Explorations of confinement.

[Daruko]

I just meant that you don't "know".  You keep thinking.

[LMNO]

If he says "Praise Jesus" every two or three chords...

I changed my mind.  That would be awesome.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I just meant that you don't "know".  You keep thinking.

Right!

As long as you can accept that you don't "know" and remain willing to accept new data... then I see no reason that pre-judgment or judgment based on assumption would be necessary.

[Cain]

If he says "Praise Jesus" every two or three chords...

I changed my mind.  That would be awesome.

Especially if you were playing Religious Wars in that set.

[LMNO]

Yeah, it goes right in line with drinking beer while playing Minor Threat.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

I just meant that you don't "know".  You keep thinking.

Right!

As long as you can accept that you don't "know" and remain willing to accept new data... then I see no reason that pre-judgment or judgment based on assumption would be necessary.

You're talking about flexibility after you have made decisions.

What I'm talking about is how every decision contains assumptions, due to the nature of language and evolutionary adaptations.

Read this, spag. And look up Psychology > Heuristics while you're at it.

[Daruko]

you're argument is the traditional determinism over "free will" model.
the seperation between assumption, decision, and action may merely be a linguistic one
consider this process to be one thing, seperated from other things, that the assumptions which "cause" the decision, are not only mutually implied by the decision, but are the same, neither arising without the other.  however, it sounds absurd to say that we cause our assumptions by our decisions.  these are truly caused by previous decisions and environmental factors, internal programming and whatnot.  but then consider that all of these are in fact caused by something outside THAT system in a completely random fashion.  what if your causality is merely an anomaly of happenstance; monkeys typing shakespeare?  as RAW says, "we don't know anything about being and non-being, we only know what we've tuned in"... whether we state that decisions are chained to or free from assumptions, we are playing a linguistic game, and the map has it's limitations.
i'm not satisfied with this explanation, but i'll post it anyway.   i think these metaphors might get in the way.

in refutation of quantum physics, einstein said, "god does not play dice."  it's always seemed to me that einstein was missing something here, but the words aren't coming out right this morning.   

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I just meant that you don't "know".  You keep thinking.

Right!

As long as you can accept that you don't "know" and remain willing to accept new data... then I see no reason that pre-judgment or judgment based on assumption would be necessary.

You're talking about flexibility after you have made decisions.

What I'm talking about is how every decision contains assumptions, due to the nature of language and evolutionary adaptations.

Read this, spag. And look up Psychology > Heuristics while you're at it.

You're still falling victim to semantics...

What I'm talking about are tentative decisions, based only on the available data, with the understanding that there likely will appear more data over time. The, as of yet, unseen data does NOT have to be pre-judged. If your decisions reflect the subjective nature of the speaker's experience/opinion/current level of knowledge... We right back to one of the major functions of E-Prime here, I think.

A decision made in E-Prime does not seem, in my opinion, to require prejudice or assumption about 'as of yet unseen' data.

In the everyday, general view that mosbunal people have, I agree... people are likely to have assumptions and sets of pre-judged data... but if General Semantics, RAW's essays on E-Prime, etc are correct in some sense this doesn't necessarily appear as a requirement to decision making.

Does it?

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

I just meant that you don't "know".  You keep thinking.

Right!

As long as you can accept that you don't "know" and remain willing to accept new data... then I see no reason that pre-judgment or judgment based on assumption would be necessary.

You're talking about flexibility after you have made decisions.

What I'm talking about is how every decision contains assumptions, due to the nature of language and evolutionary adaptations.

Read this, spag. And look up Psychology > Heuristics while you're at it.

You're still falling victim to semantics...

What I'm talking about are tentative decisions, based only on the available data, with the understanding that there likely will appear more data over time. The, as of yet, unseen data does NOT have to be pre-judged. If your decisions reflect the subjective nature of the speaker's experience/opinion/current level of knowledge... We right back to one of the major functions of E-Prime here, I think.

A decision made in E-Prime does not seem, in my opinion, to require prejudice or assumption about 'as of yet unseen' data.

In the everyday, general view that mosbunal people have, I agree... people are likely to have assumptions and sets of pre-judged data... but if General Semantics, RAW's essays on E-Prime, etc are correct in some sense this doesn't necessarily appear as a requirement to decision making.

Does it?

Well, if you're just going to ignore my entire post, then I guess this conversation is just about over...

You assume that E-Prime leads you to language that has more accuracy, but where's the proof, homie?

Have any studies demonstrated that the use of E-Prime improves people's ability to do anything better?

What about the critiques of E-Prime?

I think you assume that E-Prime has an association with clarity and accuracy even though this probably has more to do with your personal liking of RAW, Korzybski and the influence of selective thinking than any scientific proof.

What makes you exempt from expectancy sets, unconscious heuristics, and prejudgment?

E-Prime?


And I'm falling victim to semantics?

You don't want to look at the assumptions you make about language but you will try to shove some stuffy linguistic tool down my throat and everyone else's.

Fuck E-Prime and fuck you.

[Daruko]

  dangerous ideological forces at hand | erase the lines | abandon all symbols 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

dangerous ideological forces at hand | erase the lines | abandon all symbols 

...And stop with the fucking Yodaisms.

[Verbal Mike]

Net, I think Rata's just saying using E-Prime for decision making seems to lead to better decision-making.
Which seems to be the whole point.

[Triple Zero]

and i think Net is trying to say that Rat seems to be wrong in that assumption :-P

[Requia ☣]

I'm with Net on this one, there are always going to be pre judgements, existings data in your head etc.  The best you can do is acknowledge these and look out for conflicts with new information.

You can't even deomonstrate that 2+2=4 without making assumptions.  (And since I know you spags are going to [citation needed] that, go look up the godel incompletness theorom yourselves.)

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

Net:  you're turning e-prime into an ideology, which is why you seemingly do not understand it at all
           it is about the LIMITATIONS of language
           the tao that can be described is not the tao

it's not about achieving more accuracy, and it does not increase your statistical chances of being right,
but it sure as hell will save you from your arrogance, and i'm not sure that can be proven to you
part of the problem with e-prime is that conceptually you can only see the method.  once you have actually experimented with your linguistic programs, more can be understood about the effects
it's sort of like crowley's magick... you can scream all day about how full of shit crowley was, and how his methods do not work, but if you haven't tried them yourself you don't know dick. 

Some of the limitations of language that you can't seem to wrap your thick head around consists of assumptions, presuppositions, beliefs, values, and the map never being the fucking territory.

E-PRIME CAN'T EXEMPT YOUR PUNK ASS FROM THESE THINGS.

I know E-Prime inside and out, can kick your ass in NLP, and have been studying hypnosis for about 5 years fucko.

So you can take your bumblefuck smartmouth and choke on a fat load of your mom's gonorrhea infected smegma, chump.