My earlier post has been diverted to outer space, it seems. That loneliness may be a cover, you know.
Saul Bellow was a rascal. The speed of information leads to surprise and a protean miss, often. I look for patterns in history/culture and try to keep two columns- pro and con with hope for the margins. The top tiers of government are usually the culprits rather than their off-spring- and it's true of tribes as well as complicated systems- the buck really does stop- even in suitcases of cash and packets of Viagra. My "dog" would need diapers- we're at -30 wind chill factor. On Jan 21, 6:10 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > Of course, I don't expect anything tangled-up with government and > academic bureaucracy to produce much practical. The gist was once > that we should aim for praxis, a form of rational action. For some > the guide was marxism, but most of us grew up with a form of Keynesian > guide - the economics of full employment and FDR's never completed > second Bill of Rights. More recently we have reverted to the control > fraud of banksters and neo-classical economics. I was never much > interested in the 'grand theory' - as a cop I was more interested in > what people were hiding and lying about, as scientist the grand was > excluded as rigorously as possible a the laboratory door and as a > university teacher I was more interested in developing resourceful > humans than daft, religious managerial theories. As a kid, my elder > brother and sister always claimed I changed the goalposts in argument > and as I grew up I discovered this was what argument was generally > about - the goalposts changing name to root metaphor and paradigm. > Experts in argument are bought like lawyers and have about the same > ethics. When Socrates gestures at the Sophists claiming 'I know > nothing, but even this is to know more than they' he is just being the > smartest guy in the room. > We say 'jaw-jaw' is better than 'war-war' - but there is no crucial > experiment to decide in 'jaw-jaw'. The problem with argument is that > it needs arbitration if human beings are involved in it and the seeds > of its own destruction are laid in most people having no training in > how it is constructed. If you get some training in this you can be > bought like a lawyer as a mouthpiece. Machine knowledge bases and > reasoning capacity potentially offer a democratisation of argument > expertise, manufacturing capability, medicine, finance and much more - > evidence-based practice for all. In practice, doing management > information systems, one soon learns those currently in the know want > to keep things that way. I believe the professions are currently > preventing this as surely as those smashing machines in the industrial > revolution. I believe this is the central issue of the moment - and > my reasons concern the dream I have of the precipice of disgusting > war,the dullness of politics, religion and literature. Economic > growth is nearly all uninteresting - FlopBook and so on - and rarely > about the growth of capital I would value. Would we could dream up > something else - and why we cannot when 2% of labour can provide our > food. I miss any sense of collective dreaming and find only the > loneliness more 'primitive' people I've met would comment on in the > first blush of their experience amongst us. > > On Jan 21, 9:18 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Those who have contributed to the thread have shown me there isn't > > much general awareness of the 'technology'. There are already > > intelligent systems like Watson (IBM) doing a fair job on embodied > > expert knowledge (medical in this case). The general idea is in this > > from New Scientist: > > > In your wildest dreams, could you imagine a government that builds its > > policies on carefully gathered scientific evidence? One that publishes > > the rationale behind its decisions, complete with data, analysis and > > supporting arguments? Well, dream no longer: that's where the UK is > > heading. > > > It has been a long time coming, according to Chris Wormald, permanent > > secretary at the Department for Education. The civil service is not > > short of clever people, he points out, and there is no lack of desire > > to use evidence properly. More than 20 years as a serving politician > > has convinced him that they are as keen as anyone to create effective > > policies. "I've never met a minister who didn't want to know what > > worked," he says. What has changed now is that informed policy-making > > is at last becoming a practical possibility. > > > That is largely thanks to the abundance of accessible data and the > > ease with which new, relevant data can be created. This has supported > > a desire to move away from hunch-based politics. > > > Last week, for instance, Rebecca Endean, chief scientific advisor and > > director of analytical services at the Ministry of Justice, announced > > that the UK government is planning to open up its data for analysis by > > academics, accelerating the potential for use in policy planning. > > > At the same meeting, hosted by innovation-promoting charity NESTA, > > Wormald announced a plan to create teaching schools based on the model > > of teaching hospitals. In education, he said, the biggest single > > problem is a culture that often relies on anecdotal experience rather > > than systematically reported data from practitioners, as happens in > > medicine. "We want to move teacher training and research and practice > > much more onto the health model," Wormald said. > > > Test, learn, adapt > > > In June last year the Cabinet Office published a paper called "Test, > > Learn, Adapt: Developing public policy with randomised controlled > > trials". One of its authors, the doctor and campaigning health > > journalist Ben Goldacre, has also been working with the Department of > > Education to compile a comparison of education and health research > > practices, to be published in the BMJ. > > > In education, the evidence-based revolution has already begun. A > > charity called the Education Endowment Foundation is spending £1.4 > > million on a randomised controlled trial of reading programmes in 50 > > British schools. > > > There are reservations though. The Ministry of Justice is more > > circumspect about the role of such trials. Where it has carried out > > randomised controlled trials, they often failed to change policy, or > > even irked politicians with conclusions that were obvious. "It is not > > a panacea," Endean says. > > > Power of prediction > > > The biggest need is perhaps foresight. Ministers often need instant > > answers, and sometimes the data are simply not available. Bang goes > > any hope of evidence-based policy. > > > "The timescales of policy-making and evidence-gathering don't match," > > says Paul Wiles, a criminologist at the University of Oxford and a > > former chief scientific adviser to the Home Office. Wiles believes > > that to get round this we need to predict the issues that the > > government is likely to face over the next decade. "We can probably > > come up with 90 per cent of them now," he says. > > > Crucial to the process will be convincing the public about the value > > and use of data, so that everyone is on-board. This is not going to be > > easy. When the government launched its Administrative Data Taskforce, > > which set out to look at data in all departments and opening it up so > > that it could be used for evidence-based policy, it attracted minimal > > media interest. > > > The taskforce's remit includes finding ways to increase trust in data > > security. Then there is the problem of whether different departments > > are legally allowed to exchange data. There are other practical > > issues: many departments format data in incompatible ways. "At the > > moment it's incredibly difficult," says Jonathan Breckon, manager of > > the Alliance for Useful Evidence, a collaboration between NESTA and > > the Economic and Social Research Council. > > > Hearts, minds and funding > > > There are economic issues. Most of the predictable areas where data > > and evidence would be useful span different departments, and funding > > for research that involves multiple government departments is near- > > impossible to come by at the moment. "Only counter-terrorism gets > > cross-departmental funding," Wiles says. > > > And those at the frontline of all this may also need convincing. Some > > teachers have already expressed reservations. There may be problems > > with parents not wanting their children to take part in education > > trials. For instance, in a control group they will feel left out of > > innovation; in the experimental arm they will worry that the old ways > > were better. What's more, teachers may be tempted to halt a trial > > early if they feel it is not helping students. > > > Nevertheless, the government is working with NESTA and a range of > > backers to create a set of institutions dedicated to gathering > > evidence that will impact on public policy. One example is the Early > > Intervention Foundation, which helps local government evaluate schemes > > that help preschool learning amongst children who would otherwise > > enter standard education at a disadvantage. > > > There will be announcements of more initiatives in the next few weeks, > > says Geoff Mulgan, NESTA's chief executive . "We're hoping this year > > the UK will jump a step ahead of every other country in the world in > > having a set of institutions dedicated to generating evidence and > > helping it to be used in day-to-day decisions." > > > My own view is that intelligent systems could affect politics and our > > attitudes towards work and wealth distribution. It could even be the > > machines will give us rationality we are incapable of. > > > On 21 Jan, 08:59, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I don't agree with that now Don - though I once did. 'Grand > > > democratic socialism' never appealed much to me and in reality the > > > nearest to examples we have of it are in the West anyway. What I've > > > lost is any faith in the financial system and the politics of the > > > vote. I was in Bucharest in the late 80's with a Saul Bellow book > > > describing an academic finding the same corruption there as in his > > > home Chicago. Never liked Bellow much - but thought his description > > > of people who had read the great literature wandering around in the > > > freezing moral climate of the Soviet Block rang true for me - and what > > > bothers me is I feel the same in our system. I've eaten well on the > > > academic drivel Don and once believed it had some point beyond > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --
