[Table of Contents] [Search]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Politikal Korrektness rears its appearance-challenged head



I believe the premise to be close to the truth, albeit imperfect, as are all
suppositions in this complex debate.
And the apples and oranges analogy is perhaps inadequate, since the point of
the discussion was ostensibly to understand the nature and unpredictability
of change, i.e., the familiar into the only apparently familiar, similar,
etc. Technological transformations themselves, as well as the social,
cultural and economic transformations impelled my technological change, are
not linear.
Text (I feel that the current usage of this word is something on the order of
a rationalistic abstraction) is manipulated by the demands of its medium,
just as content (also abstracted as a kind of categorical convenience, beyond
any reasonable service to communication) is informed by the issues which
inhere to the circumstances and environment created by the medium. This seems
to be truer than ever, with the advent of so many narrowly defined
subcultures. In fact, no medium, no text, right? (Even spoken text is
mnemonically formalized). I think we sometimes tend to rationalize these
issues in order to reduce them to a manageable size, or to dispense with them
altogether when the potential for upheaval caused by their full regard might
exact too high a personal cost. Believe me, I speak from personal experience,
and mean no disrespect to the members of this list. On the contrary, I'm
happy to have the opportunity to discuss these matters. But I appreciate even
more a complete (not necessarily long) response. That is, not just a
statement THAT a premise is false, but WHY it is thought to be false. In
other words, less of the dismissiveness alluded to earlier---and less
inuendo.

Thanks again,
Joel Spector


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents] [Search]