Does it make any difference to your head what's between your legs? I thought you did not care? So its Alexis not alexander, haha. I chat with people not sex organs. adrian
Alex P. Real wrote: > I'm a woman. > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En > nombre de adrf > Enviado el: miércoles, 27 de agosto de 2008 14:02 > Para: [email protected] > Asunto: [epistemology 9314] Re: Prisoner exchange > > > On second thoughts, > > WHERE ON EARTH DO YOU, GEORGES AND WHOEVER ELSE GET THE AUTHORITY, THE > ARROGANCE, the temerity > to demand that I defend my right to speak? It this a group of human beings > or a cows' pecking > order setup? I did not know that my birth certificate carried in invisible > ink the hidden > agenda you gentlemen play by. > > adrian > > > > Alex P. Real wrote: >> 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
