claque ['klakwe]
group of people who, for a fee, they lend themselves to applaud a show or an actor
to carry clearly the answer reached me recently by Professor Giorgio Israel, on his blog, that people meet - except fear confermatami unilateral expulsion from the following - in response to my post on my blog ( this ):
------------
Al Sig. Furio Detti.
Un amico mi informa (non ho tempo di esplorare la rete) che lei in suo blog avrebbe pubblicato un post a me dedicato in cui - sotto il simbolo della Kippah (il copricapo ebraico) - si espongono i seguenti paralogismi:
- che avendo io collaborato con la Gelmini sarei un berlusconiano (si potrebbe dire analogamente che sono "fioroniano"...);
- che avendo criticato l'abuso dello slogan "Se non ora quando" sarei berlusconiano (pur prescindendo dai tanti articoli critici che ho scritto, quanto Berlusconi is we will see tomorrow when it launches an attack on my hard Berlusconi for his sortie against the public school).
- that known as the Lele Mora said he hoped that the fascists break the legs of the communist journalists, and since he Berlusconi, I'd hand in hand with those who want to break your legs and so on.
I'm surprised that did not conclude that I am a participant of the bunga-bunga.
Similarly one might conclude that anyone who moves some criticism of capitalism is a communist and being communist is on the same face of the Red Brigades. And with more such examples could exercise this perverse logic para-useful only to stir up hatred and justify lynchings.
That these are his aggressive methods It was already clear by his actions here (and readers of this blog will realize that what my attitude was justified.)
What are his intentions towards me it is also clear.
So, I wonder: do we still here? It's a rhetorical question that does not answer calls.
Be kind enough to sit permanently without sending unnecessary responses, both can continue freely to overthrow his mud elsewhere.
Un amico mi informa (non ho tempo di esplorare la rete) che lei in suo blog avrebbe pubblicato un post a me dedicato in cui - sotto il simbolo della Kippah (il copricapo ebraico) - si espongono i seguenti paralogismi:
- che avendo io collaborato con la Gelmini sarei un berlusconiano (si potrebbe dire analogamente che sono "fioroniano"...);
- che avendo criticato l'abuso dello slogan "Se non ora quando" sarei berlusconiano (pur prescindendo dai tanti articoli critici che ho scritto, quanto Berlusconi is we will see tomorrow when it launches an attack on my hard Berlusconi for his sortie against the public school).
- that known as the Lele Mora said he hoped that the fascists break the legs of the communist journalists, and since he Berlusconi, I'd hand in hand with those who want to break your legs and so on.
I'm surprised that did not conclude that I am a participant of the bunga-bunga.
Similarly one might conclude that anyone who moves some criticism of capitalism is a communist and being communist is on the same face of the Red Brigades. And with more such examples could exercise this perverse logic para-useful only to stir up hatred and justify lynchings.
That these are his aggressive methods It was already clear by his actions here (and readers of this blog will realize that what my attitude was justified.)
What are his intentions towards me it is also clear.
So, I wonder: do we still here? It's a rhetorical question that does not answer calls.
Be kind enough to sit permanently without sending unnecessary responses, both can continue freely to overthrow his mud elsewhere.
----------------------------------
premise dutiful
with the professor and some of its commentators last week I'm involved in a discussion on the thought, that is, if it were independent and separate from the brain. my position clearly materialist and immanent, rather functionalist, was strongly contested by the professor to the point of leading him to not publish my comments, guilty of "aggression" (1).
anyone can follow here if prof. Israel will keep, as I hope and am confident, visible and intact, my post in question will determine if my statements were worth a being shown the door and silenced as a troll. who knows the web sa a quale livello si giustifica il filtraggio dei troll e dei commentatori realmente molesti. pertanto contestai pacatamente la cosa e ovviamente negai l'addebito. il Prof. se ne accorse e l'affaruccio perché affaruccio era venne chiuso.
in seguito il prof. Israel se ne uscì con un commento sulle manifestazioni antiberlusconiane sotto l'egida del "Se non ora, quando".
qui:
http://gisrael.blogspot.com/2011/02/se-non-ora-quando-mai-giu-le-mani-da.html
which well, I recall my previous experience where I was banned for defending review does not conform to that of the keepers of the blog but still want to speak my mind on new post of Professor, I are even allowed to write two lines of response on my own blog :
http://faustpatrone.blogspot.com/2011/02/paradossi. html
which evidently seemed a crimen lese nous to Prof. Israel. as I dared, I, on my blog , challenge the position taken by our illustrious. simply and calmly exposing the hard facts of paradox that arose, namely that:
a. Professor Israel's antiberlusconiani challenging and ridiculing them in place without much complained about Levi - claiming a "copyright" ideological ideal and is simply not justified in claiming and to come to fatherhood (paternity of the sentence is Talmudic, not Primo Levi); free to say your opinion, but others feel it's free with valid arguments and unfounded;
b. il Professor Israel si metteva così paradossalmente in difesa di personaggi decisamente "impresentabili", in difesa di un novero di individui di una certa caratura; soprattutto dal suo doloroso punto di vista si piazzava dallo stesso lato della barricata di personaggi che mai oserebbe apprezzare, questo per far notare che, forse, chi contesta Berlusconi andrebbe semmai incoraggiato e tutti i torti non li ha, e per far notare quanto segue: piuttosto che ridicolizzare gli antiberlusconiani in piazza facendo il gioco di elementi decisamente "connotati" e tirando acqua al loro mulino, sarebbe stato più saggio scegliere meglio chi cover of censorship. and then complain that the professor you have ideas about the very unclear as to the barricade on which to mount ideally.
c. I think the Professor is therefore a Berlusconi, Berlusconi defended if to ridicule the opponents, I feel happy otherwise. on this are much more willing to change my mind if convinced, on the other two have almost no hope that the topic is questionable.
however, if these are my observations as Israel says "throwing mud" and be aggressive under personal against him, even being a "poking up hatred and lynching" against him or to have at least the same logic ... Well these are charges that quietly, but firmly very seriously and reject the sender with an invitation to re-evaluate and weigh their words carefully, clearly mere . Prof. Israel of course can not be disputed (but would like?!?) to accuse him of being a bungabunghista. Obviously I do not false accusations, but I refer only to the facts, so how could I ever? I'm not a ballista, I believe the correct person and reasonably objective.
I estimate the professor on a personal level, but this does not oblige me to share and applaud each of its output automatically (when the share are clear and generous with awards ), or requires me to shut my opinion discordant, without necessarily be unfair (it is a lie) and wrong (it is not intellectually justified nor justifiable) accused of throwing mud, stir up hatred ... etc. ... with a slight bitterness (not huge, but ... hot). however, the charge is exponentially out of proportion to the scale and on about what I wrote.
and this is another charge that move to Professor Israel and to acknowledge this time have spoken the truth, especially in the phrase:
That these are his aggressive methods it was already clear by his actions here ( and readers of this blog will realize that my attitude was justified).
"Readers of his blog," this is true . true in the sense that only accepts comments that are not overdriven one micron from its pensiero e dalla sua retta opinione investita di suprema "auctoritas", perché gli altri commentatori appena appena difformi Lei prima li ridicolizza in due battute e poi li censura e mette alla porta, e con modi ancora più bruschi di quelli riservati al sottoscritto (si veda come ha risposto al prof. Zamarra, additato al suo fiero disprezzo per una frase idiomatica che francamente meritava al limite una divertita osservazione). e questo Lei lo fa abbastanza sistematicamente, per verificarlo basta scorrere il Suo blog per intero.
vede caro Israel, io I do not pretend to impose Starla who is sympathetic or popular / despised by you, but I think I have the right to speak my mind on tolerance almost non-existent that you apply to people who are nice, congenial, and of course appropriate to his blog and the disproportion between the comments made and your reactions very resentful, and on the subway and on the paradigm that you have to "aggression."
and above is my sacred right to defend myself from his remark that making unfounded accusations are absolutely not an instigator of hatred, lynching un lanciatore di fango sulla sua persona. queste accuse non le merito e sono assolutamente infondate.
vuole sapere quali sono le "mie intenzioni" su di Lei - che crede, anzi sa di conoscerle già - sorbole, Lei ha anche poteri telepatici?
semplicemente interloquire con Lei, se vuole anche aspramente in termini di argomenti e di critica alle idee, perché la reputo persona intelligente ma ahimé decisamente intollerante alle opinioni differenti dalle Sue. né mai sul mio blog mi sognerò di censurarla o deriderla o denigrarLa indipedentemente dalle sue idee .
but she puts her mouth and stop at the door even after - as in your last post - I spoke this time agree with your findings. short also in my case (but not only in my, in fact) it is she who take it personally, devaluing my work because my only and not for the arguments that lead .
and this is a precise way to build a claque , certainly not paid (not the defendant is never that), but strongly selected in order to get to you before anything else that fans absolutely committed beat her hands with his elbows sticking to the torso. bravo clap clap clap very good professor. Please, do not do as the "King George" English courtiers had paludenti and forced to sit upright for hours ...
I do not do it on my blog hosted anyone as long as no checks and heavily, and before I decide to select comments ... there and wants to handle. She and her commentators have any idea are welcome at my house.
I do not make claque, I love the ideas.
excuse me, and it is estimated to have her as a professional (not defined in the case and shod that in my post critical of his line) and its other valuable observations that I find this sad and strange for you in the future will tell us who had a claque and who takes really, between me and you, to taste debate and mutual enrichment.
assure you that I have nothing personal and hateful to her, but I can not hide that, while she accuses others of aggression does not hesitate to give the "gonzo" to a third party (here ) .
short, nepppure She is a little lamb, do you?
in respect and compliments. without no malice, at least on my part.
ends here, unless your a welcome clarification, my comments.
Notes
1. Here's an example of my aggression by trollaggio:
Leibniz is simply refuted by this banal observation: the thought is a function, the organ in the brain.
It is true that the function seems to separate how to separate the abstract "movement" by rottelle and physical support that move.
But simply - even a child would understand - there is no movement without wheels. You can have a gear that does nothing, still. Fine, but you will never function without the clock mechanism.
Verification: a brain can also exist without ideas, but an idea will never exist without a brain.
ideas, soul, etc. ... not exist without the physical support of which they are mere functions. Mistaken for reality itself is only metaphysics, a bad habit of philosophy, very hard to die so seductive. Metaphysics is fortunately been demolished by Nietzsche. Do not mistake a real object to its function.
cordially.