In praise of nuance
-
Good, but no cigar. Sorry:)
No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn. - Jim Morrison
Just as well, i should smoke less. :)
---- Scripts i’ve known... CPhog 1.8.2 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete Syntax 0.1 - Syntax highlighting for code blocks in the forums
-
dennisd45 wrote:
Emphasis added.
misses the point entirely. there is no nuance twixt right and wrong, good and evil. those are absolutes.
Mike Dear NYT - the fact is, the founding fathers hung traitors. dennisd45 wrote: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced
-
This is simply poppycock. "Nuance" does not denote a correct worldview or even complex thinking. It is another left-wing corruption of a term. As defined[^], it is nothing more than a "subtle difference". What subtle difference? It's not defined and is simply another left-wing term to avoid answering any real challenging questions. So when you're saying that you have a "nuanced" approach to terrorism, you're not saying anything...at all. Conservatives speak in terms of definites and absolutes because such an approach is needed in the real world. So called "nuance" is nothing but a euphemism for childish indecisiveness. That's why conservatives make fun of liberals (especially John Kerry) for it's use. It's tantamount to countering somebody's proposed solution with "Well, the world is filled with subtle differences and we should therefore do nothing." A real world example of decisiveness vs. "nuance" follows: Decisiveness: Piece of software Q will take an estimate 3 months to design and develop based on the requirements that have been acquired to date. There may be factors that effect the delivery date such as X, Y or Z. X will have this much effect, Y this much and Z this much, etc... The result is a project that will be delivered more or less on time and experts who have real world experience with this can deliver a project successfully within the given parameters. Nuance: The piece of software Q is extremely complex. As such, it's very difficult to predict how long it will take, how it will be designed, which technologies we will use, etc... There are many outside factors that could effect our ability to deliver such a project. As such, we cannot determine when the software can be delivered. Instead, we propose an organic approach by which we can meet in a community and discuss the software over an extended period of time. Which approach is likely deliver the spec'd software on time and budget? That is the difference between a decisive and a nuanced approach.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45
espeir wrote:
factors that effect the delivery date such as X, Y or Z. X will have this much effect
The first time you used the word "effect" in that sentence, it should have been "affect". The second is correct.
-
In praise of nuance[^] A selection from this article: “Nuance” is one of those words successfully poisoned by American conservatives, like “liberal” or “feminist”. Originally a term of praise, suggesting an intelligent consideration of the many sides and shades of a complex issue, it’s now a term of mockery. Dick Cheney sneers it really well, makes it sound like a construction worker mocking a gay Parisian. The problem is, some issues ARE nuanced. Some ethical and moral decisions are nuanced. Life is nuanced, unless you’re very young, very stupid, or an irredeemable idealogue of some persuasion. (Those qualities are not mutually exclusive.) That’s why ideology, be it neoconservatism, Maoism, fundamentalist Christianity or Taliban-style Islam, is such a useful thing. Ideologues simplify things. They refuse to acknowledge those nasty nuances. There’s a simple for answer for everything: you just have to consult the revealed text (be it the Koran, Das Kapital, or Fukuyama’s “End Of History”), and there’s the answer. As long as it’s derived from or consistent with your chosen revelation, no further thought is required. Nuances don’t exist. And best of all, you don’t don’t actually have to engage with any ideas that challenge your stance. If they are not in consistent with your truth, then they are self evidently wrong, because they’re - well, they’re not consistent with the Bible, the Koran, the Little Red Book or the Thoughts of Chairman Tom Flanagan. So they’re wrong. End of story. Emphasis added.
No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn. - Jim Morrison
-
Oh for fuck's sake, grow up!
-- Not Y3K Compliant
-
Now see what you've done, you made him create yet another new name to try to sew his swill. :laugh: -- modified at 13:10 Friday 11th August, 2006
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
It is not his fault
This post is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied.
-
Nuance is fine for humor, entertainment and other such inconsequential aspects of life, but if you're making a significant moral decision, say one involving life or death for another, you really aught to seek solider ground than a "subtle difference in opinion, meaning or attitude".[^] In this regard I disagree with both the author and the poster - most of the really consequential problems in this world are not in the least "nuanced". They may be confusing, complex, or even seemingly intractable, but they almost never involve a subtle difference in opinion or meaning, but rather a fundamental one. The left's use of nuance in this respect, serves more to obfuscate reality or to avoid recognition of a troubling fundamental disagreement than it does to help address the problems.
Soldiers cannot care about "subtle difference in opinion, meaning or attitude". But they could start with the difference between "enemy" and "subhuman".
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighist -
Yeah, it sure is a lot more screwed up than your 'the good guys can do evil stuff' theory.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
Hey, I'm happy to stand along side evil-doing good guys such as FDR and Lincoln, Churchill, etc for the purpose of this argument. If you wish to make good impotent in defending itself from evil, I will always take the other side. Nothing nuanced about it.
Thank God for disproportional force.