Stuff like--maybe revolution? On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Marcus Daniels <mar...@snoutfarm.com> wrote:
> Russ writes: > > > "I say exactly what Roberts said: that identifying yet more example of > Trump's dishonest won't convince anyone on either side. So perhaps we > should get beyond that." > > Yeah, time for lawyers, boycotts, and stuff like that. > > > Marcus > ------------------------------ > *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> on behalf of Russ Abbott < > russ.abb...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, September 14, 2017 10:25:43 AM > > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] The World Turned Upside Down (and what to do about > it) > > Now that I've actually read the article I wouldn't change what I wrote, > but I'd like to add a brief comment. > > I agree with Roberts that "it’s been a long time since I felt the thinness > of the veneer of civilization and our vulnerability to a sequence of events > that might threaten not just the policy positions I might favor but the > very existence of the American experiment." > > But I disagree with Roberts that the problem is as symmetric as he makes > it out. (That was Marcus's point.) He gives an example of Trump lying > followed by the press fact checking him. That's followed by Trump > supporters concluding that the press is unfair and Trump opponents becoming > even more convinced that Trump is a lying buffoon. I agree that that all > happens. (On Google+ where I post a lot, I often make that point when > someone posts a clear example of Trump's hying and hypocrisy. I say exactly > what Roberts said: that identifying yet more example of Trump's dishonest > won't convince anyone on either side. So perhaps we should get beyond > that.) But as I said, it's not symmetric. When Trump lies yet another > time, it is the media's job to fact check him. (Roberts agrees with that.) > Then what? Trump and his supporters then attack the media. That's not part > of our political norms. When a politician is fact-checked we expect the > politician to respond honestly and his supporters to do likewise. The fact > that the Trump side continually breaks norms cannot be blamed on the Trump > opponents. Unfortunately Roberts is too committed to the conservative side > to be honest about that. His piece would have been a lot better if he had. > > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:10 AM Russ Abbott <russ.abb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> There was a good TED talk >> <https://www.ted.com/talks/caitlin_quattromani_and_lauran_arledge_how_our_friendship_survives_our_opposing_politics?rss#t-852200> >> by two women who remained friends even though they differed significantly >> politically. It's important, I believe, to be able to stay friends -- or at >> remain on civil terms -- with people we disagree with. However, I think >> that Marcus is right that in certain situations that's not the most >> important issue. As he said, politics today -- and for the past 2 decades >> or so -- has not been symmetric. One side, for the most part, has lived by >> the norm of wanting to remain on civil terms with the other side; the other >> side, has taken as its priority to grab as much power as possible without >> regard to anything else. Civil relations be damned. When an aggressor >> country invades a peaceful neighbor the priority is not to stay on civil >> terms; it's to survive and repel the invasion. When a psychopath attacks >> you, one's priority is not to stay on civil terms; it's to defend oneself >> against the attack. I'm sure there there are honest and civilized >> conservatives -- for example Ross Douthat of the NYT -- but so many of them >> don't care about remaining on civil terms. Their priority is to steal as >> much as possible in any way possible. When Obama nominated Garland and >> McConnell refused to hold hearings, Obama and Garland stayed on civil terms >> with McConnell. That didn't make peace or move any useful process forward. >> In that case it's not clear what else could have been done, but striving >> for civility in the face of rampant aggression and evil makes no sense. >> That's why no society can survive without some sort of norm enforcement >> mechanism, e.g., police, social disapproval, etc. Civility does not solve >> every problem. >> >> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:40 AM Marcus Daniels <mar...@snoutfarm.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Nick writes: >>> >>> >>> "Allow me to heckle, if you will. Marcus, your post exemplifies a >>> theory of human nature which is summarized by the motto, *in caloris >>> veritas. * >>> It is the idea that we speak the truth when we speak in the heat of the >>> moment. Trump is a wonderful demonstration of the weakness of this theory: >>> he always speaks impulsively, but never manages to speak the truth about >>> anything. I think it’s equally plausible to assert that we come closest to >>> the truth of any matter when we speak with the keenest awareness of the >>> social consequences of what we are saying." >>> >>> That's a plausible assertion if the topic is about the social properties >>> of the group. I don't see why it is plausible if the topic is some >>> completely different thing, say, like how an engine works, or the >>> diplomatic conditions in North Korea. But I wasn't talking about speaking >>> impulsively, I was talking about speaking without concern for how certain >>> people feel, or what they will do, and only being willing to get down to >>> the brass tacks with them (if there is going to by any interaction at >>> all). I don't see any reason to be generous and forgiving in the way >>> Roberts' describes; it doesn't matter to me how hard the feelings are or >>> how deep the divisions go. I think that is bad advice because it rewards >>> the bully, and encourages him/them to do it again and again, knowing that >>> the opposition with chicken-out in end in the name of civility. So, unlike >>> Steve, I'm not optimizing for peace. (That's a fine thing for him to >>> optimize for, but that's him.) It reminds me of what Christopher >>> Hitchens' said a decade ago about a possible advanced agenda of Christian >>> conservatives: "It wouldn't last very long and would, I hope, lead to >>> civil war, which they will lose, but for which it would be a great pleasure >>> to take part." >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> on behalf of Nick Thompson < >>> nickthomp...@earthlink.net> >>> *Sent:* Thursday, September 14, 2017 9:11:26 AM >>> *To:* 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' >>> >>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] The World Turned Upside Down (and what to do >>> about it) >>> >>> Dear Marcus, Owen >>> >>> >>> >>> Allow me to heckle, if you will. Marcus, your post exemplifies a theory >>> of human nature which is summarized by the motto, *in caloris veritas. >>> *It is the idea that we speak the truth when we speak in the heat of >>> the moment. Trump is a wonderful demonstration of the weakness of this >>> theory: he always speaks impulsively, but never manages to speak the truth >>> about anything. I think it’s equally plausible to assert that we come >>> closest to the truth of any matter when we speak with the keenest awareness >>> of the social consequences of what we are saying. >>> >>> >>> >>> Hey Frank; did I get the Latin right? >>> >>> >>> >>> Nick >>> >>> >>> >>> Nicholas S. Thompson >>> >>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology >>> >>> Clark University >>> >>> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Marcus >>> Daniels >>> *Sent:* Thursday, September 14, 2017 12:21 AM >>> *To:* Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> >>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] The World Turned Upside Down (and what to do >>> about it) >>> >>> >>> >>> Owen, >>> >>> >>> >>> On several occasions over the years, I have been advised by `neural >>> third parties' that the content of my writing can be edgy, but that in >>> person I'm "Not that way" or "He's fine." Now, some people think that >>> in-person interactions are more representative of a person's character. >>> That if we just get in front of one another and _see_ the others' feelings, >>> all conflict will be resolved. No. I would suggest Roberts' (Friedman, >>> and other popular writers) preoccupation with civility is mistaken. >>> Civility may keep people from killing each other, temporarily, but it >>> certainly isn't informative. It is just the application of social skill, >>> and this is not the same thing as listening, thinking, or being honest in >>> debate. It is a weak facilitator. The problem with the current situation >>> is that one side is just dishonest. In the ternary world of politics, the >>> `don't care' folks are in the crossfire, and that is appropriate. >>> >>> >>> >>> Marcus >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> on behalf of Owen Densmore < >>> o...@backspaces.net> >>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 13, 2017 9:04:42 PM >>> *To:* Complexity Coffee Group >>> *Subject:* [FRIAM] The World Turned Upside Down (and what to do about >>> it) >>> >>> >>> >>> Medium, my current outlet of choice, has an interesting "story" (Medium >>> deals in Stories, not Tech nor Politics nor ...). It echos a lot of what >>> we've been dealing with. >>> >>> >>> >>> https://medium.com/@russroberts/the-world-turned- >>> upside-down-and-what-to-do-about-it-2dc27d1cf5f5 >>> >>> >>> >>> Somewhat dark, but awfully close to home. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- Owen >>> >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> >> -- >> Russ Abbott >> Professor, Computer Science >> California State University, Los Angeles >> > -- > Russ Abbott > Professor, Computer Science > California State University, Los Angeles > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove > -- Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D. President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy emergentdiplomacy.org Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA Visiting Professor in Integrative Peacebuilding Saint Paul University Ottawa, Ontario, Canada merlelefk...@gmail.com <merlelef...@gmail.com> mobile: (303) 859-5609 skype: merle.lelfkoff2 twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
