Conversational AE (APPLIED EPISTEMOLOGY)

[Wile E. Coyote]

Wiley did his best, but Sir Keir opted for Gorden Brown, as Envoy, on the basis that he needed to appear more forward looking.

Its the death of Cyan Labour.

[Mick Harper]

Before Reform UK adopted the colour, cyan was best known from mentions in CSI shows where it is the colour lips go after strangulation (or something, I rarely pay much attention there are so many one has to keep up with, the latest is CSI Nantucket Lighthouse).

[Pete Jones]

There is certainly an AE principle of voice and tone evident here. Realize that the original interview with Gavin Newsom, the California governor, and Adam Carolla, the comedian, happened in 2013. They don't play it here in the video, but they do play their AI alteration of it.

I think Adam Carolla is essentially an AE-ist, although Mick would exclude him on partisan grounds.

https://youtu.be/xiIt_Rb0oi0?si=rakKe33YR4-ZZ5jy

[Mick Harper]

I would exclude Adam Corolla as an AE-ist because having isolated the problem--Californian blacks and Hispanics are a feckless bunch of idle bums--neither he nor Dr Drew could bring themselves to say what it was. They could delight their audience by showing Newsom was suffering from careful ignoral but they knew they would lose that audience if they said it out loud themselves.

I'd go a bit further and assume Corolla and Drew are too good liberals to even think it.

[Mick Harper]

PS I lost my biggest fan on Medium by describing this exact same scenario when a BBC reporter was in Oakland, California trying to account for why it was the pits, just across from San Francisco, the liberal heaven.

The golden gate came clanging down. It was me in the dock of the bay.

[Mick Harper]

Punter: Why can't we agree to disagree?
AE-ist: Two rational people cannot disagree on the same facts.
Punter: Sure they can.
AE-ist: All right, maybe they can, but the fact of the disagreement is more important than whatever it is they are disagreeing about.
Punter: Why?
AE-ist: Because it indicates that one or both are being irrational.
Punter: In this case surely it is you? It's your opinion on this that would be generally considered fruitcake.
AE-ist: It's true that people spouting fruitcake opinions are irrational in that they are likely to be expressing other people's opinions, not disagreeing 'on the facts'.
Punter: Glad we cleared that up.
AE-ist: But mine is not a fruitcake opinion, is it? You've never heard it before. You are clearly not judging it on the facts, only because you know it to be contrary to general opinion.
Punter: All right, you might or might not be a fruitcake.
AE-ist: No. If I didn't get my opinion from any other source, I must have got it from the facts.
Punter: That doesn't make it true.
AE-ist: I didn't say it did. I'm just saying I am being rational in believing it.
Punter: Bully for you.
AE-ist: But now we come to your position...

[Mick Harper]

Punter: I don't agree with that at all.
AE-ist: Oh, you know more about it than I do, do you?
Punter: Well, no, obviously not if you've been writing a book about it.
AE-ist: So what's your version?
Punter: Oh, I can't remember now. We did it in school.
AE-ist: But you remember it wasn't my version.
Punter: I can definitely remember that much.
AE-ist: So you feel a comprehensive school teacher knows more than I do then?
Punter: He must have studied it at... er... training college.