Hi Sam, I unintentionally deleted my membership here some months back. I've been in a few google groups that worked for a while. They've all faded over time, particularly after the 'new format'. The social media seem to do well, but I can't stand them. Most blogs I've visited have little interesting comment in-themselves, but some interesting commentators, almost always not the moderators. It's been a while since I worked in a lab, but I used to enjoy the mutual and rather friendly disrespect. Of course, various trolls and flamers get boring almost before one has to turn to moderation, but there is often an air of very unnecessary censorship and that politeness that kills edge. It's hard to think up a format that would work, let alone how anyone would have the time to do the admin, given no real business model to fund the time. I moderate Mind's Eye, which has faded from high traffic.
Epistemology is as you say. I'd like to do something that provided the opportunity for exchange of views, a bit of fun and some comfort in the realisation others are thinking the same and different things. In a way, universities used to be like that, only 'with sex' - or in my case cricket and rugby. I'd have missed that rap video of the climate scientists if not for you mate. I've had a look at a few blogs operating as 'hosted domains' or whatever we'd call them. Naked Capitalism was about the best, though the actual content poor and it looks like a book-selling thing really (the modern monetary theory crew). They essentially post links to the day's stories, soppy pics of animals and a few book plugs posing as articles, inviting comment. In fact, they really want adulators, but that's beside the point - the format is a possibility. Over the years, it's been good to find people like Georges, Chazwin, Chris Jenkins, Gabby Thiede and many others as decent sounding boards rather than hymn singers. One of the obvious thing (true in university lecturing too) is that epistemology lies in what people want to talk about and few want to be into the defeasibility, paraconsistency or even descriptions of our day-to-day informal logics - I can almost feel programmers wanting to rush off to their keyboards when I teach such (to escape), but given some real-life or fantasy to chew into a formal language, they usually knuckle down. I'd like to try some new format, but there is the day-job. In fact, in epistemological form as I see it, I'd like to be able to fantasise a simulation format of a new world of frank exchange. Thanks for your efforts Sam. On Wednesday, 7 May 2014 20:36:13 UTC+1, nominal9 wrote: > > Hi all, > > Epistemology is important, it is not just theoretical discussion, it is > reflected in things we think and do, and its implications reverberate in > daily life. > > Some people may like certain political or religious dogmas, or they may > set certain principles and present them as truth. Whatever drives them, > they don't want certain things to be discussed. > > Sadly, only a few people appear willing to discuss things here. I am not > sure why this is the case. It may be a technology issue. Google has taken > little effort to improve the functionality and features of groups over the > past few years. The same thing appears to occur at other places, such as > Yahoo. Yet, social media such as Facebook and Twitter are thriving and have > seen enormous growth. Google has responded with Google+, but I have not yet > seen much integration with groups. > > What do others think? > > Cheers, > Sam Carana > > Cheers Sam Carana, > > ALL THE BEST TO YOU AND TO THIS GROUP.... This is better than "social > media", I think.... > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
