Outstanding post, machineghost. Thank you for writing it. With your permission, I would like to share it with my students this fall in my Language and Media Literacy course (I'm a HS English/Philosophy teacher).
I have, and I know--it was all those things you and I both mention. And there were many who took advantage of the situation for various greeds (land, status, attention, religious authority, etc.). I didn't mean to simplify, because the witch trials are often used as a quick 'n dirty analogy, when in fact it was a pretty complex event.
BasilBrush, I'm afraid, friend, is right. Water content = zero.
"Relative" as an adjective is perfectly fine as a descriptor, but (not to flash a badge here), but after years of studying and teaching philosophy, the one common denominator of relativistic thought is that they tend to quickly dissolve into a series of absurd premises and silly consequents.
Of course one man's supper is another man's sin. But if you want to *start* with the presuppostion that everything truly is relative and no universal norms can be recognized, fine then. Just don't cry to the rest of us when:
*Your daughter visits the bush and has her female genetalia mutilated to keep her sexually pure.
*Your cousin is behedead by terrorists because they felt it was moral--for them--to do so.
*A member of the Ik tribe in Africa throws a child into a fire because it is the preferred entertainment.
*I'm guessing your personal favorite: You are burned at the stake by radical Christian religous fundamentalist zealots because they believed it was right for them to remove your heathen self from God's Glorious Earth.
Remember: It's all relative, so if you don't like it, I guess you better figure out some way to deal with these...others.
Keeping the powers-that-be in check is absolutely necessary, but good heavens, anarchy (unless it's of some non-ancarchist flavor) is a preposterous solution. Espousing that, coupled with a severe aversion to any kind of morality or ethics and trying to prop it up by claiming that everything is relative does not seem like human progress to me. It's simply pure paranoia. And yes, I'll be here in 10 years, just fine with everyone else. Unless someone votes a Puritan into office.
And what about the first legit child abuse support site they block? Do they get blocked and shut down too?
No, when (probably not IF) that happens, an apology is issued and they site is put back up. Not the end of the world, and it certainly wouldn't be the ONLY child abuse website.
Decrying the loss of free speech is absurd in this case. Parent was right--child porn creators and users forfeit their rights. It doesn't matter whose socio/religious/cultural values one is holding. Same is true for whites supremacists and other various hate groups; when the views expressed by someone are universally, irrefutably, unquestionably harmful to other people, that person should not have the right to speak.
I know, I know, I've heard it before: "They take this awful thing away, soon they'll come for US!" Watch out for that 90-degree slippery slope there you've established.
And please, at least study the Salem witch trials before using them in an analogy. It was not about power; it was about mass hysteria and groupthing, largely fueled by the fear of superstition in a hostile New World, harsh living condidions and a strict fundamentalist religious mindset.
The difference? The people.
on
TechTV.com RIP
·
· Score: 1
I never had G4 before, but after only a weekend it seemed obvious that Comcast made their biggest mistake by keeping the lion's share of the personalities they were mistaken enough to hire in the first place.
Content on both the G4 holdovers and the TechTV leftovers actually fairly similar. (Anyone else wonder why there are approximately sixteen game reviews shows on one channel?) Yet even watching Judgment Day versus X Play, you can see which hosts are trying too hard to be geeky-cool and which two (yes, Adam and Morgan) are simply geeky cool because they're comfortable with their own personalities (and each other as co-hosts).
The Pulse pair remind me too much of failed SportsCenter anchors who couldn't get past their own non-clever one-liners to get a job. And four minutes into watching him, Tommy Tallurico's (sp? ah, who cares) schtick was tired. One minute after that it was annoying. I didn't wait any furter to see what emotions his grating ego would evoke.
The G4 crew reminds me of a bunch of college sophomore frat punks trying to be something they're not--authentic.
The flak over Leo Laporte's dismissal illustrates this best. On screen, he wasn't the most technical guy on the planet, but you knew he could be if he wanted to. He wasn't the pandering idiot that "mainstream" networks tend to hire, either. He was geek, but he was *accessible* geek that the noobs could generally understand but the tech-savvy could still relate to. IMO, that's what TechTV had in spades that G4 is failing miserably at. I'll be watching the guide for TechTV programming, and passing on the G4 schlock.
Slashdot Mirror
Outstanding post, machineghost. Thank you for writing it. With your permission, I would like to share it with my students this fall in my Language and Media Literacy course (I'm a HS English/Philosophy teacher).
I have, and I know--it was all those things you and I both mention. And there were many who took advantage of the situation for various greeds (land, status, attention, religious authority, etc.). I didn't mean to simplify, because the witch trials are often used as a quick 'n dirty analogy, when in fact it was a pretty complex event.
BasilBrush, I'm afraid, friend, is right. Water content = zero.
"Relative" as an adjective is perfectly fine as a descriptor, but (not to flash a badge here), but after years of studying and teaching philosophy, the one common denominator of relativistic thought is that they tend to quickly dissolve into a series of absurd premises and silly consequents.
Of course one man's supper is another man's sin. But if you want to *start* with the presuppostion that everything truly is relative and no universal norms can be recognized, fine then. Just don't cry to the rest of us when:
*Your daughter visits the bush and has her female genetalia mutilated to keep her sexually pure.
*Your cousin is behedead by terrorists because they felt it was moral--for them--to do so.
*A member of the Ik tribe in Africa throws a child into a fire because it is the preferred entertainment.
*I'm guessing your personal favorite: You are burned at the stake by radical Christian religous fundamentalist zealots because they believed it was right for them to remove your heathen self from God's Glorious Earth.
Remember: It's all relative, so if you don't like it, I guess you better figure out some way to deal with these...others.
Keeping the powers-that-be in check is absolutely necessary, but good heavens, anarchy (unless it's of some non-ancarchist flavor) is a preposterous solution. Espousing that, coupled with a severe aversion to any kind of morality or ethics and trying to prop it up by claiming that everything is relative does not seem like human progress to me. It's simply pure paranoia. And yes, I'll be here in 10 years, just fine with everyone else. Unless someone votes a Puritan into office.
And what about the first legit child abuse support site they block? Do they get blocked and shut down too? No, when (probably not IF) that happens, an apology is issued and they site is put back up. Not the end of the world, and it certainly wouldn't be the ONLY child abuse website. Decrying the loss of free speech is absurd in this case. Parent was right--child porn creators and users forfeit their rights. It doesn't matter whose socio/religious/cultural values one is holding. Same is true for whites supremacists and other various hate groups; when the views expressed by someone are universally, irrefutably, unquestionably harmful to other people, that person should not have the right to speak. I know, I know, I've heard it before: "They take this awful thing away, soon they'll come for US!" Watch out for that 90-degree slippery slope there you've established. And please, at least study the Salem witch trials before using them in an analogy. It was not about power; it was about mass hysteria and groupthing, largely fueled by the fear of superstition in a hostile New World, harsh living condidions and a strict fundamentalist religious mindset.
I never had G4 before, but after only a weekend it seemed obvious that Comcast made their biggest mistake by keeping the lion's share of the personalities they were mistaken enough to hire in the first place. Content on both the G4 holdovers and the TechTV leftovers actually fairly similar. (Anyone else wonder why there are approximately sixteen game reviews shows on one channel?) Yet even watching Judgment Day versus X Play, you can see which hosts are trying too hard to be geeky-cool and which two (yes, Adam and Morgan) are simply geeky cool because they're comfortable with their own personalities (and each other as co-hosts). The Pulse pair remind me too much of failed SportsCenter anchors who couldn't get past their own non-clever one-liners to get a job. And four minutes into watching him, Tommy Tallurico's (sp? ah, who cares) schtick was tired. One minute after that it was annoying. I didn't wait any furter to see what emotions his grating ego would evoke. The G4 crew reminds me of a bunch of college sophomore frat punks trying to be something they're not--authentic. The flak over Leo Laporte's dismissal illustrates this best. On screen, he wasn't the most technical guy on the planet, but you knew he could be if he wanted to. He wasn't the pandering idiot that "mainstream" networks tend to hire, either. He was geek, but he was *accessible* geek that the noobs could generally understand but the tech-savvy could still relate to. IMO, that's what TechTV had in spades that G4 is failing miserably at. I'll be watching the guide for TechTV programming, and passing on the G4 schlock.