a Zeno Q

[MsTerry]

we have seen your opinion on freedom of expression.
of course before the expression there is the freedom of thought, but this is a highly subjective process of editing, censoring, massaging and challenging and changing undesirable expressions.
after the forming of the "new" expression, there seems to be another process of editing or censoring as to when to express oneself.
for example; to state that "Osama is the savior of mankind", might get you killed in one place but elected in another
to state one's opinion in some obscure way or place might still be freedom of expression, but is it really a freedom to have to fear the consequences of an expression ?
Is it OK to say George Bush is a murderer? Is it OK to say this at his state funeral?
In your opinion is there any difference between when to express your opinion ( asked or not) or the ability to express your opinion (where ever it is appropiate) ?
this may have the appearance of a simple question, I think it is not

[Valley Oak]

I find your post particularly interesting because it reminds of the old scenario where a person can express an intensely unpopular opinion, even if it's the truth.

Based on this idea, I will post a new message to the board and see how people respond to it.

Edward


we have seen your opinion on freedom of expression.
of course before the expression there is the freedom of thought, but this is a highly subjective process of editing, censoring, massaging and challenging and changing undesirable expressions.
after the forming of the "new" expression, there seems to be another process of editing or censoring as to when to express oneself.
for example; to state that "Osama is the savior of mankind", might get you killed in one place but elected in another
to state one's opinion in some obscure way or place might still be freedom of expression, but is it really a freedom to have to fear the consequences of an expression ?
Is it OK to say George Bush is a murderer? Is it OK to say this at his state funeral?
In your opinion is there any difference between when to express your opinion ( asked or not) or the ability to express your opinion (where ever it is appropiate) ?
this may have the appearance of a simple question, I think it is not

[Willie Lumplump]

Is it OK to say George Bush is a murderer?I think that it is mandatory.
Is it OK to say this at his state funeral?Again, mandatory, although of course one would have to be prepared for unpleasant consequences. In your opinion is there any difference between when to express your opinion ( asked or not) or the ability to express your opinion (where ever it is appropiate)?[/quote]If we are to preserve some degree of culture, we have to make distinctions. Increasingly, there is only one kind of behavior, and it is considered appropriate in all situations-- restaurants, motorcycle races, funeral homes, and schools. Our culture used to be much more nuanced and richer than it is now, although it is gratifying that overt racism has been somewhat suppressed.

[MsTerry]

If we are to preserve some degree of culture, we have to make distinctions. Increasingly, there is only one kind of behavior, and it is considered appropriate in all situations-- restaurants, motorcycle races, funeral homes, and schools.
if that were true, true freedom of speech is only to be practiced in the safety of our own homes.

[Willie Lumplump]

if that were true, true freedom of speech is only to be practiced in the safety of our own homes.But this goes back to the original point. Is having freedom the same as assaulting the world with our ideas and opinions at every possible opportunity, or at least whenever the whim might strike us? Go back and read the third chapter of Ecclesiastes.

[Frederick M. Dolan]

Presumably this is the editing process (what Braggi faults me for lacking): deciding which expressions are relevant to a given context e.g. public debate, private funeral, history textbook. In political terms free speech is free in the sense that the state can't limit expression, but is "free" the right adjective for the real-world process of speaking out? The constraints to be negotiated are many: relevance, consistency, sincerity, truthfulness, appropriateness of forum, decorum, aim....


But this goes back to the original point. Is having freedom the same as assaulting the world with our ideas and opinions at every possible opportunity, or at least whenever the whim might strike us? Go back and read the third chapter of Ecclesiastes.

[Willie Lumplump]

Presumably this is the editing process (what Braggi faults me for lacking): deciding which expressions are relevant to a given context e.g. public debate, private funeral, history textbook. In political terms free speech is free in the sense that the state can't limit expression, but is "free" the right adjective for the real-world process of speaking out? The constraints to be negotiated are many: relevance, consistency, sincerity, truthfulness, appropriateness of forum, decorum, aim....Quite right!

[Frederick M. Dolan]

An excellent place to begin an education in the complexity/constraints attending allegedly "free" speech is Aristotle's RHETORIC. And if only our politicians would devote a little time to this study!


Quite right!

[Valley Oak]

Frederick, I looked up "Rhetoric" and Aristotle on Amazon.com's website but I can't pinpoint the book you are referring to. Which of the following links is it?

www.amazon.com/Rhetoric-Thrift-Aristotle/dp/0486437930/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199038470&sr=1-15
Or is it:
www.amazon.com/Aristotle-Rhetoric-XXII-Classical-Library/dp/0674992121/ref=sr_1_23?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199038470&sr=1-23

Thanks,

Edward



An excellent place to begin an education in the complexity/constraints attending allegedly "free" speech is Aristotle's RHETORIC. And if only our politicians would devote a little time to this study!

[Zeno Swijtink]

These are different editions of the same text. The second is the more scholarly one, with Greek on the left page and an English translation on the right, and with footnotes that give variants from different manuscripts.

The first one is the cheaper one which I would assign to students. I think it has an explanatory essay by the editor.

Check here (https://books.google.com/books?id=V_IMCohto0YC&printsec=frontcover&dq=aristotle+rhetoric&sig=tpH90KXu8B2nVb-NQ2He589ENUQ#PPR5,M1) at Google Books where you can read some parts of these texts.



Frederick, I looked up "Rhetoric" and Aristotle on Amazon.com's website but I can't pinpoint the book you are referring to. Which of the following links is it?

www.amazon.com/Rhetoric-Thrift-Aristotle/dp/0486437930/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199038470&sr=1-15
Or is it:
www.amazon.com/Aristotle-Rhetoric-XXII-Classical-Library/dp/0674992121/ref=sr_1_23?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199038470&sr=1-23

Thanks,

Edward

[Valley Oak]

Thank you for the advice. I'm wondering which one would be best for me. I am a graduate student in the Political Science department as SSU. Perhaps I should just get the cheaper one. Any advantage in getting the more scholarly one?

Edward


These are different editions of the same text. The second is the more scholarly one, with Greek on the left page and an English translation on the right, and with footnotes that give variants from different manuscript.

The first one is the cheaper one which I would assign to students. I think it has an explanatory essay by the editor.

Check here (https://books.google.com/books?id=V_IMCohto0YC&printsec=frontcover&dq=aristotle+rhetoric&sig=tpH90KXu8B2nVb-NQ2He589ENUQ#PPR5,M1) at Google Books where you can read some parts of these texts.

[Frederick M. Dolan]

Either will do: they're different translations of the same book. The Loeb edition includes both the original Greek and facing English translation.


Frederick, I looked up "Rhetoric" and Aristotle on Amazon.com's website but I can't pinpoint the book you are referring to. Which of the following links is it?

www.amazon.com/Rhetoric-TOeb hrift-Aristotle/dp/0486437930/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199038470&sr=1-15
Or is it:
www.amazon.com/Aristotle-Rhetoric-XXII-Classical-Library/dp/0674992121/ref=sr_1_23?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199038470&sr=1-23

Thanks,

Edward

[Frederick M. Dolan]

Unless you know ancient Greek or plan to study it, I wouldn't bother with the Loeb. A better alternative to the Dover, though, would be the Penguin Classics edition. These are usually up-to-date translations and include excellent introductory essays, bibliography for further reading, etc.




Thank you for the advice. I'm wondering which one would be best for me. I am a graduate student in the Political Science department as SSU. Perhaps I should just get the cheaper one. Any advantage in getting the more scholarly one?

Edward

[Zeno Swijtink]

In your opinion is there any difference between when to express your opinion (asked or not) or the ability to express your opinion (where ever it is appropriate)?
this may have the appearance of a simple question, I think it is not

Freedom of speech is the ability to speak freely without restrictions imposed by others.

Freedom of speech for me is a basic right. Something important for itself as a means of self-expression or self-definition, but also for the consequences it has for the society that embraces it: the search for truth and the avoidance of error, democratic political discussion and standing in the way of bad government, and such.

Freedom of speech is not absolute, there may be other social interests that limit free speech.

Freedom of speech applies to speech in the public arena, and also sets limits to the powers of the government to prohibit speech in the private sphere. But groups of private people may still limit free speech within their group, or property owners can limit the speech that is allowed on their property.

For instance, in the time that ThePhiant's banishment was discussed ("Weeding ThePhiant") handy wrote: "From a libertarian POV, your request for "votes" re: weeding thePhiant seems to be a copout. It's YOUR site. It is private property offered on the free market."

Legally that's true: Barry can set any limits to speech on this list. But obviously if he were to do so people would leave in drones. So it's his interest not to do that. Stronger, it's in his self-interest to give us the feeling this is a public arena.

I also think the right of freedom of speech implies that the government should guarantee that there are opportunities for everyone to express ones opinion. Otherwise the right would be empty. So it implies a duty on the part of the government.

It also implies a moral, not a legal, duty, on the part of the citizen to spend some time and effort to listen and respond to others who exercise their free speech right. This may be controversial with libertarians. Conservative however may be open to that idea since they often point out that people have duties and not just rights.

Beyond that I also think everyone has the duty, not just to respond somewhat to others who express their opinion, but also to initiate new conversations.

This brings us to the second question about when and how to express your opinion which is related but different. Expressing your opinion is an action, so any moral and legal rule and any rule of rationality that governs action would apply.

So I think that the decision when and how to express your opinion should be guided by what is effective. When you say something you want to be effective because in speaking you have a certain goal in mind. But your goal should include contributing to the protection, and exercise of free speech.

[Valley Oak]

Thanks!

So I should be able to find the Penguin Classic edition in Amazon.com?

Edward


Unless you know ancient Greek or plan to study it, I wouldn't bother with the Loeb. A better alternative to the Dover, though, would be the Penguin Classics edition. These are usually up-to-date translations and include excellent introductory essays, bibliography for further reading, etc.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Thanks!

So I should be able to find the Penguin Classic edition in Amazon.com?

Edward

Try Treehorn Books 625 4th St Santa Rosa, CA (707) 525-1782

[Valley Oak]

Well, thank you, Zeno.

But I don't understand you. You seem to be a nice, intelligent, and reasonable person. But often times you also appear to be nasty and spiteful. What's up?

Edward



Try Treehorn Books 625 4th St Santa Rosa, CA (707) 525-1782

[MsTerry]

[quote]Freedom of speech is the ability to speak freely without restrictions imposed by others.
this is a clear and unrestricted statement

Freedom of speech for me is a basic right. Something important for itself as a means of self-expression or self-definition, but also for the consequences it has for the society that embraces it: the search for truth and the avoidance of error, democratic political discussion and standing in the way of bad government, and such.
Freedom of speech is not absolute, there may be other social interests that limit free speech.this contradicts the two above statements





I also think the right of freedom of speech implies that the government should guarantee that there are opportunities for everyone to express ones opinion. Otherwise the right would be empty. So it implies a duty on the part of the government.this is the part that feels like a contradiction in terminus, since it is usually is the government that restricts the freedom of expression. I assume you are referring to a free press as a way of expressing oneself, once again it is the government that restricts "unpopular" views


It also implies a moral, not a legal, duty, on the part of the citizen to spend some time and effort to listen and respond to others who exercise their free speech right.
Beyond that I also think everyone has the duty, not just to respond somewhat to others who express their opinion, but also to initiate new conversations.this might stop the world from turning into chaos from people walking around and expressing themselves, but it does feel strange that one can exercise the right to express them self and at the same time impose a duty upon another to respond and listen


This brings us to the second question about when and how to express your opinion which is related but different. Expressing your opinion is an action, so any moral and legal rule and any rule of rationality that governs action would apply. this could mean that the law of any country that restricts freedom of expression in fact is in place to allow for expression in a civilized and controlled manner.


So I think that the decision when and how to express your opinion should be guided by what is effective. When you say something you want to be effective because in speaking you have a certain goal in mind. But your goal should include contributing to the protection, and exercise of free speech.And here I thought that you would be able to make this quagmire more palatable, but it seems that, like with everything, we make up our own version of the truth.
I agree with you that people like to talk about their rights, but leave out their duties or responsibilities and that seems to be the part that gets most of us in trouble. To me, freedom of expression remains a philosophical proposition with great potential, but limited practical application.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Well, thank you, Zeno.

But I don't understand you. You seem to be a nice, intelligent, and reasonable person. But often times you also appear to be nasty and spiteful. What's up?

Edward

Believe me, I am always nice, intelligent, and reasonable. If I appear different sometimes apply Frederick's Principle of Charity and find an angle under which my posting can be looked upon as such. I could make an effort to be humorous. Or my posting could be strategic, to nudge my reader to what I think is a better understanding. Or maybe I just have a bad day and it's not really me who is talking.

Happy 2008. You are my favorite tree!

[Valley Oak]

I am turning over a new leaf for 2008: to apply Frederick's Principle of Charity.

Happy New Year!

Edward



Believe me, I am always nice, intelligent, and reasonable. If I appear different sometimes apply Frederick's Principle of Charity and find an angle under which my posting can be looked upon as such. I could make an effort to be humorous. Or my posting could be strategic, to nudge my reader to what I think is a better understanding. Or maybe I just have a bad day and it's not really me who is talking.

Happy 2008. You are my favorite tree!

[MsTerry]

Yes, what's in a name, any way?
Zeno, was this your given Calvinistic name or did it came after martyrdom?
or as a philosophical inspiration? or are you just a stranger, Xenos?
just curious



Zeno

Geslacht:
m
verklaring:
Gri. verkorting van Zenodotos, Zenodoros `geschenk van Zeus' of van Zenobios, zie Zenobius. In de oudheid een bekende Gri. naam, o.m. van de grondlegger van de stoïcijnse filosofenschool (340-270 v. Chr.). Martelaars met de naam Zeno worden in de hagiografische bronnen van de oudheid meermalen genoemd, o.m.: Zeno uit Egypte (kerk. feestdag: 13 juli) en Zeno van Gaza, met drie andere christenen was hij martelaar tijdens Julianus de Afvallige (kerk. feestdag: 8 sept.). Verder: Zeno van Verona, waarschijnlijk uit Mauretanië (Afrika), achtste bisschop van Verona; kerk. feestdag: 12 apr. Vroeger werd Zeno in het Fri. gebruikt als `vergrieksing' van Senne.




Believe me, I am always nice, intelligent, and reasonable. If I appear different sometimes apply Frederick's Principle of Charity and find an angle under which my posting can be looked upon as such. I could make an effort to be humorous. Or my posting could be strategic, to nudge my reader to what I think is a better understanding. Or maybe I just have a bad day and it's not really me who is talking.

Happy 2008. You are my favorite tree!

[MsTerry]

Zeno , now you don't follow up on your own duty. LOL
In times when we need FOS the most, such as the starting of a war, there seems to be alot of opposition to and very few rights for FOS.
e.g. people can get killed for saying something oppposing, information is suppressed, and the worse is that the press becomes embedded and impotant.
When we need FOS the least, we get it the most. e.g product development.
for example, try to buy a plumbing part without getting tripped up over ID, OD, NSP, ASB, PVC etc..
or why do we have 2 non-compatible computer systems? do we really need that kind of expression? maybe we need 10

with all the info available, the overall IQ has actually gone down.
it is one way to stop FOS.
since people don't have the need to think for themselves





And here I thought that you would be able to make this quagmire more palatable, but it seems that, like with everything, we make up our own version of the truth.
I agree with you that people like to talk about their rights, but leave out their duties or responsibilities and that seems to be the part that gets most of us in trouble. To me, freedom of expression remains a philosophical proposition with great potential, but limited practical application.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Zeno , now you don't follow up on your own duty. LOL

I'm packing and on my way out. Talk to you all later.

[geomancer]

Zeno , now you don't follow up on your own duty. LOL
with all the info available, the overall IQ has actually gone down.
it is one way to stop FOS.
since people don't have the need to think for themselves

Actually, IQ as measured by standardized tests, has gone up over the last 80 years or so. Why this is so is a much debated point. I suspect that the tests are also measuring a generalized rise in the ability to take tests.

Richard

See "Flynn Effect" on Wicipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

[quote]
IQ tests are re-normalized periodically, such that the average score is reset to 100. The revised versions are standardized on new samples and scored with respect to those samples alone, so the only way to compare the difficulty of two versions of a test is to conduct a separate study in which the same subjects take both versions.[1]

The average rate of rise seems to be around three IQ points per decade. Because children attend school longer now and have become much more familiar with the testing of school-related material, one might expect the greatest gains to occur on such school content-related tests as vocabulary, arithmetic or general information. Just the opposite is the case: abilities such as these have experienced relatively small gains and even occasional declines over the years. The largest Flynn effects appear instead on culture reduced highly general intelligence factor loaded (g-loaded) tests such as Raven's Progressive Matrices. For example, Dutch conscripts gained 21 points in only 30 years, or 7 points per decade, between 1952 and 1982.[1]

Some studies focusing on the distribution of scores have found the Flynn effect to be primarily a phenomenon in the lower end of the distribution. Teasdale and Owen (1987), for example, found the effect primarily reduced the number of low-end scores, resulting in a pile up of moderately high scores, with no increase in very high scores.[2] However, Raven (2000) found that, as Flynn suggested, data reported by many previous researchers that had previously been interpreted as showing a decrease in many abilities with increasing age must be re-interpreted as showing that there has been a dramatic increase in these abilities with date of birth. On many tests this occurs at all levels of ability.[3] Two large samples of Spanish children were assessed with a 30-year gap. Comparison of the IQ distributions indicated that the mean IQ had increased by 9.7 points (the Flynn effect),
the gains were concentrated in the lower half of the distribution and negligible in the top half, and the gains gradually decreased from low to high IQ.[4]

Taken at face value, these changes are considered large by some. Ulric Neisser, who in 1995 headed an American Psychological Association task force writing a consensus statement on the state of intelligence research, estimates that if American children of 1932 could take an IQ test normed in 1997 their average IQ would have been only about 80.[1] In other words, half of the children in 1932 would be classified as having borderline mental retardation or worse in 1997. Looking at Ravens, Neisser estimates that if you extrapolate beyond the data, which shows a 21 point gain between 1952 and 1982, an even larger gain of 35 IQ points can be argued, however Arthur Jensen warns that extrapolating beyond the data leads to results such as an IQ of -1000 for Aristotle (even assuming he would have scored 200 in his day)[5]

[end quote]

[Dynamique]

In summary, IQ tests are a load of hooey!!

It makes me shudder to think of how many children have been told that they are "stupid" or been given reason to believe that they are the family dumb-ass because of IQ tests. IQ tests have cultural and gender bias and basically measure left-hemisphere dominance.

[quote=geomancer;46409]Actually, IQ as measured by standardized tests, has gone up over the last 80 years or so. Why this is so is a much debated point. I suspect that the tests are also measuring a generalized rise in the ability to take tests. -- Richard

See "Flynn Effect" on Wicipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect
[endquote]

[Willie Lumplump]

In summary, IQ tests are a load of hooey!!I've known very brilliant people whose intelligence would certainly be reflected in IQ tests, and I've known very dim-witted people whose low intelligence would also have shown up in IQ tests. So the tests do work to some degree. But I'm not sure you need an IQ test to tell you about these extremes. And I have a hunch that IQ tests work reasonably well with whites from the middle and upper classes. But if you're a person of color, or if you're a lower-class white, I think you're pretty much out of luck. I doubt that it's possible to design a culture-free test because even test-taking skills--never mind the content--are greatly influenced by culture.

[MsTerry]

IO-tests only show a familiarity with certain thought pattern.
If Mykil fails the test because he can't spell, does that mean he can't think for himself or just that he is plain stupid and has nothing to offer this society?


I've known very brilliant people whose intelligence would certainly be reflected in IQ tests, and I've known very dim-witted people whose low intelligence would also have shown up in IQ tests. So the tests do work to some degree. But I'm not sure you need an IQ test to tell you about these extremes. And I have a hunch that IQ tests work reasonably well with whites from the middle and upper classes. But if you're a person of color, or if you're a lower-class white, I think you're pretty much out of luck. I doubt that it's possible to design a culture-free test because even test-taking skills--never mind the content--are greatly influenced by culture.

[Willie Lumplump]

If Mykil fails the test because he can't spell, does that mean he can't think for himself or just that he is plain stupid and has nothing to offer this society?There's been considerable research on the correlation between spelling and other cognitive skills, and the conclusion is that it's almost uncorrelated. How well you spell appears to be almost unrelated to anything important.