrative arc. That arc argues that *others* 
> (not Dave) claim non-credible expertise. Yet Dave implies over and over 
> again that he has such credibility. Each list item and conclusion are 
> replete with subjective perspective, but are stated with absolute 
> authority.
> 
> For example: "mainstream media outlets in the US assume their audience 
> is composed of idiots ..."
> 
> Never mind the unjustified generalization in lumping, say, MSNBC with 
> Fox News. The idea that there even is such a thing as "mainstream 
> media" given that many people get their news from Facebook or Twitter 
> (for whatever that's worth) is just nonsense.
> 
> One of the signals for "fake news" is whether or not it tweaks you, 
> triggers you. Dave's post is chock full of trigger phrases intended to 
> pluck at the tiny little drawstrings that evoke one's prejudices. It 
> could have been submitted as an authentic *rant*. Had Dave peppered the 
> post with qualifiers like "I think", "It seems to me", or "In my 
> opinion", it would be easier to read as such an authentic rant. 
> Instead, Dave is authoritatively presenting his beliefs as if they are 
> facts, either rigorously established during a 2 day road trip or 
> patently obvious to those in the know.
> 
> To be clear, I'm not claiming any of Dave's questionable beliefs are 
> false, only committing a bit of tu quoque. Dave's rant is as guilty of 
> authoritarianism as his targets.
> 
> On 4/13/20 9:59 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> > Among Dave's odd remarks,
> 
> -- 
> ☣ uǝlƃ
> 
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- 
> ... .... . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
>