Well we now have four of you men degenerating into personal attack using ridicule and contempt against me to try to destroy my morale, my faith in my own intelligence, my reputation with this group, and to ensure that no-one dares to agree with me with more than two words, for fear of the same. Misquoting, misrepresenting and intimidation are very effective techniques to solicit silence, but silence is not compliance. Now you will never know if there really is a movement happening out there, because you have made sure no-one who is tuning in to whatever is happening, will ever dare tell you about their perceptions in this forum. Do you really think I will crawl under a rock and say, stupid stupid Christine, you are too dumb to make observations, too dumb to spot trends and too dumb to suggest that they might warrant research? Do you think I should quiver in shame before my superiors and masters and beg your forgiveness of my outrageous impertinence? Oh goodness gracious me (she says as she wobbles her silly dumb head from side to side). I am silenced! Christine (an NF in an SJ world) http://www.youtube.com/user/JezebelDecibel#p/u/11/ppeN8gmk-JU [:-(*:-|*:-)] -----Original Message----- From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris lofting Sent: Wednesday, 18 November 2009 9:21 PM To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: atw: Re: The New World Order, take 2.5 > -----Original Message----- > From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Geoffrey Marnell > Sent: Wednesday, 18 November 2009 8:00 PM > To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: atw: Re: The New World Order, take 2 > <snip> > > I'm sorry Christine, but amongst the gems you do offer this > list, occasionally you put forward some claim or other that > is arrant nonsense. Your claim that everything that is to be > learnt can be learnt from YouTube is your most recent example > (and your response to Howard Silcock's neutral, uncritical > question is an example of you refusing to follow the very > ethic you want us to follow). Those who challenged you have > as much right to challenge your claims as the claims of > flat-earthers and scientologists. (You did, I notice, have > the grace to republish your posting with the claim that > caused the fuss struck out, a move that deserves respect.) > Christine appears to be demonstrating 'symmetric' thinking - it lacks precision (when compared to asymmetric thinking), has limited logic in that it is grounded in the bi-conditional and as such instinctively converts the conditional into the bi-conditional! It is a mindset grounded in post-modernism and covers the development of social networks where we can get 700 friends rather than 3! How do you service 700 friends? you don't, or more so must live a superficial life. Symmetric thinking is the foundation of the everyday activities of members of the species; its logic is shared with the logic of dream states and another category of thinking style is that of 'mythic' thinking - thinking in images etc rather than 'directed' thinking where we think in words. Symmetric thinking focuses on a process of gaining identity from/through the local context rather than asserting one's own context. In the realm of post modernism, the symmetry involved means all points of view are, basically, the same and so 'any metaphor will do' in interpreting reality. The problem of course is that symmetric thinking lacks direction and is more tied to metaphor and so romanticism/surrealism - anti-symmetry/asymmetry being more into realism and the use of metonymy (and so possible paradox). Thus we can see the holistic/organic/parallel nature of symmetric thinking, as compared to the mechanistic/partials/serial nature of asymmetric thinking BUT we also note that, with symmetric thinking, the bias to immediacy in responses covers a grounding in instincts/habits and so in generals, as compared to the recognition of unique differences of particulars in asymmetric thinking (and the associated delay of such). The development of symmetry comes as a reaction to asymmetry where intense expressions of precision etc lead to a need to conserve energy and so we see the emergence of symmetric perspectives since symmetry is the 'best fit' response to complexity (it also covers 'dumbing-down' of information to make it easier to understand by the masses - personally I prefer the focus on smartening-up than dumbing-down!) The demands of technical writing cover the dynamics of anti-symmetry/symmetry (part/whole dynamics covering the focus on difference vs sameness). The asymmetric covers the emergence of mediation and so creation of languages through use of consciousness. Since the technical nature is associated with high precision and so anti-symmetry/asymmetry, so documenting such for the 'masses' requires the translation into more symmetry-focused prose, HOWEVER, getting too symmetric means that rather than re-phrasing/simplifying we end-up dumbing-down. The issues then are in the dumbed-down material then being taken AS IF the equivalent in precision of the original material and being used to build models etc that are in fact 'false'; this a common behaviour in modern times. The overall dynamics of our species covers (a) determinism in the form of genetics with degrees of freedom available for bottom-up development and social rules operating top-down to regulate degrees of freedom, and (b) the refinement of determinism into the emergence of high level mediation in the form of consciousness. As such we move from the mindless asymmetry of a thermodynamic universe, through the symmetry of a genetically determined species, into the mindful asymmetry of individual consciousness. The path from symmetry to asymmetry is a path of fragmentation and the increasingly competitive. This then leads to unique beings asserting their own context and attracting followers to then form a social group and so a 'new' symmetry - overall we see a dynamic symmetry trying to re-configure itself to the change and direction of an asymmetric universe. Thus the emergence of social networks etc etc is a natural product of such activity and the whole dynamic can span generations - the differences now compared to the past is in the SPEED in which all of this activity can take place due to the technology. What is noteworthy is the speed aspect of the fragmentation process as a whole (collective) breaks up into individuals. There is a boom/bust socioeconomic dynamic present that allows for some to 'branch-off' the main path and it is there we see social stratification; different people moving at different rates to avoid boom/bust dynamics. This includes attempts to rigidly enforce symmetry (closed systems) as it does to bring out antisymmetry in the form of individuals moving into being politically grounded in Anarchy (as compared to anarchy - the local context, open system, interactions of anti-symmetry/asymmetry allow for emergence of 'new' perspectives and so symmetry breaking as well as re-making). The attraction of SAMENESS across symmetry includes dumbing-down of material where the quantity of such can come across AS IF full, in-depth, understandings are possible when in fact, they are not. Thus one must be wary of symmetry-biased perspectives, especially from a technical writing position. That said, an analysis of symmetry and the creation of categories of languages can lead us into uncovering faster methods in refining our intuition/wisdom through the use of reason; this includes understanding the dynamics of emotions and their assessments of situations and from that learning to ask the 'right questions' of users in preparing technical documentation. Chris http://www.emotionaliching.com ************************************************** To view the austechwriter archives, go to www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the Subject field (without quotes). To manage your subscription (e.g., set and unset DIGEST and VACATION modes) go to www.freelists.org/list/austechwriter To contact the list administrator, send a message to austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx **************************************************