[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Despite the salad Colbert cooks up, it is great seeing Atlas Shrugged getting this kind of attention. And look at the bunch of mainstream people he airs talking about AS.

This gave me a life this morning.

Michael

The Word - Rand Illusion

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c

The Word - Rand Illusion

Colbert Report Full Episodes
Political Humor

Rap Battle
NASA Name Contest

[general semanticist]

Would you believe I can't watch this in Canada? I can only see 4 clips from the show and this isn't one of them.

[Brant Gaede]

general semanticist, on Mar 13 2009, 08:46 AM, said:

Would you believe I can't watch this in Canada? I can only see 4 clips from the show and this isn't one of them.

Grab your laptop and head for the border. The same thing you might do if you need an MRI.

--Brant

[BaalChatzaf]

general semanticist, on Mar 13 2009, 11:46 AM, said:

Would you believe I can't watch this in Canada? I can only see 4 clips from the show and this isn't one of them.

I just noticed that you are from Canada. Now I understand you positions better. You live in the Kinder, Gentler, Wussier America.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Selene]

G.S.:

My question is why can you not watch this in your province? What am I not understanding about the internet in Canada or here?

Second, I have been engaged in a project concerning language and I wondered what you make of this quote from his last speech in 1950:

"Perhaps a story from the European underground under Hitler would be a good illustration. In a railroad compartment an American grandmother with her young and attractive granddaughter, a Romanian officer, and a Nazi officer were the only occupants. The train was passing through a dark tunnel, and all that was heard was a loud kiss and a vigorous slap. After the train emerged from the tunnel, nobody spoke, but the grandmother was saying to herself, 'What a fine girl I have raised. She will take care of herself. I am proud of her.' The granddaughter was saying to herself, 'Well, grandmother is old enough not to mind a little kiss. Besides, the fellows are nice. I am surprised what a hard wallop grandmother has.' The Nazi officer was meditating, 'How clever those Romanians are! They steal a kiss and have the other fellow slapped.' The Romanian officer was chuckling to himself, 'How smart I am! I kissed my own hand and slapped the Nazi.'"

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

general semanticist, on Mar 13 2009, 10:46 AM, said:

Would you believe I can't watch this in Canada? I can only see 4 clips from the show and this isn't one of them.

GS,

Enter the following exactly as given into a Google search:

Colbert "Rand Illusion"

This thing spread quickly over the Internet and you will probably find an entry with a video you can watch. I think I saw one on AOL video, but I don't know if you will have problems with that, too. So give it a spin. It's worth seeing.

Michael

[Reidy]

Did you notice that Colbert has the photo reversed from OL's page header? I've seen it more often Colbert's way.

(Whose last speech?)

[Brant Gaede]

Reidy, on Mar 13 2009, 02:52 PM, said:

Did you notice that Colbert has the photo reversed from OL's page header? I've seen it more often Colbert's way.

(Whose last speech?)

The OL pic is incorrect that way. It is the original author's photo from The Fountainhead. I suspect it was taken in the late 1930s.

--Brant

[Selene]

Reidy, on Mar 13 2009, 04:52 PM, said:

Did you notice that Colbert has the photo reversed from OL's page header? I've seen it more often Colbert's way.

(Whose last speech?)

I am sorry - Korzybski - founder - wait I love politically incorrect statements - FATHER - of general semantics which he posited as a non-Aristotelian system.

Adam

[Ted Keer]

Brant Gaede, on Mar 13 2009, 07:05 PM, said:

Reidy, on Mar 13 2009, 02:52 PM, said:

Did you notice that Colbert has the photo reversed from OL's page header? I've seen it more often Colbert's way.

(Whose last speech?)

The OL pic is incorrect that way. It is the original author's photo from The Fountainhead. I suspect it was taken in the late 1930s.

--Brant

No, the picture is not "incorrect" the way it is displayed here. Imagine the photo if it were on the top right - it would draw your attention more, de-emphasizing the title. That would be good placement for a paid advertisement, but not for the logo of a periodical, to which the masthead of a website is analogous. Now, since the image is properly placed from a layout standpoint, would it look better if it were facing the margin, rather than the center? Of course not! If Rand had a beauty mark, one might be inclined not to use a mirror image. As it stands, the masthead as designed is as it should be.

As for Colbert, he's obviously Canadian himself.

A friend who saw somebody watching this clip at work lent that guy a copy of the book.

[Selene]

Ted:

"As for Colbert, he's obviously Canadian himself. "

I believe he is from South Carolina

Adam

[general semanticist]

Selene, on Mar 13 2009, 03:13 PM, said:

My question is why can you not watch this in your province? What am I not understanding about the internet in Canada or here?

Second, I have been engaged in a project concerning language and I wondered what you make of this quote from his last speech in 1950:

"Perhaps a story from the European underground under Hitler would be a good illustration. In a railroad compartment an American grandmother with her young and attractive granddaughter, a Romanian officer, and a Nazi officer were the only occupants. The train was passing through a dark tunnel, and all that was heard was a loud kiss and a vigorous slap. After the train emerged from the tunnel, nobody spoke, but the grandmother was saying to herself, 'What a fine girl I have raised. She will take care of herself. I am proud of her.' The granddaughter was saying to herself, 'Well, grandmother is old enough not to mind a little kiss. Besides, the fellows are nice. I am surprised what a hard wallop grandmother has.' The Nazi officer was meditating, 'How clever those Romanians are! They steal a kiss and have the other fellow slapped.' The Romanian officer was chuckling to himself, 'How smart I am! I kissed my own hand and slapped the Nazi.'"

First, there must be some copyright thing that doesn't allow people connecting from Canada to view that show except on the Comedy Network's site.

Second, I believe Korzybski's story was to illustrate how many interpretations of some event are possible based on limited data. In this case it was limited by the fact that nobody could see, so only had other senses to work with.

[Selene]

Thanks. That is what I thought. Just wanted to see if I missed something.

I will be using another of his tests this week with a group of unsuspecting folks.

"Another example of 'perception' could be given which anyone can try for himself. In fact, I suggest that this simple demonstration should be repeated by all readers of this paper. The demonstration takes two persons. One, without the knowledge of the other, cuts out large headlines of the same size from different issues of a newspaper. The subject remains seated in the same position throughout. He is shown one of the headlines at a certain distance. If he is able to read it, it is discarded. Then he is shown another, different, headline at a somewhat farther distance away. Again, if he is able to read it, it is discarded. This process is repeated until the subject is unable to read the headline. Then the demonstrator tells him what is in the headline. The amazing fact is that the subject will then be able to see and read the headline the moment he 'knows' what is there."

Adam

[general semanticist]

Yes, that is a cool one. You can see that happening all the time. For example have you ever looked at an x-ray and wondered what you were looking at? But the surgeon can look at it and "see" the problem immediately because he knows what to look for. You are both receiving the same stimuli but are having vastly different 'semantic reactions' (important formulation of gs). BTW, where are you getting these excerpts?

[Ted Keer]

Selene, on Mar 13 2009, 09:02 PM, said:

The subject remains seated in the same position throughout. He is shown one of the headlines at a certain distance. If he is able to read it, it is discarded. Then he is shown another, different, headline at a somewhat farther distance away. Again, if he is able to read it, it is discarded. This process is repeated until the subject is unable to read the headline. Then the demonstrator tells him what is in the headline. The amazing fact is that the subject will then be able to see and read the headline the moment he 'knows' what is there."

Adam

This is not at all surprising - it is quite well explained by Jeffrey Hawkins in his book On Intelligence. We are primed for pattern recognition. You arre simply finding an ambiguity threshold with this experiment - you are finding the distance where the signal to noise ratio makes discrimination impossible. But, primed with the answer, the task switches from discrimination of an unknown to recognition of a given.

As for Colbert, he is quite obviously a Kebbecker, or maybe a Cajun. First, he's metrosexual. Second, in NC his name would be pronounced Colburt.

[general semanticist]

Ted Keer, on Mar 13 2009, 10:18 PM, said:

This is not at all surprising - it is quite well explained by Jeffrey Hawkins in his book On Intelligence. We are primed for pattern recognition. You arre simply finding an ambiguity threshold with this experiment - you are finding the distance where the signal to noise ratio makes discrimination impossible. But, primed with the answer, the task switches from discrimination of an unknown to recognition of a given.

It was perhaps not as well known in 1933 when it was published.

[Selene]

http://esgs.free.fr/uk/art/ak3.htm < this is the paper/speech see the first footnote - I found it interesting.

At the bottom of the article is:

http://www.general-semantics.org/ < they are out of Fort Worth Texas

Adam

[Ted Keer]

general semanticist, on Mar 13 2009, 09:28 PM, said:

Ted Keer, on Mar 13 2009, 10:18 PM, said:

This is not at all surprising - it is quite well explained by Jeffrey Hawkins in his book On Intelligence. We are primed for pattern recognition. You arre simply finding an ambiguity threshold with this experiment - you are finding the distance where the signal to noise ratio makes discrimination impossible. But, primed with the answer, the task switches from discrimination of an unknown to recognition of a given.

It was perhaps not as well known in 1933 when it was published.

The experiment itself is quite elegant. What would be Korzybski's interpretation?

[general semanticist]

Ted Keer, on Mar 13 2009, 11:29 PM, said:

The experiment itself is quite elegant. What would be Korzybski's interpretation?

Korzybski uses the language of "higher and lower abstractions" to explain this. He says our senses produce lower order abstractions which have some structure (what we see). We then produce higher order abstractions (language) which also has some structure. This experiment is meant to show how higher order abstractions can influence lower order abstractions.

[Ted Keer]

general semanticist, on Mar 14 2009, 11:10 AM, said:

Ted Keer, on Mar 13 2009, 11:29 PM, said:

The experiment itself is quite elegant. What would be Korzybski's interpretation?

Korzybski uses the language of "higher and lower abstractions" to explain this. He says our senses produce lower order abstractions which have some structure (what we see). We then produce higher order abstractions (language) which also has some structure. This experiment is meant to show how higher order abstractions can influence lower order abstractions.

Well, if you accept that terminology, then what he says is broadly true. But I would use different words, (again, primed recognition versus inductive discrimination) and I think you could easily go wrong by conflating identification and recognition as "abstraction."

Hawkins does address how a pre-existing pattern-recognizing brain circuit can prime us to recognize a pattern we have previously identified and learned. Still, the pattern must first be learned, and this is done without pre-existing knowledge.

Hawkins too fails to make certain necessary distinctions. Nevertheless, he is quite worth reading. As is David Kelley's Evidence of the Senses where he introduces the notion of a perceptual judgment as the link between percepts and concepts.