America is spinning its wheels on what sells — never mind it’s not working and never will. I’ve got an idea and a compelling case for why it would work, but its multidimensional depth doesn’t sell.
Righting the trajectory of America by changing the dynamic of debate — just might (over time). But in order to do that, you’d have to understand how we got here in the first place — and therein lies the rub:
"[W]e must accept responsibility for a problem before we can solve it"
— M. Scott Peck, The Road Less Traveled
What I have in mind is a framework for intellectually honest debate that allows principles to breathe instead of being suffocated with narrative.
Speaking of which:
"Until the rise of podcasts, twitter, and the various forms of independent media / journalism, people weren’t really aware how legacy media was influencing their thinking. I think people are finally waking up and may surprise you here, especially if more talk about it."
Repeatedly rehashing niche-based argument may be honest to a certain extent, but it’s not intellectually honest. If it were, your behavior would reflect the principles you promote regardless of the context. For 20 years, I’ve been practically spit on for practicing principles those same people preach. But no need to reconcile that — when you can just amplify the narrative with new media.
People who couldn’t spot clearly dishonest actors across the cable clans — think they’re wide awake now. Let’s put that to the test, shall well? The Twitter bio behind that quote begins with “Groupthink averse.” It would never occur to him that everything in that Tweet is Groupthink 101.
Narrative makes noise — and that sells like hotcakes.
"That the reaction is not to think it through, not to question, not to assemble facts, not to make arguments — but instead to wave banners and spout slogans such that you could hardly distinguish what they were doing from a manifesto that would come out of . . ."
When the context suits you, such words are solid gold. What you do when it doesn’t — determines the worth of your word. The fairly famous owner of the quote — once called my writing “brilliant” and was “blown away” by this site and signed up. Alas, he wasn’t too keen on the truth when I took his hero to task.
Never mind his hero’s history of hypocrisy that aligns with every word in that quote (on the biggest and most costly lie in modern history, no less). Not to mention he has a habit of toeing the party line. All of which flies in the face of the principles upon which he’s put on a pedestal.
Surely someone who’s hailed as a voice of reason would welcome the truth and abide by his own words. Afraid not. He wasn’t about to look at undeniable evidence warranting that he change his mind — so he changed the rules. And lo and behold — his followers fall in line with the same tactics to deny the obvious. That the unquestioning swat away scrutiny with glee — sure sounds a lot like legacy media to me. In the same interview from the source above, that guy said the following:
"We should be above whatever the fad or the fashion is of any given day. We should be looking at the deep questions. We should be analytical. We should be emphasizing reason."
Only for problems that are popular and easy to perceive? Whatever’s in your wheelhouse? Is that as deep as your questions go? And just where do I go to find the genuine article? People who welcome out-of-the-box thinking and are willing to put the time and effort into understanding why my idea would work — and figure out what we can do to make it better.
The problems that plague America are interrelated — and anything short of addressing that is going nowhere. If you want to start solving problems, first you need to clear the clutter that’s crippled this country. To do that, you don’t go after everything, you go after one thing that ties to everything.
Everyone’s trying to plow through problems when you should be going around them (think asymmetrical warfare). My idea calls for fiercely independent thinkers (to be fully realized), but right now — one will do. I have a very specific target audience, so it wouldn’t take much.
I am a low level minion in the back end of search tech (That didn't sound right, did it?) I can say everything he is saying is an interesting insight into the way the algorithms work. Search results are indeed a simulacrum of a partial view of reality.
Good questions. Sadly few answers, at least few that most people find all that palatable, or "inoffensive" ... 😉🙂
But something which Jonathan Swift remarked on, some 300 years ago:
JS: "... Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired: For in the Course of Things, Men always grow vicious before they become Unbelievers. ..."
His "vicious" and "unbelievers" being particularly noteworthy and relevant ...
"Good questions. Sadly few answers": So you Like my comment that leads to answers -- but don't take the trip? No offense, but what's the point? If you don't act on your concerns when given the opportunity to do so -- just how concerned could any of you be?
That's central to the point of my piece: Mountain of Preaching on a Molehill of Practice.
Without the practice -- it's just entertainment. It seems we have all the time in the world to complain about problems, but no time to do anything about them.
And that's what sells . . .
"Man is at least as much a problem-creating as a problem-solving animal. Better a crisis than the permanent boredom of meaninglessness."
What's your point? How do you know I haven't acted on, been acting on my concerns, and for some years in fact?
I quite agree with you that too many bloggers on virtually all sides of any issue -- present company excepted, of course ... -- are outright grifters, are only in the "debate" for the money as they clearly aren't listening, refuse to listen to the other side. Largely my point with the Swift quote and the Twain article.
But policies can't reasonably be implemented without some degree of consensus. Which requires discussion.
And my arguments -- basically from square one and particularly in the case of the transgender clusterfuck -- are that most people are scientifically illiterate, and too pigheaded to rectify that. Which requires some "re-education". You might try reading some of my posts on that score, starting with the last one, no pledge or subscription required ...
I'm looking for fiercely independent thinkers for an idea that could turn the tide. But it takes work -- time & effort and a willingness to think things through. No one wants to do that anymore. These people put out these podcasts & posts -- reel in some subscribers for commentary on such "deep" concerns (do absolutely nothing with ideas offered up to them):
THEN -- stay tuned, because we're gonna do it all over again tomorrow.
And nobody even bothers to ask about the efficacy of it all -- and how debate could be retooled to make it matter (which is precisely the point behind my efforts).
On that note: You seem like a gentleman and I appreciate your politeness, but if you wanted to do the work -- you would have. As for work:
************************
Work is a Journey on Which You Welcome Challenge
Work does not instantly respond — work digs to discover and inquires to clarify. Work is difficult and demands discernment. Work wonders, pauses, listens, absorbs, and reflects.
Work does not rest on who’s right and who’s wrong: Work wants to know if there’s something more to see, something to learn, something that sharpens the mind. Work never stops building on the foundation of your own work and what you learn from the work of others.
Work works its way through material that is not easy.
Work recognizes complexity and the demands of in-depth explanation. Work will go on a trip to ideas that take time and effort to understand. Work knows that you can’t see your way to a solution without understanding the different dimensions of a problem.
Work does not defend before you consider. Work does not race to conclusions — work arrives at them through careful consideration. Work is willing is rethink what you think you know. Work takes integrity, courtesy, curiosity, courage, and decency.
Work comes with the willingness to be wrong.
Work is not self-satisfied. Work does not sling snippets of certitude — work crafts argument on the merits. Work is an exchange where each party takes information into account. Work does not issue childish insults — work demands that you act your age.
You’ll find that work is far more fruitful and fulfilling than ease. Work rises & falls -- As this is the prism through which we work: How we weigh what we see and measure our response. We’ll fall short from time to time — but those willing to work will keep each other in check.
Work respects your intelligence by using it. And shows respect to others as we work our way to mutual respect. Work won’t be pretty and might even get ugly — but work will do what it takes to work it out.
And if you wanna start solving problems — work is what it’s gonna take.
Where's your evidence that I haven't done any of that work? Takes more than a bit of time and effort -- and money -- to get any sort of a handle on the science, logic, and epistemology on which many of these issues turn. And to present them in something of a palatable format.
My cancelation message: If you're not gonna engage with your subscribers in a serious-minded manner (particularly when you don't have any ideas but I do): What's the point?
But while I appreciate or sympathize with your shots at technology per se -- something of a growth industry these days -- methinks the problem is less with the tool than with the tool "user". Biologist and ant expert E.O. Wilson argued that:
“The real problem of humanity is the following: We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions and godlike technology. And it is terrifically dangerous, and it is now approaching a point of crisis overall.”
Wish I had a ready-made solution, could probably make a bundle ... 🙂 But don't think repudiating technology is a particularly wise or viable solution -- halfway across the stream isn't a good place to try changing horses. ICYMI, you might enjoy the dystopian book and silent film on that point, though can't say I recollect much of the latter, and never did read the former:
"Most importantly, what is the antidote?" Abide by your bio and you'll see (or at minimum -- you'll ask questions until you do): "Curious writer & author . . . Fueled by free thought, inquiry, mischief & reason."
What Works Vs. What Sells:
America is spinning its wheels on what sells — never mind it’s not working and never will. I’ve got an idea and a compelling case for why it would work, but its multidimensional depth doesn’t sell.
Righting the trajectory of America by changing the dynamic of debate — just might (over time). But in order to do that, you’d have to understand how we got here in the first place — and therein lies the rub:
"[W]e must accept responsibility for a problem before we can solve it"
— M. Scott Peck, The Road Less Traveled
What I have in mind is a framework for intellectually honest debate that allows principles to breathe instead of being suffocated with narrative.
Speaking of which:
"Until the rise of podcasts, twitter, and the various forms of independent media / journalism, people weren’t really aware how legacy media was influencing their thinking. I think people are finally waking up and may surprise you here, especially if more talk about it."
Repeatedly rehashing niche-based argument may be honest to a certain extent, but it’s not intellectually honest. If it were, your behavior would reflect the principles you promote regardless of the context. For 20 years, I’ve been practically spit on for practicing principles those same people preach. But no need to reconcile that — when you can just amplify the narrative with new media.
People who couldn’t spot clearly dishonest actors across the cable clans — think they’re wide awake now. Let’s put that to the test, shall well? The Twitter bio behind that quote begins with “Groupthink averse.” It would never occur to him that everything in that Tweet is Groupthink 101.
Narrative makes noise — and that sells like hotcakes.
"That the reaction is not to think it through, not to question, not to assemble facts, not to make arguments — but instead to wave banners and spout slogans such that you could hardly distinguish what they were doing from a manifesto that would come out of . . ."
When the context suits you, such words are solid gold. What you do when it doesn’t — determines the worth of your word. The fairly famous owner of the quote — once called my writing “brilliant” and was “blown away” by this site and signed up. Alas, he wasn’t too keen on the truth when I took his hero to task.
Never mind his hero’s history of hypocrisy that aligns with every word in that quote (on the biggest and most costly lie in modern history, no less). Not to mention he has a habit of toeing the party line. All of which flies in the face of the principles upon which he’s put on a pedestal.
Surely someone who’s hailed as a voice of reason would welcome the truth and abide by his own words. Afraid not. He wasn’t about to look at undeniable evidence warranting that he change his mind — so he changed the rules. And lo and behold — his followers fall in line with the same tactics to deny the obvious. That the unquestioning swat away scrutiny with glee — sure sounds a lot like legacy media to me. In the same interview from the source above, that guy said the following:
"We should be above whatever the fad or the fashion is of any given day. We should be looking at the deep questions. We should be analytical. We should be emphasizing reason."
Only for problems that are popular and easy to perceive? Whatever’s in your wheelhouse? Is that as deep as your questions go? And just where do I go to find the genuine article? People who welcome out-of-the-box thinking and are willing to put the time and effort into understanding why my idea would work — and figure out what we can do to make it better.
The problems that plague America are interrelated — and anything short of addressing that is going nowhere. If you want to start solving problems, first you need to clear the clutter that’s crippled this country. To do that, you don’t go after everything, you go after one thing that ties to everything.
Everyone’s trying to plow through problems when you should be going around them (think asymmetrical warfare). My idea calls for fiercely independent thinkers (to be fully realized), but right now — one will do. I have a very specific target audience, so it wouldn’t take much.
One email could set off a chain of events that could open the door to the kind of conversation this nation’s never had: https://onevoicebecametwo.life/2023/07/23/what-works-vs-what-sells/
Crickets -- right on cue!
I am a low level minion in the back end of search tech (That didn't sound right, did it?) I can say everything he is saying is an interesting insight into the way the algorithms work. Search results are indeed a simulacrum of a partial view of reality.
"... a black sheep is still a sheep" pretty much nailed it.
Since I left twitter I read more and listen to more podcasts while playing Scrabble online. I think I'm doing better? 🙄
Probe : Electric media environments are orphic baroque spirals of dopamine induced distraction ...
Good questions. Sadly few answers, at least few that most people find all that palatable, or "inoffensive" ... 😉🙂
But something which Jonathan Swift remarked on, some 300 years ago:
JS: "... Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired: For in the Course of Things, Men always grow vicious before they become Unbelievers. ..."
His "vicious" and "unbelievers" being particularly noteworthy and relevant ...
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/07/10/reason-out/
"Good questions. Sadly few answers": So you Like my comment that leads to answers -- but don't take the trip? No offense, but what's the point? If you don't act on your concerns when given the opportunity to do so -- just how concerned could any of you be?
That's central to the point of my piece: Mountain of Preaching on a Molehill of Practice.
Without the practice -- it's just entertainment. It seems we have all the time in the world to complain about problems, but no time to do anything about them.
And that's what sells . . .
"Man is at least as much a problem-creating as a problem-solving animal. Better a crisis than the permanent boredom of meaninglessness."
— Life at the Bottom
What's your point? How do you know I haven't acted on, been acting on my concerns, and for some years in fact?
I quite agree with you that too many bloggers on virtually all sides of any issue -- present company excepted, of course ... -- are outright grifters, are only in the "debate" for the money as they clearly aren't listening, refuse to listen to the other side. Largely my point with the Swift quote and the Twain article.
But policies can't reasonably be implemented without some degree of consensus. Which requires discussion.
And my arguments -- basically from square one and particularly in the case of the transgender clusterfuck -- are that most people are scientifically illiterate, and too pigheaded to rectify that. Which requires some "re-education". You might try reading some of my posts on that score, starting with the last one, no pledge or subscription required ...
https://humanuseofhumanbeings.substack.com/p/binarists-vs-spectrumists
I'm looking for fiercely independent thinkers for an idea that could turn the tide. But it takes work -- time & effort and a willingness to think things through. No one wants to do that anymore. These people put out these podcasts & posts -- reel in some subscribers for commentary on such "deep" concerns (do absolutely nothing with ideas offered up to them):
THEN -- stay tuned, because we're gonna do it all over again tomorrow.
And nobody even bothers to ask about the efficacy of it all -- and how debate could be retooled to make it matter (which is precisely the point behind my efforts).
On that note: You seem like a gentleman and I appreciate your politeness, but if you wanted to do the work -- you would have. As for work:
************************
Work is a Journey on Which You Welcome Challenge
Work does not instantly respond — work digs to discover and inquires to clarify. Work is difficult and demands discernment. Work wonders, pauses, listens, absorbs, and reflects.
Work does not rest on who’s right and who’s wrong: Work wants to know if there’s something more to see, something to learn, something that sharpens the mind. Work never stops building on the foundation of your own work and what you learn from the work of others.
Work works its way through material that is not easy.
Work recognizes complexity and the demands of in-depth explanation. Work will go on a trip to ideas that take time and effort to understand. Work knows that you can’t see your way to a solution without understanding the different dimensions of a problem.
Work does not defend before you consider. Work does not race to conclusions — work arrives at them through careful consideration. Work is willing is rethink what you think you know. Work takes integrity, courtesy, curiosity, courage, and decency.
Work comes with the willingness to be wrong.
Work is not self-satisfied. Work does not sling snippets of certitude — work crafts argument on the merits. Work is an exchange where each party takes information into account. Work does not issue childish insults — work demands that you act your age.
You’ll find that work is far more fruitful and fulfilling than ease. Work rises & falls -- As this is the prism through which we work: How we weigh what we see and measure our response. We’ll fall short from time to time — but those willing to work will keep each other in check.
Work respects your intelligence by using it. And shows respect to others as we work our way to mutual respect. Work won’t be pretty and might even get ugly — but work will do what it takes to work it out.
And if you wanna start solving problems — work is what it’s gonna take.
************************
Rather pretentious, being charitable ...
Where's your evidence that I haven't done any of that work? Takes more than a bit of time and effort -- and money -- to get any sort of a handle on the science, logic, and epistemology on which many of these issues turn. And to present them in something of a palatable format.
Good lord. I'm not here for chatter. Good day.
🙄
Great quote.
My cancelation message: If you're not gonna engage with your subscribers in a serious-minded manner (particularly when you don't have any ideas but I do): What's the point?
As predicted -- this channel's a joke (as they all are). I gave you a second shot. There won't be a 3rd.
👍 Some of those "old timers" knew a thing or two ... 😉🙂
Though some of the younger whippersnappers -- like Mark Twain -- haven't been too shabby either:
http://www.paulgraham.com/cornpone.html
But while I appreciate or sympathize with your shots at technology per se -- something of a growth industry these days -- methinks the problem is less with the tool than with the tool "user". Biologist and ant expert E.O. Wilson argued that:
“The real problem of humanity is the following: We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions and godlike technology. And it is terrifically dangerous, and it is now approaching a point of crisis overall.”
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/9770741-the-real-problem-of-humanity-is-the-following-we-have
Wish I had a ready-made solution, could probably make a bundle ... 🙂 But don't think repudiating technology is a particularly wise or viable solution -- halfway across the stream isn't a good place to try changing horses. ICYMI, you might enjoy the dystopian book and silent film on that point, though can't say I recollect much of the latter, and never did read the former:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolis_(1927_film)
"Most importantly, what is the antidote?" Abide by your bio and you'll see (or at minimum -- you'll ask questions until you do): "Curious writer & author . . . Fueled by free thought, inquiry, mischief & reason."
Mountain of Preaching on a Molehill of Practice:
https://onevoicebecametwo.life/2023/07/21/mountain-of-preaching-on-a-molehill-of-practice/