|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
 Posted - 11/09/2007 : 18:57:02
|
That's my whole post. It's a word I don't understand; "fr*me". Ran into it a couple of times on pro-evolution sites, but the context didn't much help. Googling didn't help, either, so far.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 11/09/2007 : 20:02:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
That's my whole post. It's a word I don't understand; "fr*me". Ran into it a couple of times on pro-evolution sites, but the context didn't much help. Googling didn't help, either, so far. |
I'm pretty sure it just means "frame" and the obscuring astrix is used to make the point that "framing" (in the sense that creationists do it) is a dirty word. |
 |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 11/09/2007 : 20:43:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by dv82matt
Originally posted by HalfMooner
That's my whole post. It's a word I don't understand; "fr*me". Ran into it a couple of times on pro-evolution sites, but the context didn't much help. Googling didn't help, either, so far. |
I'm pretty sure it just means "frame" and the obscuring astrix is used to make the point that "framing" (in the sense that creationists do it) is a dirty word.
|
Thank you. Would that use of "frames" be as in frameshift mutations? (Damn! I was just chatting with Abbie Smith, who actually used "fr*me," and didn't think to ask her!)
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 11/09/2007 20:49:20 |
|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 11/09/2007 : 21:00:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Thank you. Would that use of "frames" be as in frameshift mutations? (Damn! I was just chatting with Abbie Smith, who actually used "fr*me," and didn't think to ask her!) |
Framing as in setting the terms or context of a debate.
Here's a couple of links I dug up.
One-Stop Shopping for the Framing Science Debate
Framing Science Blog |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 11/09/2007 : 21:19:39 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by dv82matt
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Thank you. Would that use of "frames" be as in frameshift mutations? (Damn! I was just chatting with Abbie Smith, who actually used "fr*me," and didn't think to ask her!) |
Framing as in setting the terms or context of a debate.
Here's a couple of links I dug up.
One-Stop Shopping for the Framing Science Debate
Framing Science Blog
|
Ah, thank you!
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 11/09/2007 : 22:48:54 [Permalink]
|
I'm a late-comer to the "framing" debate within the science and pro-science "community." I do think that I agree with PZ Meyers, though: The major failure of Nisbet's and Mooney's vision is that they seem unable to consider that scientists are capable of or should even try to work for major changes in our culture; we are always to be the ones who must conform to the majority's views, no matter how wrong they are, and we have to be the supplicants who are very careful not to offend and who always beg for scraps in the terms they dictate. Their suggestions are all about tactical poses and completely neglect any long-term strategy or consideration of greater goals than getting by for the day.
I can accept some of their suggestions, but not all. Most importantly, I would emphasize that the role of the public intellectual must be to challenge, not to conform. Yet all I see in their proposal is a policy of appeasement, and nowhere is there an understanding or acknowledgment that scientists must also stretch boundaries, or even break them. |
I would call this position the "Plaisiclast" position. (My attempt at Greek for "Frame-breaking.") When the frame of the debate itself is the problem, the public needs to be educated about that.
Scott Belyea says it well here: I think people are talking past each other.
PZ says framing might be good idea, but why is the only practical application of framing that N&M comes with for PZ and Dawkins to not say their mind?
Isn't M&N to blame for starting on the offence? For the likes of PZ and Dawkins the message IS that religion is the source of much evil, and at the base for antiscience.
Haven't we been blaming the creationists for their big tent philosophy - don't mention yec or oec, just convince everyone that evolution is evil.
Now the first example M&N think of, is for dawkins to not talk about atheism, since people cannot distinguish between his science and his atheism, even though he seperates it in different books.
Yet when Collins mixes religion and science in his books, he is applauded as a god framer? |
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 11/09/2007 22:49:51 |
|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 03:02:02 [Permalink]
|
I'm only just now becoming aware of the framing debate which seems to be about what is the best way to present science and not so much about creationists' dishonest use of framing. PZ Myers, among others, is a bit of a bull in a china shop so I guess some people object to that and think he should be more civil to those he disagrees with.
If the message itself is offensive then there's not much you can do about that but there's no need to create additional offence by the manner it is delivered. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 04:10:43 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by dv82matt
I'm only just now becoming aware of the framing debate which seems to be about what is the best way to present science and not so much about creationists' dishonest use of framing. PZ Myers, among others, is a bit of a bull in a china shop so I guess some people object to that and think he should be more civil to those he disagrees with.
If the message itself is offensive then there's not much you can do about that but there's no need to create additional offence by the manner it is delivered.
|
That makes sense. I would simply hope that silencing PZ or Dawkins for the sake of a "sanitized," watered-down message isn't on anyone's mind. Won't work. These guys have made enormous gains for secular thinking, IMO. In effect, everyone on both "sides" is reacting to them. I would simply hope everyone would speak their minds, and let the chips fall where they may.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
 |
|
What's "fr*me" mean?
