What do you think might help solve this particularly difficult problem?

Our culture has a love affair with the put-down.  TV likes the roast.  The sitcoms glory in ridicule.  Movies push the put-down with great creativity to ever more violent and vicious extremes.

A list serve discussant starts a diatribe with, "you are a whacko," suggests that someone he disagrees with "go back to kindergarten, or earlier, to see if you can do better," and ends by threatening that, should the discussion be continued by she who disagrees with him, he will give out more "analysis from me."  If this were a face to face discussion, those comments would be seen by all but the speaker as coming from a very disturbed mind.  What is it about our Internet culture that lets such put-down incivility easily slip into the e-mail ether?

This insulter's reasoning displayed "obvious" logic-blindness; a fact that was obviousno quatation marksto most of the list serve's participants and lurkers.  As was the futility of retort.  And one of the logic-blindnesses was to the mutual reciprocities that are so necessary to intelligent discussion.  Here we enter the mysterious world of Lawrence Kohlberg, and anyone who would seriously attack this serious problem would be well advised to look deeply into Kohlberg's work and its enigmas.

We come to expect the put-down.  At every turn; in every facet of day-to-day life.  Our description of "The Singles" could easily be interpreted as a put-down.  In particular, the  facetious "virus," Herpes simpletonisus might be seen as an attempted put-down, especially since the accent is on the last syllable.

Out of the question!
There can be no put-down that carries any logical weight.

When you have found "Human Intelligence" you will see outlined why we believe this is one of the more important "obvious yet unobserved" facts of social life.  (When you discover The Platinum Plover Egg, you will see some flesh put onto that outline.)  "Logic" is almost always seen as something we can compare on a line, "low" to "high."  The insight to strive for is why the comparisons must be made, not on a line, but in a space of many dimensions.

hate HATE HATE! on the Web

We have tried to broach this problem rather directly, trying not to be rude, trying not to stir up a bit of bile.   Nevertheless,we find we do sometimes stir up some bile.

Isn't that common rudeness we see on the Internet sociopathic?.   When might it even be psychopathic?   We need to set the stage for examining this interesting problem that is especially rampant on the Internet.


But we are all human beings—on the Internet; in day-to-day life; wherever...—where we interact face-to-face in a multidimensional web of interpersonal relationships.  Rank order by "worth" or "value" is oversimplification carried much further than is usually recognized.  To see any one person as "better than" or "lesser than" another requires that rank order.  We all do it, and when we do we might stop, think, swallow our pride (recalling that pride is the first of the seven deadly sins) and, instead, think bird six-dimension color, human seventeen (plus?) dimensional intelligence...

And revel in that complexity.

The logical underpinning of this simple truth lies in the world of the "simple but difficult" at the edge of human comprehension.  Multi-dimensional ranking is a simple but powerful concept sensed by many but articulated by very few.

How might we help the Internet society find ways to map routes to this powerful insight?

Quantum Jumps
Quantum Jumps
to Opening Page
to Index Page
to the simple but difficult puzzles
to the Misconceptions workshop
to Wason's gate into the Edge
to the fine print
to A parallel (and newer) Website
to the zoo and the perceptions exemplar
to The Platinum Plover Egg
to Accurate Maps
to Glen Canyon Navigator
to your humble Webmasters: Email us!