Adrian, I´m rather acquainted with tropes, particularly according to structuralism (notably Kristeva and her psychoanalytic approach); hence my question. Same would apply to disinformation, particularly because the array of schemata you enact in speech may be different to mine. An accurate conceptual framework is important to enable understanding by others.
On what grounds do you speak about the social system? A matter of opinion? Re paradigms neither an opinion nor choice, rather narratives of science within what in English is termed science studies, in a simplification of the French concept of epistemologie de la science. Sad you have such views about human interaction, whether computer-mediated or not. There's always some degree of personal choice, no matter how little it may be, which provides room for strategies of resistance and subversion. I'm not an optimistic but if you don't like such "isolation" and "paranoia", why don't you introduce some change within your small parcel of freedom? A tiny act may shift the full perspective. Belief in determinism can well lead to mental slavery. Totalitarian regimes proved self-censorship the most effective mechanism for social control. Re "wondering" I was just being polite, quite frankly the savant should put their knowledge to more productive uses than a row. Disqualification and insults are the last resource when one runs out of reasoned arguments, and hence lead to a not very savant impression. This last bit is of course an opinion. Georges can get verbal, but (correct if me wrong, G!) it seems more related to impatience and frustration out of passion for knowledge than anything personal. And maybe some may enjoy twisting him a bit (??). Cheers, Alex -----Mensaje original----- De: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En nombre de adrf Enviado el: miércoles, 27 de agosto de 2008 8:21 Para: [email protected] Asunto: [epistemology 9310] Re: Prisoner exchange Yes Dear, LOOK UP TRope and disinformation, Inet has lots of dictionaries. THERE"S P dilemma and P Exchange, not the same, Kindly name WHO wrote "confusing the weak mindded", not me. " It would be more comfortable to live under the umbrella of a Paradigm (Kuhn terms, dated though applicable), but maybe the lack of it is a paradigm itself (Latour)" That's your choice and opinion. " In my immense folly, I can't help wondering why intellectual discussions by savant people end in quarrel rather than some fruitful outcome. Kindly stop wondering and start understanding. It's the social system which isolates us and makes us paranoid. adrian. Alex P. Real wrote: > Prisoner's dilemma is widely used in conflict resolution at grassroots level > and a little bit more complex than your quote, particularly when linked to > rational choice theory. Unfortunately not applicable to Israeli-Palestinian > conflict, otherwise it would have been solved years ago. > > Please define "disinformation". I may not always agree with Georges but his > arguments are usually flawless. I dislike online rows, so I haven't been > following this. Who's the weak minded here and according to which > indicators? Sorry but placing yourself in the hierarchical superiority of > "confusing the weak minded" when you don't know list members may not be in > line with the game theory you quote. > > Please define trope and according to who. Confusing the end of grand récits, > or rather their shattering into partial micro units at the same hierarchical > level with no overarching one, with political interests against a new > paradigm is somewhat limited. It would be more comfortable to live under the > umbrella of a Paradigm (Kuhn terms, dated though applicable), but maybe the > lack of it is a paradigm itself (Latour). Fractal geometry led to a > veritable scientific revolution, which can't really be compared to hologram.. > If interested in latest technology, its interconnection with science & arts > is a most fascinating field (e.g. virtual touchability) which is pushing > boundaries indeed and leading to a significant shift in social sciences' > theories. > > BTW, I'm an utter idiot in its etymological sense. In my immense folly, I > can't help wondering why intellectual discussions by savant people end in > quarrel rather than some fruitful outcome. > > Cheers. > > > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En > nombre de adrf > Enviado el: martes, 26 de agosto de 2008 22:36 > Para: [email protected] > Asunto: [epistemology 9293] Re: Prisoner exchange > > > PRISONER"S DILEMMA taken from wikipedia> > Prisoner's Dilemma constitutes a problem in game theory. It was originally > framed by Merrill > Flood and Melvin Dresher working at RAND in 1950. Albert W. Tucker > formalized the game with > prison sentence payoffs and gave it the "Prisoner's Dilemma" name > (Poundstone, 1992). > > Two suspects are arrested by the police. The police have insufficient > evidence for a > conviction, and, having separated both prisoners, visit each of them to > offer the same deal. If > one testifies ("defects") for the prosecution against the other and the > other remains silent, > the betrayer goes free and the silent accomplice receives the full 10-year > sentence. If both > remain silent, both prisoners are sentenced to only six months in jail for a > minor charge. If > each betrays the other, each receives a five-year sentence. Each prisoner > must choose to betray > the other or to remain silent. Each one is assured that the other would not > know about the > betrayal before the end of the investigation. How should the prisoners act? > > Prisoner EXCHANGE > "In 1985, Israel released 1,150 prisoners in exchange for three Israeli > soldiers captured in > "Lebanon. Then-Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin defended the deal. "When no > military option > "exists," he said, "there is no choice but to enter negotiations and pay a > price." [1] > > Metapoofsky is a disinformation agent. I've been on several other lists with > one in > attendancce, hoping to confuse the weak minded and their tactics are > obvious. They leave one > uncertain about whether it's nuts or what. Oh well, every village used to > have its idiot, so > what else is new? > > adrian > > > > > Georges Metanomski wrote: >> >> >> --- On Tue, 7/29/08, Alex P. Real <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> I eagerly await further comments on the Jewish side. >> =============== > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
