What, Why & How do we Know ?
Rappaport’s first rule of any constructive dialogue that aims to increase knowledge is: You should attempt to re-express your interlocutor’s position so clearly, vividly and fairly that they say “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way myself.” Clearly, it’s an extreme version of understand-before-disagree and maybe life’s too short to expect to … Continue reading “Rappaport’s Rule or Steelman”
R.E.S.P.E.C.T is the only rule – Good Faith and Honest Intentions. (Once again for the hard of hearing, the ONLY RULE of engagement is good faith and respect for the engagement.) Rule #1 RESPECT – Understand & Question before Disagree & Criticize. Rule #2 RESPECT – No ad hominem attacks on the Individual or their Tribe. Rule … Continue reading “Rules of Rhetorical Engagement”
I have a string to my agenda I call “The Court Jester“. It’s not just about our “freedom” to mock, but also about how it is an essential part of progressive dialogue – dialogue towards human progress that is. Once we understand the limits to logically objective argumentation in human decision-making, proper dialogue is all … Continue reading “Context for Humour – The Memes Matter”
Apart from passing references, I’ve never made this the focal issue of any post or tweet, but it is a pet hate of mine in the way Twitter works. The baying mob is easy to see in the trolls that inhabit comment threads of pretty much all on-line content these days, so much so that … Continue reading “The Baying Mob”
Wow that’s made my day (decade?) a mention of @frankieboyle liking a @nntaleb post. All things are possible when such stars align? https://t.co/xhApSQ8z1B — Ian Glendinning (@psybertron) February 19, 2017 Nassim Taleb Excellent on Umberto Eco:pic.twitter.com/dQZ1LYq3vP@nntaleb — Paul Holdengraber (@holdengraber) May 7, 2016 The Paul Holdengraber tweet came into my feed because it was liked … Continue reading “Sustainable Reading – Antilibrary requires no apology.”
One way or another “scientism” is at the core of many of my conversations in recent years, and in fact several in recent days too. In the last decade and a half I’ve also become quite a fan of Wittgenstein; initially suggested by Sam Norton a theologian-philosopher on a discussion-board we both frequented in the early … Continue reading “Joining up some Dots of the Day on “Scientism””
I made a link to the Dave Rubin / Steven Fry conversation a couple of days ago. I was making the connection between Julian Baggini’s piece of why simple – black and white – moral logic seems to be more popular than anything that appears more complicated or thoughtful, and linking this to some of … Continue reading “When Rationality is PC – Simplistication and Infantilism”
Hat tip to @SamiraShackle for drawing my attention to @FrankieBoyle’s Comment is Free piece in the Grauniad. The theme and conclusion is telegraphed in the title, but the content is explicitly about the seemingly deranged rationale of supporting vaguely motivated bombing in Syria but resisting direct support for Syrian refugees. It’s a very intelligent read, … Continue reading “Our addiction to “Weary Rationale” @FrankieBoyle”