Who are you calling an old pirate, Blackbeard? And what kind of nancy-boy pubs where they let woman in other than to be barmaids 'ave ye been drinkin' in?
On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 10:28:39 PM UTC, Chris Jenkins wrote: > > Only to an old pirate. > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 5:26 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Has anyone else noticed that a colon and a right parenthesis look like a >> symbol for a cut-throat razor? :) >> >> >> On Wednesday, 11 February 2015 22:19:52 UTC, Chris Jenkins wrote: >>> >>> No justifications, dear Gabs. Just a correction. :) >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 4:58 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Oh yes, What, who, whose questions are being ommitted is quite telling. >>>> There is a geometry in that too, of course. I explicitly said no blaming, >>>> and you come up with justifications?! For what? Yes, we were close to my >>>> wish come true, but then Facil appeared and it all started again. There is >>>> nothing I can do about it from where I sit. ;) >>>> >>>> Am Mittwoch, 11. Februar 2015 schrieb Chris Jenkins : >>>> >>>>> Oh, how quickly time muddles the recollection...perhaps you should go >>>>> back and review some of those posts before I left. It was for the same >>>>> reason Craig did, and had nothing to do with the legacy nature of an >>>>> email >>>>> list. I was overloaded between job and family, and simply couldn't keep >>>>> up >>>>> with the volume of communication (a strike against your assertion I left >>>>> because I knew it was an outdated format). There were hundreds of posts, >>>>> some of them quite combative (*ahem*), and any action taken by mods to >>>>> keep >>>>> the list adhering to its original intent was met with a hearty round of >>>>> "fuck you matey". It was draining. >>>>> >>>>> My goodbye: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/ >>>>> minds-eye/by$20chris/minds-eye/ZQB5vLJ2rSI/0GbRK-9nz-AJ >>>>> >>>>> Note that I put it to the group to decide, specifically because there >>>>> was no other way to effectively determine any sort of self governance, >>>>> and >>>>> I didn't feel I had the right to make an arbitrary decision without >>>>> input. >>>>> >>>>> You promptly attacked every facet of my decision (and I expected no >>>>> less). There was a long and robust conversation with a ton of familiar >>>>> faces (most missing now). Your first vote was for a natural death. Have >>>>> you >>>>> gotten your wish? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:37 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Over a thousand members, 5 actually post? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This question coming from you? YOU! Oh come on, Chrissy baby! This is >>>>>> an outdated format here that doesn't generate much traffic anymore. You >>>>>> know that, that`s your job to know that, that`s why you quit the mod job >>>>>> here! No one is blaming you for that but don´t play the innocent here! >>>>>> You >>>>>> introduced no transparent polling as to who should become your >>>>>> successor, >>>>>> but lay down your crown to the one who threw his hat in the ring, a >>>>>> method >>>>>> acceptable for the queen also. Nice try, dear. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2015-02-11 17:34 GMT+01:00 Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> >>>>>> : >>>>>> >>>>>>> Yep, he passed the bar some time ago, which is a big part of why he >>>>>>> no longer had time for these conversations. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> He's not alone in that, apparently. Over a thousand members, 5 >>>>>>> actually post? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 11:32 AM, archytas <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Such charm as ever Gabby. The term paedophile is not well taken >>>>>>>> here and may really insult Allan and make him sad. Molly was gone, in >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> sense of 'gone fishin'. Craig was becoming a lawyer. Hope he made >>>>>>>> it. He >>>>>>>> was a Mormon too. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It would have been nice to hear updates on Bacon. There were >>>>>>>> eleven Idols. I expect your superior model incorporates them, or >>>>>>>> perhaps >>>>>>>> spits spleen. We can only be sure of never seeing it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We model defeasibly now and use a lot of geometry because a lot of >>>>>>>> us think in shape. The idea is to make natural language usable by the >>>>>>>> machine. It has even more difficulty making sense of just what humans >>>>>>>> say >>>>>>>> than a pair of paranoid-schizoid positionists. We do consider >>>>>>>> 'shapes' >>>>>>>> like the molygon as underliers in our logic and they are instructive. >>>>>>>> A >>>>>>>> gabbygon is on the horizon - some no doubt thinking this is the best >>>>>>>> place. The general theory is called 'bag of words' - we look for >>>>>>>> shapes in >>>>>>>> text to give context meaning and identify root metaphors. You >>>>>>>> probably >>>>>>>> know how the SNERT stands out like a sore thumb? Maybe accusing old >>>>>>>> men >>>>>>>> and their dogs kind of thing? We are trying to find much more routine >>>>>>>> issues in word use to get at some of Tony has described as dishonesty >>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>> 'bag of words' samples taken from the 'marketplace' and other Idol >>>>>>>> conversations. What the machine establishes from metadata - >>>>>>>> considering we >>>>>>>> often haven't - is fascinating because we are not sure what it i doing >>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>> all. We have it working on the self-justification of psychopaths at >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> moment. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Gravity obviously collapses on seeing a photograph of me. Thanks >>>>>>>> for the memory. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 3:13:50 PM UTC, Gabby wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This here is my real lesson. You have been bringing up and pushing >>>>>>>>> this idol model so many times that I have forgotten what the one was >>>>>>>>> that I >>>>>>>>> found better. All that I remember is that it was either located in >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> alchemy or in the metaphysical poetry context. It was a perfect four >>>>>>>>> is all >>>>>>>>> that is left. It has been overwritten by your four idols. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2015-02-11 1:35 GMT+01:00 archytas <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Francis Bacon classified the intellectual fallacies of his time >>>>>>>>>> under four headings which he called idols. He distinguished them as >>>>>>>>>> idols >>>>>>>>>> of the Tribe, idols of the e, idols of the Marketplace and idols of >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> Theatre. An idol is an image, in this case held in the mind, which >>>>>>>>>> receives >>>>>>>>>> veneration but is without substance in itself. Bacon did not regard >>>>>>>>>> idols >>>>>>>>>> as symbols, but rather as fixations. They expand a bit like this: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 1. Tribe >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The example of desiring to see more order in the universe than is >>>>>>>>>> actually there is one of his examples of an idol of the tribe. He >>>>>>>>>> thinks >>>>>>>>>> that we all suffer from that one. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 2. Cave >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> An example of an idol of the cave (one of Bacon's examples) is >>>>>>>>>> that some minds are more drawn to new things and new ideas than they >>>>>>>>>> are to >>>>>>>>>> what has been around for a long time, while other minds are more >>>>>>>>>> drawn to >>>>>>>>>> "tradition" and "old school" ideas and ways than they are to >>>>>>>>>> newness. Bacon >>>>>>>>>> thinks we should become aware what our own tendency is so that we >>>>>>>>>> can make >>>>>>>>>> corrections for it. He hopes that by becoming aware of our own >>>>>>>>>> mind's >>>>>>>>>> tendencies toward loving novelty or tradition that we might be able >>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> "correct" for them and then hopefully see things more clearly and >>>>>>>>>> truly. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 3. Marketplace >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We often use words very loosely in common discourse. Bacon sees >>>>>>>>>> nothing wrong with that when we are just speaking ordinary language >>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>> friends and family. But, when it comes to trying to describe the >>>>>>>>>> world >>>>>>>>>> accurately and precisely, we should be aware of our tendency to use >>>>>>>>>> words >>>>>>>>>> loosely and should try to correct for it. When we are trying to >>>>>>>>>> speak >>>>>>>>>> precisely we should probably not say things like "The mountain is >>>>>>>>>> out >>>>>>>>>> today" (anyone outside of the Puget Sound area wouldn't have a clue >>>>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>>>> this means); or "The sun went under a cloud" (the sun did not go >>>>>>>>>> anywhere, >>>>>>>>>> let along underneath something); or "The sun came up this morning" >>>>>>>>>> (the >>>>>>>>>> earth actually just rotated). None of those sentences is precisely >>>>>>>>>> true, >>>>>>>>>> and if we use language imprecisely like this it can sometimes >>>>>>>>>> accidentally >>>>>>>>>> lead to huge misapprehensions about the world. Bacon thinks this >>>>>>>>>> misuse of >>>>>>>>>> words and language causes far more problems than we realize. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 4. Theatre >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If you can think of someone you know who has recently bought into >>>>>>>>>> a whole new religion or philosophy or psychology, you can probably >>>>>>>>>> see how >>>>>>>>>> they have suddenly come to interpret everything in the universe >>>>>>>>>> according >>>>>>>>>> to their new world view. That world view has become the new lens >>>>>>>>>> through >>>>>>>>>> which they perceive and interpret everything in their world. What >>>>>>>>>> Bacon >>>>>>>>>> says, though, is that we all do this. We all interpret the world >>>>>>>>>> through >>>>>>>>>> the lens of our own little world view. It's just easier to see other >>>>>>>>>> people >>>>>>>>>> doing it than it is to see ourselves doing it. Bacon thinks we >>>>>>>>>> should >>>>>>>>>> become aware of how these world views shape and distort our own >>>>>>>>>> perceptions >>>>>>>>>> of the world so that we might be able to correct for it a bit. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is old work. My questions are about how we recognise the >>>>>>>>>> 'second head' as a delusion yet move hardly at all on obvious >>>>>>>>>> political >>>>>>>>>> delusions like economics, votes counting, social care, public >>>>>>>>>> ignorance and >>>>>>>>>> the making invisible of many social issues. For me, deep questions >>>>>>>>>> on self >>>>>>>>>> are involved. The internet self is unlikely to be, as Tony says, >>>>>>>>>> the same >>>>>>>>>> as the 'real'one - but then we have know for much longer than the >>>>>>>>>> internet >>>>>>>>>> people don't say the same things in different contexts. In fact the >>>>>>>>>> man or >>>>>>>>>> woman in the bar often looks totally different the morning after, >>>>>>>>>> let alone >>>>>>>>>> what the politician says in a speech compared with when she is with >>>>>>>>>> her >>>>>>>>>> backroom boys in the spin room. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 10:17:04 PM UTC, archytas wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> At least with my knowledge of delusions I can imagine certain >>>>>>>>>>> people growing a second head overnight and shooting the wrong >>>>>>>>>>> spare. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 10:11:09 PM UTC, archytas wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> That seems to run to form Gabby. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 10:06:43 PM UTC, Gabby wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Facil picked up your question and gave his answer, I agreed >>>>>>>>>>>>> and then came Allan barking at Facil and I told Allan to watch >>>>>>>>>>>>> his tongue >>>>>>>>>>>>> or leave to his own thread. Only then did you enter the group >>>>>>>>>>>>> timeline to >>>>>>>>>>>>> start your big daddy has come home show. Now tell me what my >>>>>>>>>>>>> deceitful >>>>>>>>>>>>> intent was ... Or better, tell me tomorrow, I'm off for today. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Dienstag, 10. Februar 2015 schrieb archytas : >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The only people I meet like that tend to be online students >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tony. We use Skype video conferencing for a few sessions, so >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have actually >>>>>>>>>>>>>> seen each other. I'm quieter than people imagine, though none >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have yet >>>>>>>>>>>>>> said 'uglier'. I'm very prone to catch whatever bugs go around >>>>>>>>>>>>>> university >>>>>>>>>>>>>> environments too, so rather like electronic distance. With >>>>>>>>>>>>>> colleagues, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> situation is we know a lot more about each other than most in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> online >>>>>>>>>>>>>> encounters. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> My version has 'confusion' written through it. I say >>>>>>>>>>>>>> something, Gabby takes it another way, or knows what I intended >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and chooses >>>>>>>>>>>>>> another slant for whatever reason. Online, I assume she has a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sense of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> humour and a good turn with words. Deception is not part of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> first place. Just guesses with less risk than so called >>>>>>>>>>>>>> reality. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>> suppose the classic online deceiver is the groomer - where the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> intent is to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> set up and image and then meet the victim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 7:54:18 PM UTC, facilitator >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 2:11:33 PM UTC-5, archytas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The delusion that we are what we project is interesting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tony. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "We claim to be what we project". Your version allows for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reality mine allows for dishonesty. I think most people want to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> project a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> filtered image of themselves enough so that if we ever meet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we've only conversed with online we become slightly astonished >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different they appear and act in "real life". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> topic in the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/minds-eye/2_ICOWzarWY/unsu >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bscribe. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an >>>>>>>>>>>>>> email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic >>>>>>>>>> in the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/minds-eye/2_ICOWzarWY/unsu >>>>>>>>>> bscribe. >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email >>>>>>>>>> to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in >>>>>>> the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ >>>>>>> topic/minds-eye/2_ICOWzarWY/unsubscribe. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>>>>> [email protected]. >>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>>>> Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ >>>>> topic/minds-eye/2_ICOWzarWY/unsubscribe. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>>> [email protected]. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> --- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >>> -- >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> ""Minds Eye"" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
