4 ms·
Amusing, but is this really useful? Most of the people who read this are likely to already agree with the sentiment, and those few who did not yet are convinced
by memetichazard 16y ago
Amusing, but is this really useful? Most of the people who read this are likely to already agree with the sentiment, and those few who did not yet are convinced by reading this are unlikely to have any pull where it matters. (Plus, there was an article recently that suggests that faced with contrary evidence, people will dig their heels even deeper)
And the massive group of people who don't really know anything much about the subject and could be useful if they, the entire group, all read about the issues and thought about it, are hardly likely to read this. (Though I suspect this is the audience that is being targeted, seeing as how the entire article is really just an analogy)
Rather than seeing more of these articles, I'd like to see, oh, arguments that we can use in general regarding such issues.
For instance, someone says (regarding some upcoming restrictive legislation), "Don't worry about it. It doesn't affect you if you have nothing to hide/aren't doing anything wrong". What are the main things you want to say to respond to that?
- slapshot 16y agoVery long and abstract to get the point across. Many people who don't already agree with the confusion will just start fighting the details of the pasta-related hypothetical. To take just one, lots of lawyers will argue that it is already illegal under U.S. anti-trust law to require that buyers bundle a patented good (the pasta makers) and the supplies to run it (wheat). That's why you see generic inkjet cartridges. The actual legal reality is substantially more complex, but it's the sort of trivial detail that will trip people up. A good allegory must be short and simple to understand. Kurt Vonnegut understood this. His allegorical tale of Harrison Bergeron (original: http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html) (summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron) is incredibly simple to understand: in a world of PC gone mad, the government ties weights to the ankles of the best ballet dancers so that nobody is jealous that somebody else dances better. He repeats the tale as applied to intelligence (constant distraction) and good looks (must wear an ugly mask). There's exactly one step in his allegory: if you excel in any way, you'll get punished. You have to write clean crisp allegories like that if you hope to leave a lasting impact. Ten-step tales of patented pasta and wheat and wheat-making machines and so forth just lose too many people in the details.
- yason 16y agothose few who did not yet are convinced by reading this are unlikely to have any pull where it matters All words are golden for someone out there. I might agree with the sentiment, you might as well, my parents might not realize what's going on and never get the article (even if they could read English), many others will disagree, but there will be people who read this and it will light the bulb in their heads, and they will realize: "Fuck, man! This is so true, I knew this is how it is but I just never found the words." Nicely written article, by the way. I didn't even skip to the point, I just first enjoyed reading about pasta.