D&D and the rising pandemic

[Snarf Zagyg]

It is my observation that metaphors are useful primarily a tool for instruction, rather than discussion. In instruction, the metaphor can be used to introduce a broad concept, followed with further detail, which eventually supplants that introduction in the student's mind. In discussion, however, the speaker is not positioned to follow with sufficient detail before the other participants engage - the metaphor does not get supplanted, and the discussion becomes about the metaphor, instead of the following details that never came about.

I don't agree with this, but only because you are using discussion as a synonym for argument.

Instruction (or learning) does not have to be from the position of principal/agent or teacher/student. Instead, it often works well in a multi-modal approach ... assuming people that are engaged are listening.

In real life (as you later put it), I have many discussions with people in which I both instruct and learn; the internet tends to disfavor this type of discussion. Most people eschew learning in favor of argument.

 

[J.Quondam]

I read something just now that I had to post here-

Something I’ve noticed in recent years that Wu didn’t get into is that readers desire precision in metaphors and analogies, even though metaphor is — by definition! — not supposed to be taken literally. People seem much more interested in taking analogies apart, identifying what doesn’t work, and discarding them rather than — more generously and constructively IMO — using them as the author intended to better understand the subject matter. The perfect metaphor doesn’t exist because then it wouldn’t be a metaphor.

(h/t kottke.org)

This was posted as an observation about the pandemic, but this also encapsulates, perfectly, a feeling I've had when having discussions on the internet. A truly good metaphor or analogy can be used to illuminate; they are the perfect mechanism when you are trying to explain something in order to get a concept across.

But far too often, internet discussions are not conversations and are not viewed (by many people) as an attempt to understand something, but instead as attempt to battle it. So instead of attempting to see the utility (even if limited) of the analogy, all the effort is put into rubbishing it because ... the analogy is not, and cannot be, the same as whatever is being discussed. sigh

I think the perfect metaphor for this is like when druids wear metal armor.

 

[Janx]

Not at all. Those traditions are strongly in the teacher/student mode. The teacher asks, 'What is the sound of one hand clapping," and then sends the student go and meditate on it instead of allowing the student to pose inquiries.

On these boards, nobody takes the student role.

you know, it's funny you say that, because between this side-topic here and in the What If, there are countless threads on EN World over the last 20 years where I was wrong and you changed my mind. From simple facts to philosophical stances.

I learn stuff from you all the smurfing time.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I read something just now that I had to post here-

Something I’ve noticed in recent years that Wu didn’t get into is that readers desire precision in metaphors and analogies, even though metaphor is — by definition! — not supposed to be taken literally. People seem much more interested in taking analogies apart, identifying what doesn’t work, and discarding them rather than — more generously and constructively IMO — using them as the author intended to better understand the subject matter. The perfect metaphor doesn’t exist because then it wouldn’t be a metaphor.

(h/t kottke.org)

This was posted as an observation about the pandemic, but this also encapsulates, perfectly, a feeling I've had when having discussions on the internet. A truly good metaphor or analogy can be used to illuminate; they are the perfect mechanism when you are trying to explain something in order to get a concept across.

But far too often, internet discussions are not conversations and are not viewed (by many people) as an attempt to understand something, but instead as attempt to battle it. So instead of attempting to see the utility (even if limited) of the analogy, all the effort is put into rubbishing it because ... the analogy is not, and cannot be, the same as whatever is being discussed. sigh

This is also true of hyperbole. It's an intended exaggeration for effect. People on the internet tend to treat it like it is a bad thing (in and if itself and not just when used poorly) and intentionally call it out and argue with it, even when knowing full well that it was intended as an exaggeration. In my mind if both parties know what is being said, then there is no sense in arguing about how it's said. (Within reason, of course).

 

[Umbran]

I don't agree with this, but only because you are using discussion as a synonym for argument.

No, I am not. I note that you might be falling into the very mode you are regretting in the post. How do I know? You are telling me what I mean, rather than asking for clarification with an open mind.

Instruction (or learning) does not have to be from the position of principal/agent or teacher/student.

I would say Learning does not have to be in that form. Instruction largely does. Instruction implies an instructor, and an instructee. There's ways to learn that aren't being instructed.

And this, by the way, is why metaphor doesn't work well in discussion. Our dance here around definitions is equivalent to dancing around a metaphor finding out what the speaker meant by it, and disagreeing over bits.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

No, I am not. I note that you might be falling into the very mode you are regretting in the post. .

uh huh.

I just posted a quote that I thought reflected on how disagreeable discussions on the internet are, and the first thing you did was disagree with it.

I may appreciate the irony differently than you do.

 

[Hussar]

Correct me if I'm wrong about any of this (I have friends who live in Japan and I've been there six or seven times) - As a gaijin, you don't ever even have the option of owning the land, you just have the rights to the house and its use?

This is not true. Foreign people can buy land in Japan just fine.

 

[Hussar]

Not at all. Those traditions are strongly in the teacher/student mode. The teacher asks, 'What is the sound of one hand clapping," and then sends the student go and meditate on it instead of allowing the student to pose inquiries.

On these boards, nobody takes the student role.

Well I’m Japanese education it would be far more likely for the teacher to give you the one true answer that the student must not question and must be able to rote repeat perfectly.

Please don’t get me started about the state of Japanese education.

 

[Hussar]

Note if you don’t mind living in the countryside and you have kids it is entirely possible to get a free house and land in Japan.

When you have a serious aging population problem and your population is predicted to drop in about half in the next generation, all sorts of new problems crop up.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

This is not true. Foreign people can buy land in Japan just fine.

Huh. I guess I was misinformed. So you can do it, but the more reasonable option (cost-wise) is to buy the house without the land, even though it depreciates?