4.0861 Rs: On Humanist; Repetition; Thanks (3/49)
Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Thu, 3 Jan 91 22:19:44 EST
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 4, No. 0861. Thursday, 3 Jan 1991.
(1) Date: Thu, 27 Dec 90 12:34:16 CST (9 lines)
From: Natalie Maynor <nm1@Ra.MsState.Edu>
Subject: Re: 4.0854 Humanist: E-mail Etiquette
(2) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 91 18:02:43 EST (24 lines)
From: Willard McCarty <MCCARTY@vm.epas.utoronto.ca>
Subject: on repetition, again
(3) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 91 14:52:00 PST (16 lines)
From: Michael_Kessler.Hum@mailgate.sfsu.edu
Subject: Death and names
(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 90 12:34:16 CST
From: Natalie Maynor <nm1@Ra.MsState.Edu>
Subject: Re: 4.0854 Humanist: E-mail Etiquette
As Willard has pointed out, the "oral" characteristics of this medium
perhaps lead to a certain amount of repetition. Another reason for
repetition is simply that the medium is growing: Repetition is
inevitable as newcomers join discussions. Natalie Maynor
(nm1@ra.msstate.edu)
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------33----
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 91 18:02:43 EST
From: Willard McCarty <MCCARTY@vm.epas.utoronto.ca>
Subject: on repetition, again
In a limited sense what Tracy Logan calls a "great tool" for searching
a large database does vitiate my argument from orality -- that repetition
keeps a topic (and more) in remembrance. Accessing ideas by words doesn't
provide for such a great tool, however; in Vannevar Bush's words, such a
thing is "a stone adze in the hands of a cabinet-maker". Sure, a piece of
sharp stone is better than nothing, but it isn't the fine chisel we need.
Furthermore, things repeated, by being repeated, are marked as still
important. What bothers me most of all, however, is the notion (if
indeed it is in play for this particular argument) that this here new
medium should be made to behave as if it were something we understand
well. I don't think we do. Until we do a willingness to accept
apparent misbehaviour as right action in an as yet unseen context is
required, don't you think?
I know, this argument too must be qualified. There are limits. This
electronic society must find its own equilibrium.
Willard McCarty
(3) --------------------------------------------------------------27----
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 91 14:52:00 PST
From: Michael_Kessler.Hum@mailgate.sfsu.edu
Subject: Death and names
This subject ran about a month ago. I forwarded all the responses to
the person who asked me the original question, and received the
following response:
"... I never expected such a great 'success' of my simple questions! and
very interesting information and suggestions, leading to further
meditation. So the technical progress is not only made for business
purposes... Thanks to all persons who participated!"
To which I add my thanks,
MKessler@HUM.SFSU.EDU