this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
10 points (100.0% liked)

badposting

366 readers
7 users here now

badposting is a comm where you post badly

This is not a !the_dunk_tank@hexbear.net alternative. This is not a !memes@hexbear.net alternative. This is a place for you to post your bad posts.

Ever had a really shitty bit idea? Joke you want to take way past the point of where it was funny? Want to feel like a stand-up comedy guy who's been bombing a set for the past 30 minutes straight and at this point is just saying shit to see if people react to it? Really bad pun? A homemade cringe concoction? A cognitohazard that you have birthed into this world and have an urge to spread like chain mail?

Rules:

  1. Do not post good posts.
    • Unauthorized goodposting is to be punished in the manner of commenting the phrase "GOOD post" followed by an emoji that has not yet been used in the thread
    • Use an emoticon/kaomoji/rule-three-abiding ASCII art if the rations run out
  2. This is not a comm where you direct people to other people's bad posts. This is a comm where you post badly.
  3. This rule intentionally left blank.
  4. If you're struck for rule 3, skill issue, not allowed to complain about it.

Code of Conduct applies just as much here as it does everywhere else. Technically, CoC violations are bad posts. On the other hand: L + ratio + get ~~better~~ worse material bozo

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
TomboyShulk@hexbear.net
WhyEssEff@hexbear.net
ZoomeristLeninist@hexbear.net
gaycomputeruser@hexbear.net
gaystyleJoker@hexbear.net
10
For a Donald Rumsfeld epistemology (hexbear.net)
submitted 1 year ago by Zeronelite@hexbear.net to c/badposting@hexbear.net
3 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I believe there is a gaping hole in the field of epistemology, particularly in how it categorizes knowledge. We all know philosophers are liars by nature, so why not take from the philosopher in american history, Daniel Rumsfeld.

To quote him directly, "As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know."

Slavoj Žižek himself has spoken on the fourth category here, the unknown known.

"If Rumsfeld thinks that the main dangers in the confrontation with Iraq were the 'unknown unknowns', that is, the threats from Saddam whose nature we cannot even suspect, then the Abu Ghraib scandal shows that the main dangers lie in the "unknown knowns"—the disavowed beliefs, suppositions and obscene practices we pretend not to know about, even though they form the background of our public values."

In today's world where all facts are up for debate, where unknown unknowns are the greatest threats of all (not known knowns such as human-caused climate change), our best chance for survival is to adopt this framework.

What do you think?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We need to add a third axis

Known known knowns - The known category of facts that are established to be known
Known known unknowns - The known category of possibilities established to be unknown
Known unknown unknowns - The known category of possibilities not yet established or theorized
Known unknown knowns - the known category of unspoken beliefs, practices, and behaviors which are declared to not exist officially.

Unknown known knowns - The category of known facts that is not known to be a category
Unknown known unknowns - The category of possibilities that could be categorized as unknown but is not yet known as a category
Unknown unknown knowns - Ideology
Unknown unknown unknowns - beanis

[–] comrade_pibb@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

You had me at beanis