Understanding the Organization of Ideonexus

Posted on 12th September 2004 by Ryan Somma in Ionian Enchantment

“Each of us, at some time in our lives, turns to someone – a father, a brother, a God – and asks, ‘Why am I here? What was I meant to be?'”

– Commander Spock, Star Trek: The Motion Picture

This website is a blog. People create blogs with many different purposes from humor, to espousing their views, to relating their everyday lives. The purpose of this blog is to help me better understand what I believe about the world through communicating it to others.

This blog is an attempt to express the schema of Ryan Somma’s mind. I am a human being with a mercurial belief system that causes me severe identity problems. This site provides a form of therapy for this condition, allowing me to solidify my perceptions and conclusions about the world, defining myself as a person.

Since the brain is where we store all of our life’s data, I decided to structure my ideas in this imaginary web-brain. The left hemisphere is the more logical half of the brain, the right is the more creative, and the corpus callosum sits between them, allowing the hemispheres to communicate with one another.

The Corpus Callosum

This is the main page, where the left and right hemispheres converge. Here the most recent thoughts/articles are listed chronologically. In this site’s header, you will notics an “i” and an “I” pointing to one another. This represents the Cartesian Duality, the perception that our minds are separate from our bodies.

The Left Hemisphere

On the logical side of the brain, I have broken the sections down according to the Scientific Process. That is:

Observations –> Hypotheses –> Experimentation –> Theory

These four steps I have split into two categories. Observations and Hypotheses are “introspective” aspects of the process. They occur inside our minds, therefore I have put them under a section titled “Cognitive Schema,” which is the collection of ideas in our heads.

When it comes time to bring these ideas out into public, we enter “The Memepool,” or public discourse. Through debate we force our ideas through a sort of survival of the fittest. For this reason I have replaced “Experimentation” with “Disputation.” Theories also go here, because they are conclusions I have come to about how the world should work.

The Scientific Process within the Left Brain

The Scientific Process Within the Left Brain

This entire site is nothing but conclusions, so sampling the flavor of the articles in these various categories will give you a better idea of what I put where and why. In each of these categories I have provided “Resources” to increase your knowledge and “Disinformation” to warn you of pitfalls.

The “Concept Map” is also located in this hemisphere. This is not a concept map at all, but merely a database to help you browse all of the site’s articles. One day I would like to have a true Concept Map for this site, but from a programming standpoint, World Peace might be easier to achieve.

The Right Hemisphere

In the creative half of the brain, there is no complex logical structure. There is books “Bibliophilism,” movies “Cinephilism,” and me “Autobiography.” If you like books, check it out. If you like film, check it out. If your curious about the kind of person who would build such a site, check it out.

I will try to contribute to all sections equally. I have a monumental list of articles I want to write for this site, so there will be no end to where this can go.

Enjoy!

Comments Off on Understanding the Organization of Ideonexus

“Your Concept Map is not a Concept Map”

Posted on 11th September 2004 by Ryan Somma in Ionian Enchantment

Excellent Observation!

Visitors to this site will notice that while the “Concept Map” section of the site does provide a list of articles, or concepts, there is no “Map.” This is because I have absolutely no clue how to dynamically generate a true concept map.

A Concept Map is what it sounds like, a map of concepts. It is a visual representation of a web of interrelated ideas. Theoretically, our minds could be expressed in such a diagram, but it would be so vast and complex that constructing it would take an infinite amount of time, because the experience of constructing the map would change the organization of ideas in our own minds, creating an infinite loop. Analyzing your own mind, for the purpose of drawing a schema of it, is not such a good idea.

Detail of My Self-Schema

Detail of my Self-Schema,

a Sub-Domain of my Cognitive Schema

So a Concept Map is an attempt to represent the architecture of the Cognitive Schema. This is purely theoretical, but it does give us the means to illustrate certain aspects of how our minds work and adapt to a changing conceptualization of the world.

Let’s take the implications of a common childhood misconception:

Santa Claus is Real Misconception

“Santa Claus is Real” Misconception and

Other Associations

When the individual holding this misconception learns the truth, emotions and rationalizations create a shockwave of changing associations throughout the Cognitive Schema. In the example below, the individual experiencing the adjustment feels emotionally betrayed and their web of concepts surrounding Santa Claus are distorted through this emotion:

Santa Claus is Not Real

“Santa Claus is Not Real” Revelation and

Resulting Changes to the Concept Map

These shockwaves can extend beyond the initial subject into other sections of the Concept Map:

Don't Trust Parents

Question Authority

…and beyond, ultimately affecting the entire worldview:

God?

God?

The process of challenging our ideas strengthens them. This web site serves as a sort of Concept Map for my Cognitive Schema. Placed on the Web, it enters The Memepool, where it can be subjected to disputation and improvement.

A true Concept Map, dynamically generated, linking the various ideas on this site, would be a great, but also extremely difficult task to accomplish, requiring Flash or Java and a rather advanced Database Architecture.

It would be fun to navigate though, wouldn’t it?

Comments Off on “Your Concept Map is not a Concept Map”

Creative Commons Screenplay: “Schroedinger’s Cat”

Posted on 6th September 2004 by Ryan Somma in Creative Commons Works

Download a free PDF of this screenplay.

Logline:

A man wakes up in a room without an exit and cannot remember who he is. He must piece together the person he used to be and what his role is in this twisted experiment. Only the truth may be too horrifying for him to accept.

Estimated Running Time: 109 Minutes

Creative Commons License
Schroedinger’s Cat by Ryan Somma is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License.

Comments Off on Creative Commons Screenplay: “Schroedinger’s Cat”

A Review of SpinSanity’s “All The President’s Spin”

Posted on 1st September 2004 by Ryan Somma in Mediaphilism

Our goal is to show how Bush has attempted to deceive the nation and why he has escaped serious consequences for doing so. In the process, we hope to spur discussion about a political system under siege by the forces of public relations and spin. Bush may be the current leader of the arms race of deception, but his presidency reveals a deeper problem at the heart of American democracy. (Preface XI)

I am a long time reader of SpinSanity.com. The site was like a long-sought sanctuary in the mad mad world of political punditry. Here was a site that not only deconstructed the rhetorical abuses of pundits I disagreed with, but also revealed the dishonest tactics of people now formerly my political heroes.

SpinSanity is the only place on the Web where liberals and conservatives meet in the comments section to actively discuss the issues of the day. The regulars, Hubris, pyrrho, JD, Batman, Averroes, sweetchuck, hrun, Winston Smith, and many others who are slipping my mind presently are all committed to a constant debate with no end. This is a user community I greatly appreciate for their never-ending disputation and I am thankful to SpinSanity for inspiring it.

“All the President’s Spin” is the first book by SpinSanity’s authors Ben Fritz, Bryan Keefer, and Brendan Nyhan. The introduction points out the author’s past liberal and Democratic political activities but also correctly points out their long record of tackling spin from across the political spectrum, and the resulting hate mail they receive for it. As any regular reader of SpinSanity knows, the comments section of the site is forever being filled with accusations of bias from both liberals and conservatives, and the authors are justified in claiming this attests “to the fact that we effectively challenge the left and right on a regular basis.”


A Bridge Book Masquerading as a Liberal Book

Let me start off with my one criticism: This book will scare away Conservatives. If I were a Bush supporter, I doubt I would have the strength of will to read almost 300 pages of research into the dishonesty of my candidate. To disassociate the individual from their unfair statements requires a level of sophisticated reasoning that very few everyday people possess–even SpinSanity readers. People who support Bush identify with him. Attacking his methods, therefore, becomes an attack on him and then on the individual, who must shut-out SpinSanity as a source to protect their cognitive integrity.

The book’s purpose is much deeper than the mere “Bush Hating” or “Bush Lies” genre of literature so popular at the moment, but addresses a problem that is deteriorating discourse in this country. It is possible to criticize George Bush’s propagandizing and disinformation tactics without coming down so hard on the individual.

So I must criticize the authors for their occasionally insensitive phraseology. For instance: “…the Bush White House’s dishonesty is ultimately different, and more insidious, than that of Reagan or Clinton.” (pg 27) Such a statement might have been better left up to the reader to discern for themselves. The authors certainly have the right to argue the exceptional nature of the Bush Administration’s deceptions, but in the interest of persuading all readers, such a charge might best be left aside.

In a world of red and blue readers who never read the opposition’s books, SpinSanity has written one of the few “Bridge” books that all can enjoy. The propaganda and spin are the enemies, not the individuals disseminating them, and I urge conservatives to read this book with that concept in mind.


Love the Spinner, Hate the Spin

Readers who are able to disassociate the individual from their methods will find this an invaluable resource. Don’t look at this as another “Bush Bashing” book, but rather a case-study in media manipulations and controlling public perceptions. The methods are crafty, shocking, and Bush’s playbook will certainly be used by future administrations to control us. In fact, the authors provide several examples of the proliferation of these deceptive techniques.

In the chapter “Conclusions” the authors come down justifiably hard on liberal institutions such as the Center for American Progress, FrameWorks Institute, and Rockridge Institute, for their “fight fire with fire” approach to Conservative rhetoric.

The chapter on the 2004 Presidential campaigns removes any argument one might make that this book is attempting to turn voters away from Bush. The play by play evaluation of the equally manipulative rhetoric being employed by each candidate is admirably even-handed. The purpose here is not to sway voters, but to help them see through the smokescreens and become better informed. SpinSanity wants their readers to come to a closer understanding of the truth, because substance is the more important than anything else in defining our country’s direction.


Exhaustively Researched, Documented, and Academic

Adhering to a very academic approach, SpinSanity defines what constitutes “Deception” early on (pgs 5-6), and then provides almost nothing but facts. Statistics, public statements, and concise explanations of the rhetoric construct a powerful argument. The references listed in the back of the book are thorough, the most accessible I have ever encountered, and easily verified. SpinSanity has nothing to hide. The authors want us to check their sources, see for ourselves how their research led them to these theories. Such openness in revealing their methods serves as a testimony to their veracity and the veracity they want to promote in America’s political system. These are authors who respect the intelligence of their readers.

SpinSanity also makes excellent use of Historical background. From Wilson and FDR, Kennedy and Nixon, Reagan and Clinton to Bush we see the evolving application of the “permanent campaign,” where the PR power of the Presidential Office is exploited to manipulate the public and Congress. During an account of the Bush administration’s lead-up to the Iraq war, the authors remind us several times that misperceptions of Saddam Hussein’s capabilities were merely an extension of the Clinton administration’s characterizations of them.


Successful Persuasion

A book that makes me see things in a new perspective automatically rises to levels of greatness in my mind. Here the SpinSanity team has caused me to reevaluate my concept of journalistic “objectivity,” making me realize that truly objective news sources merely relay competing statements without context or critical analysis. It’s merely one person’s word against another with no way for the audience to evaluate them.

For this reason, SpinSanity surprises me when they give credit to the left-leaning Washington Post and the right-leaning Fox News for their critical analysis of political statements. The Economist, my personal favorite newsmagazine, also comes out with some praise for its fair-minded libertarian deconstruction of American politics.

I was also impressed with the authors explanation of the dilemma candidates face in regards to their persona and the press. It reminded me of 1988’s “Wimp or Shrimp” characterizations of Bush Sr and Dukakis. In 1996 and 2000, the candidate could either be a slimy dishonest intellectual or a loveable doofus. Which is preferable? Which will earn your statements a free pass with the press?

This is not a book about George Bush. This is a book about rhetoric. That has always been SpinSanity’s mission, to make us aware of how we are being manipulated. I consider SpinSanity’s first book a glowing success in this regard, and I eagerly await their second book, whatever topic they choose to focus on next. One day, I hope to have a small library of their works, what will surely be an invaluable resource in the “arms race” of rhetoric and awareness.

Comments Off on A Review of SpinSanity’s “All The President’s Spin”