5309 Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:58:00 -0600
From: Stephen.P.Brown@dal.frb.org
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
Rather than approximating the truth, the forever ongoing style wars on
Tango-L are more likely to yield what Stephen Colbert calls 'truthiness.'
The latter being facts or concepts one only wishes or believes to be true.
An article recently published in Public Choice
<https://www.springerlink.com/content/100332/> (subscription required) by
Michael C. Munger examines the information content of political blogs.
Munger finds that bloggers and the mainstream media face the same
difficulties if they wish to rely on the blogosphere as a generator of
truth. Both bloggers and media converge on a small number of key blogs
operated by elite opinion makers as sources of information. But these
elite opinion makers are highly aware of how political discourse is
conducted and are likely to resist any information that doesn't conform to
their existing attitudes and beliefs. In addition, blogs and blog readers
are likely to separate themselves into smaller networks of people who hold
substantially similar views. These factors tend to generate biased,
polarizing views that are self-perpetuating, and people develop an
us-versus-them mentality.
Munger's conclusion runs counter to a perhaps commonly held view that the
blogosphere or discussions on forums such as Tango-L can serve as
marketplace for information that approximates a parallel processing
statistical estimator of the truth with nice properties as additional
observers are added. The key to a good outcome is that there is some
mechanism for sharing and aggregating the information and that observers
are independent rather than polarized. In a polarized world where
liked-minded individuals replicate the information already provided by the
elite opinon makers, the independence property necessary to avoid
truthiness is destroyed.
For some related thoughts, see
Why Biased Views Are Self Perpetuating
https://www.tejastango.com/inside_2004archive.html#0027
Taking Tango Styles to Extremes
https://www.tejastango.com/inside_2004archive.html#0007
With best regards,
Steve
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:41:32 -0800
From: "Konstantin Zahariev" <anfractuoso@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
<ade549600711271141h25633e79gf797cee9f91d4ec@mail.gmail.com>
On Nov 27, 2007 7:58 AM, <Stephen.P.Brown@dal.frb.org> wrote:
> Rather than approximating the truth, the forever ongoing style wars on
> Tango-L are more likely to yield what Stephen Colbert calls 'truthiness.'
> The latter being facts or concepts one only wishes or believes to be true.
>
> An article recently published in Public Choice
> <https://www.springerlink.com/content/100332/> (subscription required) by
> Michael C. Munger examines the information content of political blogs.
> Munger finds that bloggers and the mainstream media face the same
> difficulties if they wish to rely on the blogosphere as a generator of
> truth. Both bloggers and media converge on a small number of key blogs
> operated by elite opinion makers as sources of information. But these
> elite opinion makers are highly aware of how political discourse is
> conducted and are likely to resist any information that doesn't conform to
> their existing attitudes and beliefs. In addition, blogs and blog readers
> are likely to separate themselves into smaller networks of people who hold
> substantially similar views. These factors tend to generate biased,
> polarizing views that are self-perpetuating, and people develop an
> us-versus-them mentality.
>
> Munger's conclusion runs counter to a perhaps commonly held view that the
> blogosphere or discussions on forums such as Tango-L can serve as
> marketplace for information that approximates a parallel processing
> statistical estimator of the truth with nice properties as additional
> observers are added. The key to a good outcome is that there is some
> mechanism for sharing and aggregating the information and that observers
> are independent rather than polarized. In a polarized world where
> liked-minded individuals replicate the information already provided by the
> elite opinon makers, the independence property necessary to avoid
> truthiness is destroyed.
But this is not a symmetric property of the system. This mutation of
truth into truthiness is not an inherent property of the medium or
method of organization and of information exchange, but of the people
that participate in it. Consequently, this problem seems to appear
more readily and is more difficult to quash in places/meeing
groups/blogs that are mostly populated by right-wing authoritarians.
For an examination of this concept see for example
https://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/ and the book (pdf) therein.
So I don't agree that it is the medium and form of organization of
Tango-L that is the reason to expect the triumph of truthiness in it.
With best regards,
Konstantin
Victoria, Canada
>
> For some related thoughts, see
> Why Biased Views Are Self Perpetuating
> https://www.tejastango.com/inside_2004archive.html#0027
> Taking Tango Styles to Extremes
> https://www.tejastango.com/inside_2004archive.html#0007
>
> With best regards,
> Steve
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:52:28 -0600
From: ClifDavis <clif@clifdavis.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
Absolutely amazing. It's those pesky vast right wing conspiracy
authoritarians again. You just can't trust them anywhere. I say we lock
them all in a room and force them to listen to Mambo #5 for 20 hours a
day while performing the Electric Slide.
All I want to do is dance.
Clif
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 12:11:41 -0800
From: "Konstantin Zahariev" <anfractuoso@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
<ade549600711271211y38614708tab3675e5976fa72@mail.gmail.com>
On Nov 27, 2007 11:52 AM, ClifDavis <clif@clifdavis.com> wrote:
> Absolutely amazing. It's those pesky vast right wing conspiracy
> authoritarians
Before this becomes a huge distraction, I would like to point out that
(i) the important word is 'authoritarian', and (ii) 'right-wing' in
this context does not refer to or imply political or party orientation
since the definition (somewhat redundant) is that of an authoritarian
who aligns with the government in power. It is an interesting concept
and a hypothesis, so take it or leave it, comment on it or not, just
like Steve posted something he found interesting and we are free to
take it or leave it, or comment or ignore it.
With best regards,
Konstantin
Victoria, Canada
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:26:15 -0600
From: ClifDavis <clif@clifdavis.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
Hum, let us for a moment, just for conversations sake, say the right
wing authoritarian is the tango "leader" and the left wing
non-authoritarian is the follower. Is one "more" invested in the power
of the dance than the other or simply opposites of the same coin?
If they are the same, then does this invalidate your original statement
of "usually right wing authoritarian..."
Does the right wing "tango leader" have a closer association with the
music than the left wing "tango follower"?
If in the same frame of thought, the right wing authoritarian is closer
to the government, is the opposite faction, the left wing
non-authoritarian, closer to the non-government, anarchist?
Konstantin Zahariev wrote:
>On Nov 27, 2007 11:52 AM, ClifDavis <clif@clifdavis.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Absolutely amazing. It's those pesky vast right wing conspiracy
>>authoritarians
>>
>>
>
>
>Before this becomes a huge distraction, I would like to point out that
>(i) the important word is 'authoritarian', and (ii) 'right-wing' in
>this context does not refer to or imply political or party orientation
>since the definition (somewhat redundant) is that of an authoritarian
>who aligns with the government in power. It is an interesting concept
>and a hypothesis, so take it or leave it, comment on it or not, just
>like Steve posted something he found interesting and we are free to
>take it or leave it, or comment or ignore it.
>
>With best regards,
>
>Konstantin
>Victoria, Canada
>
>
>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:59:03 -0600
From: Stephen.P.Brown@dal.frb.org
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
Previously I wrote:
>> Rather than approximating the truth, the forever ongoing style wars on
>>Tango-L are more likely to yield what Stephen Colbert calls
'truthiness.'
Konstantin responded:
>[T]ruthiness is not an inherent property of the medium or
>method of organization and of information exchange, but
>of the people that participate in it.
Agreed, but I would add "and of the way the relate to each other."
>Consequently, this problem seems to appear more readily and
>is more difficult to quash in places/meeing groups/blogs that
>are mostly populated by right-wing authoritarians.
I don't see what authoritarians (right-wing or otherwise) have to do with
it. Truthiness is the result of informal networks of like-minded
individuals who reinforce each others' perspectives and help maintain
individual biases. The key to an unbiased outcome is that there is a
mechanism for sharing and aggregating the information and that observers
are independent of each other rather than polarized into identifiable
groups with self-perpetuating biases. In a polarized world where
liked-minded individuals replicate the information that others have
provided, the independence property necessary to avoid truthiness isn't
found.
As I see it, when it comes to style wars and many other topics, Tango-L
participants do seem to separate themselves into smaller networks of
people who hold substantially similar views and support each other. In
such cases, they generate self-perpetuating polarizing views with an
us-versus-them mentality. Those are exactly the conditions that develop
competing truthinesses.
With best regards,
Steve
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:22:52 -0800
From: "Konstantin Zahariev" <anfractuoso@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
<ade549600711271322i1b4dae6brdc027f0ffc66d8d1@mail.gmail.com>
Clif,
I think Steve's and my post have nothing to do with dancing but are in
a more general sense about the dynamics of a discussion group such as
Tango-L. So I do not see necessarily how you could draw any direct
inferences between _dancing_ and truthiness or authoritarianism,
though yuo may argue something about the _discussions_ here if you
really want to.
Authoritarians come as both leaders and followers (which has nothing
to do with tango leaders and followers or dancing or music).
> Hum, let us for a moment, just for conversations sake, say the right
> wing authoritarian is the tango "leader" and the left wing
> non-authoritarian is the follower. Is one "more" invested in the power
> of the dance than the other or simply opposites of the same coin?
> If they are the same, then does this invalidate your original statement
> of "usually right wing authoritarian..."
My statement was about truth versus truthiness in discussion forums,
nothing to do with dancing. See above.
> Does the right wing "tango leader" have a closer association with the
> music than the left wing "tango follower"?
Sorry I have no idea what you are asking given the concepts. If we
subtract 47 from beauty, is the white train late?
> If in the same frame of thought, the right wing authoritarian is closer
> to the government, is the opposite faction, the left wing
> non-authoritarian, closer to the non-government, anarchist?
No. BTW, fervent informed supporters of communist totalitarian USSR
are also seen as right-wing authoritarians in this framework.
Here are some excerpts from Altemeyer that may help clarify the concepts:
--- begin ---
Authoritarianism is something authoritarian followers and authoritarian
leaders cook up between themselves. It happens when the followers submit too
much to the leaders, trust them too much, and give them too much leeway to do
whatever they want [...]
Right-Wing and Left-Wing Authoritarian Followers
Authoritarian followers usually support the established authorities in their
society, such as government officials and traditional religious
leaders. Such people
have historically been the "proper" authorities in life, the
time-honored, entitled,
customary leaders, and that means a lot to most authoritarians.
Psychologically these
followers have personalities featuring:
1) a high degree of submission to the established, legitimate authorities in
their society;
2) high levels of aggression in the name of their authorities; and
3) a high level of conventionalism.
Because the submission occurs to traditional authority, I call these
followers rightwing
authoritarians. I'm using the word "right" in one of its earliest
meanings, for in
Old English "riht"(pronounced "writ") as an adjective meant lawful,
proper, correct,
doing what the authorities said. [...]
So a right-wing authoritarian follower doesn't necessarily have
conservative political views. Instead he's someone who readily submits to the
established authorities in society, attacks others in their name, and is highly
conventional. It's an aspect of his personality, not a description of
his politics. Rightwing
authoritarianism is a personality trait, like being characteristically
bashful or
happy or grumpy or dopey.
You could have left-wing authoritarian followers as well, who support a
revolutionary leader who wants to overthrow the establishment. I knew
a few in the
1970s, Marxist university students who constantly spouted their chosen
authorities,
Lenin or Trotsky or Chairman Mao. Happily they spent most of their time fighting
with each other, as lampooned in Monty Python's Life of Brian where the People's
Front of Judea devotes most of its energy to battling, not the Romans,
but the Judean
People's Front. But the left-wing authoritarians on my campus
disappeared long ago.
Similarly in America "the Weathermen" blew away in the wind. I'm sure
one can find
left-wing authoritarians here and there, but they hardly exist in
sufficient numbers
now to threaten democracy in North America. However I have found bucketfuls of
right-wing authoritarians in nearly every sample I have drawn in Canada and the
United States for the past three decades. So when I speak of
"authoritarian followers"
in this book I mean right-wing authoritarian followers [...]
--- end ---
With best regards,
Konstantin
Victoria, Canada
> Konstantin Zahariev wrote:
>
> >On Nov 27, 2007 11:52 AM, ClifDavis <clif@clifdavis.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Absolutely amazing. It's those pesky vast right wing conspiracy
> >>authoritarians
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Before this becomes a huge distraction, I would like to point out that
> >(i) the important word is 'authoritarian', and (ii) 'right-wing' in
> >this context does not refer to or imply political or party orientation
> >since the definition (somewhat redundant) is that of an authoritarian
> >who aligns with the government in power. It is an interesting concept
> >and a hypothesis, so take it or leave it, comment on it or not, just
> >like Steve posted something he found interesting and we are free to
> >take it or leave it, or comment or ignore it.
> >
> >With best regards,
> >
> >Konstantin
> >Victoria, Canada
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:32:41 -0800
From: "Konstantin Zahariev" <anfractuoso@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
<ade549600711271332r49c2696at52dac4913e650a65@mail.gmail.com>
On Nov 27, 2007 12:59 PM, <Stephen.P.Brown@dal.frb.org> wrote:
> I don't see what authoritarians (right-wing or otherwise) have to do with
> it. Truthiness is the result of informal networks of like-minded
> individuals who reinforce each others' perspectives and help maintain
> individual biases. The key to an unbiased outcome is that there is a
> mechanism for sharing and aggregating the information and that observers
> are independent of each other rather than polarized into identifiable
> groups with self-perpetuating biases.
But I think the key is how these groups deal with information that
contradicts their views. The biased outcome/truthiness only persists
if unfavourable facts are selectively rejected, i.e. the outcome is
unfalsifiable. This apparently tends to happen with authoritarians
more, hence my mention of the concept.
So I think it is not whether participants in informal networks are
polarized or independent, but whether they allow or not their theories
and views to be falsifiable.
With best regards,
Konstantin
Victoria, Canada
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:50:14 -0800
From: meaning of life <kushi_bushi@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: <tango-l@mit.edu>
if you want to see how this forum deals with "information that contradicts its' views" go read the responses to queries about "close embrace", "whether tango music is uninspiring", or "if you dance tango to non tango music, is it still tango?". the reponses to these topics reminded me of the responses to non conformists in basic training (see boot party on wikipedia). from the condescending remarks to the pure vitriol, certainly, this forum is not open to contradicting viewpoints or even queries. interestingly, in my case, the non public responses where well constructed and quite helpful (even the ones that disagreed), indicating that people are "afraid" to contradict the group publicly.
The Tangonista
Sponsered by P.E.T.A. (People Expressing Tango Attitude)
NOTICE - no cats were injured in the making of our music
> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:32:41 -0800
> From: anfractuoso@gmail.com
> To: tango-l@mit.edu
> Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
>
> On Nov 27, 2007 12:59 PM, wrote:
>
>> I don't see what authoritarians (right-wing or otherwise) have to do with
>> it. Truthiness is the result of informal networks of like-minded
>> individuals who reinforce each others' perspectives and help maintain
>> individual biases. The key to an unbiased outcome is that there is a
>> mechanism for sharing and aggregating the information and that observers
>> are independent of each other rather than polarized into identifiable
>> groups with self-perpetuating biases.
>
> But I think the key is how these groups deal with information that
> contradicts their views. The biased outcome/truthiness only persists
> if unfavourable facts are selectively rejected, i.e. the outcome is
> unfalsifiable. This apparently tends to happen with authoritarians
> more, hence my mention of the concept.
>
> So I think it is not whether participants in informal networks are
> polarized or independent, but whether they allow or not their theories
> and views to be falsifiable.
>
> With best regards,
>
> Konstantin
> Victoria, Canada
Put your friends on the big screen with Windows Vista? + Windows Live?.
https://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_MediaCtr_bigscreen_102007
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 15:57:29 -0600
From: ClifDavis <clif@clifdavis.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
Since I have had my chops busted for "not relating my conversation to
dance", I brought tango into it.
I do feel that it is relevant to the discussion in that sense.
As related to the general discussion being held, subjectively taking a
bit of information and by group decree claiming it to be truth "because
we say so" is nothing more than group delusion. "Truthiness" is nothing
more than making it up out of whole cloth. "I want this to be true".
As to how this relates to the group postings, I am constantly amazed at
the extremes inside the groups, from the totally closed minded to the
fully open minded.
Truth is just that, if it is not true, it is false.
Just an old guy thinking out loud.
Clif
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:07:37 -0600
From: Stephen.P.Brown@dal.frb.org
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
Konstantin wrote:
>But I think the key [to truth vs. truthiness] is how these groups
>deal with information that contradicts their views. The
>biased outcome/truthiness only persists if unfavourable
>facts are selectively rejected, i.e. the outcome is
>unfalsifiable.
I agree, although the statement is presented to an extreme. All that is
required that the distribution of accepted answers has a persistent bias
in differing from the truth.
>This apparently tends to happen with authoritarians
>more, hence my mention of the concept.
It does seem likely to be correct that authoritarian organization might
lead to a greater likelihood of the rejection of unfavorable facts. (It
may even be one definition of authoritarianism.) So I will agree with
you.
Nonetheless, individual self-perpetuating biases can persist as was shown
by Wing Suen in The Economic Journal (April 2004), and informal networks
of like-minded individuals can generate group biases and polarization
without authoritarians, as shown by Munger in Public Choice (January
2008). I think such group biases and polarization is evident in the
truthiness often found on Tango-L.
So, I think our views are converging.
Interestingly enough, for most tango dancers, their first introduction to
such biases likely came from their first teacher. Most teachers convey
their own sense of style rather than teaching tango in a manner that is
indedpendent of style.
Steve
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:04:24 -0800
From: "Konstantin Zahariev" <anfractuoso@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
<ade549600711271604n47fa3e19i477204d64226816@mail.gmail.com>
On Nov 27, 2007 1:50 PM, meaning of life <kushi_bushi@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> if you want to see how this forum deals with "information that contradicts its' views" [...]
But that's just it - Tango-L is not a very good example in most cases
because it deals a lot in opinions about art forms. So your sentence
above should really be "if you want to see how this forum deals with
_opinions_ that contradict its' views" - but then it really addresses
a somewhat different phenomenon.
There are other reasons why bringing out examples of past Tango-L
activity is not necessarily illuminating to the truthiness versus
truth discussion - there's deep (personal) history among some, and
there are subjects that are brought up repeatedly and/or in an
implicitly or explicitly non-constructive way, so some people are just
tempted to dismiss or declare. This does not necessarily mean they
have no argument against what is offered or that they cannot defend
their point of view.
In other words, the notion of an informal discussion network of people
with converging views clustering and developing information biases is
still an idealized model of the real thing. Tango-L is not close to
that model, but perhaps one can study it by isolating properties
somehow (identify relevant variables, keep variables other than the
one you study fixed, etc.)
With best regards,
Konstantin
Victoria, Canada
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:06:23 -0500
From: "jjg" <jjg@jqhome.net>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:22:52 -0800, Konstantin Zahariev wrote
Since I've got some time to kill...
>
> --- begin ---
>
> Authoritarianism is something authoritarian followers and authoritarian
> leaders cook up between themselves. It happens when the followers
> submit too much to the leaders, trust them too much, and give them
> too much leeway to do whatever they want [...]
>
> Right-Wing and Left-Wing Authoritarian Followers
>
> I call these
> followers rightwing authoritarians. I'm using the word "right" in
> one of its earliest meanings, for in Old English "riht"(pronounced
> "writ") as an adjective meant lawful, proper, correct, doing what
> the authorities said. [...]
>
> So a right-wing authoritarian follower doesn't necessarily have
> conservative political views. Instead he's someone who readily
> submits to the established authorities in society, attacks others in
> their name, and is highly conventional. It's an aspect of his
> personality, not a description of his politics. Rightwing
> authoritarianism is a personality trait, like being
> characteristically bashful or happy or grumpy or dopey.
>
This usage is in direct opposition to the much more usual usage of the terms
left and right to denote political bent. Using it in this way as well as
labeling it a "personality trait" looks for the world like you are rigging the
terms to make a moralistic pronouncement. Mutatis mutandi anyone not very
keenly aware of your definitions will understand that being conservative
(which everyone is about something) is a pathology.
Generally nobody is across the board left or right, but some mixture; run down
a list of abortion, capital punishment, affirmative action, guns, pornography,
women's rights, gay marriage and the like and chances are excellent you don't
fall squarely anywhere. This is why political parties in the US, at least,
have been getting shriller since they perceive that they are losing their grip
on their traditional constituents but have yet not assimilated why. I (and I'm
not alone) would point out that traditional political categories are pretty
much meaningless anymore, serving merely to label those we disagree with
before we dismiss them.
<snip/>
> I'm sure one can
> find left-wing authoritarians here and there, but they hardly exist
> in sufficient numbers now to threaten democracy in North America.
Not really -- there are tons of the them and they generally work at
universities in the US. Most of them have tenure too. Democracies tend to
absorb their opponents rather than be brittle and have revolutions and while a
lot of the leftists in the 60's were moaning about "co-opting" (viz.,
co-operating with the Establishment) they completely missed the fact that they
were getting most of their wishes granted. This leads to rather bizarre
things, such as the Marxist academic literary critic who owns a budding real
estate business renting apartments to students.
As for being a threat to Democracy actually a lot of recent trends at the
University are pretty inimical to democratic institutions. Look at
post-modernism and its various offshoots*. These have engendered a sort of
parallel universe where lit-crit types have their version of history,
economics and the like that are touted as simply being alternative
"narratives" to mainstream fields. Heck even the Sciences have not been
spared this sort of revisionism. Witness folks like Bruno Latour (heavyweight
philosopher) proclaiming that all Science is simply an alternate belief system
and results (e.g. Gravity) are simply agreed upon by Scientists who may change
them for purely sociological reasons. He even went so far at one point to
wonder publicly how Ramses II could have died in 1200 BC of tuberculosis which
wasn't discovered until 1882. (?!!)
If you are interested, check out the book "Higher Superstition" (Gross &
Levitt) which chronicles a lot of this. A great book which is by turns funny
and alarming while being very engagingly written.
So getting back to truth and truthiness... There has been a great rise in
truthiness and a lot of it can be squarely blamed on instruction people have
been receiving in the Humanities. In such cases students have been so hobbled
by their instruction that they are simply not able to frame a coherent
argument nor evaluate one. The most important thing one could get from an
education, as one old Oxford Don said, was to "know when people are talking
rot." On that account, most universities in the US have failed spectacularly.
Yeah, I guess I'm pretty grumpy that a good, solid educational grounding has
gone the way of the dodo.
Cheers,
Jeff G
* I'll spare you a run down in the main text, but most of these schools of
thought came into existence as extensions of Heidegger's philosophies (via
Derrida, Focault, Lacan) who was a bona fide Nazi (almost managed to be named
Hitler's Philosopher during the late 30's). These were strongly critical of
systems like Marxism and when many radicals found Marxism wanting, opted for
these instead. Having studied totalitarian systems and their thinking (great
place to start is Hannah Arendt's book on the subject) it is very spooky
listening indeed. Most of them reach the conclusion of the Nazis that the West
is the source of all evil in the world and on the verge of collapse. Most of
the knee-jerk anti-Western pronouncements you hear come from this camp. The
Nazis used this as an argument against Democracy which is an easy inference in
these systems, but one that most academic users of these philosophies tend to
shy away from. However, if your philosophical system undermines every tenet of
Democracy at every turn, what do you have left?
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:35:20 -0800 (PST)
From: NANCY <ningle_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
THIS IS NOT TANGO RELATED. PLEASE TAKE IT ELSEWHERE.
<<Rito es la danza en tu vida
y el tango que tu amas
te quema en su llama>>
de: Bailarina de tango
por: Horacio Sanguinetti
Be a better pen pal.
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 01:39:38 +0000
From: Jay Rabe <jayrabe@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: <tango-l@mit.edu>
Highly enjoyable discussion.
On the subject of whether it applies to tango-L:
If you're talking about governments or economic systems, while you can of course have highly polarized viewpoints, regardless there are metrics and objective criteria that can be evaluated to assess the truth of one side's assertion of being a "better" system - per-capita income, unemployment rate, price stability, etc. The presence of such criteria are necessary, it seems, so that the "ignoring evidence inconsistent with the position/belief" principle can even be applied.
However it seems to me that most of the really polarized debates on Tango-L are about what I call semantics, eg: what is the difference between the style I call milonguero, vs. the style you call close-embrace? Or: If I'm dancing to pop music, doing steps that (in the absence of music) anyone knowledgeable would recognize as Argentine Tango steps, can I call the dance I'm doing Argentine Tango in spite of the music?
For these kind of questions and issues, it seems the relevant core factors are personal preference and values, and I cannot imagine what evidence one might offer to support either polar position.
J
TangoMoments.com
> From: Stephen.P.Brown@dal.frb.org
> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:59:03 -0600
> Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
>
> Previously I wrote:
> >> Rather than approximating the truth, the forever ongoing style wars on
> >>Tango-L are more likely to yield what Stephen Colbert calls
> 'truthiness.'
>
> Konstantin responded:
> >[T]ruthiness is not an inherent property of the medium or
> >method of organization and of information exchange, but
> >of the people that participate in it.
>
> Agreed, but I would add "and of the way the relate to each other."
>
> >Consequently, this problem seems to appear more readily and
> >is more difficult to quash in places/meeing groups/blogs that
> >are mostly populated by right-wing authoritarians.
>
> I don't see what authoritarians (right-wing or otherwise) have to do with
> it. Truthiness is the result of informal networks of like-minded
> individuals who reinforce each others' perspectives and help maintain
> individual biases. The key to an unbiased outcome is that there is a
> mechanism for sharing and aggregating the information and that observers
> are independent of each other rather than polarized into identifiable
> groups with self-perpetuating biases. In a polarized world where
> liked-minded individuals replicate the information that others have
> provided, the independence property necessary to avoid truthiness isn't
> found.
>
> As I see it, when it comes to style wars and many other topics, Tango-L
> participants do seem to separate themselves into smaller networks of
> people who hold substantially similar views and support each other. In
> such cases, they generate self-perpetuating polarizing views with an
> us-versus-them mentality. Those are exactly the conditions that develop
> competing truthinesses.
>
> With best regards,
> Steve
>
>
Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.Download today it's FREE!
https://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_sharelife_112007
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 19:18:50 -0800
From: "Konstantin Zahariev" <anfractuoso@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
<ade549600711271918y30880b97wf7fea566356f88db@mail.gmail.com>
On Nov 27, 2007 2:07 PM, <Stephen.P.Brown@dal.frb.org> wrote:
> Konstantin wrote:
> >But I think the key [to truth vs. truthiness] is how these groups
> >deal with information that contradicts their views. The
> >biased outcome/truthiness only persists if unfavourable
> >facts are selectively rejected, i.e. the outcome is
> >unfalsifiable.
>
> I agree, although the statement is presented to an extreme. All that is
> required that the distribution of accepted answers has a persistent bias
> in differing from the truth.
>
> >This apparently tends to happen with authoritarians
> >more, hence my mention of the concept.
>
> It does seem likely to be correct that authoritarian organization might
> lead to a greater likelihood of the rejection of unfavorable facts. (It
> may even be one definition of authoritarianism.) So I will agree with
> you.
>
> Nonetheless, individual self-perpetuating biases can persist as was shown
> by Wing Suen in The Economic Journal (April 2004), and informal networks
> of like-minded individuals can generate group biases and polarization
> without authoritarians, as shown by Munger in Public Choice (January
> 2008). I think such group biases and polarization is evident in the
> truthiness often found on Tango-L.
Yes I agree.. and I should look these references up to see what they
did exactly, thank you. I guess I was focusing more on the 'why'
rather than the 'what'.
Cheers,
Konstantin
Victoria, Canada
> So, I think our views are converging.
>
> Interestingly enough, for most tango dancers, their first introduction to
> such biases likely came from their first teacher. Most teachers convey
> their own sense of style rather than teaching tango in a manner that is
> indedpendent of style.
>
> Steve
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 19:23:57 -0800
From: "Konstantin Zahariev" <anfractuoso@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
<ade549600711271923h6f9ed5eci85f2966e34c76dce@mail.gmail.com>
On Nov 27, 2007 1:57 PM, ClifDavis <clif@clifdavis.com> wrote:
> Since I have had my chops busted for "not relating my conversation to
> dance", I brought tango into it.
I was not aware of that history..
> I do feel that it is relevant to the discussion in that sense.
>
> As related to the general discussion being held, subjectively taking a
> bit of information and by group decree claiming it to be truth "because
> we say so" is nothing more than group delusion. "Truthiness" is nothing
> more than making it up out of whole cloth. "I want this to be true".
>
> As to how this relates to the group postings, I am constantly amazed at
> the extremes inside the groups, from the totally closed minded to the
> fully open minded.
> Truth is just that, if it is not true, it is false.
>
> Just an old guy thinking out loud.
> Clif
Well, I tend to agree with what you said above. But translating
Steve's original point into Tango-L situation is harder and of more
limited utility because of the subject - art forms of music and
dancing and expressing opinions (as in personal feelings or
preferences). Not exactly a field where objectivity can sort out truth
>from dare.
Cheers,
Konstantin
Victoria, Canada
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 19:29:04 -0800
From: "Konstantin Zahariev" <anfractuoso@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
<ade549600711271929x46dc5a58u42d78e08e10232f0@mail.gmail.com>
On Nov 27, 2007 5:39 PM, Jay Rabe <jayrabe@hotmail.com> wrote:
[...]
> For these kind of questions and issues, it seems the relevant core factors are personal preference and values,
> and I cannot imagine what evidence one might offer to support either polar position.
>
> J
> TangoMoments.com
Yes, this is what I was trying to say to... umm... the kushi_bushi
character I was replying to earlier. Opinions (as in personal
preferences and feelings) about art forms are not exactly falsifiable.
Cheers,
Konstantin
> > From: Stephen.P.Brown@dal.frb.org
> > Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:59:03 -0600
> > Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
> >
>
> > Previously I wrote:
> > >> Rather than approximating the truth, the forever ongoing style wars on
> > >>Tango-L are more likely to yield what Stephen Colbert calls
> > 'truthiness.'
> >
> > Konstantin responded:
> > >[T]ruthiness is not an inherent property of the medium or
> > >method of organization and of information exchange, but
> > >of the people that participate in it.
> >
> > Agreed, but I would add "and of the way the relate to each other."
> >
> > >Consequently, this problem seems to appear more readily and
> > >is more difficult to quash in places/meeing groups/blogs that
> > >are mostly populated by right-wing authoritarians.
> >
> > I don't see what authoritarians (right-wing or otherwise) have to do with
> > it. Truthiness is the result of informal networks of like-minded
> > individuals who reinforce each others' perspectives and help maintain
> > individual biases. The key to an unbiased outcome is that there is a
> > mechanism for sharing and aggregating the information and that observers
> > are independent of each other rather than polarized into identifiable
> > groups with self-perpetuating biases. In a polarized world where
> > liked-minded individuals replicate the information that others have
> > provided, the independence property necessary to avoid truthiness isn't
> > found.
> >
> > As I see it, when it comes to style wars and many other topics, Tango-L
> > participants do seem to separate themselves into smaller networks of
> > people who hold substantially similar views and support each other. In
> > such cases, they generate self-perpetuating polarizing views with an
> > us-versus-them mentality. Those are exactly the conditions that develop
> > competing truthinesses.
> >
> > With best regards,
> > Steve
> >
> >
>
> Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.Download today it's FREE!
> https://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_sharelife_112007
>
>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 19:42:09 -0800
From: meaning of life <kushi_bushi@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Style Wars: Truth and Truthiness
To: Konstantin Zahariev <anfractuoso@gmail.com>, Tango-L
<tango-l@mit.edu>
the "kushi_bushi character" was merely trying to add that since dissenting points of view were almost instantly attacked with viciousness and vitriol, that people were hesitant to present dissent to the "group think" unless they were purposefully being combative (as opposed to presenting useful discourse and dialog).
further he was presenting that in the case that he was most familiar, there was quite a bit of back channel input (private) agreeing with the proposition that was contrary to the "group think". the magnitude of this back channel response indicates that people are "afraid" to present disenting views to the group publicly for "fear" of having the anger directed at them and their position (contrary to the "group").
both observations indicate that this forum, like most others is not "open", and is infact prone to "group think". therefore, the "truth" will not "emerge", and the "truthiness" will prevail.
The Tangonista
Sponsered by P.E.T.A. (People Expressing Tango Attitude)
NOTICE - no cats were injured in the making of our music
You keep typing, we keep giving. Download Messenger and join the i?m Initiative now.
https://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGLM
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:58:55 -0500 (EST)
From: "Keith Elshaw" <keith@totango.net>
Subject: [Tango-L] Truth and Truthiness
To: tango-l@mit.edu
The truth could be said to be, I think, that Tango-L has been virtually
made comatose and put on virtual life-support by people who might be
well-meaning; who certainly are smart; but who do not exhibit personal
knowledge of having learned the cardinal rule of tango and life:
Be generous.
If you don't give, you don't get.
Being generous can sometimes be the simple act of not posting a reply to a
message instead of - you know ...
The takers-away took Tango-L away.
Bet they are awful dancers, each and every one of them.
If they want to get better, all they have to do is hold it sometimes.
If I may say.
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:46:10 -0700
From: "David Hodgson" <DHodgson@TangoLabyrinth.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Truth and Truthiness
(Dr. Zorrito arrives with a deliberator)
Kids, I don?t know about truthlessness (can someone confirm if this is an
actual word or not).
But see Tango-L for what it is, a forum for passing information and thoughts
about Argentine Tango. Tango-A is for passing on information about A. Tango
events.
To use it beyond this is like looking up a subject on Wikipedia and
believing that once one has read said wiki subject, thinks they have the
knowledge of a PHD about said subject. Without having gone through any form
of that initiation.
The truth is, in this view, the wiki reader still is not aware they are
seeing brown.
Enjoy every one,
Am off to dream about making sexy, beautiful Tango.
Zorrito.
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 8:59 PM
To: tango-l@mit.edu
Subject: [Tango-L] Truth and Truthiness
The truth could be said to be, I think, that Tango-L has been virtually
made comatose and put on virtual life-support by people who might be
well-meaning; who certainly are smart; but who do not exhibit personal
knowledge of having learned the cardinal rule of tango and life:
Be generous.
If you don't give, you don't get.
Being generous can sometimes be the simple act of not posting a reply to a
message instead of - you know ...
The takers-away took Tango-L away.
Bet they are awful dancers, each and every one of them.
If they want to get better, all they have to do is hold it sometimes.
If I may say.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.8/1154 - Release Date: 11/27/2007
11:40 AM
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.8/1154 - Release Date: 11/27/2007
11:40 AM
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:50:36 -0500
From: WHITE 95 R <white95r@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Truth and Truthiness
To: Keith Elshaw <keith@totango.net>, <tango-l@mit.edu>
Hi Keith,
I sense a sadness and nostalgia in your post. Maybe you miss the good old days? ;-).... I think that writing the obit for the tango-L might be a little premature. I think that the Tango-L appears to be "comatose" because people just don't have much to say. I agree with you in that a bit more generosity, kindness and tolerance would be nice to see in some of the postings to the forum. However, I don't think the mild bickering or the few really insulting or annoying posts that show up from time to time are the cause of the slowing down of discussions. It's probably just a lull in the action or a cyclical low in audience participation. Perhaps your well timed opinon will revive the discussions......
Cheers,
Manuel
visit our webpage
www.tango-rio.com
> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:58:55 -0500
> From: keith@totango.net
> To: tango-l@mit.edu
> Subject: [Tango-L] Truth and Truthiness
>
> The truth could be said to be, I think, that Tango-L has been virtually
> made comatose and put on virtual life-support by people who might be
> well-meaning; who certainly are smart; but who do not exhibit personal
> knowledge of having learned the cardinal rule of tango and life:
>
> Be generous.
>
> If you don't give, you don't get.
>
>
> Being generous can sometimes be the simple act of not posting a reply to a
> message instead of - you know ...
>
>
> The takers-away took Tango-L away.
>
> Bet they are awful dancers, each and every one of them.
>
> If they want to get better, all they have to do is hold it sometimes.
>
> If I may say.
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:08:15 +0000
From: " Santiago " <santiagosteele@earthlink.net>
Subject: [Tango-L] Truth and Truthiness
To: tango-l@mit.edu
<97167711-1196274427-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1790682004-@bxe119.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Just a suggestion - maybe you guys should spend less time at your computer and more time on the dance floor. Honestly, this has gone beyond ridiculous.
Also, I've heard that that a little sunlight once in awhile does wonders for one's disposition.
Santiago
Sent wirelessly via BlackBerry from T-Mobile.
