Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: CHAT: DeGracean theory (was: RE: CHAT: The Fabulous Personalities of Conlang

From:Stephen DeGrace <stevedegrace@...>
Date:Wednesday, June 12, 2002, 17:41
--- In conlang@y..., And Rosta <a-rosta@A...> wrote:
> Stephen DeGrace: > > > Seeing as the thread is properly labelled CHAT,
how
> > > about you indulge us with an exposition of your > > > theory? There must be quite a few of interested, > > > given the number of people telling us their M-B
type.
> > > > Um, all right :) > > > > ::cringes:: I hate this putting my money where my > > mouth is stuff, it is so much more easy and
pleasant
> > to just be a critic ;) > > > > It's really too long to go into, but you can find
an
> > (I am told) rather dense essay on it at: > > > > http://www.geocities.com/stevedegrace/personality > > > > I wrote it up, even though it falls in the
category of
> > Things People Should Never See <g>, because it was > > quite taken with it when the idea came to me (you
know
> > what these inspirations are like)... and I wanted
to,
> > hmm, _create_ it, so writing it down in a public
way
> > was like doing that. I'm not sure if I birthed it > > right though :). > > Thanks. I've read it with interest and find it about
on
> a par without most of the other serious-minded stuff
on
> personality that I've seen on the web -- the same
balance
> of denseness and clarity, the same degree of
insightfulness,
> the same degree of empirical support (though your
text
> is more upfront about it).
Ha ha, thanks, I think ;).
> Thanks to these discussions, I've realized that what
I'm
> after is not a theory of types or a theory of the
dynamics
> of personality, but rather a map of personality
space.
> The distribution of individual personalities within
that
> space is an empirical matter for which I suspect no
decent
> data exists.
What do you mean by "personality space"? :)
> I have to confess, Stephen, that although, as I
said, I
> did read your essay carefully and with interest, the
thing
> that sticks in my memory is your contention that
correct
> spelling is not an art for a gentleman. You are
right,
> but nor is art an art for a gentleman, and nor is > scholarship, philosophy, science or anything else
useful
> to society and civilization. The true art of a
gentleman
> is to cultivate complete parasitism on the Labour of > others. Accordingly, I reckon you neither
orthographer
> nor gentleman.
Wow, And, that's a beautiful compliment... I think ;) Stephen ______________________________________________________________________ Movies, Music, Sports, Games! http://entertainment.yahoo.ca

Reply

And Rosta <a-rosta@...>