Posts by HORansome
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Up Front: Casual, Shallow and Meaningless, in reply to Sacha,
Completely anecdotal data says "Yes." My first years (in a fairly large class so it's an okay sample size[1]) seem to read a lot and very widely, if the books I see them reading is any indication.
1. Of course, my sample is already biased, given that they are uni students.
-
Up Front: Casual, Shallow and Meaningless, in reply to Jackie Clark,
You can get by without small talk: I've managed to initiate friendships and the like by launching straight into the big talk ("Come on, boffins!") by just being disarming (and slightly charming). It probably is a special skill: years of speech and drama coaching (once again, part of my learning to work with my disability) has been useful, but small talk isn't necessary, just sufficient (for some people).
-
Up Front: Casual, Shallow and Meaningless, in reply to BenWilson,
It may be a skill that can be taught but it won't necessarily enrich your life. For example, I can do small talk (indeed, arguably I was taught the how and why of small talk due to my having a speech disability and needing to know ways to get around said disability) but it negatively impacts my life when I use that skill. I hate small talk with a burning passion. It drains my will to live and I can feel myself switch off when that part of my brain activates (it's an innate skill, because it was taught at a young age, so I don't have to work at it). Indeed, my circle of friends are people with whom I do not need to small talk with (which is not to say that they can't engage in small talk), which makes my life immeasurably easier.
-
Hard News: Dropping the Bomber, in reply to Paul Williams,
Maharey would have been an interesting choice, if he had been available.
I've often joked that Clayton Cosgrove should have got the role: he was the most vocal Labour MP in the first few months after Goff was chosen and Clark stood down.
-
Hard News: Dropping the Bomber, in reply to Steve Barnes,
Whilst it's a nice conspiracy theory you have there, Steve, its one that has to go up against the other candidate explanations for the event which aren't conspiratorial at all but focus mostly on how Goff just isn't very good as a parliamentary leader of the Labour Party. Whilst no one can deny that he has spent decades working for the country, that doesn't imply that he's leadership material. Good ministers do not necessarily make good leaders.
Also, your theory is just a bit back to front: Key went into the election, in his current guise, against the previous parliamentary leader (and then Prime Minister), Helen Clark. Key wasn't trying to be Goff: he was trying not to be Clark. It's actually telling that Labour, upon seeing how successful Key was, chose Goff (who I've never particularly liked anyway: he's too right-of-left for my liking) as their contender for next Prime Minister.
As for claiming that Crosby-Textor is telling me what to think about the Labour Party, well, they must have been instructing me since the advent of the Foreshore and Seabed Act (since that was when I gave up on Labour, out of disgust. Possibly even earlier: I almost always votde to the left of Labour when I have had the opportunity). Cunning Australian bastards.
-
Hard News: Dropping the Bomber, in reply to Steve Barnes,
Actually, I think it's quite obvious why Goff isn't playing to a lot of us on the Left: he (and his caucus) is trying too hard to be like John Key and be all things to all people.
-
And, once again, I wish there was a like button for PAS.
-
Hard News: Dropping the Bomber, in reply to BenWilson,
When the thesis is passed in it goes up, electronically, at the UoA library. I'll be posting links to the PDF for all and sundry at that time. Everyone will get to read it.
And, if I have my way, everyone will have to read it.
Muhahahaha.
Whoops, seem to have leaked my evil plan too soon.
-
Hard News: Dropping the Bomber, in reply to Sacha,
Actually, I'm going to tweet the thesis once it's been accepted, sentence by sentence.
Well, except that as it's a philosophy thesis, some sentences might take several tweets...
-
Hard News: Dropping the Bomber, in reply to BenWilson,
I have a soft spot for Feyerabend (although I find it interesting that he's taken as having said philosophers can't describe the scientific method when it really does look like Feyerabend gives a quite good account/description) of scientific methodologies (I think that plural is doing a lot of work there).
And don't talk to me about Popper... I have a chapter chunk devoted to how I think he got conspiracy theories all upside down. That being said, some account of (sophisticated) falsificationism is a useful tool for demarcating between theories you should reasonably accept and theories you should ask for more evidence for (and yes, I have a bit of a chapter about that, too).