Page 1 of 1 [ 4 posts ] 

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

02 Feb 2015, 10:18 pm

This is the off-topic-topic. Let it wander where it will.

I saw something like this in a discussion between Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss, where they decided to hold a debate, but without a moderator, and let it wander wherever it went. Dawkins' contention was that a moderator often tries to move things along, just when things are getting interesting. I only got to see about 20 min of what looked like an entertaining discussion. I plan to go back and watch the rest.

It's only right that most topics here in PPR stay on-topic, especially in honour of the question or supposition posted by the original poster. But once in a while you see a sub-plot developing that would be interesting to follow, only to see it evaporate, through the want of staying on-topic. People might start a fresh topic off the back of that, but often it fails to maintain the same momentum.

As the title suggest, this is an experiment, but not one with any terms of reference or raison d'être.

## What will the experiment show? Any predictions?

Dawkins and Krauss are philosophically similar and there's a bit of back-slapping between the two, but I wonder how an unmoderated conversation would go between an eloquent atheist and an eloquent theist. Maybe it's a dynamic that happens when two people are setup in front of an audience. They often behave better than if they were just an audience member, or part of a group discussion. If you know you're going to have half of the conversation, you can afford to be more generous or patient.

It's also interesting to watch how an audience reacts to what is said.

I watched an episode of Q&A recently, which had Krauss on it. I had forgotten that Q&A is an Australian production :oops: but was soon reminded. As the opening credits gave way to the clapping audience, I suddenly thought, 'That's a very Australian clap.' It's almost like you can tell the geography of the audience by the sound of their clapping. It was a curious moment.

## Australians, New Zealanders, British, Americans, Japanese, French, Italians and elsewhere... do you know the sound of your own clap? :lol:


_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.


Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

02 Feb 2015, 11:39 pm

Burgerstani here, and I do with shame.

They do when someone shows up, and has done nothing, then look around to see and hear when others start stopping, and the last clapper is frowned upon. It Is more like the wave at a football game. The hotdog vendor is frowned at for ignoring the will of the mass.

They clap like sea lions when the guy with the basket of fish shows up.

When something ends they do not do it for praise, as they are all eyeing the exits.

It is more the canned laughter of a laugh track, a filler, faked response.

It was not always so, old radio, and early TV, a leggy blond in heels and a bathing suit drum major outfit came out holding up a sign, saying Laughter, Applause, where in vaudeville, people yelled out, booed, and made rude noises.

We are half way to Best Korea, were the first who stops clapping vanishes.

I recently proposed a method of overthrowing the government, by going to political speeches and calling out at every pause, Hallelujah! Amen! It does not matter what they say, they are preachifying, speaking in tongues.

Adding a laugh track to politics, the SNL Jihad, would be most effective. Momma Bear Palin was the crossover, politics is now standup.

Praise will destroy them.

In the old days speakers were carried about on the shoulders of the crowd, some to the saloon, some to the cess pool, and some to the County Line. Public Opinion carried a risk factor.

We are the worst example of mass media, conditioned response. Pavlov would be proud.



Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

03 Feb 2015, 6:22 am

Inventor wrote:
Pavlov would be proud.

And the tail wags the dog. Trouble is, the dog wears one of those cone collars.


_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.


Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

03 Feb 2015, 8:31 pm

Is an audience like a street mob? Perhaps it is. Like most things, they're not good or evil of themselves - it's just in how they're used. So a mob of any sort can be 'used' to create destruction, or to sway public opinion, to aid a cause, to prompt individuals to follow the crowd. I guess that's why I don't like crowds - there's a certain conformity expected. Like commuters on a train - don't chat to the person opposite, don't look happy, don't make yourself noticed, don't approach anyone. Heh.. maybe that's why I'm ok with train travel. lol


_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.