Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science

From: Lester Zick (lesterDELzick_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 02/02/05 

Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 19:11:31 GMT

On 2 Feb 2005 10:52:27 -0800, "OsherD" <mdoctorow@comcast.net> in
comp.ai.philosophy wrote:

>And I much appreciate your reply, Lester.
>
>My immediate impression would be that, having started the thread, you
>should periodically remind people what you started the thread about.
>This may seem boring, but the search for knowledge is a tradeoff
>between the boring and the interesting. Of course, one might be
>tempted to say: "But why don't they read the earlier postings of this
>thread?" Some people are undoubtedly lazy period. However, people
>also have curious methods of reading posts. I myself, with limited
>time (despite what looks like frequent posts on different forums), tend
>to either create new threads or look at the last reply to a thread and
>proceed from there. Over-confidence undoubtedly plays a part, since I
>sometimes think that I can or should be able to understand a thread
>from an issue that has been raised in a later posting. Yet here we are
>correcting this problem! You are mentioning the earlier postings, I
>am mentioning the later and earlier ones! Let's compromise. I will
>look at more of the earlier postings and you tell me where you think
>the postings should be now. Then we can go out and "tilt windmills."

Maybe I misunderstand the process of retrieval, Osher. It's hard to
tell exactly where various people come into the movie, particularly on
fast moving groups like sci.math and sci.physics. I suppose what I
assumed was that those interested in the origin or earlier parts of a
thread would simply look them up through a search engine. If not I can
certainly repost, but I'm leery of simply trolling the same article.

I don't really mind when threads morph in various directions. I can't
really expect to discipline thread content nor would I want to. I've
often contributed to the morphing of the threads of others along what
I consider more interesting or more productive lines. Occasionally the
process goes awry I suppose but not out of malicious intent. If you
want specific articles reposted I'll certainly oblige. It's just a
little difficult to tell who needs what or what someone will find of
interest. Let me know if you can point out specific things to repost.

Regards - Lester

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... >should periodically remind people what you started the thread about. ... >between the boring and the interesting. ... You are mentioning the earlier postings, ... Let me know if you can point out specific things to repost. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... >should periodically remind people what you started the thread about. ... >between the boring and the interesting. ... You are mentioning the earlier postings, ... Let me know if you can point out specific things to repost. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Musings on life in general aboard Flying Pig WRT RBC
    ... you postings are mostly about your travails. ... running aground, bad weather, the sinking, etc. ... change approaches, e.g., on this trip alone. ... More later on the continuing saga, but it's starting to get boring. ...
    (rec.boats.cruising)
  • Re: Serena Humble?
    ... that is the gut feeling I have after a little ... material I find interesting and discourage the material I find boring. ... Postings that are rampantaly off-topic -- ... The endless, endless ...
    (rec.sport.tennis)
  • Re: No Topics
    ... Contributions are always welcome... ... I suppose I could be arsed to repost lots of boring old stuff that ... playing Tetris and annoying people and going to bed. ...
    (soc.culture.scottish)
Loading