h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

>And you get through the hard times and find you are full to the brim with delight and joy in each other. Not to mention gratitude, respect, and a strong desire to live up to those promises. *bows in respect for putting this in words so well*
I may quote that in a speech to Mrs SG V one day

>I am perfectly capable of taking care of myself, that being alone isn't the same thing as being lonely, that the rest of my life is mine to do with as I please, and that I really am going to be just fine
Oh, I just wish that my mother would have an inkling of that

Atelieromanics? Don't know if that's the word, but I'd confess to be one.

>> I actually discussed a central thought of Michel Foucault's without using the terms 'discourse' or 'discursive'.

Actually, I'd be sufficiently impressed if the sentence had stopped after the word Foucault's and before the word without. So is definitely due.

I'm not doing badly on writing about data without making it obvious that I think it's not plural. I did think of writing "these conundra" though, just as a dig.

B

Ti, sometimes my fan (and my mum's) knock and rattle when the little nut, that holds the 'lid' to the lever that opens it, is a bit loose. I then remove the filter and tighten the nut.

*have read the posts about relationships, and can't think what to add. Unless you all want to hear my long and winding story*

[PE]

Ben,

Re your essay, I wrote an essay for an MSc module on Computer Based Learning and compared the two pedagolical paradigmes: instructional or vertical and contructivist or enabling. Bit of a stretch for your subject but I'll check references if you want.

WA

Ben, are you saying that you want binaries? I mean, the most obvious binary I can think of is male/female. But if you are looking for specifically antagonistic, there's church/state, monotheist/polytheist (or atheist, frankly), and Communist/Capitalist. Democratic/Dictatorship. East/West.

one that I'm having a tough time framing as a binary two word combination...Von Rankean vs. Linguistic Turn. Basically, these are two diametrically opposed ways of doing history. Von Rankean historians (rather positivist, frankly) look at the documents and take them at face value, while Linguistic Turn historians (also sometimes called 'postmodernists') believe that every document should be scrutinized in context, looking for authorial agendas, etc.

Okay, I'll shut up now.

I read that as Ben wanting irreconcilable view points or philosophies, where followers of the one believe the other side is just plain wrong, rather than just straight forward opposites.

One we've discussed before Ben is the two sides of the fox hunting debate, although I don't think that's really what you're after as neither point of view could be described as a philosophy, nor can they be easily encapsulated in a single word.

after a quick scoot through, favourite kitchen appliance?

kettle (must have a coffee first thing in the morning)
toaster
microwave

all three of these make me human in the morning.

relationships hmmmmmm.....

been married for 13 years, got married after 7 months

have 5 kids of varying ages

Thre are days when I can't stand being around her and other days where she can be the loving person I met all those years ago, vice versa I know there are times I drive her nuts as I am not the easiest person in the world to live with

do I love her? Yes, without question I knew she was the right person for me from the word go

Oh, thanks WA and MR - there's a conversation here about it too, so we can avoid overheating the Atelier with hot air. F1599167?thread=6593255 I'm intrigued by your paradigms WA, and may take a look at them too.

The binary I want MR is between close-minded dogmatic fundamentalism on the one hand and open-minded agnosticism which is comfortable with ambiguity and nuance on the other, so that I can run it at 90 degrees to the postivist / interpretivist binary.

It seems to me (in the Social Sciences at least) that postivism and interpretivism make different contributions and that both are valid. Horses for courses and all that. As a result I get very pissed off with the fundamentalist arguments that there is One True Way (whichever it might be) and that All Other -isms are Damned. You call it fence-sitting - I call it being comfortable with ambiguity and nuance!

That said, in your example MR I'm with the Linguistic Turners, but hey.

*Returning you to your original programming.*

[LTP] my
wiccan-christian

correction swap Papalism for christian

I was just musing about relationships and suchlike, and I realised that one of the reasons Mr Vip and I get on so well is because we met under strange and very stressful conditions, and worked very closely together (within a larger group) for a week with very little in the way of breaks other than sleep.
It's the 'put them through hell and they'll come out friends' mentality, I guess. We leant to rely on each other in times of stress and unhappiness before we ever had the good times. Now we can draw on that reliance if things ever get hairy. It's a theory, at any rate!

oh, I'm very much on the side of the linguistic turners, as well, Ben. Very much so.

so what you're really talking about is fundamentalism vs. unitarianism. Not so much religiously, but more broadly speaking. The side that believes that there are Truths and facts and absolutes vs. truth/facts as relative to their contexts.

I meant to add before that Mrs SG V and I knew each other for a year or so before we started holding hands (one January evening in 1985... still celebrated). We lived together first time in the half year we were in France in '86 & moved together some time after getting back.

House in '91, married in '92, and 15 came to the world in '93.

And even before we started dating, friends told us that we behaved (or seemd or whatever the wording was) as a married couple. Sure
will stay being one *touches wood*

>> so what you're really talking about is fundamentalism vs. unitarianism. Not so much religiously, but more broadly speaking. The side that believes that there are Truths and facts and absolutes vs. truth/facts as relative to their contexts.

I may be. I'm not sure what unitarianism is, actually.

Seems to me that it's a doctrinal thing - and certainly you can find feminists and post-modernists and interpretivists who claim that everything is constructed and depends on context - but who hold no truck with positivism.

It's this fundamentalism that I'm trying to get at, and that can be present in any stance really.

Rigid vs. Flexible Absolute vs Evolving

Clinical or forensic v intuative or touchy feely.

My copy of Kugel has been in another city for over a year now, so I don't remember his exact terminology, but in How to Read the Bible Kugel distinguished between those who consider the Bible as inerrant and those who allow for its wisdom and guidance while also treating it as a loose collection of historical documents with propagandist subtexts.

Creationists vs. evolutionary theory folks?

All such yummy suggestions.

I think I'll go with "fundamentalist" vs "agnostic" and state that I've borrowed the terminology from religious debates.

It's slightly worrying that I found it so difficult to articulate clearly though.

Cheers

B