Protestantism

» pink101 - Some Interesting Comments

AT this site, http://www.trinity.edu/%7Emkearl/, I found some interesting comments. Here is an example:
:
"Now in the supposed 'Information Age' six out of ten American households do not purchase a single book and one-half of American adults do not read one. Forty-two years ago in 1965 when the Gallup Organization asked young people if they read a daily newspaper, 67 percent said yes; in 2004, according to the NORC General Social Survey, roughly 20 percent answered affirmatively. And yet 'they' say we are saturated with informational overload!."
.

-- posted by pink101

» paper_turtle - Information Overload

.
inform (transitive form)
1. a) to give form or character to; to be the formative principle of
1. b) to give, imbue, or inspire with some specific quality or character; animate
2. [rare] to form or shape (the mind); teach
3. to give knowledge of something to; tell; acquaint with fact, etc
(intransitive form)
to give information (as in one who informs on the deeds of another)
.
.
Therefore, information ought to be that which informs.
.
Seems to me what we have is not information overload, but data overload (meaning stuff which appears to be information but doesn't really feed our heads).
.
When I log onto my ISP homepage, the latest news headlines are up at the top. But its not really news (as in what you might read in the paper); its about which movie star got arrested, or which sports figure did something or other.
.
Here on the 'net some people spend hours reading other people's blogs, and find their horoscopes, or simply try to get through all the spam to the real e-mails (and of course the e-mails contain jokes which have been forwarded 100 times or more).
.
Yuppers. You can learn a lot on the 'net.
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» paper_turtle - Some Interesting Comments

In response to Some Interesting Comments posted by pink101:

just tried to check out the link and it didn't work.
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» paper_turtle - Probably a detour, but ...

.
In response to Some Interesting Comments posted by pink101:

+ 1. + Yesterday in another thread you were talking about culture in relation to my grandmother and her particular gifts (herbal healing and psychic diagnoses). You said her culture probably fostered her gifts, and indirectly implied they were therefore explained by her culture. I don't know a lot about her background, but here are two conflicting facts:
.
a) her grandfather was a Seminole Indian, so its probably that her herbal knowledge (and/aptitude) was passed down through him.
.
b) her father was a Baptist minister, and would have thought psychic gifts were the work of the devil.
.
Thing is, though, most children whith psychic abilities--even today--keep them a secret because those they do tell make them feel ashamed of their gift.
.
.
+ 2. + In our discussion earlier this morning you said you thought that face to face and internet communication were two very different forms of communication. You didn't answer my question re two standards of conduct. Care to comment?
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» pink101 - Some Interesting Comments

In response to Some Interesting Comments posted by paper_turtle:
.
http://www.trinity.edu/mkearl/index.html
.
Try it from this link.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - Probably a detour, but ...

In response to Probably a detour, but ... posted by paper_turtle:
.
Well, there's a lot to bring up regarding such questions.
.
Culture, in and of itself, is quite a complicated concept. You could easily spend an entire university study on it all the way through an endless array of doctorals.
.
I think it is the subject that leads us to understand ourselves and each other.
.
You asked me if I would comment on the interenet in comparison to face to face communication.
.
The interenet carries with it an anonymity that face to face interaction cannot share. We give ourselves more freedom to be blunt in our comments than we might in a face to face confrontation. Maybe it can be seen that the standards of contact as you put it are totally up to the individual. It's more about group identity than it is about the media. Even so, the 'Net is considered to be the New Media in comparison to any other kind that is. We really don't understand it; but, we are learning.
.
My thoughts are that internet discussion groups are formed to satisfy some interest of the individual members; whereas, face to face groups are generally formed to satisfy the mutual interests of the individual members. This sets up the major differences regarding the forms of communication involved.
.
How long ago was it that I attempted to create a site here at Suite101.com in which all the participants would agree to a specific set of rules? Two years ago or so? That effort was met with an immediate and negative reaction. Now, we are coming almost full circle regarding the idea of standards of conduct as though they can be unspoken, but, fully understood.
.
It's part of the group formation process and, as such, it is the subject of much study by sociologists. Sociology, as you may know, is a subset of study under the broader fields of Communications Studies which involves a very broad range of schools and universities. Scholars are just beginning to scratch the surface of the issues involved in this what seems to be an inexhaustible pursuit.
.
I think we can discuss it; but, I doubt that we will come to any conclusions.
.
Maybe we could think of the 'Net as a beast about which one might like to learn its nature? It boggles the mind.
.

-- posted by pink101