Conversational AE (APPLIED EPISTEMOLOGY)

[Mick Harper]

We do not have many exchanges with our opponents--they make sure of that, and quite properly so from their point of view. Not so much because they would lose the argument, they never believe they have, but because it gives us undue recognition by engaging with us at all.

This cuts down on our own opportunities for Hegelian advance. So we have to make them up--or at any rate expand ones that have happened in embryo. I'll put a few up that have come my way, starting with this classic
-----------

AE-ist: Glastonbury Tor is artificial.
Geologist: Nonsense, the geology is entirely natural.
AE-ist: How can you tell?
Geologist: It's obvious.
AE-ist: Humour me, I'd like to know, not being a geologist.
Geologist: Well, I wouldn't know off hand, I'd have to consult a specialist.
AE-ist: You mean it's not the sort of basic information that a Professor of Geology would know?
Geologist: Well, this Professor of Geology certainly doesn't know.
AE-ist: So who would you consult? What is the name of the specialty that decides on such matters.
Geologist: That I couldn't say.
AE-ist: So you won't be able to?
Geologist: I don't intend to waste a lot of time finding out something that's obvious.
AE-ist: So you know that much anyway. Cheers.

This was before AI so he could look it up with a dab on the mouse. But he won't because it will either be a waste of time or he will feel foolish. I could look it up but I won't because it will either be a waste of time or I will feel foolish.

[Mick Harper]

Media bloke: I loved your first book. I'm sure we can work something out.
AE-ist: It's a bit old hat for me, I'm afraid. What about my last book? I'd be interested in doing something with that.
Media bloke: A bit off the wall, not for us.
AE-ist: The first one was off the wall.
Media bloke: Maybe, but I thought it was spot on.
AE-ist: Surprising really, you not having a background in the field.
Media bloke: You explained it so well.
AE-ist: I used the exact same techniques in the second book.
Media bloke: Sorry, but I didn't think it hung together at all.
AE-ist: Still, that is strange.
Media bloke: What is?
AE-ist: Well, you could see one worked and the other didn't, not knowing anything about either. Yet I couldn't see it despite having made myself a bit of an expert on both.
Media bloke: That's the way it is, I guess. Oh, and by the way I did study that one at university. You know, the basics.
AE-ist: So you're not prepared to take my word for it and greenlight a treatment?
Media bloke: You've got to go with your gut in this business.

And all the other books/YouTubes from then on as well. People who think you're a right sharpie one day, think you turn into a complete dope the next.

[Mick Harper]

Civilian: Your whole theory depends on ocean water not evaporating. I'm not going to give house room to something that breaks the most elementary laws of physics.
AE-ist: You are absolutely certain it breaks the laws of physics?
Civilian: You can demonstrate it in the lab.
AE-ist: Not on an oceanic scale, you can't.
Civilian: I'm sure they've measured it at sea. It would be a doddle for oceanographers.
AE-ist: But you don't know whether they have or they haven't.
Civilian: Obviously not. Why would I?
AE-ist: And you don't intend to check?
Civilian: You check, it's your theory.
AE-ist: I have done so now. They couldn't. Hello, are you still there...

This is more or less verbatim.

[Mick Harper]

AE-ist: Have they nailed down that it really is the greenhouse effect that's causing global warming?
Professional Greenie: Of course they have. It's been unarguable science for thirty years.
AE-ist: You know that isn't true.
Professional Greenie: Well, argued by climate deniers.
AE-ist: No, I mean that it is science. One thing you can't do with the earth is replicated experiments.
Professional Greenie: Scaled up from lab modelling.
AE-ist: I doubt they've even done that. It would be featured in telly documentaries constantly.
Professional Greenie: We know enough chemistry. And physics.
AE-ist: We know sod all about the workings of the upper atmosphere.
Professional Greenie: Everyone professionally concerned is satisfied.
AE-ist: But as you say, it is unargued.
Professional Greenie: What's that supposed to mean?
AE-ist: Nobody's been arguing about a theory to which some doubt must attach.
Professional Greenie: So what?
AE-ist: Since it is the future of the human race one would think a few resources would be devoted to possible alternative explanations. Just in case.
Professional Greenie: They probably are.
AE-ist: So why haven't they come up with anything? We'd surely have heard if they had. We would sure as hell hear if they hadn't.
Professional Greenie: I don't know.
AE-ist: I do.

[Mick Harper]

AE-ist: Why do you think they haven't found any evidence of an early medieval monastery on Lindisfarne?
Professor of Archaeology: Our resources are limited.
AE-ist: Limited to thirty two excavations in the last twenty-five years, you mean?
Professor of Archaeology: It's the rub of the green.
AE-ist: It's a very small island.
Professor of Archaeology: Well, that's the way it is. We know it's there because of the historical evidence.
AE-ist: How many excavations will it take before you question the historical evidence?
Professor of Archaeology: There is no upper limit. We are not permitted, by academic convention, to question another discipline's findings.
AE-ist: When you're in a hole, stop digging.

[Mick Harper]

Him: You must be a Russian troll to write this bollocks.
Me: I can think of at least two more likely explanations.
Him: Such as?
Me: I don't know as much as you do about the Ukraine War.
Him: That's certainly true judging from your Ukraine posts.
Me: I'm just all round less smart than you.
Him: I wouldn't be surprised. I've read some of your other stuff.
Me: To sum up: I could be a troll, or I could be ignorant, or I could be stupid.
Him: What's your point?
Me: You have evidence for my ignorance and stupidity, you have no evidence for me being a Russian troll.
Him: Where is this leading?
Me: Now you know all this and agree with it, would you mind apologising for calling me a troll. Please ensure the apology is sufficiently heartfelt to prevent me making a formal complaint to the Site Administrators that you have unwarrantably accused a fellow-member of a criminal offence which, I understand, would result in you being summarily ejected.

[Grant]

I've published so much pro-Russian stuff on the internet. My Twitter avatar used to be Putin!

But never once has anyone offered to pay me a penny for writing it. Those Russians are mean.

[Mick Harper]

[Mick Harper]

Polemics 101

[Mick Harper]

AE-ist: According to neo-Darwinist theory all species must experience a period of time when they co-exist with the species that gave rise to them.
Academic Biologist: Obviously, it's unavoidable.
AE-ist: That period might be short, it might be indefinitely long.
Academic Biologist: For sure.
AE-ist: So all species can be divided into two categories: those whose ancestral species is still around and those whose ancestral species is extinct.
Academic Biologist: I've never thought of it in those terms but, yes, that must be so.
AE-ist: Including right now.
Academic Biologist: Of course.
AE-ist: Can you name a species in the first category (and provide the name of the ancestral species). Please avoid any species that has a connection with human domestication activities.
Academic Biologist: Not offhand, no. As I said, it's not something I've ever felt a pressing need to consider. I'll send you an email.
AE-ist: I think you'll find you won't.

[Mick Harper]

AE-ist: According to linguistic theory all languages have evolved from previous languages.
Academic Linguist: Apart from the first one.
AE-ist: So all languages must experience a period of time when they co-exist with the language that gave rise to them.
Academic Linguist: Obviously, it's unavoidable.
AE-ist: That period might be short, it might be indefinitely long.
Academic Linguist: For sure.
AE-ist: So all languages can be divided into two categories: those whose ancestral language is still around and those whose ancestral language is extinct.
Academic Linguist: I've never thought of it in those terms but, yes, that must be so.
AE-ist: Including right now.
Academic Linguist: Presumably.
AE-ist: Can you name a language in the first category (and provide the name of the ancestral language). Please avoid languages that have commercial, sacerdotal or artificial associations or that you speak yourself as a mother tongue.
Academic Linguist: Not offhand, no. As I said, it's not something I've ever felt a pressing need to consider. I'll send you an email.
AE-ist: I think you'll find you won't.

[Mick Harper]

AE-ist: Would you say, generally speaking, we are roughly equal in terms of intelligence and general education?
Mug Punter: I wonder sometimes, but yes, I suppose so.
AE-ist: In that case, why do you think we keep disagreeing?
Mug Punter: You're a twat. Sorry but that's the way it seems to me. You keep saying such silly things.
AE-ist: You mean I'm constantly wrong?
Mug Punter: And how.
AE-ist: Otherwise you would change your position, wouldn't you?
Mug Punter: That'll be the day.
AE-ist: So when I say A and you say not-A, all things being equal, either one of us might be right. It's fifty-fifty.
Mug Punter: In theory.
AE-ist: But of course we might both be wrong.
Mug Punter: Is this going somewhere?
AE-ist: You have agreed then that so far as theoretical proposition A is concerned, the possibility you are wrong is slightly more likely than that you are right.
Mug Punter: All things being equal.
AE-ist: But as you say, 'we keep disagreeing'. On A, B, C, D, E .... n. How do you account then for the fact that, despite having a slightly more than 50/50 chance of being wrong on each occasion, you have never been wrong?
Mug Punter: Like I say, it's because you're a twat.
AE-ist: A twat of equal intelligence and education as yourself.

[Mick Harper]

Random member of group: So we're all agreed. How are we going to pay for it?
AE-ist member of group: The poorest member pays for the whole thing.
Random member: Typically stupid. Tell us why, we know you're dying to.
AE-ist: The overall sum is too small to worry about so it is easiest if one person pays.
Random member: In that case, why not the richest of us?
AE-ist: Do you know who that is?
Random member: No.
AE-ist: Nobody does. But we know who the poorest is and he doesn't seem to mind.
Random member: Ridiculous. I'll pay the initial amount and send everyone an email with my bank details and what each of you should contribute. Don't worry, I'll send reminders if you forget. Then I'll do the same every... I think it's every three months. Agreed?
Members: Agreed!
AE-ist: A shame. I wanted to keep control.

[Mick Harper]

(Friendly) Academic: The trouble with you is that you spend so long hanging out with the crazies you've become one yourself.
AE-ist: The trouble with you is that you spend so long hanging out with academics you've become one yourself.
Academic: Don't be facile. Right or wrong, academics have at least gone through a certain number of rationality gatekeepers.
AE-ist: Far too many. You all go through the same ones, you all end up in the same position. A recipe for not being able to tell what is right or wrong.
Academic: I'd prefer to call it 'checks and balances' but I'm not prepared to go down that road again with you.
AE-ist: Fair enough, but you'd have to concede it is not a recipe for radical thinking.
Academic: Thank God for that from what I see produced on the internet every day.
AE-ist: You don't believe in supping with the Devil, no matter how long the spoon?
Academic: By definition, no.
AE-ist: We don't believe in devils. Or anything else supernatural.

[Mick Harper]

AE-ist: Where does the term Middle Ages hail from?
AI: The term "Middle Ages" was coined by Italian humanists during the Renaissance, in the 15th and 16th centuries.
AE-ist: And why on earth would they do that, pray?
AI: They viewed this period as a "middle time" between the perceived greatness of classical antiquity and their own era, which they believed marked a rebirth of civilization.
AE-ist: Ooh, get them. Cheeky mares. But do go on.
AI: Specifically, the Latin term "media tempestas" ("middle season") first appeared in 1469. Later, variants like "medium aevum" (first recorded in 1604) and "media saecula" (first recorded in 1625) emerged.
AE-ist: Yes, yes, but when did it go mainstream?
AI: The historian Leonardo Bruni was the first to use a tripartite periodization (ancient, medieval, and modern) in his 1442 work, History of the Florentine People. This model became standard after the 17th-century German historian Christoph Cellarius also adopted this three-period division.
AE-ist: No, I mean really mainstream. You know, in English.
AI: The term medium aevum in Latin was Anglicized as "middle ages" in 1618. The adjective "medieval" (or "mediaeval"), meaning pertaining to the Middle Ages came into wider use in the 19th century.
AE-ist: So if the Middle Ages stretched all the way from Rome to the Renaissance, when the hell was the Dark Age?
AI: The Renaissance, often seen as a distinct period, actually overlapped with the Late Middle Ages (1300-1500), with some scholars like Petrarch contrasting the "light" of the Renaissance with the perceived "darkness" of the preceding centuries.
AE-ist: Surely the Dark Ages did not extend until 1300?
AI: The term "Dark Ages" is also associated with the Middle Ages, particularly the early part, but is now less frequently used due to its negative connotations.
AE-ist: I don't understand. What business is it of historians to start making judgements based on 'negative connotations'. If it's 'dark', it's dark and that's an end to the matter.
Academic historian: We do not employ the term Dark Age at all, it would be considered a gross breach of correct terminology. What in common parlance might be referred to as the Dark Age is the Early Middle Age, an adjunct to the Late (sometimes 'High') Middle Age.
AE-ist: So it wasn't dark at all?
Academic historian: We deplore such vulgar generalisations, preferring to emphasise the continuity of history between the end of the Roman Empire in the West c 400 AD and the Renaissance c 1450 AD.
AE-ist: What about the continuity of history between the Roman Empire and these Early Middle Ages of yours, after 400 AD? In the West.
Academic historian: I couldn't say, it's not my field. You would have to take the matter up with Classicists.