And she removed the bumper-sticker from her web-site after the interview with the journalist from Forbes.
Incredible but true, some people start ignorant and become less so. -- rec -- On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Douglas Roberts <d...@parrot-farm.net>wrote: > First things first: the bumper sticker. It is, sadly, real, and not just > a photoshopped artifact: > > It came out of Georgia, and the woman who created it was shocked, just > shocked, that people would think it racist. > > > http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/don-t-nig-purveyor-paula-smith-says-bumper-185405237.html > > More to come... > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Steve Smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote: > >> Doug - >> >> You may be correct that the tools are insufficient and/or distancing >> through abstraction... and yes it may be a side show. But as you point >> out, a side show that has not even been mounted. >> >> >> *Those issues, of course, being the irrational, hateful, harmful >> effects of mass adherence to narrow, fundamental religious dogma, plus >> whatever the deep underlying psychological urges are that constantly seem >> to draw whole populations into those belief systems. >> >> * >> >> I don't disagree that these are the *symptoms* we experience/observe. >> But I'm still more than a little curious about the *causes*. You might >> posit (I think you did! ) that the *cause* of various irrational, hateful, >> harmful effects are "mass adherence to narrow, fundamental, religious >> dogma" and I can't really argue with you on that. But where the hell does >> *that* come from? Is it necessary? >> >> My suggestion of a model (at the risk of distancing through abstraction) >> is to seek a more "systematic" answer... *What* are those underlying >> psychological urges you speak of? Are there alternative systems of >> thinking and organization that might yield more desirable global >> behaviours? >> >> What *fundamental* aspects of our systems of belief (religious, >> political, economic, social, etc.) are *guaranteed* to lead us there over >> and over. Call it Islam, call it Mormonism, call it Logical Positivism, >> but why does it so often lead us back to the same self-rightous, intolerant >> places? Were not most if not all religions founded or evolved or shaped >> around trying to fix the existing flaws in the systems previously in place? >> >> >> *You don't need an ABM to illustrate that; you need a few good history >> books.* >> >> You may read different history books than I do. The history books I >> read illustrate *that* whole populations are drawn into dysfunctional >> behaviours supported by their belief systems (though depending on who wrote >> them, it is always a one-sided story, glorifying one set of dysfunction in >> contrast to another demonized set. >> >> I suggested *illumination* not *illustration*. I can look around, from >> your (existing only in photoshop I suspect) racist bumpersticker or just >> about every conversation I hear to have what we are talking about >> *illustrated*... but what I want to know is *what is it all about?*, is >> there anything to be done! CAN we get enough distance through abstraction >> to discover actionable or effectual changes in local strategy to effect >> global change? >> >> Or do we just fall (dive headlong?) into a bubbling mass of xenophobic >> blame and/or self-righteous cynicism? I personally prefer the latter, but >> it really doesn't change anything for the better. >> >> - Steve >> >> >> >> >> Steve, you perhaps accidentally point out what in my opinion is the >> primary weakness of this so-called "Complexity" group. That weakness >> being, again solely in my opinion, an inability or perhaps an unwillingness >> to face the real substantive, important complexity issues that surround us. >> >> Instead, the group nearly always proposes to study some superficial >> abstract, academic side issue. It doesn't seem to matter what the >> particular "complexity" issue du Jour is, the "solution" proposed, but >> never implemented by the members of this list is *always* some abstract, >> distancing, academic approach. >> >> Not that I am picking on you, really I am not. But seriously, are you >> proposing to use an ABM to explain the societal effects of religious >> fundamentalism? That would be a side show. It would place a level of >> abstraction between the real issue and the observer which would totally >> mask the underlying causal issues. >> >> Those issues, of course, being the irrational, hateful, harmful effects >> of mass adherence to narrow, fundamental religious dogma, plus whatever the >> deep underlying psychological urges are that constantly seem to draw whole >> populations into those belief systems. >> >> You don't need an ABM to illustrate that; you need a few good history >> books. >> >> And if you want to understand why people are so prone to locking >> themselves into destructive, exclusive, egocentric world-views, well, good >> luck with that. I suspect however that game theoretics and ABMs are not >> the proper tools for the job. >> >> --Doug >> >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:16 AM, Steve Smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote: >> >>> Hussein - >>> >>> I hear you... many of us are challenged to defend the name of our God >>> or our Faith or our gender or our cultural or genetic heritage or sexual >>> orientation or hair color or set of our jaw. Even when obviously (but >>> superficially?) motivated, these are false challenges and to accept them is >>> a fools game. >>> >>> The shrill voices against Islam (or even "ahem" Mormons) are not >>> helping, even if some who act in it's name are doing horrific things. >>> Those who paint with a broad brush can only slop their own paint on >>> themselves... >>> >>> From much distance at all, everyone else looks like "other". >>> >>> I'm often disappointed with this list (myself included) that we invoke >>> the terms of Complexity Science but don't often take it anywhere. >>> >>> Is there a game theoretic model, or more to the point, an agent model >>> based on game theoretic principles that might help to illuminate this >>> phenomenon? The phenomena of personal vs shared belief, sectarianism, >>> intolerance? Is there a small subset (in the spirit of the oft-cited MOTH >>> strategy for prisoner's dilemma) of the phenomena that can show a bit of it? >>> >>> - Steve >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Los Alamos Visualization Associates >>> LAVA-Synergy >>> 4200 W. Jemez rd >>> Los Alamos, NM 87544www.lava3d.comsas@lava3d.com505-920-0252 >>> >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Doug Roberts >> drobe...@rti.org >> d...@parrot-farm.net >> http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins >> >> 505-455-7333 - Office >> 505-670-8195 - Cell >> >> >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >> >> >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >> > > > > -- > Doug Roberts > drobe...@rti.org > d...@parrot-farm.net > http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins > <http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins> > 505-455-7333 - Office > 505-670-8195 - Cell > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
