Psychology Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Context, context dependency: sentences, words and texts depend to a varying extent on the addition of additional information to eliminate ambiguities. In particular, the use of index words such as "here", "now", but also of pronouns like "mine" leads to indeterminacy of the reference. The additional information may possibly be taken from an already existing information set, whereby the sentences to be examined, words or texts, form a subset of this more comprehensive set. Such a more comprehensive amount of information already existing elsewhere is called context. See also dependency, ambiguity, indeterminacy, discovery._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Jonathan Zittrain on Context/Context Dependence - Dictionary of Arguments
I 229 Context/internet/free speech/Zittrain: Contextualization suggests that the aim of an informational system should be to allow those who are characterized within it to augment the picture provided by a single snippet with whatever information, explanation, or denial that they think I 230 helps frame what is portrayed. Civil libertarians have long suggested that the solution to bad speech is more speech while realizing the difficulties of linking the second round of speech to the first without infringing the rights of the first speaker.(1) […]There is also the worry that the fog of information generated by a free-for-all is no way to have people discern facts from lies. Generative networks invite us to find ways to reconcile these views. We can design protocols to privilege those who are featured or described online so that they can provide their own framing linked to their depictions. This may not accord with our pre-Web expectations: it may be useful for a private newspaper to provide a right of reply to its subjects, but such an entity would quickly invoke a First Amendment—style complaint of compelled speech if the law were to provide for routine rights of reply in any but the narrowest of circumstances.(2) And many of us might wish to discuss Holocaust deniers or racists without giving them a platform to even link to a reply. The Harvard Kennedy School’s Joseph Nye has suggested that a site like urban legend debunker snopes.com be instituted for reputation, a place that people would know to check to get the full story when they see something scandalous but decontextualized online.(3) >Misinformation, >Fake news, >Social media, >Social networks, >Internet, >Internet culture. 1. See, e.g., RICHARD DELGADO & JEAN STEFANCIC, UNDERSTANDING WORDS THAT WOUND 207 (2004). 2. This kind of compelled speech would not be unprecedented. For much of the twentieth century, the FCC’s Fairness Doctrine forced broadcasters to air controversial public interest stories and provide opposing viewpoints on those issues. See Steve Rendall, The Fairness Doctrine: How We Lost It and Why We Need It Back, EXTRA!, Jan./Feb. 2005, http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2053. Under President Reagan, the FCC repealed this doctrine in 1987. Id. Despite this administrative change, the Supreme Court has consistently interpreted the First Amendment to include the right not to speak in a line of compelled speech cases. See, e.g., Keller v. State Bar of Cal., 496 U.S. 1 (1990) (holding that lawyers could not be forced to pay bar association fees to support political messages with which they disagreed); Abood v. Detroit Bd. of Educ, 433 U.S. 915 (1977) (holding that teachers could not be forced to pay union fees to support political messages with which they disagreed). 3. Posting of Joseph Nye to The Huffington Post, Davos Day 3: Internet Privacy and Reputational Repair Sites, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-nye/davos-day-3-inter-net-pri_b_39750.html (Jan. 26, 2007, 18:14 EST)._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Zittrain I Jonathan Zittrain The Future of the Internet--And How to Stop It New Haven 2009 |
||
> Counter arguments against Zittrain
> Counter arguments in relation to Context/Context Dependence
