A commenter to an earlier post recommends this canonical essay from MIT on Tact Filters. Funny and helpful Wish I had read it earlier.
« Policing On-Line Communities | Main | Cannibal Tribe Apolgizes for Eating Methodists »
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The comments to this entry are closed.
To Whom it May Concern
Gifthub is an immortal work of art in theMenippean Tradition,written in a Padded Cell (he calls it a Dumpster for obvious reasons) in a state of shock by Phil Cubeta, Morals Tutor to America's Wealthiest Families, under an alias, or alter ego, The Happy Tutor, Dungeon Master to the Stars in Wealth Bondage...... More....
Email Phil Cubeta, Morals Tutor to America's Wealthiest Families.
Join the Charity Masquerade Ball.Or, just come as you are.
Yesterday I was thinking about linking this here at first, but the connection to the discussion of authenticity is strong too.
I was thinking that some of us do want the Naked Truth, and it may be related to the same division that accounts for this difference in tact filters. Some of us have faith that the Truth when fully revealed cannot be anything but beautiful. Ugliness has to hide itself in the dark corners and cloak itself in the veil of authority.
In terms of the structure of our social filters, I think there are other dynamics in play as well. People who are dedicated to the pursuit of Truth know that we are fallible, George Soros identifies radical">http://www.google.com/search?q=george+soros+open+societ+reforming+global+capitalism&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail">radical falibility as a candidate for a universal principle. I think he is right, and a physicist I'm currently reading would probably agree.
That makes us very exacting in our pursuit, the world can be subtle, elusive and even tricky (the trickster gods are sacred to us), and we can be demanding both on ourselves and others. If someone is prickly because they are wrestling the mathematics of the universe' structure, or has multiple billion dollar positions at risk, you can forgive them for being at least temporarily unaware and incompetent in the social graces. When we already respect a person for the beauty they have shared from the creativity and gift of a fine mind, there is no question of forgiveness.
Posted by: Gerry | January 17, 2008 at 07:58 AM
In science, being wrong isn't a crime, being unintelligable is.
Posted by: Gerry | January 17, 2008 at 08:00 AM
Thanks, Gerry, blogged your first link.
Posted by: phil | January 17, 2008 at 09:29 AM