Vintage Slog, John.
Three Blind Lies says it all
Climate Change, Land Use and Monetary Policy: The New Trifecta by Geraldine Perry
My rating: 5 of 5 stars
An excellent exposition on the subject , Wonderful.
The Median is Not the Message. Skewed distributions and Long Tails! #Gould v #Taleb Naming Names with John Ward at the Slog.
(In a symmetrical distribution, the profile of variation to the left of the central tendency is a mirror image of variation to the right. In skewed distributions, variation to one side of the central tendency is more stretched out—left skewed if extended to the left, right skewed if stretched out to the right.)
I didn’t have to stop and immediately follow Isaiah’s injunction to Hezekiah—set thine house in order for thou shalt die, and not live. I would have time to think, to plan, and to fight.
Jay Gould , The Median is not the message.
As the world goes through a necessary reset of the rules, we will experience significant upheaval. I recommend Chris Martenson’s material at http://www.chrismartenson.com to understand the exponential ruleset and to dialogue with an enlightened community taking steps to minimize the upheaval for their local communities. That is the only prudent option at this point.
Posted on January 8, 2011by dvrabel
The Median and the mean
N1, N100 and NLarge
Soundbites, Narratives and Policy
consumption, Investment and Production
in and of narratives of the particular (Consumer), the aggregate (The Invested) and the Large/Complex.(The Powerful)
The Powerful (NLarge) are imposing Policy onto their Aggregator (N100) Technocratic class responsible for the investment in and Manufacture of Wholesale Narratives which N1 an atomized and discombobulated populace consume in a soon to be rationed social points system.( All predicated on Three Blind Lies.)
A sort of Guide for the perplexed.
Newsfeeds in the corporate media have become esoteric these days and consulting Maimonides is not such a bad idea.
Introductory Remarks. [ON METHOD] THERE are seven causes of inconsistencies and contradictions to be met within a literary work.
The first cause arises from the fact that the author collects the opinions of various men, each differing from the other, but neglects to mention the name of the author of any particular opinion. In such a work contradictions or inconsistencies must occur, since any two statements may belong to two different authors.
Second cause: The author holds at first one opinion which he subsequently rejects: in his work., however, both his original and altered views are retained.
Third cause: The passages in question are not all to be taken literally: some only are to be understood in their literal sense, while in others figurative language is employed, which includes another meaning besides the literal one: or, in the apparently inconsistent passages, figurative language is employed which, if taken literally, would seem to be contradictories or contraries.
Fourth cause: The premises are not identical in both statements, but for certain reasons they are not fully stated in these passages: or two propositions with different subjects which are expressed by the same term without having the difference in meaning pointed out, occur in two passages. The contradiction is therefore only apparent, but there is no contradiction in reality.
The fifth cause is traceable to the use of a certain method adopted in teaching and expounding profound problems. Namely, a difficult and obscure theorem must sometimes be mentioned and assumed as known, for the illustration of some elementary and intelligible subject which must be taught beforehand the commencement being always made with the easier thing. The teacher must therefore facilitate, in any manner which he can devise, the explanation of those theorems, which have to be assumed as known, and he must content himself with giving a general though somewhat inaccurate notion on the subject. It is, for the present, explained according to the capacity of the students, that they may comprehend it as far as they are required to understand the subject. Later on, the same subject is thoroughly treated and fully developed in its right place.
Sixth cause: The contradiction is not apparent and only becomes evident through a series of premises. The larger the number of premises necessary to prove the contradiction between the two conclusions, the greater is the chance that it will escape detection, and that the author will not perceive his own inconsistency. Only when from each conclusion, by means of suitable premises, an inference is made, and from the enunciation thus inferred, by means of proper arguments, other conclusions are formed, and after that process has been repeated many times, then it becomes clear that the original conclusions are contradictories or contraries. Even able writers are liable to overlook such inconsistencies. If, however, the contradiction between the original statements can at once be discovered, and the author, while writing the second, does not think of the first, he evinces a greater deficiency, and his words deserve no notice whatever.
Seventh cause: It is sometimes necessary to introduce such metaphysical matter as may partly be disclosed, but must partly be concealed: while, therefore, on one occasion the object which the author has in view may demand that the metaphysical problem be treated as solved in one way, it may be convenient on another occasion to treat it as solved in the opposite way. The author must endeavour, by concealing the fact as much as possible, to prevent the uneducated reader from perceiving the contradiction.
Jain Many Sidedness
Anekāntavāda (Sanskrit: अनेकान्तवाद, “many-sidedness”) refers to the Jain doctrine about metaphysical truths that emerged in ancient India. It states that the ultimate truth and reality is complex and has multiple aspects. Anekantavada has also been interpreted to mean non-absolutism, “intellectual Ahimsa”, religious pluralism, as well as a rejection of fanaticism that leads to terror attacks and mass violence. Some scholars state that modern revisionism has attempted to reinterpret anekantavada with religious tolerance, openmindedness and pluralism.
Affirmation: syād-asti—in some ways, it is,
Denial: syān-nāsti—in some ways, it is not,
Joint but successive affirmation and denial: syād-asti-nāsti—in some ways, it is, and it is not,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-asti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syān-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is not, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-asti-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is, it is not, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is indescribable.
Frustrated by the polarisation of both Public, Popular, Scientific and Professional Discourse I have been seeking out some guidance from two old Sensai, or guides, Maimonides and E F Schumacher, there are others. I am particularly fond of re consulting Bateson’s, an ecology of mind in times of frustrated perplexity, when people I know to be caring, intelligent and respectful people simply talk past, at, and in ignorance of the same qualities they possess, being present in the object of what can only be called their fury.
I hope these references might also assist other readers who occasionally wash up on these shores, to find patience and understanding in their own as well as with other people’s tempers.
Always read the comments, as Maimonides says a golden apple may be wrapped in Siver filigree.
“The People is a beast of muddy brain that knows not its own force, and therefore stands loaded with wood and stone. The powerless hands of a mere child guide it with bit and rein. One kick would be enough to break the chain, but the beast fears, and what the child demands it does. Nor its own terror understands, confused and stupefied by bugbears vain. Most Wonderful! With its own hand it ties and gags itself, gives itself death and war for pence doled out by kings from its own store. Its own are ALL THINGS between earth and heaven. But this it knows not. And if one arise to tell this truth, it kills him unforgiven.”― Tomasso Campanella