31 OCT 2018 by ideonexus
Kayfabe
Although the etymology of the word is a matter of debate, for at least 50 years “kayfabe” has referred to the unspoken contract between wrestlers and spectators: We’ll present you something clearly fake under the insistence that it’s real, and you will experience genuine emotion. Neither party acknowledges the bargain, or else the magic is ruined.
[...]
The aesthetic of World Wrestling Entertainment seems to be spreading from the ring to the world stage. Ask an average Trump support... 1 
notes
notes29 DEC 2016 by ideonexus
Most current-events-related conversations are just people...
“Because it helps you participate in everyday conversations!” is a weak but at least meaningful answer to the “What is accomplished” question. But when you quit playing the current events game, and observe others talking about them, you might notice that almost nobody really knows what they’re talking about.
There is an extraordinary gulf between having a functional understanding of an issue, and the cursory glance you get from the news. If you ever come across a water-cooler conve...
1 22 OCT 2013 by ideonexus
The Loser in an Argument is Actually the Winner
He explains, “Suppose you and I have an argument. You believe a proposition, P, and I don’t. I’ve objected, I’ve questioned, I’ve raised all sorts of counter-considerations, and in every case you’ve responded to my satisfaction. At the end of the day, I say, ‘You know what? I guess you’re right.’ So I have a new belief. And it’s not just any belief, but it’s a well-articulated, examined and battle-tested belief. Cohen continues, “So who won that argument? Well, the war...The problem with the "war" metaphor for debate is that it defines winning as failing to adjust one's position at the end, while the "loser," the one who has conceded points based on the evidence, comes away from the encounter with a much stronger and tested understanding of the subjectmatter.
15 JUL 2013 by ideonexus
Parkinson's law of triviality
In the third chapter, "High Finance, or the Point of Vanishing Interest", Parkinson writes about a finance committee meeting with a three-item agenda.
The first is the signing of a £10 [4] million contract to build a reactor, the second a proposal to build a £350 bicycle shed for the clerical staff, and the third proposes £21 a year to supply refreshments for the Joint Welfare Committee.
The £10 million number is too big and too technical, and it passes in two minutes and a half.
The bi...
1 Summary provided from Wikipedia until a direct quote can be found. Concept is that the more trivial an issue, the more debate weighed on it because everyone understands the issue enough to have an opinion.
06 JUN 2013 by ideonexus
Check Your Privilege
Learn to Listen Rather Than Speak
This one is a lot harder than it sounds, and I say this as someone who loves speaking and voicing her opinion on things. One of the greatest things we, as privileged people, can bring to a discussion being held by non-privileged groups is our closed mouths and open ears/minds. When you enter a minority space, you need to realize that this is their soapbox, not yours. Your privilege gives you many other soapboxes that you can take advantage of, so when p... 1 notes
notesFrom the article that inspired the use of this term in debate.
18 MAR 2012 by ideonexus
Science is a Fairy Tale
I am among those who think that science has great beauty. A scientist in his laboratory is not only a technician: he is also a child placed before natural phenomena which impress him like a fairy tale. We should not allow it to be believed that all scientific progress can be reduced to mechanisms, machines, gearings, even though such machinery has its own beauty. Marie Curie speaking in a debate.
31 JAN 2012 by ideonexus
Scientific Revolution
Although few expressions are more commonly used in writing about science than 'science revolution,' there is a continuing debate as to the propriety of applying the concept and term 'revolution' to scientific change. There is, furthermore, a wide difference of opinion as to what may constitute a revolution. And although almost all historians would agree that a genuine alteration of an exceptionally radical nature (the Scientific Revolution) occurred in the sciences at some time between the la...Folksonomies: scientific revolution
Folksonomies: scientific revolution
1 notes
notesWhat is a revolution? What causes it? When did it begin? Scholars disagree on these matters.
12 JAN 2012 by ideonexus
Mystery is a Cover for Absurdity
A pleasant morning. Saw my classmates Gardner, and Wheeler. Wheeler dined, spent the afternoon, and drank Tea with me. Supped at Major Gardiners, and ingag'd to keep School at Bristol, provided Worcester People, at their insuing March meeting, should change this into a moving School, not otherwise. Major Greene this Evening fell into some conversation with me about the Divinity and Satisfaction of Jesus Christ. All the Argument he advanced was, "that a mere creature, or finite Being, could no...John Adams comment on a debate he had with a a Major concerning the Divinity.
08 MAY 2011 by ideonexus
Science is an Equal-Opportunity Critic
Again, the reason science works so well is partly that built-in error-correcting machinery. There are no forbidden questions in science, no matters too sensitive or delicate to be probed, no sacred truths. That openness to new ideas, combined with the most rigorous, sceptical scrutiny of all ideas, sifts the wheat from the chaff. It makes no difference how smart, august or beloved you are. You must prove your case in the face of determined, expert criticism. Diversity and debate are valued. O...Science's error-correcting mechanisms hit everyone equally, but all ideas are welcome for scrutiny.
11 APR 2011 by ideonexus
When Science is Debated in the Courtroom
When Rachel Carson made us aware of the dangers arising from the mass application of toxic chemicals, she presented her arguments in the manner of an advocate, not a scientist. In other words, she selected the evidence to prove her case. The chemical industry, seeing its livelihood threatened by her action, responded with an equally selective set of arguments, chosen in defense. This may have been a fine way of achieving justice, and perhaps in this instance it was scientifically excusable; b... 1 notes
notesRachel Carson and the Chemical Industry presented their selective version of the facts in the debate over the environment, which is not a scientific process and hurts the ultimate understanding of the truth when one side wins.
