Several exciting things:
1) My new website is finally live! Take a look at http://www.chrisbenjaminwriting.com/ and let me know what you think. Especially if you find any troubles navigating, errors or uglies. [For those who saw an earlier version, it's worth another look - big changes.]
2) I received this message from Lesley Choyce at Pottersfield Press: "At long last, Nova Scotia: Visions of the Future is about to be released. I’m thrilled with the result. We are launching the book Thursday, July 9, 6-8 pm at Stayner’s Wharf 1781 Upper Water Street, Halifax." This excites me because I have a chapter in this anthology, the result of Lesley's invitation to "some of the best minds (and hearts) around the province to present their vision of this possible province of the future." The unfortunate thing is, I won't be able to make the launch. But, you fair reader may still pre-order your copy online at http://www.amazon.ca/Nova-Scotia-Visions-Lesley-Choyce/dp/1897426070/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1237333996&sr=8-1.
3) My latest column is up at The Coast. I don't like the title they gave it, or the stereotypical drawing they used. But the article itself is about a heroic woman named Cheryl Maloney, who is doing everything in her power to call attention to something no one seems to be thinking about: the fact that First Nations Reserves are extremely vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Yet aboriginal people in this country have not been consulted in climate change adaptation planning - which itself is very limited and narrow to date. See the column at http://www.thecoast.ca/halifax/include-us-in-climate-change-adaptation-plans-say-natives/Content?oid=1150888, and apologies for the picture and title. (My problem with the title is the "say natives" part, which assumes that if one aboriginal person says it, all aboriginal people say it.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Congrats on all the successes. I like the webpage. Nice and clean with links. The first glimspe of you pic made me think a young Jim Carrey.
That's a very common reasoning error (sometimes referred to as the law of small numbers). An intentionally counter-intuitive example will reveal how easily it can generate logical inconsistencies:
1. Dick Cheney supports gay marriage.
2. Dick Cheney is a political conservative.
3. Therefore, political conservatives in general support gay marriage.
Despite the obvious pitfalls, such faulty induction persists, possibly because it produces correct conclusions as easily as it does haywire ones:
1. Moon kills small animals.
2. Moon is a pussycat.
3. Therefore, pussycats in general kill small animals.
Despite the mis-connection of dots necessary to arrive at it, the latter conclusion is heaps more sensible than the former, giving an overall (false) impression of right reasoning.
Still and all, I admit to a sneaking suspicion that were newspapers -- loci of ideology that they are -- to be constrained by even modest standards of reasoning or evidence, very little of what's in them would ever have been written in the first place. Sorry your article ended up being not as you intended it as a result.
--Bunny Out--
Thanks Charles. Surprisingly enough, I've got that Jim Carrey thing a few times. If only my face was that elastic.
FB: Good examples. I think it's a common error in thought and conversation, but maybe slightly less so in print. Still, too common even in print.
'Too common' indeed. It is actually probably the more so in print, depending of course on the print involved, journalism being the expect the greater villain.
expectED, sorry
Post a Comment