yay!
Locked
 
|
I asked awhile back, "where are the patriot hackers"? Well, it turns out at least some of them have been pressuring MAGA (Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon) to deplatform Trump and his Legion of Morons: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/apple-suspends-parler-from-app-store You won't learn that from the articles, though. What's interesting to me is their rhetoric about being deplatformed smells A LOT like Jonathan Haidt's rhetoric that launched the Heterodox Academy. And it's similar to Joe Rogan's plausible deniability defense against accusations that he provides a megaphone for wackos like Mikhaila Peterson: https://youtu.be/7fncJdVjy5U "before we realized you don't need greens to survive". While it seems reasonable to zoom out and let these memes fight for survival in the long run, that synoptic view insulates itself from the *pain* they cause their hosts. Sure, it may be just fine to let budding Breatharians run their little experiments, and most likely die, so that the meme is steadily disproven. Or to let the QAnon's live their little lives believing nonsense. And, sure, sometimes, like with the storming of the capitol last week, those memes accumulate enough to cause reality to take a slightly different trajectory, at least for a little while. But as long as it's all sorted out in the LONG RUN, right? Never mind the pain suffered by the host(s), right? The arguments put forth by the supporters of Heterodox and Joe Rogan's platforming of wackos seem to provide near-canonical examples of the relevance of ethics. -- ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen
|
|
Putting aside for a moment the outpouring of news content, which at the
moment, is pressing the discussion of whether or not angry mobs are possible without social media (seemingly ignoring much of history), I might agree that data for *the relevance of ethics* are starting to flood in like Pennsylvania ballots. In fact, much of vFriam this week, seemed to be dedicated to beating around that bush. It had me in a bit of an *aporia* though, as I was unsure as to how to proceed. What exactly is wanted from ethics? My tendency is to put on my philosopher's hat or my scientist's hat, but more and more I feel doubtful that these tools are the correct ones. Forlorn, I find myself in a foundationless state of post-modernism, believing that there can be no analysis besides one situated in power dynamics and boundary disputes. Please advise. -- Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
|
https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/philosophy/research/areas/ethics-value-theory/index.html --- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 10:21 AM jon zingale <[hidden email]> wrote: Putting aside for a moment the outpouring of news content, which at the - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
Cool. What can you tell me about it?
-- Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
Very logically and mathematically informed but still substantive ethics program. Do you ever go back to Pittsburgh? Frank --- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 10:57 AM jon zingale <[hidden email]> wrote: Cool. What can you tell me about it? - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
Re: Pittsburgh and Ethics (was yay!)
|
|
Hmm, we should probably start a different thread here as we are beginning to
bend Glen's. While I believe that people are out there thinking about ethics, I am unsure where to even begin wrt a framework. It seems reasonable to be doubtful of an academic program as many historical programs that sought out to speak on the subject have either failed (in my ignorant estimations) or retreated into sub-disciplines where the exploration could remain valid. I would need something more conceptually substantive before diving into such a program. As far as Pittsburgh, I think I would love to visit again. My experiences in that city were pre-adult and fairly traumatic. While I was fortunate enough to get into Taylor Allderdice's magnet program, I lived about an hour away on the other side of the tracks. It is a part of Pittsburgh that we do not talk about on Friam or in pleasant company, so please pardon my breaking of this taboo here. Ironically enough, there is for me a connection between my experience of Pittsburghs *south-side* culture and the discussion Glen is attempting to start regarding ethics. So, idk, how should we approach the question of dissenting voices, charismatic voices, and difference? -- Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by jon zingale
Ok, so, FWIW, a Peircean take on ethics is that it is like any other form of
inquiry. To the extent that the participants are seeking a convergence, it is interesting and useful; to the extent that they are seeking divergence, for its own sake, it is boring and sophistic. It is in that sense that he regards logic as a subfield of ethics. Logic is how we "should" think. The whole goal of thought, whether ethical or scientific, is to anticipate experience as it will be, not as we'ld like it to be. N Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University [hidden email] https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ -----Original Message----- From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of jon zingale Sent: Monday, January 11, 2021 11:21 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [FRIAM] yay! Putting aside for a moment the outpouring of news content, which at the moment, is pressing the discussion of whether or not angry mobs are possible without social media (seemingly ignoring much of history), I might agree that data for *the relevance of ethics* are starting to flood in like Pennsylvania ballots. In fact, much of vFriam this week, seemed to be dedicated to beating around that bush. It had me in a bit of an *aporia* though, as I was unsure as to how to proceed. What exactly is wanted from ethics? My tendency is to put on my philosopher's hat or my scientist's hat, but more and more I feel doubtful that these tools are the correct ones. Forlorn, I find myself in a foundationless state of post-modernism, believing that there can be no analysis besides one situated in power dynamics and boundary disputes. Please advise. -- Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by Frank Wimberly-2
No links without explication! Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/philosophy/research/areas/ethics-value-theory/index.html --- On Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 10:21 AM jon zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by thompnickson2
I'd begun preparing this long post saying nothing. So I deleted it. Nick's done a good job, here, except that I completely disagree with his assertion that sought divergence is boring and sophist. Convergence is fine. But often convergence can be premature or artificial. What we (and presumably Peirce) want is *good* convergence ... the right kind of convergence. Convergence at the right rate, with error correcting processes, enough heat to strengthen but not burn the metal, etc. And *that* is ethics. There's a large number of people who've converged on QAnon. Sure, that convergence will *eventually* fade because it's garbage. In the meantime, people are dying and going crazy. What to do in that meantime? How do we diverge from QAnon and settle into a better convergence *sooner* than we would otherwise? Divergence and convergence are not disjoint things, one to be rejected and another adopted.
Anyway, should Parler be deplatformed? Should Gebru have been fired/deplatformed by Google? Should I actually give some eyeball time to OAN just to see what kind of bullsh¡t they say? Should Weinstein have been run out of Evergreen into the welcoming arms of Heterodox? There's no grand unified ethical program for resolving these questions. That's not what ethics is. We must be (methodological) pluralists. Instead, it's a set of languages and lexicons for naming the components and discussing their relationships. In many ways, having such language *deescalates* conflict because rather than saying some value is "wrong" or "evil", we can call it by its ethics name and bias the convergence so that it satisfices multiple objectives. It's similar to, say, "the disease model of alcoholism". By naming it as a disease, we free up discussion of it from the *converged* concept that alcoholics are simply morally degenerate. And that works even *if* alcoholism is nothing like a disease. It strikes me that, in these interesting times, we're recognizing that deplatforming has always been A Thing. But because of the state of our culture and technology, we've now identified it and *need* to talk about it. I would claim ethics gives us the language to do so. On 1/11/21 10:42 AM, [hidden email] wrote: > Ok, so, FWIW, a Peircean take on ethics is that it is like any other form of > inquiry. To the extent that the participants are seeking a convergence, it > is interesting and useful; to the extent that they are seeking divergence, > for its own sake, it is boring and sophistic. It is in that sense that he > regards logic as a subfield of ethics. Logic is how we "should" think. > The whole goal of thought, whether ethical or scientific, is to anticipate > experience as it will be, not as we'ld like it to be. -- ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen
|
|
|
I think we should not get so hung up on the dying and going crazy. The numbers aren't like COVID-19. There's nothing the wackos could really do to get to numbers like that, other them to kill themselves by eating too many jerky sticks. There's the national embarrassment aspect that could bleed over into national security, and of course there is the lunatic with the nuke codes.
If a site intends to do something distasteful but not quite illegal, why would they ever tie themselves to platform where it is so trivial to be turned off? They deserve it just for their lack of foresight. -----Original Message----- From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of u?l? ??? Sent: Monday, January 11, 2021 11:16 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [FRIAM] yay! I'd begun preparing this long post saying nothing. So I deleted it. Nick's done a good job, here, except that I completely disagree with his assertion that sought divergence is boring and sophist. Convergence is fine. But often convergence can be premature or artificial. What we (and presumably Peirce) want is *good* convergence ... the right kind of convergence. Convergence at the right rate, with error correcting processes, enough heat to strengthen but not burn the metal, etc. And *that* is ethics. There's a large number of people who've converged on QAnon. Sure, that convergence will *eventually* fade because it's garbage. In the meantime, people are dying and going crazy. What to do in that meantime? How do we diverge from QAnon and settle into a better convergence *sooner* than we would otherwise? Divergence and convergence are not disjoint things, one to be rejected and another adopted. Anyway, should Parler be deplatformed? Should Gebru have been fired/deplatformed by Google? Should I actually give some eyeball time to OAN just to see what kind of bullsh¡t they say? Should Weinstein have been run out of Evergreen into the welcoming arms of Heterodox? There's no grand unified ethical program for resolving these questions. That's not what ethics is. We must be (methodological) pluralists. Instead, it's a set of languages and lexicons for naming the components and discussing their relationships. In many ways, having such language *deescalates* conflict because rather than saying some value is "wrong" or "evil", we can call it by its ethics name and bias the convergence so that it satisfices multiple objectives. It's similar to, say, "the disease model of alcoholism". By naming it as a disease, we free up discussion of it from the *converged* concept that alcoholics are simply morally degenerate. And that works even *if* alcoholism is nothing like a disease. It strikes me that, in these interesting times, we're recognizing that deplatforming has always been A Thing. But because of the state of our culture and technology, we've now identified it and *need* to talk about it. I would claim ethics gives us the language to do so. On 1/11/21 10:42 AM, [hidden email] wrote: > Ok, so, FWIW, a Peircean take on ethics is that it is like any other > form of inquiry. To the extent that the participants are seeking a > convergence, it is interesting and useful; to the extent that they are > seeking divergence, for its own sake, it is boring and sophistic. It > is in that sense that he regards logic as a subfield of ethics. Logic is how we "should" think. > The whole goal of thought, whether ethical or scientific, is to > anticipate experience as it will be, not as we'ld like it to be. -- ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by gepr
Glen, I have a solution to the "deplatforming" problem that I know you are going to abhor, so I thought I would reveal it to you, first.
See, I told you you would hate it. Nick Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ -----Original Message----- I'd begun preparing this long post saying nothing. So I deleted it. Nick's done a good job, here, except that I completely disagree with his assertion that sought divergence is boring and sophist. Convergence is fine. But often convergence can be premature or artificial. What we (and presumably Peirce) want is *good* convergence ... the right kind of convergence. Convergence at the right rate, with error correcting processes, enough heat to strengthen but not burn the metal, etc. And *that* is ethics. There's a large number of people who've converged on QAnon. Sure, that convergence will *eventually* fade because it's garbage. In the meantime, people are dying and going crazy. What to do in that meantime? How do we diverge from QAnon and settle into a better convergence *sooner* than we would otherwise? Divergence and convergence are not disjoint things, one to be rejected and another adopted. Anyway, should Parler be deplatformed? Should Gebru have been fired/deplatformed by Google? Should I actually give some eyeball time to OAN just to see what kind of bullsh¡t they say? Should Weinstein have been run out of Evergreen into the welcoming arms of Heterodox? There's no grand unified ethical program for resolving these questions. That's not what ethics is. We must be (methodological) pluralists. Instead, it's a set of languages and lexicons for naming the components and discussing their relationships. In many ways, having such language *deescalates* conflict because rather than saying some value is "wrong" or "evil", we can call it by its ethics name and bias the convergence so that it satisfices multiple objectives. It's similar to, say, "the disease model of alcoholism". By naming it as a disease, we free up discussion of it from the *converged* concept that alcoholics are simply morally degenerate. And that works even *if* alcoholism is nothing like a disease. It strikes me that, in these interesting times, we're recognizing that deplatforming has always been A Thing. But because of the state of our culture and technology, we've now identified it and *need* to talk about it. I would claim ethics gives us the language to do so. On 1/11/21 10:42 AM, [hidden email] wrote: > Ok, so, FWIW, a Peircean take on ethics is that it is like any other > form of inquiry. To the extent that the participants are seeking a > convergence, it is interesting and useful; to the extent that they are > seeking divergence, for its own sake, it is boring and sophistic. It > is in that sense that he regards logic as a subfield of ethics. Logic is how we "should" think. > The whole goal of thought, whether ethical or scientific, is to > anticipate experience as it will be, not as we'ld like it to be. -- ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by gepr
MGD -- Sorry for being unclear. I think at least some of the COVID-19 deaths are due to premature convergence. E.g. I got into a discussion at the (outdoor) pub about a month ago with 2 friends who've known each other since grade school. They both lean coservative, but one seemed much more data driven (and willing to call out his friend for saying stupid stuff he learned from Fox News). When they *both* expressed their irritation that gyms, bowling alleys, etc. were locked down even though most of our evidence points to social gatherings, I tried to make the point that our evidence is simply not fine-grained enough. So, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
The more reasonable guy got it. The other guy didn't. So, in the meantime, we *could* control how the convergence happens, the violence of any necessary heat baths to back out of premature convergence *if* we have the language to use with our prematurely converged peers. Without that language, we're just shrill tribalists. But I agree completely on the tech front. Witness libgen and sci-hub and their multi-platform paths through tech like IPFS, torrent, etc. Such separates the profiteers from those truly devoted to their mission. NST -- As for digital courts, I don't think that's a bad idea at all, for the same reason I don't think we should accuse sitting congress people of things like "sedition" just for voting aye on the objections to electoral votes. The disinformation peddlers, sure. But not the rank and file who simply voted. But your assumption #1 is laughable at first blush. What even is a "society"? What does it mean for it/they to have a goal? Etc. But you could sidestep that by talking of a "Constitution" for the internet, a foundation for some sort of "rule of law". Then it would be possible to build something like a court system for texts/artifacts you might find there. On 1/11/21 11:28 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > I think we should not get so hung up on the dying and going crazy. The numbers aren't like COVID-19. There's nothing the wackos could really do to get to numbers like that, other them to kill themselves by eating too many jerky sticks. There's the national embarrassment aspect that could bleed over into national security, and of course there is the lunatic with the nuke codes. > > If a site intends to do something distasteful but not quite illegal, why would they ever tie themselves to platform where it is so trivial to be turned off? They deserve it just for their lack of foresight. On 1/11/21 11:28 AM, [hidden email] wrote: > 1. A society cannot survive without an idea of truth, at least as a goal. > 2. We have numerous mechanisms for determining truth, notably the courts. Every day Juries and courts decide matters of fact. Fallibly, inconsistently, probabilistically. > 3. We cannot have platforms deciding matters of truth. > 4. Therefore, we are going to have to institute digital courts. > 5. It is up to people like FRIAM members to cogitate on what a digital court will look like. -- ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen
|
«
Return to Friam
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |