This is the Message Centre for No Absolutes
- 1
- 2
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
a girl called Ben Started conversation Oct 20, 2002
Hi my evil twin, and welcome to h2h2.
(Wow! I never thought I would get to talk to my evil twin, and here I am. Cool).
Ok, long words but small chunks.
As it says on the front page, this is the Earth Edition of the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy. We are all researchers here, who can - if we want to - write about anything we want so long as we adhere to the <./>Terms</.> and Conditions of the site.
If you are using Brunel, (which is the default look-and-feel of the site which has one colour for the forums, another for the entries, and another for the help pages, and so on), then your 'Create New Entry' button is below the last of your Journals. You click on the button, put in a title and start to type. I will come back to the machanics a bit later on.
If we want added glory and kudos - and a lot of us do - then we want to get our entries into the edited guide, or on to the front page somehow. There are some Writing-Guidelines about what is and is not suitable for the edited guide, and these are being followed more strictly now than they were in the past.
There are two ways to get an entry which does conform to the guidelines into the Edited Guide. One is to write your entry and when you think it is completely ready, put it into PeerReview. PR is a cross between a badger-bait and a beauty pagent. It is like a badger-bait because everyone and anyone can drop by and say what they like about you entry. (You often get more attention in Peer Review than you do on the front page). It is like a beauty pagent because the entry will stay in Peer Review until it is either kicked out because you and everyone else has ignored it for months, or until it is kicked out because it is not in fact suitable for the edited guide, or until one of the scouts (who are volunteer researchers like you or me) picks it for the edited guide.
The other way to get an entry into the edited guide is to write one for a uni project. It still has to adhere to the guidelines, but it doesn't have to go through Peer Review. It is often helpful to have someone critique your entry though, and you can put yours, when it is finished into the Writing-Workshop. This is what I am doing with the entries I am writing for this project.
There is a third way onto the front page, which is suitable for entries which are good, but which don't conform to the guidelines. This is through the <./>ThePost</.> .
Okie dokie - we have covered the mechanics, albeit briefly, and we have covered the difference between any old guide entry and an edited one. The next thing I guess is what do I actually want you to write?
Take a look at the Writing-Guidelines and the Writing-Beginners page for advice on style, and so on. And read a few of the edited entries, that will give you the best idea of what an edited entry actually is.
In terms of subjects, an entry on the social sciences lack of rigour in their approach to atheism is a very interesting take on the subject.
And the question of how to approach your belief, (or non-belief), if you aspire to atheism is another very interesting question, but it does come perilously near the rule that I set saying that this should be about belief and not about beliefs.
You should be aware, and you can probably guess anyway, that some of the hottest, most intense and longest-lasting flame-wars on this site have been caused by discussions about religion.
People take it extremely personally when they think their beliefs have been dissed, and they are astonishingly agressive in saying so. You may be entering the lions den.
This is why I am stipulating that none of the entries should be about specific beliefs. Only about the mechanism and function of belief, and how belief interacts with other human activities, and vice versa. I think that the two paras you wrote suggest that you could write at least one entry on one of the subjects without stepping too far out of the guidelines I have set for the project.
Finally - Guide ML. Guide ML is like html, and it comprises the tags which make edited pages come up with headers and subheaders and bold and italic and stuff like that.
When you click on the 'Create New Entry' button you will get a window like the one for posting to a conversation. Below the window there are two options, Plain Text or Guide ML. If you write the entry in plain text, then GTB, who I hope will be doing our subbing for us, will put it into GuideML for you. If you want to write it in Guide ML, then the simplest thing is to use the Brunel skin, (select 'Brunel' in your Preferences button on you U-Space), and select the 'Guide ML' Radio Button. That will give you a lot of useful buttons at the top of the window, which you can use like the buttons in MS Word to add tags to your entry.
So there you are. A potted guide to writing for the guide. Let me know what you think!
Ben
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
No Absolutes Posted Oct 21, 2002
Yay ben....i've just quickly read what you've written, and will decide what category i fit into shortly...i have a paper i've written for uni which i could do something with, but to make it exactly targeted at your topic...may need some tweaking...then i'm not sure where i need to put it...hmmmm
i appreciate what you've written, thank you so much, it makes it a lot easier to understand now....when were you wanting the article by? how long is appropriate...
and i'm not worried about offending anyone here...i'm australian...we do it as a sport when we visit england
off to read your links, do some thinking, and then resume my nap where i left off,
b2
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
a girl called Ben Posted Oct 21, 2002
How long and how long?
Well I have never counted the words in any of mine, and I tend to write long entries. The Guidelines seem to think that 2000 words is quite long. I have certainly said more than that in an entry and got away with it though.
And when? The target date for completing the project is the end of November (about 5 weeks away now).
The sooner the better, without disrupting your normal life is the answer I guess.
If it is late, I promise not to winge!
a non-wingeing pom called Ben
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
a girl called Ben Posted Oct 21, 2002
PS
Re: subject matter - what you do is up to you, the subjects listed in the project page are to whet the appetite. Either of the two subjects I mentioned would be good though.
Re: offending people - it may not matter to you, but it matters to me, and it will matter to the italics. 'Tread on no toes' is the project motto, and don't forget the 'no trolling' rule. But on the other hand I am by nature subversive....
Please: can you let me have a title asap? I will add you to the list of contributers now, and I will add your proposed title as soon as I have it.
All the best, and enjoy your
Ben
PPS - where in Oz are you? I am going there in November/December and will be attending the Sydney meet which I think is on the 23rd.
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
No Absolutes Posted Oct 22, 2002
B1
gathering? of h2g2 peeps? i'm in the thriving metropolis of sydney...
i have a title
Will the Social Sciences sell its soul or lose its balls?
(dont forget i'm australian) i can change it... but it ties in nicely to the end.....can i just post it here and you can suggest what to do with it?
BUT it is in the first person...i got an HD though...
let me know.
b2
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
a girl called Ben Posted Oct 22, 2002
The gathering of hootooers is discussed here: F72190?thread=208177&latest=1 The date has changed to the 23rd though.
I am grinning slightly nervously at your title. And definitely looking forward to reading the entry. You can either post the draft here and we can discuss it, or you can sling it directly into a 'new entry' page.
The first person thing may be a problem, but there are ways of getting around that. If you do put it into a 'new entry' page our co-projecters can put in their two pennorth. One thing, if you wrote it in word, then cut and paste it through notepad first. Hootoo does odd things to Word's special characters.
I will write up the title 'as is' in the project page, and I look forward to reading your entry.
B
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
No Absolutes Posted Oct 22, 2002
b1,
hmm.... i shall be happy to put it here first...i have no idea how to start a new topic...then you can play with me, and or it...and guide me on what to do....
off to find it and do the wordpad thing...*arnie voice* i'll be back.
b2
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
No Absolutes Posted Oct 22, 2002
Will the Social Sciences sell its soul or lose its balls?
I am not only a member of, but also an advocate of, the social taxonomy of Atheism. Although, at a personal level, I agree with the Social Sciences in disregarding God as a factor in explaining phenomena I do not allow them the intellectual indolence and arrogance I indulge in personally, to reach the same conclusion.
If the Social Sciences, tacitly or overtly, wish to deny the existence of a higher power, then they should either prove it or accept it as a possible confound.
I am an Atheist because it is in my nature to question, and to demand reasonable and rational answers. Religion has not addressed my questions adequately, so my informed and haphazardly researched conclusion is that God does not exist. In part, I am a student of the Social Sciences because it is in my nature to question and demand reasonable and rational answers. Social Science does not prove the non-existence of God (and God has not yet proven the non-existence of the Social Sciences either).
Atheists demand explanations, proof and science. A discipline that calls itself a science is misleading in doing so, when it does not address the imperative of substantiated proof. Throughout university, students are required to cite studies and research, to analyse statistics and find alternate explanations for phenomena they draw conclusions from and comment upon. Why is the same short leash not demanded of the Social Sciences?
The Social Sciences presume to know the minds of its students and assume they are either atheists or tolerant of atheistic explanations. As a deduction, this is completely acceptable to me. The difficult is that Atheists reach their conclusion of Atheism based on insufficient or no proof of the existence of a God. Atheists use scientific method in rejecting the God hypothesis.
The Social Sciences command faith in themselves! The Social Sciences demand that they are not questioned about this, and in doing so, estrange themselves from Atheism. Atheists do not and can not accept answers based on faith. For the Social Sciences to presume that I will not question the foundations of their Atheistic hypotheses, and not allow me the arena nor the right to challenge their tenet based on lack of proof, puts them firmly and squarely within the hypocrisy of a Science demanding faith.
QUESTION AUTHORITY was a witty but thought provoking Sixties graffiti that is more ironically relevant today as Social Science demands we question everything except our faith in the methodology of the Social Sciences. All other phenomena are observed, measured, accounted for and deemed significant or insignificant. Ideas that fit the 'too hard basket' are deemed non-existent or dismissed.
I question why the Social Sciences feed me what I want to hear, as an Atheist, but do not encourage, allow and necessitate introspection and criticism.
If the Social Sciences did not intend to arrogantly pat me on my head and tell me not to worry my pretty little head about such contradictions they would, at least, explain why God was factored out of Social Science equations. It is poor academic policy, patronising and disenfranchising to ignore such a significant aspect in the hope that it might either go away or remain unnoticed.
In order to address this fundamental contradiction adequately, or even pay lip service to the antagonism, the capped and gowned clergy of the Social Sciences could be sensitised in areas of inconsistencies and the consequences of expecting or accepting blind faith.
An alternate approach that is equally modern and sophisticated as some contemporary Social Science academics, the Stimulus Response model, could be devised where Social Scientists who fail to adequately address all phenomena in their frames of reference could be given a small electric shock to the genitalia until failure to comply was no longer an issue.
b1
nervous twitching starts...tell me what you think...remember...i'm australian...thick skinned and oft thick headed..
b2
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
a girl called Ben Posted Oct 22, 2002
I think it is good. Also, I want it for the project.
Good things are the style it is written in, and the clarity of the argument. (And the spelling!)
I think that there may be a problem with the first person voice. I will ask Mina for an official opinion - the argument against first person pieces is that other researchers' opinions may be added to an entry, and that gets confusing for the reader. But that argument is irrelevant here.
What I will also do is try to redraft it in the third person for you, keeping the argument intact, but losing the personal voice.
If you can write to that standard then you will be able to contribute a lot to the guide, if you choose to.
Thanks for taking the time and the effort to write it.
B
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
a girl called Ben Posted Oct 22, 2002
Ok
I have re-drafted it to remove the first person. The two paragraphs where this sits badly are the first and the third, and I suggest that you consider redrafting, reducing, removing or replacing them.
But the rest of it works fantastically.
Guide entries have headers and subheaders to break them up on the screen. Can you sling in a couple or more to make it look cute?
All the best.
Ben
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Will the Social Sciences sell its soul or lose its balls?
This is a question which faces those who are not only members of, but also advocates of the social taxonomy of Athism. Although at a personal level they may agree with the Social Sciences in disregarding God as a factor in explaining phenomena, there remains an issue with allowing professionals the intellectual indolence and arrogance which an individual may indulge in personally to reach the same conclusion.
If the Social Sciences, tacitly or overtly, wish to deny the existence of a higher power, then they should either prove it or accept it as a possible confound.
Many people arrive at Atheism because it is in their nature to question, and to demand reasonable and rational answers. Atheists find that religion does not address their questions adequately. The conclusion that God does not exist may be haphazardly researched, but it can still be informed. Many become students of the Social Sciences because it is in their nature to question and demand reasonable and rational answers. Social Science does not prove the non-existence of God (and God has not yet proven the non-existence of the Social Sciences either).
Atheists demand explanations, proof and science. A discipline that calls itself a science is misleading in doing so, when it does not address the imperative of substantiated proof. Throughout university, students are required to cite studies and research, to analyse statistics and find alternate explanations for phenomena they draw conclusions from and comment upon. Why is the same short leash not demanded of the Social Sciences?
The Social Sciences presume to know the minds of its students and assume they are either atheists or tolerant of atheistic explanations. As a deduction, this is completely. The difficulty is that Atheists reach their conclusion of Atheism based on insufficient or no proof of the existence of a God. Atheists use scientific method in rejecting the God hypothesis.
The Social Sciences command faith in themselves! The Social Sciences demand that they are not questioned about this, and in doing so, estrange themselves from Atheism. Atheists do not and can not accept answers based on faith. For the Social Sciences to presume that someone will not question the foundations of their Atheistic hypotheses, and not allow them the arena nor the right to challenge their tenet based on lack of proof, puts them firmly and squarely within the hypocrisy of a Science demanding faith.
QUESTION AUTHORITY was a witty but thought provoking Sixties graffiti that is more ironically relevant today as Social Science demands we question everything except our faith in the methodology of the Social Sciences. All other phenomena are observed, measured, accounted for and deemed significant or insignificant. Ideas that fit the 'too hard basket' are deemed non-existent or dismissed.
Whch begs the question why the Social Sciences feed Atheists what they want to hear, as Atheists, but do not encourage, allow and necessitate introspection and criticism.
If the Social Sciences did not intend to arrogantly pat people on their heads and tell them not to worry their pretty little heads about such contradictions they would, at least, explain why God was factored out of Social Science equations. It is poor academic policy, patronising and disenfranchising to ignore such a significant aspect in the hope that it might either go away or remain unnoticed.
In order to address this fundamental contradiction adequately, or even pay lip service to antagonism, the capped and gowned clergy of the Social Sciences could be sensitised in areas of inconsistencies and the consequences of expecting or accepting blind faith.
An alternate approach that is equally modern and sophisticated as some contemporary Social Science academics, the Stimulus Response model, could be devised where Social Scientists who fail to adequately address all phenomena in their frames of reference could be given a small electric shock to the genitalia until failure to comply was no longer an issue.
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
No Absolutes Posted Oct 23, 2002
b1,
i actually think you did a wonderful job with that....i'm happy to put it in the lion's den for ripping and shredding now...i dont think i've got much perspective left on it so i leave it at your tender mercies....
tell me what else i can do....coming up to exams so may not be as productive for a few weeks...but probably still lurking,
b2
(who had another existential red hair moment yesterday )
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
a girl called Ben Posted Oct 23, 2002
Post the url of the entry in this thread, and I will add it to the project page.
All the best
Ben
PS - Can I borrow some of your hair dye?
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
No Absolutes Posted Oct 23, 2002
b1
oh darn...the url? urm..i know what a url is...but dont know how to get the exact one of the post....sorry....i'm a bit stoopid.
as for the hair dye....you can have my hair at this rate....
i've been writing stuff for uni...and i'm much rather play here!
b2
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
a girl called Ben Posted Oct 23, 2002
The URL is the web address of the page that the entry is on. If you copy and paste it here, then I will be happy. In fact all that I need is the bit after the last / which starts A
B
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
No Absolutes Posted Oct 24, 2002
b1, is this it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brunel/F101745?thread=217973 no A though.... :- b2
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
a girl called Ben Posted Oct 24, 2002
Hi
If you use the 'new entry' button to make a new entry, cut and paste the text into it, and save it, you will end up with an ANumber. Let me have that, et voila!
GTB will handle the Guide ML for us.
All the best
B
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
No Absolutes Posted Oct 24, 2002
b1
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brunel/A857694
is that it?
fingies crossed,
b2
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
a girl called Ben Posted Oct 24, 2002
That is GREAT! I have added it to the Project Page.
You can make any changes you like up to the point where GTB subs it. After that, he becomes the editor, and you are the researcher and can't edit it.
Someone will have to put in headers and sub-headers. If you want to do that, then please do.
If you are happy to leave it, then GTB will do it when he subs the entry.
Thank you, and congratulations on producing the first completed entry for the project!
(Not much will happen for a long time and then we will eventually get it on the front page).
All the best
Ben
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
a girl called Ben Posted Oct 24, 2002
PS - Can you submit it to the Writing Workshop? That way if anyone wants to critique it, their comments can go in that thread.
Click 'edit entry' and on the editor page there should be a 'submit for review' pulldown. The Writing Workshop is in that list.
Thanks again.
All the best
B
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
No Absolutes Posted Oct 24, 2002
b1
will try and figure out how to, and shall be on the case post haste...
b2
Key: Complain about this post
- 1
- 2
Welcome to Hootoo, and a quick rundown on Edited Entries and stuff like that
- 1: a girl called Ben (Oct 20, 2002)
- 2: No Absolutes (Oct 21, 2002)
- 3: a girl called Ben (Oct 21, 2002)
- 4: a girl called Ben (Oct 21, 2002)
- 5: No Absolutes (Oct 22, 2002)
- 6: a girl called Ben (Oct 22, 2002)
- 7: No Absolutes (Oct 22, 2002)
- 8: No Absolutes (Oct 22, 2002)
- 9: a girl called Ben (Oct 22, 2002)
- 10: a girl called Ben (Oct 22, 2002)
- 11: No Absolutes (Oct 23, 2002)
- 12: a girl called Ben (Oct 23, 2002)
- 13: No Absolutes (Oct 23, 2002)
- 14: a girl called Ben (Oct 23, 2002)
- 15: No Absolutes (Oct 24, 2002)
- 16: a girl called Ben (Oct 24, 2002)
- 17: No Absolutes (Oct 24, 2002)
- 18: a girl called Ben (Oct 24, 2002)
- 19: a girl called Ben (Oct 24, 2002)
- 20: No Absolutes (Oct 24, 2002)
More Conversations for No Absolutes
Write an Entry
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."