Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Speeches For Father's 60th Free

"Game of Death" and the dividends of zero-thought



February 22, on its second channel, dedicated to cultural and sporting events, RTBF ran a "document" high grade "controversial" followed brainstorming a staggering brains to "provoke debate" (such as movies Joachim Lafosse) in the morning croissant, horse butchers, the laundromat, the PMU and during secular religion. Hearing test for broadcast, two weeks later, on France 2.
In one case as in the other, it was a flop. While in Belgium, this desperate attempt to boost ratings was being pressed by King Kong Peter Jackson tf1, unless it was followed in France Louis La Brocante .

And it justice.


It is however important to mention, as his trash down the night before going to sleep, and remember that shampoo & vibrators ray bookstores, we can now obtain " Experience extreme "of Nick and Christopher Michel Eltchaninoff, next to the battery of the future bestseller by Patrick Sebastien (" revolt, not revolution ." Manifesto of the sting, "gathering humanist and citizen awareness and pressure" ***)



What to say further in this great moment of behavioral psychology bidonnée? Not much, if not likely that we will explain, after counting the number of product sales, which - even better than the Stanley Milgram experiment - the true test subjects were not, ultimately, those which were thought to know or think that he believed were, but we, ourselves, what will be a second broadcast hopefully before the summer schedule.



Lacking the courage to fade the nth description of "device" in this issue (just type on google), I will reproduce here a comment I committed the night of the Belgian broadcasting on the site "intermedia" in rtbf where everyone-each was invited to respond.




http://www.intermedias.be/profiles/blogs/le-jeu-de-la-mort?


"- No, what'll it's a bit big. Rtbf I know that sometimes likes to do in the malicious. I therefore welcome the staging, though a bit thick.
I have not thought a second, potentially situable issue anywhere in the geography television francophone accents or Belgian or French or Canadian, but typically "airs" (kind of Trianon actors, see, is an art of be just "a few" bad), famous psychologists perfectly cheesy and / or unknown (plus bonus: a true-false book-writing by a super-reporter and co-authored by a philosopher unlikely).


The all arranged around the famous Stanley Milgram test tightens we are on the grid every 5 years, as if they were amnesic.
Only one candidate was seen, we are told, "the flight of Icarus," and therefore had to be excluded from the selection. All others, yet recruited by a large representative sample of the population - requires scientific methodology - lived on Saturn.
Although it is the tube as second helping of dish, sauce, dessert and coffee grows in all schools of France and Navarre for over 40 years by all the teachers failed to imagination, these men and women were mostly applied electric shocks gun false false counterparts, but never combine the classic television school.


short, "we" are, tele-spectators, the "tested" this real issue, which would be a little heavy, a setting in abyss of our own credulity and our submission to the authority of that TV.


But if you want my opinion, this kind of demonstration on the map called, um ... "Scientific" (of course if one believes that the field of human behavior can be reduced to a behaviorist always positivist side) does not show. Issues of zero-sum thinking, just the show.
Whatever "balance sheet" which will be drawn, I do not give any credit, because in my case, it is nice game I give no authority, no legitimacy nor the tests, nor on TV, or psychologists and sociologists-advertising toothpaste.
Thanks anyway for the opportunity to say so. It was fun, nothing more. But seriously, we can do better: I am a hoax simmering with onions when you want, and far more credible. You know where to reach me. In advance, thank you.


PS: Chris "Nick" (the misnamed, because no "picnic" not who wants), and the specialist Stanley Milgram, whose name is not for me right now, tsssss.


But shame on the "significant" (academic and others) that lent themselves to this farce on the board. Ç has speaks volumes about the irrelevance of their own work and their incompetence in their field. When it is indeed to assume that people are stupid enough to swallow all these stereotypes of psycho-sociology formatted 50s (to the point of being unable to place these demonstrations belaboured smokers and on occasion a docudrama video gag-worthy), it has only shaved the walls. "


" - jerzy @ pericolosospore, should stop drinking and take the products ... must go to bed the ... "


" - I go to bed late on Friday and I do not drink.

For products, submit the question to Michael Eltchaninoff, French philosopher, co-author with Nick's bestseller published in early March: "Experience extreme " more and better qu'Ushuaia Doctor Mabuse together, account of a mind-blowing experience-survey, to Stephen King, that nobody saw coming in the scientific community, and who will yet shake thoroughly, fortunately preceded already by TV broadcasting documentaries in prime time, and in a few days on France 2, oh joy.


Remember that Michael Eltchaninoff is a major thinkers of our time, the equal of Luc Ferry, a Andre Comte-Sponville or Michel Onfray: author of a booklet published on Dostoevsky in PUF ago 10 years, unfortunately out of print, but better known for the immortal "Bronzer is a Russian specialty standing" and season 1 of "unbearable".


This author as rigorous as facetious did not hesitate to put his skills to the great journalist Christophe Nick, to finally get to the general public and viewers tateuses admirable work of Zeno Ligre of psycho -Sociology Experimental, I appointed the general Jean-Leon Beauvois , keynote speaker in this shocking document, and specialist-mondialo global issues affecting the Manipulatio No, of course.


I did not know yet, I confess, the existence and crucial importance of this "maverick" until I drop, at the moment, the instructions that he devotes Wikipedia. I quote:

"Jean-Leon Beauvois, taking a distance with the meta-theories in a good position [sic] in the scientific and cultural Zeitgeist (interactionism, constructivism, cognitivism, neuro-scientism ...) and asserting his materialism and behaviorism, wanted to develop, with some of his students (number of doctoral students are now university ) [re-sic. What has happened to the other deuce?] , lines of research not dependent on the dogmas of the liberal and individualistic societies, dogmas too often taken by social and psychological sciences, for meta-theoretical truths first. Research topics on which he worked or has driven throughout his career within this concern. They are mainly related to the analysis meta-theoretical, theoretical and experimental investigations of socio-cognitive processes, these processes in which social relations inserting the subjects and objects of knowledge are all constitutive of knowledge generated and / or used as psychological subject and the objects themselves (ternary diagram of knowledge, see 4, 5, 6, 7). His latest book (10 below) inserts a synthesis and analysis work done in a political essay on the historical and social power. "


---> Gee, it's beautiful. I am graduated in phizolofie vaguely, and although I do not "authority" in this area, I am able to confirm that, obviously, despite the faux-scientific Patagonian snoring in this excerpt from the leaflet Wikipedian (in its entirety, it does justice to JL Beauvois, because it is almost as important as that devoted to Galileo or Einstein, or Jean-Baptiste Botul), the work of this laboratory Pico della Mirandola in experimental psychology from front to rear guard spawn truly paths new, with assumptions about the "manipulation" of the subject by the object (and vice versa, as Mark Twain would say) never interviews up to date, or by Gaston Bachelard, nor by Jean Piaget, Karl Popper nor nor by Peter Sellers, nor by Michel Foucault, nor by Dr. Spock.


We had to read it, wait for the remarkable documentary by Christophe Nick, flanked, it has not stressed enough, a Hollywood soundtrack taking, as well as a parallel to Eisenstein would green with envy, which undoubtedly strengthens the impact epistemological powerful drawings by "Shadocks" the great JL Beauvois, contemptuous of totalitarianism manipulator sketch on his table at his fellow-students out any Right-of season 5 Experts.

Like what television leads to everything.


Thank you and goodnight. "




(*** Despite or because of personal investment that requires exacting detail by the urgent task in the show Sebastien P. cultural G. Durand (" the object of scandal "), it will continue to provide weekly programming of" the greatest cabaret in the world ".
Spearheading the fight against nepotism and the privileges," the years happiness will be ensured, as last summer, Olivier Villa, his son)



Addendum analytical vaguely, if at that the irony is not, has never been an effective weapon to resist the exponential spread of stupidity legitimized:

Node of the case, if there is one (I continue to believe in a pseudo-test "abyss" where we believe and test the claims submission to the authority of the viewer of the protocol and interpretation of the figures of "scientific" initiating and framing this issue), c ' is that acquiescence to the contents of the "demonstration" (obedience to authority, namely that of a "game show," a presenter and an audience) just depends on the assumption "meta-theoretical "looks like Beauvois, whereby the viewers watching" experience "and its" interpretation "can not fail to" comply "with the legitimacy and prestige of "science" that says "truth" of the deduction process he himself induced.
And on what basis? All bases are subject to dispute here:

a)
We establish a relationship between structural equivalence "game tv host / candidate" and relationship "scientific / Volunteer tester.

Admittedly evidence here, the context of the "game show" (in this case "press the buzzer") was substituted in the space-time, value and effect comparable , context test Milgram.

Based on the equivalence of this whimsical and haphazard implementation, we "built" device "test" is supposed to measure immediately the same effects induced by the same causes.

b)
But in terms of behaviorist premise of Milgram himself, independently operated by fraudulent equivalences, already a problem arose: as measured at fair test Milgram? Was it always like that Milgram asked his hypothesis, soon emerged as "given" basic indisputable: the submission to "authority" learned "- the subject presumed to know - which gives guidelines? What do we know about? Induced reactions could be interpreted otherwise.

For example: what would it be the "bid" and "obedience" is it identifiable with the "submission"?
The guy who executes instructions, even the most unspeakable, is that necessarily the bid is at stake? The alleged abdication of personal responsibility, secondarisée in a chain of responsibility upstream and fragmented, that it mean "submission"? It became a sort of "ready to think" from Arendt's writings (at least we keep it general) about "the banality of evil" and officials of the Nazi state.

But it is a rather weak assumption that rely, in the range of decisions an "official" within a framework of "x" state crime, a "loss of autonomy "the subject, interpreted in terms of" submission / obedience ". Why would it matter by then deprived of his liberty and his choice? It is quite possible to act with responsibility and full conviction, joining a cause or a world view he believes is right and legitimate in the name of "good".
And it's much more alarming than simply "Abdicating" his responsibility and to submit, and much less easy to excuse. Zeal is also the case of the zealots, and zealots is not difficult to find in a society that spends his time defining and delineating an "axis of good", "axis of evil", a specific category of people designated to stigmatization, demonization, the characteristics of a radical alterity whereby the other, as another sort of defined forms of empathy, is more identifiable with a " alter ego. " The immigrants, the unemployed, etc..
Onem the officer who applied to controlled the sanction of deprivation of unemployment benefits, deciding on the basis of quantitative and "objective" in his list that he does not meet the conditions for "actively seeking employment and permanent" applies does He and the directives of the Ministry of Employment and authoritative secondarisation his "subjectivity", or he believes in personal conscience, from his position as an employee, especially employee contracted and poorly paid a thankless job, that does indeed deserve not controlled its benefits? Etc..

c) The hilarious
"specialist" Jean-Leon Beauvois brandishes eloquent, moving it himself (or pretending) and raved like a magician hypnotized to pulling rabbits out of his own hat fake, its battery worn concepts, so impressive and so spectacular: "totalitarianism", "handling" and big brother television company.

is more than a little weak and easy as we wondered for a moment, in the terms mentioned above, the pseudo-evidence of causality posed between "obedience" and "submission ", and therefore we also reflects more contemporary analysis (beyond the eternal scheme of pontificating "totalitarianism" and "loss of autonomy of the subject"), Foucault and others, showing that operating procedures are now more power to the logic of decentralization, dispersion, and most are integral processes "subjectification" free and intimate, much more efficient than the old stuff of alienation vertical (constant value of responsibility, conscience autonomously, assertiveness, personal initiative, of "resilience" - as it was discussed here ).


d)

- In the case of this issue, not only what kind of presuppositions ethological "ready to think" organizes the material conditions of the alleged "experience", but its protocol is nothing "scientific", despite evidence that the supposedly shared psycho-sociology behaviorist based on the establishment of panels, according to statistical frequencies representative of a "population" "standard: how the" candidates "are they representative of a" standard "and on what basis this" standard "was supported?

The candidates were selected randomly according to a procedure of "competition" spontaneous: they are "representative" of anything. But even in the case - not proven - the establishment of a target audience recruited by some unknown statistical panel, the panel itself would participate in the enactment of the arbitrary "standard" in terms that recognizes as legitimate only on the basis of the authority not discussed the psycho-sociology "scientific" operating here his inductions.

So in the best case, whatever the content inferred from what is called "result" of the test according to the interpretative assumptions discussed here, such proof rests entirely on the premise - which is a consensus - a submission to the authority of "scientific expertise" that says the "real" and creates the conditions for "true".


0 comments:

Post a Comment