My pareidolia knows no bounds.

More
10 years 9 months ago #21714 by pareidoliac
Replied by pareidoliac on topic Reply from fred ressler
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Larry Burford</i>
<br /><b>[pareidoliac] "Pareidolia (Rev 2) is ..."</b>

There is no definition named "rev 2". Do you perhaps mean the definition named "ressler"?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Yes. (changed it above). Thanks.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 9 months ago #21509 by Larry Burford
<b>[pareidoliac] "Might is not right and pareidolia (Rev 2) ..."</b>

Still no "rev 2".

I get the impression that you don't always pay close attention to what you are writing. As opposed to what you think you are writing.

It is always a good idea to read your own posts, and edit them as necessary, <u>after</u> you push the submit button. I make lots of mistakes, too. But you guys don't see very many of them because I catch them within minutes of posting.

(It adds to my God-like aura ...)

LB

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 9 months ago #24213 by Larry Burford
<b>[pareidoliac] "To imply as (Rev 1) does that natural real people are crazy for seeing pareidolia ( Rev 1) ...</b>

I don't get that from the 'rev 1' definition. Don't sense any militaristic vs pacifistic tension between the two of them either. Not even a hint.

***

'Rev 1' and 'ressler' <u>still</u> seem to say about the same thing to me. This is curious. Am I missing something?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 9 months ago #21510 by Larry Burford
To All,

This discussion, at least the most recent parts of it, about how different members see a particular word differently, is exactly the sort of thing I was hoping for when I began insisting that you must all specify the definition you are using for the word pariedolia(rev 1).

It is ... astonishing, discouraging, enlightening ... to see it in detail. But it does shed light on why we have so much trouble communicating with each other. And why we sometimes get mad. Or worse.

Reminds of that scene from <i>Cool Hand Luke</i>. The Warden says 'What we have here is a failure to communicate' right before he catches a bullet as a result of said failure.

LB

(Sorry, this is so far off topic here that it's not even funny. Sometimes you just have to go with the flow ...)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 9 months ago #21511 by Larry Burford
(thanks for the edits, Fred)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 9 months ago #24214 by rderosa
Replied by rderosa on topic Reply from Richard DeRosa
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Larry Burford</i>
<br />Also, I'm wondering if anyone will post a version or versions of the definition that launched us along this trajectory?

Hello? Zip? You are still welcome here.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I was thinking of doing exactly that, but before I do, I'd like to propose a name change to the one I posted from "Rev1" to "Modern". It's more of an active descriptor and it would leave the door open to naming the original definition that Zip Monster provided something like "Traditional" "Original" or some word that characterizes that period of the post Civil War era.

I was a little caught off guard with the idea at first and "Rev1" was all I could think of, but now that I've had time to think about the importance of this little exercise, I think a more descriptive name is in order. Regarding Fred's definition, I think the most descriptive definition is the one we're using "Ressler".

Larry, let me know if you approve this name-change.
Fred, thanks for participating. I always enjoy reading your comments and I'm sure others out there do too.

=============================================
* 1 ****************************************************
Reference: encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/

<b><u>Definition:</b></u>

Pareidolia (/pr#616;#712;do#650;li#601;/ parr-i-doh-lee-#601;) is a psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) being perceived as significant, a form of apophenia. Common examples include seeing images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the moon or the Moon rabbit, and hearing hidden messages on records when played in reverse.

The word comes from the Greek words para (#960;#945;#961;#940;, "beside, alongside, instead") in this context meaning something faulty, wrong, instead of; and the noun eid#333;lon (#949;#7988;#948;#969;#955;#959;#957; "image, form, shape") the diminutive of eidos. Pareidolia is a type of apophenia, seeing patterns in random data.

Name: <b><u>Modern:</b></u>

rd

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.955 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum