From: Devon White (devon@thegreatwork.com)
Date: Tue May 13 2003 - 23:24:46 MDT
Lee Corbin wrote:
>>What I hate is people pretending they're objective, when they're not.
We agree on this. To me, this is one of the most important portions of this
discussion.
Subjective experience masquerading as objective "reality."
As other threads on this list indicate, information is
obviously passed through the filters of the network and/or the network
representative and
as such take on those entities particular biases
.
It seems much more respectful to viewers to have something like E-prime*
used in
reporting news- although i think this would be a little too combersome
especially with the
attention span that i assume of most network viewers.
In any case, i think it would behoove our intelligence as a culture if
reporters and talk show hosts
would say things like, "in my opinion" etc . . . and consistently remind the
viewer that this is the
subjective experience of the reporter (where appropriate) and would cite
sources when it is
not their opinion but the "facts" as interpreted or reported by someone
else.
I find it unfortunate that relativistic and quantum logic has not reached
the vernacular yet.
It seems to me that the endless treatment of "reality" as some block-like,
objective entity
as opposed to what seems to me the more accurate description of "reality" as
a subective
and verb-like experience causes more stupidity and "bad-thinking" than
almost any other
form of brainwashing out there.
I think that the majority of Americans (people less interested in the rigor
of intellect and logic
of a group like this as well as less inclined or able to analyze the details
and structure of
arguments being presented to them) are consistently tricked, duped,
programmed - by a
language that denies or regretfully forgets the major discoveries made by
physicists in the 1920's
and anthropologists ever since. Namely, that there are multiple
interpretations of every situation,
i.e. light seem like a wave if we test it like this and a particle if we do
it like this.
i.e. peace loving hippies or dirty, jobless, commies
i.e. "Jimmy Carter takes a cheap shot at president Bush!" or "Jimmy Carter,
Tellin' it like it is."
etc . . .
Though i don't expect O'Reilly to discuss the implications of Schroedinger's
Cat or Godel's Proof
with his guests, i think a little respect by all of the talk show hosts and
news reporters for the intelligence
(latent as it may be in some cases) of the people would do us all a lot of
good.
Maybe general semantics and a course of logic should be included in
journalism schools.
Seems to me that a little relativity and self-reflexivity could go a long
way in making people more aware and in
stopping the stupidity inherent in the presupposition that there is a
"right" opinion as opposed to a more or less
accurate or pragmatic opinion.
*(See http://www.generalsemantics.org/Articles/E-Prime_intro.htm and
http://www.angelfire.com/nd/danscorpio/ep2.html for basic understanding of
E-prime)
-=devon=-
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 13 2003 - 23:35:35 MDT