Comments on: The Georgetown Cocktail Party Paradox http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/07/21/the-georgetown-cocktail-party-paradox/ Just another geek in the geek kingdom Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:38:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 By: Ottovbvs http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/07/21/the-georgetown-cocktail-party-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-8509 Ottovbvs Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:08:00 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3432#comment-8509 "Barry // Jul 22, 2009 at 10:42 am People can solve many such conflicts by believing whatever they need to keep the money coming." ........Believing your own propaganda you mean...certainly true but the end result is usually a set of mediocrities.....I've worked in both environments and the better run businesses were alway the places where the dissidents could speak up......once the consensus was agreed you had to salute the flag but that's fine......but if you have any competence at all existing forever in a bubble is not very satisfying. Particularly when it involves the total suspension of reality as it does in so many of these cases. “Barry // Jul 22, 2009 at 10:42 am

People can solve many such conflicts by believing whatever they need to keep the money coming.”

……..Believing your own propaganda you mean…certainly true but the end result is usually a set of mediocrities…..I’ve worked in both environments and the better run businesses were alway the places where the dissidents could speak up……once the consensus was agreed you had to salute the flag but that’s fine……but if you have any competence at all existing forever in a bubble is not very satisfying. Particularly when it involves the total suspension of reality as it does in so many of these cases.

]]> By: Barry http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/07/21/the-georgetown-cocktail-party-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-8508 Barry Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:42:15 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3432#comment-8508 People can solve many such conflicts by believing whatever they need to keep the money coming. Those who don't tend to mess up their careers; this has both a weeding-out effect, and a 'warning to others' effect. People can solve many such conflicts by believing whatever they need to keep the money coming. Those who don’t tend to mess up their careers; this has both a weeding-out effect, and a ‘warning to others’ effect.

]]> By: Ottovbvs http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/07/21/the-georgetown-cocktail-party-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-8505 Ottovbvs Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:01:49 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3432#comment-8505 Anyone would think Shilldom was a newly discovered phenomenon. It's been with us ever since the invention of moveable type and monarchs ceased breaking the fingers of over ideological scribes. That people lie for money is nothing new. What surprises me is the degree of compartmentalization that must be required to maintain the pretence. For someone with a fairly high intelligence level, and most professional journalists are fairly bright, the stress must be considerable. Somewhat akin to knowing one's wife is conducting an affair with another man. To take to particularly egregious cases Goldberg and Kristol. Now right wing spinning is a family business in both cases but surely they can't REALLY believe all this stuff. Douhat is mentioned by Friedersdorf and I suspect many of his comments about Douhat's intellectual honesty are probably fairly accurate judging by the abysmal quality of just about every offering of his I've seen in the Times. He along with Brooks is the conservative voice but he's clearly conflicted about it. I actually see something of the same conflict in Brooks sometimes although he's extremely erratic and usually solves the dilemma by disappearing into clouds of social philosophizing. Rather than just the public dissembling, surely the interesting issue is the interior conflicts this must create in all those outside the totally corrupt. Or am I being too kind to the journalistic profession? Anyone would think Shilldom was a newly discovered phenomenon. It’s been with us ever since the invention of moveable type and monarchs ceased breaking the fingers of over ideological scribes. That people lie for money is nothing new. What surprises me is the degree of compartmentalization that must be required to maintain the pretence. For someone with a fairly high intelligence level, and most professional journalists are fairly bright, the stress must be considerable. Somewhat akin to knowing one’s wife is conducting an affair with another man. To take to particularly egregious cases Goldberg and Kristol. Now right wing spinning is a family business in both cases but surely they can’t REALLY believe all this stuff. Douhat is mentioned by Friedersdorf and I suspect many of his comments about Douhat’s intellectual honesty are probably fairly accurate judging by the abysmal quality of just about every offering of his I’ve seen in the Times. He along with Brooks is the conservative voice but he’s clearly conflicted about it. I actually see something of the same conflict in Brooks sometimes although he’s extremely erratic and usually solves the dilemma by disappearing into clouds of social philosophizing. Rather than just the public dissembling, surely the interesting issue is the interior conflicts this must create in all those outside the totally corrupt. Or am I being too kind to the journalistic profession?

]]> By: The Morning Metropolitan « http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/07/21/the-georgetown-cocktail-party-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-8503 The Morning Metropolitan « Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:06:51 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3432#comment-8503 [...] The Georgetown cocktail party, deconstructed. [...] [...] The Georgetown cocktail party, deconstructed. [...]

]]> By: the teeth http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/07/21/the-georgetown-cocktail-party-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-8496 the teeth Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:14:59 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3432#comment-8496 Oh. If you insist on being reasonable & fair-minded that does make much more sense, though in a non-hilarious/awesome way. Oh. If you insist on being reasonable & fair-minded that does make much more sense, though in a non-hilarious/awesome way.

]]> By: Julian Sanchez http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/07/21/the-georgetown-cocktail-party-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-8494 Julian Sanchez Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:36:41 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3432#comment-8494 Err, I was thinking X in the sense of a variable for which one might substitute a D or an R. Err, I was thinking X in the sense of a variable for which one might substitute a D or an R.

]]> By: the teeth http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/07/21/the-georgetown-cocktail-party-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-8492 the teeth Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:01:14 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3432#comment-8492 If the X stands for Xenophobe, that's hilarious & awesome. If the X stands for Xenophobe, that’s hilarious & awesome.

]]>