Havaianas Online London

an honorary

Mitchell 624 Fishing Rod

Chi fa da sé...

few days ago, Berlusconi was on sale at door to door to talk about the delivery of the first houses for earthquake victims in Onna. The event caused a huge amount of controversy on which I prefer to skirt the issue because I find it very unattractive. What interests me most, Instead, it is a comment from a friend of mine joked that the Prime Minister had gone to a show "without contradiction" to complain about "those who speak ill of him without contradiction."

is what interests me: a reflection on the contradictory.

Let's start with the basics: the dictionary. The usual good
De Mauro says:
1 adj., The pl., Value-rec., Of facts or words that are in conflict with one another: conflicting opinions, contradictory events
2 adj., Which is conflicting, inconsistent, ambiguous : c. speech, character, behavior c.
3 sm, public discussion between two people who claim to contrary opinions, esp. during debates, processes and sim. The case that

ci riguarda è ovviamente il terzo, ma vedremo che alla fine si ricasca anche nei primi due.

Quindi chiediamoci: com'è che funzionano le esternazioni al giorno d'oggi in televisione?
Perché in effetti è dello specifico della televisione che stiamo parlando: nessuno si sognerebbe di pretendere un contraddittorio sulle pagine di un giornale o di un sito internet... al massimo esiste il diritto di rettifica... ma nessuno si aspetta che su "Il Giornale" accanto all'editoriale di Feltri compaia anche un contro-editoriale della Concita De Gregorio, o viceversa su L'Unità.

Torniamo alla televisione: che guardiate un telegiornale o un dibattito televisivo ormai la formula è chiara: si devono riportare le posizioni di "Both" sides. Comment by (center) left a comment (center) right (intentionally omit the "sandwich", which in this context I do not care)

In each transmission of "debate" there is always a clear division between the seats of the guests, right and left sides face each other and, of course, talk him and rail against each other. I no longer see what is the difference between the two sides. Everyone moves to positions that are at odds with the other party. On any topic interpretations are pre-defined and symmetrical. In place of these programs could easily put a pair of robot that when one says "white" the other replies, "black" and get the same result.

And then we come to the elusive "contradictory."
What added value will never be able to make obscure the presence of a contradiction to the goodness of the arguments of the parties?
's simple, at least in appearance if one can accuse him mind the other if one fails the other may, if one disregards the other will be corrected. But the real fact is that it never happens! They both lie, both fail, both misrepresent, each to pull the water to his mill and do "good impression" in front of spectators. So it becomes a debate in a race of dialectic, in which the winner is the one with the strongest arguments but what manages to make the figure of another idiot.
It is also a dialectical structure borrowed from an area that should not have anything to do with these debates: the courtroom. In the process the accused by counsel is trying to dismantle the arguments of the prosecution. In a perfect world, the public prosecutor and counsel for both pursue the search for truth, each with a different point of view: the first protects the interests of the community, the second to the accused. Both should be champions of justice, to prevent miscarriages of justice, facing each other in court just to make sure that every test and every witness will be examined thoroughly and from both points of view.

not what happens in the televised debates!
The televised debate is not like a process which seeks the truth, but at a boxing match where you try to knock out the opponent, using even strokes prohibited if the referee allows it there or is distracted.

And then what the "contradictory"? If you did
simple interviews, each would tell her, the audience would hear the two bells (or maybe even two, why not?) And then judge with his head. Instead this will stand by and watch a match and there is limited at best, as the judges of the ring, to give one vote to the two contenders so deciding "who won" the second each of us. A farce!

And so the much famed "contradictory", which should lead to the truth ends up contradicting himself, playing the role of arena where truth dies, a victim of the plays.

Car Lease Template Letter

Sleep


E'da few days I want to write a post sull'insonnia, insomnia true that I have never suffered, but, behold, I have difficulty falling asleep when approaching certain events that I'm afraid or that I have many expectations.

The fact of wanting to write a post, I thought I could help rationalize the fact that my is not a big problem.
I was interested to see what really was this mysterious insomnia. Sincerely
not that I know much more now, I read something here and there and this seems the most interesting , ma dato che non sono per niente fresca, per il suddetto problema, i miei neuroni lavorano a una velocità ridicola e non è che assimilino tanto in questi giorni!!

Mi sono appuntata qualche titolo da leggere, lo farò in tempi migliori.

Quello che mi andava di scrivere non sono i rimedi presi qua e là e tramandati di padre in figlio che sono tanto pittoreschi, ma a me, in tutta sincerità, non hanno mai fatto niente, ma consigliarne uno.
Leggete la Littizzetto !!
Questo è il mio antidoto anti-insonnia: è stata efficace durante la maturità, ma purtroppo funziona solo quando leggo qualcosa di nuovo.
Se si degnasse di pubblicare Another, perhaps my sleep would return quiet ...