Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8434383" data-attributes="member: 42582">Well, here we disagree.There is no continuum. There is on continuous sequence. There is no "ordered arrangement" by reference to a particular characteristic (eg the quality, such as colour, that I mentioned).Suppose the question is: should we erect a statue of the Pied Piper in our town park? On that there can be a spectrum of opinion, from very strong yes through the dunno, don't cares to the ardent opposition.Suppose the question is: who should be on the statue to be erected in our town park? If most people think either it should be the Pied Piper or it should be Little Bo Peep, then in a colloquial sense we might have a spectrum of opinion - and in characterising it as such we ignore the small minority who want Robin Hood.But if there are significant blocs of opinion who want, respectively, the Pied Piper, Little Bo Peep, Robin Hood, and Daffy Duck, then what is the spectrum? All we have is variation. But there is no continuum on which all the relevant instances can be located.As I've said, I don't regard this as a merely pedantic point because it occurs in nearly all discussions of the distribution of authority and is used as a premise in arguments that reach false conclusions, such as that the best or indeed only way to reduce GM authority over outcomes is to move to a sandbox: without considering that authority over outcomes is related to (i) authority over backstory and (ii) the role of backstory in adjudication and in framing, in ways that are different in various sorts of non-railroaded play - with a sandbox only being one of those ways.</blockquote>

Verification