…the noyau, an animal society held together by mutual animosity rather than co-operation
Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative.
The Skeptical Zone
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."
…the noyau, an animal society held together by mutual animosity rather than co-operation
Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative.
Well Allan, according to your logic, any change to the code would be a new code.
I thought gregory might like to know I just got a paper on aesthetics accepted today.
Congratulations, m’dear.
I hope you already figure that Gregory is not the only one who “might like to know”.
That’s just you showing off your sense of humor, right? 🙂
walto,
Congrats! What journal, and when will it be published?
Congrats Walto! High five.
Congrats walto!
I hear that God implanted an aesthetic sense in each of us. No doubt your paper is beautiful and that helped get it accepted.
Thanks, guys! The paper is called ‘Musical Form and Aesthetic Value’ and it’s largely a critique of some anti-serialism stuff by Diana Raffman, Richard Taruskin and Stanley Cavell. Dunno when it will appear yet–I’m supposed to contact an editor. Maybe he/she will give me an approximate date. (could be a long time: they had the manuscript for 14 months before deciding!)
I’m too superstitious to post the journal name until I see what, if anything, this editor plans to do to it. (I mean, what if they want to gut it?) But if they don’t make me waive the right to do so, and it doesn’t get destroyed, I’ll put up a pre-pub copy and divulge the vehicle on my academia page soon.
OTOH, the ethics paper is still in limbo at Erkenntnis: when I complained about the quality of the referees’ comments, I was told by an editorial assistant that an editor had decided to look at, so now I don’t know if it’s still under review there or not. (I asked twice–no reply). If it is, I’m not supposed to send it anywhere else. So frustrating. Fred Dretske once said that his best papers were the hardest ones to get published.
Again, thanks for all the kind words. I’m only a part-time academic, but this stuff means a lot to me.
Can’t just anybody get an academia page and put stuff on it?
😉
Walto, Woot!
My daughter just got her first paper published in Structure.
It’s a humbling experience when you can’t follow half the stuff your kid is writing.
There is actually some Schoenberg I sorta liked – e.g. the violin concerto. Weird and beautiful. (Hmmm…whatever happened to that LP?)
Congratulations, Walt. Something to be proud of, I agree.
Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together…mass hysteria!
I love Schoenberg.
Interestingly, one of the focal points of my paper, a piece by Diana Raffman, argues that those who seem to enjoy either performing or listening to atonal music can only be faking. That type of argument will be familiar here of course, since it’s so similar to FMM’s claims that everyone who says they don’t believe in “mind(s) behind the universe” is lying (or deceiving him/herself). I had a blast teeing off on her. She’s got a paper on perception (endorsing qualia) that I really hate too. That makes me suspect that there’s some connection between her two theses (or perhaps my two contrary views). But I’m not sure, and I haven’t spent much time working on her perception paper. The literature is so freaking huge.
PS: Thanks, Bruce!
Gregory is furiously derailing the current Philosophy thread with complaints about moderation, and I don’t want to encourage the derail. He makes a sideswipe against me here
I don’t doubt I’ve “gotten away with” some comments that weren’t quite rule-abiding – just like I don’t doubt that I’ve gotten away with speeding a little, not getting a ticket because the flow of traffic was fast enough and smooth enough that cops didn’t interfere with anyone in particular.
But I’m always happy when a comment of mine gets moved to Guano. Well. “happy” probably isn’t the exact right word. (Should I try harder to show off my extensive vocabulary?) What I mean is that I’m okay with getting reined in by moderators; reminds me to be self-moderating more than not.
And I certainly would be happy if other commenters point out when I’ve crossed a line in comments. I don’t expect y’all to do it every time, or ever, really, because y’all’ve got other things to do with your participation here — but just saying: it’s fine, it’s all fine if you do. 🙂
I like the metaphor. I’d make a terrible speed cop.
You’d make a terrible moderator. Fortunately you’re just an admin.
Mung,
You are butthurt personified.
And you’re finally posting where you ought to have been posting all along.
A win-win?
A righteous person like you would either retract a claim they could not support or would support that claim with actual evidence, right? If not, why the righteous pretense? It stinks of hypocrisy.
Of course, of that’s the cologne of your choice…
Poor butthurt Mung. No matter where he goes he’s a victim.
Unlike keiths, I have actual evidence.
the allegation
keiths accused me of making a false claim.
The “moderators” let it pass. No surprise there.
keiths supports or retracts his assertion.
Or not.
What a righteous lot you all are!
And, no surprise here, keiths has a staunch supporter in Adapa. Another TSZ regular who makes a claim and then refuses to retract or support it.
“Mung has a long and sordid history of anti-gay bigoted behavior at UD.”
– Adapa
Lizzie is proud of you both.
Ironically, this makes Patrick, with his insistence of support or retract, look foolish.
Mung,
Unfortunately for you, our reputations precede us.
Everyone knows that you are afraid of my questions and that I am not afraid of yours.
It’s why I offered you this deal, which you, of course, were afraid to accept, thus cementing your reputation:
Apologies to Mung, (though it helps when people provide links)
I see the comment by Adapa that Mung complains about is indeed here. I agree it is rule-breaking.
ETA a quick site search at UD doesn’t throw up any such history. Nor can I say I’ve gained such an impression during the time I was regularly reading UD comments.
Is this the specific comment?
Then step forward and defend your faith instead of falsely claiming that I haven’t offered an argument against it. that Keiths has not made an argument against “your faith” (presumably Christianity).
As I keep saying, there is no 24 hour service. I certainly currently have no time to read every comment. If something gets missed that you feel strongly about, you have to flag it.
I’d say Keith is possibly one of our more outspoken critics of theism but is it that he hasn’t directed a specific argument to Mung on Mung’s particular dogma?
Nobody’s perfect.
Poor poor butthurt Mung, still whining and sniveling.
What’s the matter poor baby? I though you were going to ignore all my posts? Looks like that was as truthful as most everything else you post here.
Shouldn’t you run back to UD again and tell them again how badly everyone is treating you?
Mung,
Sorry for the delay in replying, I had to vet my response with the Code Illuminati. I have been instructed to say: That would be a matter for the Code Illuminati. Transmission ends.
Adapa,
Yet you have made a statement:
Mung has a long and sordid history of anti-gay bigoted behavior at UD.
I think you should support the claim with some examples. Not recalling any such line from Mung, I tried searching the site but didn’t turn anything up. There were certainly anti-gay comments from other commenters.
Allowed to put only an abstract on my academia page until publication (prob in 2040 or thereabouts). Have done so. Journal is PNM. http://www.perspectivesofnewmusic.org/
Damned Code Illuminati. X>{
I’ve been trying to get on that freaking council for (get this!) eighteen years!! The last time anybody there responded to one of my letters was 2009–and it was a form letter from some intern. I still say they’re clearly wrong about Code Grey, but they never even deign to indicate why they won’t change their “mind.”
Just a bunch of stupid basTURDS. Screw them.
I’d still take an appointment, though.
Even a temporary one.
That is my opinion based on comments made against marriage equality and supporting the Christian “right” to ignore antidiscrimination laws. You may have a different opinion.
I still think the bald public statement:
Mung has a long and sordid history of anti-gay bigoted behavior at UD.
should be supported with examples rather than a generality. Personally, I don’t have the evidence needed to make such a judgement.
Adapa,
I’ve had another search (site:UD gay marriage mung) and I’m only finding comments from Mung that could best be described as vacuous.
Is this the sort of comment you are referring to?
Mung,
From the comment you linked:
Are you saying that you did not claim that keiths never offered an argument against your faith?
keiths — Can you link to where Mung made such a claim?
(I do not have my admin hat on. This interjection is me being a buttinski.)
Mung,
I did see Adapa make this claim. I have personally seen no evidence of it. Got any, Adapa?
Mung,
No one else can make me look foolish. I reserve that privilege to myself.
Ninja’d by Alan!
ANOTHER PROOF of God!
http://www.statnews.com/2015/11/11/flu-shots-reduce-effectiveness/
Alan Fox (and Adapa),
That’s distasteful, but I notice that even there Mung hasn’t come out (so to speak) and made a clear claim. More evidence is needed to support the “Mung has a long and sordid history of anti-gay bigoted behavior at UD.” claim.
Mung’s history is long and sordid one way or the other–especially sordid (and egregious and bogus), whatever the hell he’s ever said anywhere. Just ask anybody.
He’s like a walking sordid meltdown.
He must go away or I will taunt him a second time.
Patrick,
Yes, and I will be happy to provide a link once Mung accepts my offer and commits to answering my questions.
What I won’t do is give him a freebie. He has a bad habit of dodging questions, then turning around and demanding answers from others. Rather than rewarding that behavior, I intend to keep the pressure on him.
It’s a win for me either way. Regular readers know that I am not afraid of Mung’s questions, though he is quite fearful of mine.
He’ll either answer my questions, thus subjecting his views to examination and criticism — or he’ll refuse, thus reinforcing the impression that he fears the questions and lacks confidence in his ability to defend his answers.
Personally, I hope he’ll answer the questions. Online discussions are far more interesting when participants have the guts to state and defend their positions. The constant evasions of Mung, Erik and Gregory are boring as hell and reflect rather poorly on them.
I’m particular interested in Mung’s (or any Christian’s) answers to these two questions.
🙂
I should apologize here to the admins for dragging them into this. I am not asking for any admin action so I really ought to avoid making comments that refer to admins/moderators by title or by name.
Meanwhile, keiths wears his sanctimonious hypocrisy like a favorite pair of old jeans.
If you have evidence that I am or ever was opposed to gay marriage, do present it.
Whether people do or do not have a ‘right’ to ignore laws is a question of a different nature. I certainly would not encourage any Christian to violate anti-discrimination laws. If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it.
You should take KeithS up on his offer, Mung. That’ll show him!
Mung,
I actively encourage people to violate most laws.
Mung,
Let’s see about that.
I think that each of us should answer the other’s questions, and have offered a deal in which we would do exactly that.
You think that I should have to answer your questions, but that you shouldn’t have to answer mine.
Which of us is the hypocrite, Mung?