Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 46
  1. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,489
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    6088
    Rep Adjustment Power
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by NAOS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This is probably the most problematic piece I've encountered from the Atlantic. There's a huge literature out there on the development of the Epistemological Crisis we find ourselves in, and I will save this particular piece in the subfile titled "really bad reiterations of the subjective-objective dichotomy: how much of this **** will we now have to suffer through?"

    I disagree with much of his historicizing; he doesn't bother to outline a theory of truth; he identifies the wrong bogeymen on pretty much every scale; he totally butchers several lines of thought emerging from the 60s; etc. A truly bad moment for the Atlantic.
    There's a great deal I take exception to in Andersen's Atlantic piece, and much of it does revolve around his interpretation of influences, trends, and ideas born in the 60's and early 70's. That said, I've always thought Truth was a standard to aim for. And we seem to be in a period where alternative facts are being set up as somehow equally valid as truths. Not that truth, in any subject or situation is that easy to discern. There is history as it happened, and history as it's written, and as it's written can introduce relativism. But, shall we get to the point that the alternate fact supported by the Flat Earth Society is equally as valid as believing the Earth is a globe?
    Likes Jonah liked this post

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,489
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    6088
    Rep Adjustment Power
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by NAOS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    just read this. Good idea.
    I'm sure you're right, but I could not resist pointing out how Dutch's comment identified him as a fake libertarian.

  4. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,489
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    6088
    Rep Adjustment Power
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Scat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    When the prominent poster in a thread is the OP...
    To post the thread with the information I wanted to post required 3 comments to start, or else one gigantic comment. I went with the former. The third posting dealt with one example of the overall topic, the rise of fake news and alternative media narratives in 21st century America. That article showed the close parallels between the Alt Right and Alt Left, both are essentially anti-globalist for example, and had a balance that might make it of value to anyone, regardless of where a person fell on the political spectrum.

    I never expected that the thread would get dozens or hundreds of comments. But, we are living in an age where fake news, alternative facts, and alternative media outlets vie with mainstream media outlets, and these trends are important in the history we are living through

  5. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,489
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    6088
    Rep Adjustment Power
    30
    My thanks to whichever mod corrected the spelling error in the subject line....

  6. #20
    Senior Member NAOS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Jazz Forum
    Posts
    15,681
    Mentioned
    85 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    28515
    Rep Adjustment Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Red View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There's a great deal I take exception to in Andersen's Atlantic piece, and much of it does revolve around his interpretation of influences, trends, and ideas born in the 60's and early 70's. That said, I've always thought Truth was a standard to aim for. And we seem to be in a period where alternative facts are being set up as somehow equally valid as truths. Not that truth, in any subject or situation is that easy to discern. There is history as it happened, and history as it's written, and as it's written can introduce relativism. But, shall we get to the point that the alternate fact supported by the Flat Earth Society is equally as valid as believing the Earth is a globe?
    I don't disagree with the problem; I've consistently wrung my hands over epistemological problem and rampant relativism as soon as I understood the forces in play and their apparent intractability. We've been accelerating within those orbits, no doubt. But one thing I definitely won't settle for is some facile or wistful view about the past and its easier relationship to truth. Nor will I be around while the mass culture takes 10 full steps back on the subjectivity-objectivity problem -- and where the "left" is pounding the streets on the side of rationality and objectivity in way Andersen does here. Especially if that means largely misidentifying the bogeymen and butchering the huge breakthroughs toward truth that emerged from the 20th century.

    Andersen has identified a problem that many cultural critics have identified. Good for him? He then proceeds to botch just about every other aspect of the project (I'll give him a pass on the contemporary stuff that fills his piece, but, again, most of that is far from the cutting edge of cultural criticism).
    {size/HUGE} RUDY {/size}
    Likes Jonah, Red liked this post

  7. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    14,250
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    7751
    Rep Adjustment Power
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Red View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm sure you're right, but I could not resist pointing out how Dutch's comment identified him as a fake libertarian.
    how am i a fake libertarian you never took a gander at the libertarian ideals, and their are different kind.

    but i have read socialist masterpieces from marx his books, to hitlers mein kampf and mouslinini manifesto!
    true socialist communistic masterpieces!
    01-21-2013
    I, HeavenHarris, hereby pledge to my fellow JFC'rs that I will no longer give out neg-reps. All it does is cause negative things, like fights, drama, bitching, ill will, bad feelings, etc.
    Love, not hate, is the answer bros and moes.

    LOL Lol breaks his pledge 5 days later hahahaha

  8. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    413
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    2343
    Rep Adjustment Power
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by NAOS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't disagree with the problem; I've consistently wrung my hands over epistemological problem and rampant relativism as soon as I understood the forces in play and their apparent intractability. We've been accelerating within those orbits, no doubt. But one thing I definitely won't settle for is some facile or wistful view about the past and its easier relationship to truth. Nor will I be around while the mass culture takes 10 full steps back on the subjectivity-objectivity problem -- and where the "left" is pounding the streets on the side of rationality and objectivity in way Andersen does here. Especially if that means largely misidentifying the bogeymen and butchering the huge breakthroughs toward truth that emerged from the 20th century.

    Andersen has identified a problem that many cultural critics have identified. Good for him? He then proceeds to botch just about every other aspect of the project (I'll give him a pass on the contemporary stuff that fills his piece, but, again, most of that is far from the cutting edge of cultural criticism).
    One or two names or links to the critics you have in mind would be appreciated.

  9. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    2,991
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    185
    Rep Adjustment Power
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by NAOS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't disagree with the problem; I've consistently wrung my hands over epistemological problem and rampant relativism as soon as I understood the forces in play and their apparent intractability. We've been accelerating within those orbits, no doubt. But one thing I definitely won't settle for is some facile or wistful view about the past and its easier relationship to truth. Nor will I be around while the mass culture takes 10 full steps back on the subjectivity-objectivity problem -- and where the "left" is pounding the streets on the side of rationality and objectivity in way Andersen does here. Especially if that means largely misidentifying the bogeymen and butchering the huge breakthroughs toward truth that emerged from the 20th century.

    Andersen has identified a problem that many cultural critics have identified. Good for him? He then proceeds to botch just about every other aspect of the project (I'll give him a pass on the contemporary stuff that fills his piece, but, again, most of that is far from the cutting edge of cultural criticism).
    Easy peesy. We have a tendency to treat news like Knowledge by Acquaintance rather then Knowledge by Description. Meaning you think yer familiar with a topic like yer familiar with a person. In other languages they have differnt. Terms fer knowin someone an knowin somethink. English don't. We treat are news like tha subject matter is someone we know not somethink we actually comprehend.
    Im okay with getting rid of people. - @gregbroncster

    👆THREAD IMPROVEMENT 👆


  10. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,489
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    6088
    Rep Adjustment Power
    30
    Well, here's the thing from where I stand...

    Kelly Anne Conway was the first administration official to use the phrase "alternative facts". But if we see that as an effort to create an equivalency between truth and fiction, fact and falsehood, it's difficult to see how that really helps the body politic.

    And it's happening at a time where, as a nation, we may be more divided since the Civil War.

    I have a close friend, who declined my offer to view the Vice News footage of the Friday night torch led parade in Charlottesville. The reason he gave was "the media lies. I don't have to watch it. It's fake". Even telling him that a white nationalist leader had invited Vice News to film him made no difference. It was fake, and he did not have to watch it to know it was fake.

    This is happening everywhere, to the extent there are now two sets of realities. With two narratives of current events in America. I am sorry if I have to look at people like Trump, Spicer, Conway, etc. as the drivers of an effort to create an alternative world that seems detached from the real world. That's my bias, but it sure seems like that is what is happening. It sure seems like creating this equivalency can be laid at their feet at this time.

    If we want two Americas unable to communicate with each other, that's one way to go about ensuring those two Americas will grow further apart and not communicate. Not only is that detrimental, but it's difficult to see how we can fail to recognize how injurious to our political and societal health that can be. And that's why I started this thread. If I reach even a handful of people interested and able to agree we should be concerned with creating an equivalency tween fact and fiction, that's good enough for me.

  11. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,489
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    6088
    Rep Adjustment Power
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by NAOS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't disagree with the problem; I've consistently wrung my hands over epistemological problem and rampant relativism as soon as I understood the forces in play and their apparent intractability. We've been accelerating within those orbits, no doubt. But one thing I definitely won't settle for is some facile or wistful view about the past and its easier relationship to truth. Nor will I be around while the mass culture takes 10 full steps back on the subjectivity-objectivity problem -- and where the "left" is pounding the streets on the side of rationality and objectivity in way Andersen does here. Especially if that means largely misidentifying the bogeymen and butchering the huge breakthroughs toward truth that emerged from the 20th century.

    Andersen has identified a problem that many cultural critics have identified. Good for him? He then proceeds to botch just about every other aspect of the project (I'll give him a pass on the contemporary stuff that fills his piece, but, again, most of that is far from the cutting edge of cultural criticism).
    I love science, and even majored in geology before switching my focus to social science. But, I'm not into what I call Scientism, and so I really disagree with Andersen's easy dismissal of trends I participated in during the 60's and 70's, and which I still consider valuable. He identified, and essentially, castigated as irrational and detrimental to rationality things that I don't think were harmful at all. Just as one example, studies of near death experiences, NDE's. It's a fascinating subject, and I won't piss on it the way he does.

    The end of his essay, on the other hand, dealing with the rise of Trump, I just thought he nailed Trump in large part. I disagreed with his simplistic approach, and his tracing the roots entirely to the 60's, the New Age, etc. I think we need to consider the erosion of trust in all manner of authority as well. Which, in my lifetime, began with the assassination of JFK, but has now extended to a distrust in scientific authority, etc...

  12. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    2,991
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    185
    Rep Adjustment Power
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Red View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Well, here's the thing from where I stand...

    Kelly Anne Conway was the first administration official to use the phrase "alternative facts". But if we see that as an effort to create an equivalency between truth and fiction, fact and falsehood, it's difficult to see how that really helps the body politic.

    And it's happening at a time where, as a nation, we may be more divided since the Civil War.

    I have a close friend, who declined my offer to view the Vice News footage of the Friday night torch led parade in Charlottesville. The reason he gave was "the media lies. I don't have to watch it. It's fake". Even telling him that a white nationalist leader had invited Vice News to film him made no difference. It was fake, and he did not have to watch it to know it was fake.

    This is happening everywhere, to the extent there are now two sets of realities. With two narratives of current events in America. I am sorry if I have to look at people like Trump, Spicer, Conway, etc. as the drivers of an effort to create an alternative world that seems detached from the real world. That's my bias, but it sure seems like that is what is happening. It sure seems like creating this equivalency can be laid at their feet at this time.

    If we want two Americas unable to communicate with each other, that's one way to go about ensuring those two Americas will grow further apart and not communicate. Not only is that detrimental, but it's difficult to see how we can fail to recognize how injurious to our political and societal health that can be. And that's why I started this thread. If I reach even a handful of people interested and able to agree we should be concerned with creating an equivalency tween fact and fiction, that's good enough for me.
    You do realize you are self contradictory in the fact that you claim you are biased at the same time attackin bias? You also flung more Never Trump poop, confirmin what yer complainin bout. Than ya went on ta rant bout some great American divide that is not true an completely fabricated by your own departure from reality. Ya think it is true but facts would disagree. Ya really think we are as divided as civil war? Laughable. More divided then Vietnam? LOL son I lived through them years an the US oil crisis an I kin tell ya first hand it ain't no differnt taday.
    Im okay with getting rid of people. - @gregbroncster

    👆THREAD IMPROVEMENT 👆


  13. #27
    Premium Member Harambe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    5,136
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    23554
    Rep Adjustment Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Boris View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You do realize you are self contradictory in the fact that you claim you are biased at the same time attackin bias? You also flung more Never Trump poop, confirmin what yer complainin bout. Than ya went on ta rant bout some great American divide that is not true an completely fabricated by your own departure from reality. Ya think it is true but facts would disagree. Ya really think we are as divided as civil war? Laughable. More divided then Vietnam? LOL son I lived through them years an the US oil crisis an I kin tell ya first hand it ain't no differnt taday.
    I'm convinced you do not get to criticize anyone about anything concerning "bias".
    No one wants civility here.

  14. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    2,991
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    185
    Rep Adjustment Power
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Boris View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Easy peesy. We have a tendency to treat news like Knowledge by Acquaintance rather then Knowledge by Description. Meaning you think yer familiar with a topic like yer familiar with a person. In other languages they have differnt. Terms fer knowin someone an knowin somethink. English don't. We treat are news like tha subject matter is someone we know not somethink we actually comprehend.
    To piggyback on this an give example, young people tend ta think they know why we are friends with Saudi Arabia an why we fight these wars. They treat this with Knowledge by Acquaintance. They do not know the history of Saudi Arabia's oil embargo that was economical warfare against the US akin ta are economic warfare against Russia Iran North Korea. They do not know 1 billion petro dollars went ta funding fundamentalist Wahhabism an funneled ta create Al-Queda an tha Taliban.

    So what Kissinger an tha Neo-cons do? We made peace with Saudis an created regime consent change an we continue to charter ta them in Middle East policy so they do not engage in a nother economic war. They got us by the balls.

    But you kids do not know any of this an yet ya think you kin have a proper perspective of war cause world peace Miss America Padgent winners to ya so.

    No Knowledge by Description only Aquaintence.
    Im okay with getting rid of people. - @gregbroncster

    👆THREAD IMPROVEMENT 👆


  15. #29
    Senior Member NAOS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Jazz Forum
    Posts
    15,681
    Mentioned
    85 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    28515
    Rep Adjustment Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    One or two names or links to the critics you have in mind would be appreciated.
    Well, in the past few years this stuff has been pretty lively on the blogosphere. Julian Sanchez (search "coda on closure") and even David Frum (search "How the GOP Got Stuck in the Past") have written lightning rods that have produced interesting speculations on this subject.

    More generally, Andersen doesn't seem to get the advances we've made with respect to the truth in several independent disciplines. For example, geology, physics, biology, philosophy.... all the way down to certain subfields within the humanities and social sciences have worked to cobble together a much better general theory/model of truth than anything humanity has ever expressed before. If you want references, I'd suggest reading anything in the Nietzsche and Deleuze traditions (including DeLanda). Enjoying the 20th century transformations in geology is highly recommended. A good start is McPhee's book Annals of the Former World. Biology texts which focus on radical distributed theories of life are not too hard to find. ETC.

    The real bogeymen here are: (a) religious models of Truth (and their relationship to power / their lasting power), especially the monotheistic strain; I certainly don't think that, with respect to truth, we are anywhere close to achieving the death of God-the-creator and I'd expect there to be some wild tantrums in mass culture if/before we do; (b) the deep, grinding partisan nature of our political process right now; (c) an educational apparatus that hasn't responded well to the digital age -- specifically in how to cultivate/train mass culture on how to deal with information... especially generationally significant transformations in the form and flow of information.
    {size/HUGE} RUDY {/size}
    Thanks Jonah thanked for this post
    Likes Red liked this post

  16. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    In a ghetto near you. . . .
    Posts
    9,000
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    20899
    Rep Adjustment Power
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by Red View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I had been thinking of starting this thread as food for thought for those interested in the growth of fake news and alternative facts. A comment by babe, in the Houston thread, that, with regard to his opinions on climate change, "I get to think what i want to think", decided me in favor of posting this. Kurt Andersen is a novelist and journalist who has written a book, "Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire: A 500 Year History", which purports to trace the historical roots leading to the point where the truth becomes whatever one feels like the truth is. Each of these video clips is progressively longer, with the Charlie Rose interview being 17 minutes. Food for though I hope, and not reason for shouting matches.





    The human failure/inability to define "reality" has been fodder for ages of philosophers' speculations and vain attempts to present a compelling picture of something humans can really call "reality".

    Having failed at the basic challenge, guvmints substitute propaganda lines and prescribed educational objectives or religions as tools for guiding the populace.

    And that is the real problem. The fantasy that people need such control or guidance.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About Us
We are a community of Utah JazzFanz that are passionate about our team. We celebrate the highs that come with last second heroics and (some of us) cry in defeat. Welcome to our community. Be respectful of others and join in to the conversation...
Join us