Geez, Dave. I might have put it the other way. People are persuasive as hell; they just aren’t communicating.
But I haven’t been following the thread.
Get back here! It’s Friday and we need you.
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Prof David West
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 7:56 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Motives - Was Abduction
"Persuasive" is a term the reviewer used, Adams restricts his analysis to "communication." The two terms are worlds apart. I would claim that no one in politics is persuasive, and given the polarity that exists in political discourse, it is impossible for anyone to be persuasive.
davew
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019, at 6:03 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
< As to the ethics dimension; you quoted one of Adam's reviewers: "But, when I was in school, we always discussed ethical responsibility of the persuader and Adams does not. As long as Trump was persuasive he was going to win and that’s what matters." >
He’s not persuasive. His arguments are ridiculous and appeal to the stupid and ignorant. See Alfredo’s post.
Marcus
============================================================
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |