Blogosphere: A need for counterpoint

[coberst]

Blogosphere: A need for counterpoint

 

The counterpoint to emotional, narrow, partisan, and temporally momentary exhortations is: rational, fundamental, universal, and designed temporally to be intellectual considerations for all seasons.

 

The counterpoint I suggest is that of criticism as defined by Matthew Arnold 1828-1888: Arnold says “I am bound by my own definition of criticism: a disinterested endeavor to learn and propagate the best that is known and thought in the world.”

 

It appears that most people consider the Internet not to be a congenial media for rational discourse. I think that such need not be the case. I suggest that we, who find the Internet discussion forum to be a useful venue for all kinds of discourse, attempt to test that Internet forum for use as a means to perform the type of criticism Arnold defines.

 

Arnold’s form of criticism is designed to serve, not an immediate need for society enhancement but to serve, as an instrument for laying a concrete foundation for all seasons.

 

The results of this form of criticism depend upon the critiquing agent becoming a grounding source for the best knowledge available. Arnold does not mean the best information available but he means the best knowledge, which is founded on the best understanding available. Just as it is possible to reach all the way back to mid-nineteenth century England for the best, the critic needs to prepare him or her self for such a role by a life time of self-actualizing self-learning.

 

The ideas and quotes are taken from “Essays in Criticism” by Matthew Arnold 1828-1888. A web site that speaks about this renowned poet and critic can be found at http://www.english-literature.org/essays/arnold.html

 

I want to make the blogosphere into a logo sphere! Do you find appeal in this appeal?

[Tormod]

I am not sure what you mean by

 

I suggest that we, who find the Internet discussion forum to be a useful venue for all kinds of discourse, attempt to test that Internet forum for use as a means to perform the type of criticism Arnold defines.

 

Can you give an example?

 

I find your posts on critique highly interesting and though provoking.

[coberst]

Tormod

 

What I suggest is that those people who wish to develop a strong intellectual life as a hobby might find it to be good both for the person and also for the community. With the knowledge and understanding one could take it upon them self to post essays on forums that express not the practical side of solving today’s problems but the intellectual side of the matter.

 

Arnold was a poet and a critic and his technique and advice to others is to approach the matter not by joining in to the practical and often partisan debate but to provide fundamental insights based upon the best knowledge that is available in the world and thus to provide food for new ideas about solutions for problems.

 

I just checked Arnold’s book out from the library last week and discovered as I read that he was suggesting just exactly what I have been trying to do for the last 30 months. You can read virtually any of my posts and they represent what I think Arnold was suggesting. I am suggesting that others develop a hobby of developing an intellectual life and use that knowledge to post their thoughts.

[TheBigDog]

The art of unbiased news reporting is going the way of the Dodo. The blogosphere allows us to abondon unbiased as a standard and let individuals report whatever mixture of opinion, fact and propaganda that they see fit. It is the free market of information and it will continue to evolve. The down side of this is that you need to be selective about your sources, and the best you can hope for is to find ones that are consistant.

 

If I have a set of facts, and ten other people have that set of facts. And I can then read how each of those ten people described those facts, then I get an understanding of people who think like me, and people who do not. Even then there is always some variation, as there is propably nobody who sees everything exactly the same way that I do. But by recognizing commonalities between myself and others I can build a level of trust in their analysis because I so often find it in alignment with my own. In the blogosphere there is far more information that anyone can ever read. So you need to have a pocket full of reliable ones, and a bunch that you are evaluating all the time.

 

Am I saying that I let other people think for me? No. I am saying that there are people who's opinions are so ordinarily similar to mine that I would defer to their interpretation until I have had an opportunity to examine the facts in closer detail for myself.

 

It is also handy with the blogosphere to sample sites that are typically in discord with you. They often present facts that your otherwise reliable sources are not addressing in their analysis. Although often they have the same facts, but just see radically different priority in what they mean to the root issue. But that is the nature of opinion.

 

Bill