To add comments or start new threads please go to the full version of: The Appropriate Mode Of Communication
PhysForum Science, Physics and Technology Discussion Forums > General Sci-Tech Discussions > Other Sci-Tech Topics

Confused2
3rd July 2009 - 11:47 PM
From:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversation

QUOTE
A conversation is communication between multiple people. It is a social skill that is not difficult for most individuals. Conversations are the ideal form of communication in some respects, since they allow people with different views on a topic to learn from each other.


Discuss.
rpenner
5th July 2009 - 02:51 AM
But as there is just one universe (or multiverse in some popular cosmologies), then there can be just one science and so different views on some matters reflect either developing science or ignorance of science.

Different views on empirical matters are typically resolved by confrontation with facts that leave at least one of the views as discredited. Different views in the courtroom are either relevant in which case they must be resolved to at least one party's dissatisfaction or not relevant in which case they are ignored and typically go one unresolved.

Different views on the status of scientific theories are either supported or not supported by the entirety of empirical evidence in the relevant domain. If both views are supported, then more science needs to be done. If a view is not supported, then it is a matter of ignorance. And ignorance is a barrier to communication.

How can I convey to a blind person of the nature of lime green or milk chocolate, and why they in my perception would be a poor combination for a building exterior.
Confused2
6th July 2009 - 10:29 PM
QUOTE
..then there can be just one science and so different views on some matters reflect either developing science or ignorance of science.


We could cast the 'more knowledgeable view' and the 'less knowledgeable view' as the 'less ignorant view' and the 'more ignorant view' - while the first cup may not be exactly full - the second cup is clearly very close to empty.

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
..then there can be just one science and so different views on some matters reflect either developing science or ignorance of science.


We could cast the 'more knowledgeable view' and the 'less knowledgeable view' as the 'less ignorant view' and the 'more ignorant view' - while the first cup may not be exactly full - the second cup is clearly very close to empty.

.. Different views on the status of scientific theories are either supported or not supported by the entirety of empirical evidence in the relevant domain.


The individual with the greater knowledge has the advantage of.. kicking a$$ and looking mighty fine.
The individual with the greater knowledge has the burden of.. a glass that is not empty.

Once the a$$-kicking starts you will (inevitably) get confrontation - 87% ego, 1% physics and 17% statistics invented on the spur of the moment - that's just human beings for you.

It is also important that (as moderator) your own glass remains full.

It would be appropriate for me to finish with a link to a picture of Alice showing the Mock Turtle a square - the Mock Turtle shows her a parallelogram - with right angles all round. Physforum continues to fill my glass, very nicely, thank you.

-C2

Edit .. on reading this it seems I may myself have become 'confrontational' .. please be assured that it is my wish to unlearn the trick.
Meem
6th July 2009 - 10:54 PM
QUOTE
But as there is just one universe (or multiverse in some popular cosmologies), then there can be just one science and so different views on some matters reflect either developing science or ignorance of science.


I am stating how this makes "me feel", not how "you should," about my "neighborhood," or universal locality. How many solar systems are there in our galaxy? How many Galaxies are there in our universe? If, just if, we were able to somehow transverse a great distance, and observe a "sub-intelligent" life-form, with cognitive reasoning ability ... how would we treat them? how would they perceive us?

This is deep ethical territory in the matters of perception or perspective. What if we found a planet, but we didn't have nifty "life-scan" detectors. What if to explore it we actually hand to land and do it? And in the process we came across "lizard-cave men", maybe they even watch us land. What would they think of us? How would we treat them? Would we try to "force" knowledge into their minds with machines? Would we interact with them at all?

Now, flip the coin, what if they came our way?

What if so many thousands of years ago, when an arm of sagittarius could have very well been extremely close to our "neighborhood", we had some visitors? When is that arm band due to come back around again? Wasn't there a recent discovery about the milky-way "eating" sagittarius? inter galactic immigrants, possible? Maybe though, they aren't limited by the distance but I'm sure the "ride" wouldn't be as long. Who would want to come here? Look at how we treat each other. Hello earth, there is no god we have proof! Would they say that? What could we reason them to believe?

But out of the billions of things out there, I suppose, like people on earth, we and I are the only ones. There is no need for morality astringent ethical codes, within reason.

Is that really all that stupid?

http://www.reference.com/browse/hawthorne%20effect
Meem
7th July 2009 - 12:16 AM
Stop the intergalactic violence now! Or else!


http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2008/...-way-is-de.html

QUOTE
Apparently, the Milky Way has made it a habit to hungrily snack on the stars of other galaxies. Recently, a team of Australian researchers discovered that the Milky Way galaxy has been cannibalizing on the Sagittarius galaxy and others.


http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/gala...ble_030924.html

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
Apparently, the Milky Way has made it a habit to hungrily snack on the stars of other galaxies. Recently, a team of Australian researchers discovered that the Milky Way galaxy has been cannibalizing on the Sagittarius galaxy and others.


http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/gala...ble_030924.html

Detailed new observations of our Milky Way Galaxy reveal thousands of stars being stripped from a neighbor that's stretched into a twisted shape resembling a wet noodle.

The Sagittarius dwarf galaxy, now a vestige of its former self, serves as a snack for the much larger Milky Way.

Astronomers already knew Sagittarius was being torn apart. The new study maps the extent of the carnage, showing how debris wraps around and passes through the Milky Way, astronomers said today.

Sagittarius is 10,000 times less massive than the Milky Way.
"It's clear who's the bully in the interaction," said Steven Majewski, a University of Virginia professor of astronomy.

Theorists have long said that small galaxies like Sagittarius are the building blocks of large galaxies. Several
Confused2
7th July 2009 - 07:08 AM
Essence of conversation is 'turn-taking' (aka good manners) - this prevents a hostile individual from totally derailing a discussion.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.