| |
|
  |
 Pheromemes : Semeiotics of Ovular Ideas, Ξ-Goats + <Esc>-Goats = Go, Nads, Go! |
|
|
| Moulton |
|
Anthropologist from Mars
Group: Contributors
Posts: 10,222
Joined:
From: Greater Boston
Member No.: 3,670
|
Fifty years ago, biologists discovered pheromones. The name means "to transfer" and "to excite". By analogy, let us consider pheromemes — those seminal notions and ideas that manage to arouse and excite others, for better or for worse. In the long march to construct and compile the sum of all human knowledge, insight, and wisdom, a few key ideas are transformational. Transformational ideas are also dangerous ideas, since they overthrow the status quo, thereby threatening those whose livelihood depends on preservation of the status quo. In this thread, let's explore pheromemes which arouse, excite, and transform those who are exposed to such epiphany-inducing twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Kato |
|
dhd
Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined:
Member No.: 767
|
I don't know if this counts - but:one of your own Wikipedia Review memes eventually permeated my consciousness after 1000s of obscuring posts, Moulton. Concocting and Publishing a Haphazard Theory of Mind Moulton is always banging on about this. And he has on occasion linked to the Wikipedia article, which describes a " theory of mind" as: QUOTE(Wikipedia) Theory of mind is the ability to attribute mental states — beliefs, intents, desires, pretending, knowledge, etc.—to oneself and others. As originally defined, it enables one to understand that mental states can be the cause of—and thus be used to explain and predict—others’ behavior When Moulton refers to "Theory of Mind" here, he is usually doing so in a negative sense, to explain the "unseemly" practice of an internet figure attributing some intention or motivation to another internet figure, based on little or no evidence, and certainly no real life interaction. This happens all the time on Wikipedia, where many unchecked assertions are written about other editors' frames of mind, with scarcely a thought to the consequences. The classic example is: QUOTE User:XYZ is only here to troll Moulton, in his role as an uber-scientist, maintains that published interactions of the sort we see on WP, and here at WR, should have some semblance of Scientific Method about them. This chimes with his evangelizing of "Ethics in Media" - and his constant calls for an intense process of deductive reasoning to be undertaken before statements are published as "fact" in any forum. When Moulton famously challenged the assertions made on a WP biography of a colleague, one of his gripes was that the article writers had published " as encyclopedic fact a rather dubious theory of mind" of his colleague's intentions regarding a well known sceintific petition. Here, Moulton describes the concoction of a "haphazard theory of mind" as "one of the seeds of lunatic social drama." Meaning that to assume, and then publish an ill-thought out assertion about another person's intentions, is a sure fire way of causing a grim shitstorm. And such behavior will likely have negative consequences for all concerned. Everybody loses. Whether this is on WP, on WR or any other such venue. Having seen this type of thing time and again, I can only conclude that Moulton is correct. (Most of us fail to to live by these lessons, including Moulton himself, it should be said.) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Moulton |
|
Anthropologist from Mars
Group: Contributors
Posts: 10,222
Joined:
From: Greater Boston
Member No.: 3,670
|
QUOTE(Kato @ Mon 19th January 2009, 8:00am)  Most of us fail to to live by these lessons, including Moulton himself, it should be said. Which brings me around to yet another irritating pheromeme — Peter Senge's notion of Ethical Best Practices for a successful Learning Organization. Leaving aside for a moment the difficult question of ascending Kohlberg's Ladder of Ethical Reasoning, there is little doubt that my efforts to develop personal Best Practices as a Science Educator has been a spectacular failure. I wish I could declare it an epic failure, because then I could at least call upon the Homeric gods to memorialize my dramatic failure in decently rhymed iambic pentameter instead of shreklisch dithyrambic vexameter. Nonetheless, I was buoyed to note that Bishzilla, that irascible caricature of Dinosaur Brains, has embraced the pheromeme of Ethical Integrity as a worthy personal goal for an upwardly aspiring reptile. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Moulton |
|
Anthropologist from Mars
Group: Contributors
Posts: 10,222
Joined:
From: Greater Boston
Member No.: 3,670
|
Willful Intellectual DishonestyI have a new pheromeme to begin working on this weekend... In academic work, it is not uncommon to make (and correct) mistakes in one's understanding, analysis, or model of the subject being studied. There are unrecognized or unidentified mistakes. There are persistent self-delusions. And then there is willful intellectual dishonesty. This weekend's topic in Epistemology would be this: How can a reviewer recognize an instance of willful intellectual dishonesty on the part of another scholar? What is the best practice for identifying, confirming, and remediating an instance of willful intellectual dishonesty?By way of example, did Jimbo and his jejune sychophants from IDCab engage in willful intellectual dishonesty when they engaged with me and JWSchmidt? How can that be objectively determined? What does it take, beyond identifying a mistake to classify it as willful intellectual dishonesty (rather than simply a careless error by an imperfect instance of otherwise sincere scholarship)? In particular, is there a variety of willful intellectual dishonesty that recurs systematically (rather than haphazardly) in the WikiSphere? I would nominate haphazard theories of mind as a candidate for recurring willful intellectual dishonesty in WikiCulture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Jon Awbrey |
|
Ï„á½° δΠμοι παθήματα μαθήματα γÎγονε
Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,783
Joined:
From: Meat Puppet Nation
Member No.: 5,619
|
Dymanic Entry —No time today, so I'll just start a list of other themes that come to mind under this head: Willful Suspension Of Disbelief (WSOD) Willful Suspension Of Critical Thinking (WSOCT) Willful Ignorance Killing Intellect Altogether (WIKIA) Willful Inhibition Of Disgust (WIOD) — And A Tip O' Th' Hat 2 GPS 4 That 1 Willful Affectation Of Being A Dumbass (WAOBAD) To Be Continued … Ja³ (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Moulton |
|
Anthropologist from Mars
Group: Contributors
Posts: 10,222
Joined:
From: Greater Boston
Member No.: 3,670
|
The US Marines have a Creed known as " My Rifle" that goes like this:
This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
My rifle is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life.
My rifle, without me, is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless. I must fire my rifle true. I must shoot straighter than my enemy who is trying to kill me. I must shoot him before he shoots me. I will . . . .
My rifle and I know that what counts in this war is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our burst, nor the smoke we make. We know that it is the hits that count. We will hit . . . .
My rifle is human, even as I, because it is my life. Thus, I will learn it as a brother. I will learn its weaknesses, its strengths, its parts, its accessories, its sights, and its barrel. I will ever guard it against the ravages of weather and damage. I will keep my rifle clean and ready, even as I am clean and ready. We will become part of each other. We will . . . .
Before God I swear this creed. My rifle and I are the defenders of my country. We are the masters of our enemy. We are the saviors of my life.
So be it, until victory is America's and there is no enemy, but Peace!
Now compare the Creed of the US Marines to this variation, which I call "My Brain" ...
This is my brain. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
My brain is my best friend. It is my life. I must master its use as I must master my life.
My brain, without the breath of life, is useless. Without my brain, I am useless. I must employ my brain truly and imaginatively. I must think more clearly than my adversary who is trying to outsmart me. I must outthink him before he does something stupid. I will . . . .
My brain and I know that what counts in this life is not the verbal barbs we fire, the noise of our spam, nor the smoke and mirrors we gin up. We know that it is the insights that count. We will enlighten . . . .
My brain is organic, even as I, because it sustains the life of the mind. Thus, I will learn to use it as a constant companion. I will learn its weaknesses, its strengths, its aspects, its senses, its insights, and its expressions. I will ever guard it against the ravages of political trespass and scapegoating. I will keep my brain clean and alert, even as I am clean and ready. We will become part of each other. We will . . . .
Before God I swear this creed. My brain and I are the creators of my life experience. We are the masters of our perennial adversaries of fear and ignorance. We are the saviors of a life worth living.
So be it, until serenity is our victory and there is no fear and no ignorance, but Peace of Mind!
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Jon Awbrey |
|
Ï„á½° δΠμοι παθήματα μαθήματα γÎγονε
Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,783
Joined:
From: Meat Puppet Nation
Member No.: 5,619
|
QUOTE(Moulton @ Sun 25th January 2009, 3:48am) The US Marines have a Creed known as " My Rifle" that goes like this: …The way I learned it, it went a bit like this: QUOTE
This is my Rifle [respondent points to his rifle]
This is my Gun [respondent points to his groin]
This un's fer Shooting [respondent points to his rifle]
This un's fer Fun [respondent points to his groin]
Sadly, all too Sadist Sackly, Yer Wikipediot Infant-rie Hain't yet larned the diff. Ja³ (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Jon Awbrey |
|
Ï„á½° δΠμοι παθήματα μαθήματα γÎγονε
Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,783
Joined:
From: Meat Puppet Nation
Member No.: 5,619
|
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 6th February 2009, 5:52am) Narcissism and ReframingI was gratified to see Somey and Milton Roe pick up and expand on the pheromemes of Narcissism and Reframing. I was especially intrigued by the insight that these two salient character traits of Wikipedians are linked vie a self-reinforcing pathological feedback loop that is resistant (perhaps even immune) to outside corrective influences. Playground bullies are often Narcissists who arrogantly frame the rules to suit themselves and who are quick to excoriate and punish any who would deviate from their insular, jejune, and distorted world view. Framee, Re-Frame Thyself. Ja, Ja, Ja (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/sleep.gif) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Kato |
|
dhd
Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined:
Member No.: 767
|
QUOTE(Moulton @ Tue 17th February 2009, 2:06pm) SnarkQUOTE(NPR Morning Edition @ February 17, 2009) A new book says snark is threatening to take over how Americans converse. Snark is a tone of teasing or snideness. David Denby is the author of Snark. He talks with Ari Shapiro about how clever put-downs and cheap shots are coarsening public debate. Ari Shapiro discusses with author David Denby the subtle distinctions between satire, irony, and snark. Click on the link to listen to the audio at NPR. Americans often seem unerringly free of teasing, snideness, irony and cheap shots. I've sometimes theorized that globalization is also working the other way round. On the surface, everyone moans about being swamped by US culture. But perhaps some of it is going the other way, and the exposure to British culture - where teasing, snideness, irony and cheap shots is a Way of Life - is having an impact in the US. If folks find that teasing, snideness, irony and cheap shots are hurtful, then maybe take a British view. If it's above the belt, it's just jousting, a sport, and everyone shakes hands at the end of it. Your Narcissistic Wounding pleas wouldn't last five minutes in The House of Commons, Moulton. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xUy2inkGHQ&feature=related |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |
