Let me fire up Jupyter to make it pseudo-formal...
-
-
Replying to @generativist @Aelkus
Er, actually, I'll save that for later, since I'm re-projecting my dissertation to a new medium which will do a better job anyway. Informally...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @generativist @Aelkus
Let's say there is a context with associated beliefs. You express an opinion on one of the associated beliefs. It matches mine, constrained to that belief. But, I select a different associated belief. My expression matches yours, had you been constrained to that belief.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @generativist @Aelkus
But, which ones you select convey information about the relationships *between* beliefs, which is what we really care more about. It's how we navigate implications. But, it's hard to share those things, so we look for cues in selection.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @generativist @Aelkus
So, when people think, "oh those two people are talking past each other, but they really agree," they're making a mistake. They agree over an artificial, constrained projection; but their mental models disagree, as evidenced by expressive propensities.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @generativist @Aelkus
It's also the place where so much fuckery hides because it's the hardest to quantify easily. E.g. GSS/ANES asks "What's your opinion on [X]?" it doesn't observe what beliefs you express and sample from in your life. It measures the wrong thing.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Aelkus
Yea, that works, too. Opinions and other simple expressions convey a lot of information...just not necessarily about the explicit referent. And what we choose to say given agenda power reveals a lot more than given a context prompt.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
The example that I found more compelling was abortion. Fiorina used the GSS data to say, "see, over these seven prompts, people generally agree, in aggregate." Except, no, there is no reason to think "in the wild" people find each particular context equally important.
-
-
Replying to @generativist @Aelkus
We're kind watching that unfold in real-time now, too. Political agents are carving up social groups by signalling which particular context matters to them.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.