Counterclaim 1

2:52PM Jul 25, 2019

Speakers:

Keywords:

questions

alcohol

happening

people

plato

claim

text

analysis

football game

parts

thinking

data

conversation

point

talking

call

word

problem

dog

sell

They,

They,

you know, they think of holes ho le, instead of who le. So just for record sake, I'm talking about who le. Because every time I do this, I'll say something like, we got to put the parts back into the hole. And I get someone in the back room it's like, right. So just fair warning, You probably weren't thinking that already. But maybe I have a little high school boy in me.

you know, they think of holes ho le, instead of who le. So just for record sake, I'm talking about who le. Because every time I do this, I'll say something like, we got to put the parts back into the hole. And I get someone in the back room it's like, right. So just fair warning, You probably weren't thinking that already. But maybe I have a little high school boy in me. So I had to tell myself that synthesises and analyses other relationships between parts and holes. Ultimately, everything I've been saying to you, for the past week and a half has been analytical. I have been trying to explain how to take something that's a whole and turn it into parts. Let's Look at this. For example, does this diagram make sense to you? We did this the other day, the text and the argument than the conversation, the text, when it arrives, whatever it is, whether it's a pig to be analysed, whether it's Plato's Republic, it operates as a singular whole, its unified. And What are we doing to that text, we're taking that text and we're stretching it, we're pulling it apart. Remember what I said about disputation, disputation, it's not disagreeing, it's peeling, its opening. So analysis is stretching that out and opening it up. Okay, synthesis moves the opposite direction.

So I had to tell myself that

synthesises and analyses other relationships between parts and holes. Ultimately, everything I've been saying to you, for the past week and a half has been analytical. I have been trying to explain how to take something that's a whole and turn it into parts. Let's Look at this. For example, does this diagram make sense to you? We did this the other day, the text and the argument than the conversation, the text, when it arrives, whatever it is, whether it's a pig to be analysed, whether it's Plato's Republic, it operates as a singular whole, its unified. And What are we doing to that text, we're taking that text and we're stretching it, we're pulling it apart. Remember what I said about disputation, disputation, it's not disagreeing, it's peeling, its opening. So analysis is stretching that out and opening it up. Okay, synthesis moves the opposite direction. So here's the idea. What I'm essentially saying is analysis is comparable to what you would call reading. Reading is just analysis, its opening. Sentence synthesis is what we call writing, it's narrowing. And they just move at inverse directions. analysis is pulling the text up to the level of the open conversation. synthesis is moving from the conversation back to a text, and you're always passing through the same points. And What I want to do is I want to demonstrate how these things happen. So that you see that the gentle art of conversation is not just something that we do willy nilly. It's something that actually describes the main two movements of every academic exercise. Let's Take for example, notice what happens in mathematics. I'll use mathematics because it always seems like this has nothing to do with mathematics. In a mathematics textbook, let's suppose your professor says I want you to do numbers 14 and 16. We'll come back and look at that process tomorrow. Here's The 14. Here's the period. And then there's usually some line here where there's numbers, right? It could be like x squared minus blank equals blank, Right? It's something of that nature. And usually, if you're quote, working out that problem, Remember, prob pro bowling that's thrown in front of you. If you're working out that problem, Usually it unfolds below. Right? This is what we call, quote, showing your work. it unfolds below the thing of a long division problem. You're like, all this stuff's happening down here. And So what was presented as a whole, The problem is being unfolded analytically. And usually, then you get an answer. And you take that answer, and you put it back at the top. And that answer looks like a whole again, we've moved my whole down three parts back to a whole, It happens in every discipline, Same way, with dissection, I'm going to take a whole pig unfolded, and analyse components, and then draw a singular conclusion. It has liver disease, You're always moving whole parts, whole parts over and over and over. These are the main two intellectual movements that are happening. But The reason I focused on conversation is because these are happening so fast, and they're happening all the time. Somebody pops out in the conversation and says, I don't think we should vote for blank. Whatever presidential candidate By the way, what kind of claim is that? I don't think we should vote for blank. Based on the five, can you think in your head, proposal rights obvious? There's a singular statement, then all sudden, the conversation starts to erupt, right? Well, why don't you think that

So here's the idea.

What I'm essentially saying is analysis is comparable to what you would call reading. Reading is just analysis, its opening. Sentence synthesis is what we call writing, it's narrowing. And they just move at inverse directions. analysis is pulling the text up to the level of the open conversation. synthesis is moving from the conversation back to a text, and you're always passing through the same points. And What I want to do is I want to demonstrate how these things happen. So that you see that the gentle art of conversation is not just something that we do willy nilly. It's something that actually describes the main two movements of every academic exercise.

Let's Take for example,

notice what happens in mathematics. I'll use mathematics because it always seems like this has nothing to do with mathematics. In a mathematics textbook, let's suppose your professor says I want you to do numbers 14 and 16. We'll come back and look at that process tomorrow. Here's The 14. Here's the period. And then there's usually some line here where there's numbers, right? It could be like x squared minus blank equals blank, Right? It's something of that nature. And usually, if you're quote, working out that problem, Remember, prob pro bowling that's thrown in front of you. If you're working out that problem, Usually it unfolds below. Right? This is what we call, quote, showing your work. it unfolds below the thing of a long division problem. You're like, all this stuff's happening down here. And So what was presented as a whole, The problem is being unfolded analytically. And usually, then you get an answer. And you take that answer, and you put it back at the top. And that answer looks like a whole again, we've moved my whole down three parts back to a whole, It happens in every discipline, Same way, with dissection, I'm going to take a whole pig unfolded, and analyse components, and then draw a singular conclusion. It has liver disease, You're always moving whole parts, whole parts over and over and over. These are the main two intellectual movements that are happening. But The reason I focused on conversation is because these are happening so fast, and they're happening all the time. Somebody pops out in the conversation and says, I don't think we should vote for blank. Whatever presidential candidate By the way, what kind of claim is that? I don't think we should vote for blank. Based on the five, can you think in your head, proposal rights obvious? There's a singular statement, then all sudden, the conversation starts to erupt, right? Well, why don't you think that I think I'll vote for I don't think I will vote for her. Blah, blah, blah, blah, What's happening is analysis is starting to get peeled apart in two parts, Right. And then later, when you do do vote, or you do actually put your ticket down, or you do make a decision, It's come back to a hole in conversation, those two movements are always happening. They're the same as you know, curl and release, curl, and release right there constantly. Concentrating, stretching, concentrating, stretching, stretching, his analysis, concentrating is a synthesis happens. And it's happening constantly. So if I can, if I can say essentially, that the general art of conversation is that those two skills,

I think I'll vote for I don't think I will vote for her.

Blah, blah, blah, blah, What's happening is analysis is starting to get peeled apart in two parts, Right. And then later, when you do do vote, or you do actually put your ticket down, or you do make a decision, It's come back to a hole in conversation, those two movements are always happening. They're the same as you know, curl and release, curl, and release right there constantly. Concentrating, stretching, concentrating, stretching, stretching, his analysis, concentrating is a synthesis happens. And it's happening constantly. So if I can, if I can say essentially, that the general art of conversation is that those two skills, That's everything, If you can figure out how to do them on purpose, and you can figure out how to do them carefully. And I'm convinced beyond convinced that this model will do it for you. So Let's suppose what we're going to do is we're going to work out first we're going to take a hole, and we're going to try to stretch it out into parts. Okay. So let's say the claim let's let's pick something that's important for bridge students. For example, we asked about the football games earlier, right? You're going to be exposed to football games this fall. Even If you don't like football, you cannot get away from it. It's hysterical around here, especially if there's winning, Right? I don't know if you all remember this or not. But I you are probably little Tennessee beat. Beat Florida one year, not during the Butch Jones here. It was earlier than that. And they were whizzes back when you could tear down the goalpost. I mean, you weren't supposed to but it happened. The students tore down the goalposts. Did you know this used to happen? Oh, this is an old football thing. Like back in the day, fans would swarm the field after a big win, and literally they'd get up on the goalpost until it tore down. They March that goalposts all the way down this road. They carried it from one end to the other, You couldn't drive anywhere. This is just like this is a See, when Lane Kiffin. He was a coach here at UT for like a year, when he quit. He got hired and he left to go to USC. They lined the street. And they were taking mattresses out of their dorms and setting them on fire all the way down the strip weird stuff. Okay, so I'm telling you, this place is hysterical with a bunch of drunken football fans. It's nutty. Okay. Now, So what I'm saying is you can't get away from football, it's going to be in your face one way or the other. So Let's go back to the original claim. The claim was, the UT is going to sell utk is going to sell selling

That's everything,

If you can figure out how to do them on purpose, and you can figure out how to do them carefully. And I'm convinced beyond convinced that this model will do it for you.

So Let's suppose

what we're going to do is we're going to work out first we're going to take a hole, and we're going to try to stretch it out into parts.

Okay. So let's say

the claim let's let's pick something that's important for bridge students. For example, we asked about the football games earlier, right? You're going to be exposed to football games this fall. Even If you don't like football, you cannot get away from it. It's hysterical around here, especially if there's winning, Right? I don't know if you all remember this or not. But I you are probably little Tennessee beat. Beat Florida one year, not during the Butch Jones here. It was earlier than that. And they were whizzes back when you could tear down the goalpost. I mean, you weren't supposed to but it happened. The students tore down the goalposts. Did you know this used to happen? Oh, this is an old football thing. Like back in the day, fans would swarm the field after a big win, and literally they'd get up on the goalpost until it tore down. They March that goalposts all the way down this road. They carried it from one end to the other, You couldn't drive anywhere. This is just like this is a See, when Lane Kiffin. He was a coach here at UT for like a year, when he quit. He got hired and he left to go to USC. They lined the street. And they were taking mattresses out of their dorms and setting them on fire all the way down the strip weird stuff. Okay, so I'm telling you, this place is hysterical with a bunch of drunken football fans. It's nutty. Okay. Now, So what I'm saying is you can't get away from football, it's going to be in your face one way or the other. So Let's go back to the original claim. The claim was, the UT is going to sell utk is going to sell selling

alcohol.

alcohol.

So we're going to say that we're going to take football games is our text. Football games are a text. Okay. And there's the claim.

So we're going to say that we're going to take football games is our text. Football games are a text. Okay. And there's the claim. You all follow me so far. The text is a football game. Here's New England. Okay. And The claim is utk is selling alcohol. Or we could say ought to sell alcohol or we could say whatever we want. But right now we're just going to say is selling alcohol next year,

You all follow me so far. The text is a football game.

Here's New England. Okay. And The claim is utk is selling alcohol. Or we could say ought to sell alcohol or we could say whatever we want. But right now we're just going to say is selling alcohol next year,

Everybody follow?

Everybody follow?

Now, if we're going to take that singular text, that singular phenomenon, and we're going to expand it, Okay, And we're going to expand it, then we are going to ask you certain questions. First of all, what kind of claim are we looking at? We're looking at definitional flight. Good, because it is this way, Okay. We're not going to talk about the warrant quite yet. We're going to get there in just a second. If we're going to go over here and Bry let our data breathe, We're going to need a tool. And those tools are what starts with the Q questions. Thank you. And these are going the wrong direction. These are the questions I want to ask. I want to ask comparison questions. Now remember,

Now, if we're going to take that singular text, that singular phenomenon, and we're going to expand it, Okay, And we're going to expand it, then we are going to ask you certain questions. First of all, what kind of claim are we looking at? We're looking at definitional flight. Good, because it is this way, Okay. We're not going to talk about the warrant quite yet. We're going to get there in just a second. If we're going to go over here and Bry let our data breathe, We're going to need a tool. And those tools are what starts with the Q questions. Thank you. And these are going the wrong direction. These are the questions I want to ask. I want to ask comparison questions. Now remember, what is it? What are these questions? Remember, if the text is in front of me, these kinds of questions are nothing but sort of different angles or different positions to look at the text. So if the claim is utk is selling alcohol, the text is the game what can we learn about this process? We can do comparison we can say things like how is x similar or dissimilar to why For example, we could say how is alcohol similar or dissimilar to other concessions?

what is it? What are these questions? Remember, if the

text is in front of me, these kinds of questions are nothing but sort of different angles or different positions to look at the text.

So if the claim

is utk is selling alcohol, the text is the game what can we learn about this process? We can do comparison we can say things like how is x similar or dissimilar to why For example, we could say how is alcohol

similar or dissimilar to other concessions?

Answer that

Answer that How are they similar? dissimilar?

How are they similar? dissimilar?

Right. Okay,

Right. Okay, so it will will say well, I'll just put lit does lit Do you said say lit Right? Okay. Can lit mean? Is it only mean drunk? Or can it mean frenzy? So it can be both. Okay, so I'll just put lit and then I'll put drunk over here just so we don't confuse that. Okay. What What else is the difference between alcohol and other concessions or how are they similar or dissimilar either way? How Are they similar? They both provide what? To the university?

so it will will say well, I'll just put lit does lit Do you said say lit Right? Okay. Can lit mean? Is it only mean drunk? Or can it mean frenzy?

So it can be both.

Okay, so I'll just put lit and then I'll put drunk over here just so we don't confuse that. Okay. What What else is the difference between alcohol and other concessions or how are they similar or dissimilar either way? How Are they similar? They both provide what? To the university? Right? They're both sell sellable. Okay, we left that more circumstantial. We'll go back to that in just a second. Alcohol and can say okay, okay, So you're saying the dissimilar because alcohol might drive be more, Okay. They're just similar in terms of, let's say? They're similar in terms of sales. One might sell more than the other. Okay, good. How else?

Right? They're both sell sellable.

Okay, we left that more circumstantial. We'll go back to that in just a second. Alcohol and can say okay, okay, So you're saying the dissimilar because alcohol might drive be more, Okay. They're just similar in terms of, let's say? They're similar in terms of sales. One might sell more than the other. Okay, good. How else?

satisfaction is different.

satisfaction is different.

Okay.

Okay.

Let's go to definition. What kind of thing is alcohol?

Let's go to definition. What kind of thing is alcohol?

Okay, it's usually liquid. In fact, I can't think of a time that it's not. So It's a drink. But It's not usually like a alcohol. It's not typically like a thirst beverage. You don't want to drink it because you're thirsty. A beer maybe? We're going to say it's liquid form, what? What are the parts of alcohol? Or think about the things that

Okay, it's usually liquid. In fact, I can't think of a time that it's not. So It's a drink. But It's not usually like a alcohol. It's not typically like a thirst beverage. You don't want to drink it because you're thirsty. A beer maybe? We're going to say it's liquid form, what? What are the parts of alcohol? Or think about the things that

are contained in the idea of alcohol?

are contained in the idea of alcohol?

Okay, there's usually an event, Think about the alcohol itself,

Okay, there's usually an event, Think about the alcohol itself, thinking about why it would matter.

thinking about why it would matter.

For example, think of the delivery mechanism.

For example, think of the delivery mechanism.

What does it come in?

What does it come in?

Good. It could be a can. It could be bottle.

Good. It could be a can. It could be bottle.

It could be a keg. It could be a cup.

It could be a keg. It could be a cup.

Now, why would that matter? But asking that question. Let's suppose right now I say to you, this is your text, you're going to you're going to write a disputation on this and 500 words, What's happened right now is we've taken a text, we're expanding it, We're analysing it, and we're analysing it by using questions to enlarge the data. And when we start to see this stuff through definitional questions for what are the parts of x, we start to see a potential hazard? Right? Should the stadium be full of bottles? Should it be full of cans? How do you manage it with cups? What distinguishes a beer cup from a regular concession cup? Do people have to rebuy cups every time they drink a beer? Do they not you see what it's creating questions as to whether this is a viable delivery system or not. So If I'm wanting to dispute this, I'm peeling it apart, I can do that. If I want to disagree, I could focus in just on this stuff and write my 500 words about the delivery mechanism. If I want to agree, I could find something in this and say, here's a really good way to do it. What I'm doing is I'm creating space for me to start looking at it and start to narrow it back down and synthesise it. I'm starting to see some stuff make room for it. This is what conversation should do it. We're sitting in a room full of people, and you're talking about this stuff. As these questions come up, and we're talking about it, it should spawn ideas. And when it's positive ideas, you start to write them down, you jot them down, you think about it. Let's think about some other ones, circumstantially, you talked about people's desire for what's happening when alcohol occurs. Think about what are the circumstances for alcoholic consumption?

Now, why would that matter? But asking that question. Let's suppose right now I say to you, this is your text, you're going to you're going to write a disputation on this and 500 words, What's happened right now is we've taken a text, we're expanding it, We're analysing it, and we're analysing it by using questions to enlarge the data. And when we start to see this stuff through definitional questions for what are the parts of x, we start to see a potential hazard? Right? Should the stadium be full of bottles? Should it be full of cans? How do you manage it with cups? What distinguishes a beer cup from a regular concession cup? Do people have to rebuy cups every time they drink a beer? Do they not you see what it's creating questions as to whether this is a viable delivery system or not. So If I'm wanting to dispute this, I'm peeling it apart, I can do that. If I want to disagree, I could focus in just on this stuff and write my 500 words about the delivery mechanism. If I want to agree, I could find something in this and say, here's a really good way to do it. What I'm doing is I'm creating space for me to start looking at it and start to narrow it back down and synthesise it. I'm starting to see some stuff make room for it. This is what conversation should do it. We're sitting in a room full of people, and you're talking about this stuff. As these questions come up, and we're talking about it, it should spawn ideas. And when it's positive ideas, you start to write them down, you jot them down, you think about it. Let's think about some other ones, circumstantially, you talked about people's desire for what's happening when alcohol occurs. Think about what are the circumstances for alcoholic consumption?

Okay.

Okay.

Now, it doesn't seem like that's relevant to the game. But What if I want to write my whole essay or a whole 500 words about how we don't need to bring the party atmosphere into the sport atmosphere? Right? Because what if I change x here? I put alcohol there deny. But What's the other thing? it happening in this? They're selling alcohol? When? During What? football games? So what if I put football game in there? What is happening when the football game occurs? What are the circumstances of a football game?

Now, it doesn't seem like that's relevant to the game. But What if I want to write my whole essay or a whole 500 words about how we don't need to bring the party atmosphere into the sport atmosphere? Right? Because what if I change x here? I put alcohol there deny. But What's the other thing? it happening in this? They're selling alcohol? When? During What? football games? So what if I put football game in there? What is happening when the football game occurs? What are the circumstances of a football game?

Say it again.

Say it again.

Okay, so there's a contest of some sort. Think about the other features of a football game.

Okay, so there's a contest of some sort. Think about the other features of a football game. Okay, volume levels, that could somehow be affected. We're not going to use every data point, but we can play with it. What about Pardon? Okay, that's true. So energy.

Okay, volume levels,

that could somehow be affected. We're not going to use every data point, but we can play with it. What about Pardon? Okay, that's true. So energy.

Right now,

Right now,

your prejudices killing you. Because you're only thinking like a 20 year old.

your prejudices killing you. Because you're only thinking like a 20 year old.

You forgetting this?

You forgetting this? They're they're

They're they're

drastically different.

drastically different.

It's hard for us to see the complications of this because we're inclined to think with reference to ourselves. That was the whole point of the Plato essay.

It's hard for us to see the complications of this because we're inclined to think with reference to ourselves. That was the whole point of the Plato essay. Only thinking what we know now what we don't know, it's hard for us to turn around and see their kids behind us. Just shadows on the wall. So things change, right? We So when I change what word I put in here, And I just say football game, What was caused or what's caused by the football game, what's happening is the football game occurs, It starts to change the picture a little bit.

Only thinking what we know now what we don't know, it's hard

for us to turn around and see their kids behind us. Just shadows on the wall. So things change, right? We So when I change what word I put in here,

And I just say football game,

What was caused or what's caused by the football game, what's happening is the football game occurs, It starts to change the picture a little bit.

Okay.

Okay.

What else?

What else?

Let's ask this one. What happens as alcohol occurs? or excuse me, what cause what causes or is caused by the alcohol? What's The alcohols purpose?

Let's ask this one. What happens as alcohol occurs? or excuse me, what cause what causes or is caused by the alcohol? What's The alcohols purpose?

what's caused by the alcohol? We already said? lit? Pardon?

what's caused by the alcohol? We already said? lit? Pardon?

It's actually a depressant.

It's actually a depressant. But it's to Usually it's to induce some kind of physiological response when people don't usually drink. I mean, now what also we have the distinction here? Most likely, we're talking about one kind of alcohol. Right? Probably beer. Why are we probably thinking beer? What do we know from here? parts of alcohol that make beer the most probable? It's easy to what? Yes. Correct. packaging is easier, because you don't walk around the football games, like shuffling over people with shard? Nay, but

But it's to Usually it's to induce some kind of physiological response when people don't usually drink. I mean, now what also we have the distinction here? Most likely, we're talking about one kind of alcohol.

Right? Probably beer.

Why are we probably thinking beer? What do we know from here? parts of alcohol that make beer the most probable?

It's easy to what? Yes.

Correct. packaging is easier, because you don't walk around the football games, like shuffling over people with shard? Nay, but Excuse me. Right? You're not doing it with a wine glass. You most likely not selling spirits, Right? probably not going to have a wet bar, you're probably not gonna have vodka on racks in the back of the concession stand, which is because you have to have a bartender's licence. Right? So by asking the questions about what the parts of it are, we start to narrow in and see this picture. Now. For the sake of argument, Let's press forward and say at this point, we've reached the height of analysis, we have the let's say, because we can always ask more questions, You do realise each one of these data points could branch off into its own little data point, like what's the nature of volume, I could, you know, any of my data points I could put back into the system, For example, kids, what causes it was caused by kids, what's happening when the kids are there? What are the parts of the kids experience, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And that could affect any of those sorts of things. So This can grow exponentially. But let's say right now, we reached the height of analysis, and you're assigned a 500, word, disputation or response, And you want to zone in on something. Before we zone in, what we want to do is we want to take this, and we want to convert the claim back into a question. That's What I want to do. That's my first step. So instead of starting with, instead of starting with a point or a thesis, I'm going to convert it back into a question. And I'm going to say, should utk sell alcohol? at games?

Excuse me.

Right? You're not doing it with a wine glass. You most likely not selling spirits, Right? probably not going to have a wet bar, you're probably not gonna have vodka on racks in the back of the concession stand, which is because you have to have a bartender's licence. Right? So by asking the questions about what the parts of it are, we start to narrow in and see this picture. Now. For the sake of argument, Let's press forward and say at this point, we've reached the height of analysis, we have the let's say, because we can always ask more questions, You do realise each one of these data points could branch off into its own little data point, like what's the nature of volume, I could, you know, any of my data points I could put back into the system, For example, kids, what causes it was caused by kids, what's happening when the kids are there? What are the parts of the kids experience, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And that could affect any of those sorts of things. So This can grow exponentially. But let's say right now, we reached the height of analysis, and you're assigned a 500, word, disputation or response, And you want to zone in on something. Before we zone in, what we want to do is we want to take this, and we want to convert the claim back into a question. That's What I want to do. That's my first step. So instead of starting with, instead of starting with a point or a thesis, I'm going to convert it back into a question. And I'm going to say,

should utk

sell alcohol? at games?

Okay.

Okay.

And then what I want to do The reason I put it into a question, is it It helps me organise my approach by creating a simple yes or no teach art?

And then what I want to do The reason I put it into a question, is it It helps me organise my approach by creating a simple yes or no teach art? Yes, they should know they should. Super Duper simple, Right. And My question is generated by all of the analysis. Now, I don't have to ask this question. I could ask something else. For example, I could have not focused on the claim, I could have focused on one of these data points. I could have said, I could have focused here and said, should kids, should there be a kid section in the stadium? You see how I got to that from my analysis. Because it undue exposure of kids to hostile, crazy drunken fans, it might be reasonable to say a section should be designated to kids in the same way a section is designated to students. It's possible. I'm not going to make that argument. But I could have gone any direction. I could have asked any question here. But what I did is kept it simple and just inverted the claim. Should we sell alcohol. Now, what I'm going to do is I'm going to plot answers on here. But I already have all the material I need. Where's the material I need? In the data. So simple. I've done the heavy lifting. The key is this can happen in an hour of sitting in a room reading out loud, You shouldn't have to go back to a dorm room and have to brainstorm all this stuff on your own. If you're part of the conversation, it's happening in real time in front of you. Here we've done analysis, This direction. And now we're since we're going to synthesise we're going to move back from parts to holes. So Let's start with the know let's start with the reasons we shouldn't. Why Shouldn't we sell alcohol the games based on our data or based on our questions?

Yes, they should know they should.

Super Duper simple, Right.

And My question is generated by all of the analysis. Now, I don't have to ask this question. I could ask something else. For example, I could have not focused on the claim, I could have focused on one of these data points. I could have said, I could have focused here and said, should kids, should there be a kid section in the stadium?

You see how I got to that from my analysis.

Because it undue exposure of kids to hostile, crazy drunken fans, it might be reasonable to say a section should be designated to kids in the same way a section is designated to students. It's possible. I'm not going to make that argument. But I could have gone any direction. I could have asked any question here. But what I did is kept it simple and just inverted the claim. Should we sell alcohol. Now, what I'm going to do is I'm going to plot answers on here. But I already have all the material I need.

Where's the material I need? In the data.

So simple. I've done the heavy lifting. The key is this can happen in an hour of sitting in a room reading out loud, You shouldn't have to go back to a dorm room and have to brainstorm all this stuff on your own. If you're part of the conversation, it's happening in real time in front of you. Here we've done analysis, This direction. And now we're since we're going to synthesise we're going to move back from parts to holes. So Let's start with the know let's start with the reasons we shouldn't. Why Shouldn't we sell alcohol the games based on our data or based on our questions?

Okay, so others?

Okay, so others?

Miners?

Miners?

danger. Keep one.

danger. Keep one.

What do you mean by that?

What do you mean by that?

Okay, okay. So physical limits.

Okay, okay. So physical limits. Go

Go back to one of your questions.

back to one of your questions.

Remember these

Remember these

things circumstantially,

things circumstantially, What iF I said, what's happening when a ball game occurs? You have to be asking yourself, what are the conditions that surround a football game?

What iF I said, what's happening when a ball game occurs? You have to be asking yourself, what are the conditions that surround

a football game?

Ask yourself all the questions you can possible thing. For example, how do people get here?

Ask yourself all the questions you can possible thing. For example, how do people get here?

Right, That's huge.

Right, That's huge.

Now go back to our chart, What's an obvious reason you don't want to sell it? Right. What else?

Now go back to our chart, What's an obvious reason you don't want to sell it? Right. What else?

What about the things you said about packaging?

What about the things you said about packaging?

Or think go back to these questions? Definition? What kind of thing is alcohol? How is alcohol delivered? We talked about the cup. What about how it's stored? Right. So The question is, do you have to go back in? What would that cause? If you have to have a cooling system? Or you have to have taps? Let's say they had taps? Okay, what's the problem with those taps?

Or think go back to these questions? Definition? What kind of thing is alcohol? How is alcohol delivered? We talked about the cup. What about how it's stored? Right. So The question is, do you have to go back in? What would that cause? If you have to have a cooling system? Or you have to have taps? Let's say they had taps? Okay, what's the problem with those taps?

So again,

So again, Okay, that's true.

Okay, that's true.

Right, we have to question How Are we going to build those?

Right, we have to question How Are we going to build those?

So Why does that matter?

So Why does that matter?

Because UT the stadium right now is not outfitted to sell alcohol. What would that mean? If they were going to choose to do it? That's, that's true, they'll make money for but they also have to spend right to do what? Yeah, to build systems that can keep the alcohol in proper condition in order to deliver it. It can't spoil as to get you have new shipping standards. So we might just say it's a logistical problem.

Because UT the stadium right now is not outfitted to sell alcohol. What would that mean? If they were going to choose to do it? That's, that's true, they'll make money for but they also have to spend right to do what? Yeah, to build systems that can keep the alcohol in proper condition in order to deliver it. It can't spoil as to get you have new shipping standards. So we might just say it's a logistical problem.

actually getting alcohol in those places.

actually getting alcohol in those places.

It may be cost prohibitive, may cost too much to have it as opposed to making it. Now, what are some of the reasons that we should based on our data and what we're thinking? Okay, obviously, people love it. Obviously, alcohol has been in the stadium for a long time.

It may be cost prohibitive, may cost too much to have it as opposed to making it. Now, what are some of the reasons that we should based on our data and what we're thinking? Okay, obviously, people love it. Obviously, alcohol has been in the stadium for a long time.

Oh, gosh.

Oh, gosh.

I mean, I can remember when I was

I mean, I can remember when I was eight years old, sitting behind the end zone, the guy behind me had binoculars that he screwed off, and just poured him into his cup that's been happening for aeons, not to mention that students already getting drunk before they go to the game.

eight years old, sitting behind the end zone, the guy behind me had binoculars that he screwed off, and just poured him into his cup that's been happening for aeons, not to mention that students already getting drunk before they go to the game. Yeah. So we've already had some alcoholic exposure. What are some reasons you say? Yes, we should.

Yeah.

So we've already had some alcoholic exposure. What are some reasons you say? Yes, we should.

OK. So the energy the good time.

OK. So the energy the good time.

That's great. Good idea. Sponsorships, that's big. If you make this in zone, the

That's great. Good idea. Sponsorships, that's big. If you make this in zone, the Budweiser, blah, blah, blah, True. Also legality mean, people who are above 21 just think why can I, you know, legally available to me? Why can I do it here?

Budweiser, blah, blah, blah,

True.

Also legality mean, people who are above 21 just think why can I, you know, legally available to me? Why can I do it here?

What else?

What else?

What about statistics? What if we can prove

What about statistics? What if we can prove

that it's not really harmful?

that it's not really harmful? Not that many people. If people have been drunk in the stadium for a long time, have we had major problems? Have we had people falling off the stands? And have we had people getting into massive fights or gun shootouts or whatever. I mean, people got the guy that got beat up outside the San Francisco Giants Stadium got beat up because he was a fan of a different team, not because people weren't necessarily have a whole lot of it, you know, accelerated it. But generally, alcohol may make some people act stupid, but we hadn't seen major problems. So that would be was what we would call precedent. Meaning like we What else? One things we haven't asked is authority. Who says what are what do experts say about x? Okay, cops, you're going to be on the no side, probably. But What about other authorities who are saying alcohol just fine in a stadium? How would we find that? Because guess what,

Not that many people. If people have been drunk in the stadium for a long time, have we had major problems? Have we had people falling off the stands? And have we had people getting into massive fights or gun shootouts or whatever. I mean, people got the guy that got beat up outside the San Francisco Giants Stadium got beat up because he was a fan of a different team, not because people weren't necessarily have a whole lot of it, you know, accelerated it. But generally, alcohol may make some people act stupid, but we hadn't seen major problems. So that would be was what we would call precedent. Meaning like we What else?

One things we haven't asked is authority.

Who says what are what do experts say about x? Okay, cops, you're going to be on the no side, probably. But What about other authorities who are saying alcohol just fine in a stadium? How would we find that? Because guess what, There are other stadiums that

There are other stadiums that

that do it?

that do it?

And Do they have problems? Not really.

And Do they have problems? Not really.

So we may find out that these are more fears than they are actualities. And so what we're doing is we're looking at our chart Now, I'm going to write a 500 word disputation response to this text. Here's The next step for me. So Here's what I've done.

So we may find out that these are more fears than they are actualities. And so what we're doing is we're looking at our chart Now, I'm going to write a 500 word disputation response to this text. Here's The next step for me. So Here's what I've done. I have inverted I've inverted the into question, I've responded by plotting data responses to my question, thrown them out there. And Here's the advantage, all the heavy lifting is done conceptually. Now, I'm going to sort them. Now in order to sort them, What I'm going to do is I'm going to come in here, and I'm going to look, and I'm going to say I'm going to I'm going to choose Yes, just for fun, By the way, this in this together,

I have inverted

I've inverted the into question, I've responded by plotting data responses to my question, thrown them out there. And Here's the advantage, all the heavy lifting is done conceptually. Now, I'm going to sort them. Now in order to sort them, What I'm going to do is I'm going to come in here, and I'm going to look, and I'm going to say I'm going to I'm going to choose Yes, just for fun, By the way, this in this together, become what you call your thesis, Right? But it's what I call your claim. That's The only difference. I'm saying claim. You've said thesis, I'm just trying to get you off that needle, I'm trying to get you off the needle of thesis, three point pair three points, or three paragraphs and a conclusion, Whatever. I'm trying to get you to think beyond that. So What I'm gonna do is I'm gonna come back in here, and I'm gonna see if any of my Yes, answers go together. Because I'm not going to write a paragraph for each one of these. I'm looking at them, and I'm thinking to any of them, but can you see any of them you think that belong together?

become what you call your thesis, Right?

But it's what I call your claim. That's The only difference. I'm saying claim. You've said thesis, I'm just trying to get you off that needle, I'm trying to get you off the needle of thesis, three point pair three points, or three paragraphs and a conclusion, Whatever. I'm trying to get you to think beyond that. So What I'm gonna do is I'm gonna come back in here, and I'm gonna see if any of my Yes, answers go together. Because I'm not going to write a paragraph for each one of these. I'm looking at them, and I'm thinking to any of them, but can you see any of them you think that belong together?

Regulation?

Regulation?

legality

legality

said again, said again.

said again, said again.

President Oh, yeah, we could say that.

President Oh, yeah, we could say that. I'm going to put precedent with already, and others. But I'm regulation, legal and statistic together, I'm going to put sponsor with money, and energy. Now look at what I've done, I've used three different notations. When I come over here to write my paper. Now, I've already have a paragraph structure of an introductory thing here. I have whatever my claim is going to be here. My first paragraph is going to be about this.

I'm going to put precedent with

already, and others. But I'm regulation, legal and statistic together, I'm going to put sponsor with money, and energy. Now look at what I've done, I've used three different notations. When I come over here to write my paper. Now, I've already have a paragraph structure of an introductory thing here. I have whatever my claim is going to be here. My first paragraph is going to be about this.

My second paragraph is going to be about this.

My second paragraph is going to be about this.

Right? And What I'm going to call them

Right? And What I'm going to call them is that x is about is going to be about the let's call it the legal implications. That is this the the, what's called the formal

is that x is about is going to be about the let's call it the legal implications. That is this the the, what's called the formal

implications.

implications.

What I'm doing is I'm taking those x's and putting them together and saying what they share in common is they're all about the formal issues, the rules, the laws, the stats,

What I'm doing is I'm taking those x's and putting them together and saying what they share in common is they're all about the formal issues, the rules, the laws, the stats, You Follow me, Those are formal things. I'm going to call the check mark. The consumer value, Sounds a lot sexier.

You Follow me,

Those are formal things.

I'm going to call the check mark.

The consumer value, Sounds a lot sexier.

And then I'm going to call the line

And then I'm going to call the line

The history

The history

of alcohol consumption. So What I'm going to say in my papers, I'm going to say we should actually sell alcohol games, because there are formal conditions that will support it, consumer value that supports it, and historical conditions

of alcohol consumption. So What I'm going to say in my papers, I'm going to say we should actually sell alcohol games, because there are formal conditions that will support it, consumer value that supports it, and historical conditions that support it. You Follow me? So all I need to do then, is that's my main paragraph. But here's the beauty. I have sub points under those. What am I sub points come from? Here? I'm going to slide Sponsorships in here somewhere. And So the key is the question about, oh, I don't have something it's not long enough I am I my writing is not long enough for whatever. When someone says I don't have any more to write, what it tells me is you haven't thought about it carefully. And that doesn't mean you're a bad thinker, it just means you might be tired.

that support it. You Follow me?

So all I need to do then, is that's my main paragraph.

But here's the beauty.

I have sub points under those. What am I sub points come from? Here? I'm going to slide Sponsorships in here somewhere. And So the key is the question about, oh, I don't have something it's not long enough I am I my writing is not long enough for whatever. When someone says I don't have any more to write, what it tells me is you haven't thought about it carefully. And that doesn't mean you're a bad thinker, it just means you might be tired.

And so in this case, In this case, we've already really got a lot of data. And we did this in 30 minutes, Granted with a lot of coaching, but I can easily take out all of those terms and put something else in there. And I could say this in your, in your business class, you read some text about some economic principle, Once you stretch out the claim and stretched out the data, you have all the stuff that you need. Now you're supposed to write a response as to how you feel about this economic principle. And you're like, I don't know, yes, or no, it's, I like it, or I don't like it. The response of I like it or don't like it, or I agree or disagree so flat. It's a juvenile. It suggests that I'm still looking at the shadows. And all I can say is yes or no. But analysis and synthesis says I can see inside it. There was a girl last hour, we were talking about parking tickets, that's example we used, and I was talking about challenging the sovereignty of parking tickets. And she said, I don't think it works that way. I was thinking that's a definitional claim. I'm making a proposal claim it shouldn't work that way. Right. And so if you can take an idea and investigate it, and open it, That's how we make progress as humans. If we simply said this is the way that it is you obey and keep your head down, we would still have major, major institutional prejudice, we still do. But it would be legal. With that stuff, we had to change because we open up these ideas as something in there is bad. And oftentimes it was down here.

And so in this case, In this case, we've already really got a lot of data. And we did this in 30 minutes, Granted with a lot of coaching, but I can easily take out all of those terms and put something else in there. And I could say this in your, in your business class, you read some text about some economic principle, Once you stretch out the claim and stretched out the data, you have all the stuff that you need. Now you're supposed to write a response as to how you feel about this economic principle. And you're like, I don't know, yes, or no, it's, I like it, or I don't like it. The response of I like it or don't like it, or I agree or disagree so flat. It's a juvenile. It suggests that I'm still looking at the shadows. And all I can say is yes or no. But analysis and synthesis says I can see inside it. There was a girl last hour, we were talking about parking tickets, that's example we used, and I was talking about challenging the sovereignty of parking tickets. And she said, I don't think it works that way. I was thinking that's a definitional claim. I'm making a proposal claim it shouldn't work that way. Right. And so if you can take an idea and investigate it, and open it, That's how we make progress as humans. If we simply said this is the way that it is you obey and keep your head down, we would still have major, major institutional prejudice, we still do. But it would be legal. With that stuff, we had to change because we open up these ideas as something in there is bad. And oftentimes it was down here. We need to talk about the war in this time. Same way with physics right? For a long time, we can only do x y&z with a gun or a plane or whatever.

We need to talk about the war in this time.

Same way with physics right? For a long time, we can only do x y&z with a gun or a plane or whatever.

But when we opened up the idea, we figured out new things.

But when we opened up the idea, we figured out new things.

Right. And So my point is, it's good to open up texts to issue these challenges to explore them, because that's how we advance. Now I want to do this one more time. I want to do early, fast. And I want to do it with Plato's Republic and show you that the same thing is operative. Okay.

Right. And So my point is, it's good to open up texts to issue these challenges to explore them, because that's how we advance. Now I want to do this one more time. I want to do early, fast. And I want to do it with Plato's Republic and show you that the same thing is operative. Okay.

Can I race this? Anybody running? Okay?

Can I race this? Anybody running? Okay?

Do you know why you're supposed to erase up and down? Oh, Jesus scared the bejesus out of me. I'm glad that's on record.

Do you know why you're supposed to erase up and down? Oh, Jesus scared the bejesus out of me. I'm glad that's on record. Do you know you're not supposed to wipe up and down? Or what side to side When your teacher? He might have a guest supposed to wipe up and down? Not sound design? Because it makes your fanny wiggle? You don't want to distract it. That's a joke. Right? Oh, good. I like that smirk. Look of like that. So stupid. Why don't you then add that. But that's like the that's the look, I'm hoping to get my wife. My favourite thing to do to my wife is say really, really Improper and inappropriate things to her at night, While we're watching TV. And she just will look over at me with this discuss and say you have problems? And I think yes, I get so excited. She says that's what you want from me as an inner city. Yes, that's what I need. I'm addicted to reactions. That's What's so hard for me to be a teacher, I either get reactions, and when I don't get any, I'm just like, I'm on withdrawal. Like, it kills me see people being like, think now I need you to I need you to do something. Now we're supposed to we're doing this with Plato's Republic. Okay. Sorry about the mess up here. What's Plato's basic claim? In what we read yesterday? Or day before yesterday?

Do you know you're not supposed to wipe up and down?

Or what side to side When your teacher? He might have a

guest

supposed to wipe up and down? Not sound design?

Because it makes your fanny wiggle? You don't want to distract it. That's a joke. Right? Oh, good. I like that smirk. Look of like that. So stupid. Why don't you then add that. But that's like the that's the look, I'm hoping to get my wife. My favourite thing to do to my wife is say really, really Improper and inappropriate things to her at night, While we're watching TV. And she just will look over at me with this discuss and say you have problems? And I think yes, I get so excited. She says that's what you want from me as an inner city. Yes, that's what I need. I'm addicted to reactions. That's What's so hard for me to be a teacher, I either get reactions, and when I don't get any, I'm just like, I'm on withdrawal. Like, it kills me see people being like,

think now I need you to I need you to do something. Now

we're supposed to we're doing this with Plato's Republic. Okay.

Sorry about the mess up here.

What's Plato's basic claim? In what we read yesterday? Or day before yesterday?

Was this basic claim about the cave in the shadows?

Was this basic claim about the cave in the shadows?

Great, Okay. That's a complicated way. But yes, we might say that, what we that we might say restricted knowledge is not knowledge.

Great, Okay. That's a complicated way. But yes, we might say that, what we that we might say restricted knowledge is not knowledge.

Okay, I'm not gonna write knowledge just for the sake of space. Nobody okay. But that will kind of claim is us.

Okay, I'm not gonna write knowledge just for the sake of space. Nobody okay. But that will kind of claim is us. Definition right. Now, Remember, what I said yesterday, is that whenever you have a claim, oftentimes, the all five claims are there, one is just sticking out more than the others. In this case, the definitional claim that restricted knowing is is not knowledge is sticking out what is this Plato also have a proposal element to that is present as you should turn around and be free. His evaluation element is, you know, being free is better than being in prison. His resemblance is that knowledge is like being free or not knowing is like me in prison. Does that make sense? So all of the other other claims are there. There's not sticking out as far. Now, our Texas Republic, what can we say about data? We would have to ask ourselves, those questions one more time. And we're going to do this quickly. I promise. We would ask ask yourself these questions. For example, how is x similar to Why? What kind of thing is x? What are the parts of x? Okay, what are the let's say x is knowing? What are the parts of knowing what does it mean to know something?

Definition right. Now,

Remember, what I said yesterday, is that whenever you have a claim, oftentimes, the all five claims are there, one is just sticking out more than the others. In this case, the definitional claim that restricted knowing is is not knowledge is sticking out what is this Plato also have a proposal element to that is present as you should turn around and be free. His evaluation element is, you know, being free is better than being in prison. His resemblance is that knowledge is like being free or not knowing is like me in prison. Does that make sense? So all of the other other claims are there. There's not sticking out as far. Now, our Texas Republic, what can we say about data? We would have to ask ourselves, those questions one more time. And we're going to do this quickly. I promise. We would ask ask yourself these questions. For example, how is x similar to Why? What kind of thing is x? What are the parts of x? Okay, what are the let's say x is knowing?

What are the parts of knowing what does it mean to know something?

Okay.

Okay.

Oh, good. familiarity. Interesting. Okay. Good. What else might we say? Where we can listen to one another word? This is for speed sake? What kind of thing is what else? Is Plato? and include in there?

Oh, good. familiarity. Interesting. Okay. Good. What else might we say? Where we can listen to one another word? This is for speed sake? What kind of thing is what else? Is Plato? and include in there?

What analogy does he use? To describe knowing?

What analogy does he use? To describe knowing?

light? Good.

light? Good. So What are the parts of light? What are the parts of dark? We can ask that. Okay, good light is seeing. Okay. We could say, we could throw dark in the same dark is danger. Dark isn't sure a lot of stuff we can throw in there. For this again, for the sake of speed, we're going to press forward a little bit. We could ask ourselves, what's another thing we could throw in there for x? Take? We are taking this from the text? What's something else in the text that Plato uses that we could throw in? I mean, what are the people? Essentially? prisoners? Good. So I might say how is ignorance similar to being imprisoned? Or what kind of thing is a prisoner? Let's say ask that one. What kind of thing is a prisoner? What's the part of being a prisoner? Good? or interesting? Or you might say something? I'm sorry to cut you off? Okay.

So What are the parts of light? What are the parts of dark? We can ask that. Okay, good light is seeing. Okay. We could say, we could throw dark in the same dark is danger.

Dark isn't sure a

lot of stuff we can throw in there.

For this again, for

the sake of speed, we're going to press forward a little bit. We could ask ourselves,

what's another thing we could throw in

there for x? Take? We are taking this from the text? What's something else in the text that Plato uses that we could throw in? I mean, what are the people? Essentially? prisoners? Good. So I might say how is ignorance

similar to being imprisoned?

Or what kind of thing is a prisoner?

Let's say ask that one. What kind of thing is a prisoner? What's the part of being a prisoner? Good? or interesting? Or you might say something? I'm sorry to cut you off? Okay.

No, freedom changed.

No, freedom changed.

Stuck.

Stuck.

alone. Oh, I like that.

alone. Oh, I like that. Okay,

Okay, Again, going back to his text, we could throw in something else. Oh, cause what caused it was caused by x. So let's say x is knowledge from Plato, what caused the person to turn around? That's what I said. Pardon? Curiosity. I hope I agree with both of you. But did Plato say that? Yes, something just happened. In the text. He just says, suppose one day, one of the prisoners turned around. So In reality, Plato really never gives us What causes the person to turn around. At the end of that part. He said, there must be some art to this, but he never answered what it is. Of course, later, he's going to say it's the art of philosophy. But in that particular text, he doesn't say. So it leaves it open to us to dispute, Right. Alright, so we're looking at all this. And this time, let's go ahead and attack the warrant, play to believe something about knowledge in his claim, and his data. That's way down there and the warrant that he never really says, But Miss Bowman really put her finger on it A moment ago in the data, that there's some that knowing is this knowing is the same as this.

Again, going back to his text, we could throw in something else. Oh, cause what caused it was caused by x. So let's say x is knowledge from Plato, what caused the person to turn around? That's what I said. Pardon? Curiosity. I hope I agree with both of you. But did Plato say that? Yes, something just happened. In the text. He just says, suppose one day, one of the prisoners turned around. So In reality, Plato really never gives us What causes the person to turn around. At the end of that part. He said, there must be some art to this, but he never answered what it is, of course, later, he's going to say it's the art of philosophy. But in that particular text, he doesn't say. So it leaves it open to us to dispute, Right? Alright, so we're looking at all this. And this time, let's go ahead and attack the warrant, play to believe something about knowledge in his claim, and his data. That's way down there and the warrant that he never really says, But Miss Bowman really put her finger on it A moment ago in the data, that there's some that knowing is this knowing is the same as this?

Nope. Nope. Nope.

Nope. Nope. Nope.

His whole analogy is based around this

His whole analogy is based around this particular sense. Keep going. This sense is what defines knowing. Nope.

particular sense. Keep going. This sense is what defines knowing, Nope.

Seeing and knowing are the same thing.

Seeing and knowing are the same thing.

Which we all naturally believe Why? Because we think this way we don't even know we do. We've accepted his His

Which we all naturally believe Why? Because we think this way we don't even know we do. We've accepted his

premise or his

warrant before even questioning it. For example, when someone says, Oh, you don't understand,

Let me paint you a picture.

They've equated knowledge with visibility. Or if we say, if you watch a movie, and all of a sudden a character figure something out what pops up above his head, a light bulb, So he went from not being able to see to being able to see and Plato uses the same examples. We've always associated knowing and seeing, which is interesting, right? Because think about what happens when I say the word dog. Right now, you know what I'm talking about. Because in your brain, you conjured an image, I didn't can't see your image. But you consciously could have been your dog, the dog that bit you a dog you saw in a magazine, The dog that you want, whatever it was, you generated an image, Right? And so for Plato, seeing knowing are very, very similar. But let's suppose I'm writing my 500 word essay. I'm not to the stage yet where I'm going to invert the question. But remember, that's what I'm going to do. My first step is going to be to establish a question, What can I ask, I could say, is restricted. Now, I could ask this question. But I don't want to something's happening inside of me when I'm hearing this. And I'm thinking,

I don't know if I'm with that.

I want to question this.

And I'm going to ask, is knowing,

Seeing

Because in my brain and myself sitting in the conversation, and I'm sitting there working through things, I'm asking myself,

why was Plato so scared of music?

He didn't like it, music or poetry.

Of course, he thinks they're copies of copies. But that aside, one of the reasons he did like music, is because it bypass your knowledge. Because guess what you don't do in music, You don't see anything. It goes straight to your skin. Somehow it gets to you before you have any images of anything. It just, It happens to you. You get goosebumps, you sweat, you react, you have a feeling a sensation, and then you might conjure an image, you might now for us, A lot of times music is associated with images, because you grew up with music videos, YouTube's blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. But historically speaking, music was just something that happened. And it didn't need any kind of image. And so played it was scared of that he didn't like that idea, because he think you need to process it. But What if he was wrong? What if knowledge is not saying but knowledge is feeling,

sensing?

smelling? What if we change the question? And so what I can do is I can go back to all of this, and I can start to plot My response. Right? And I start to take all of my data, and I start filling things out.

Whatever symbol you want to choose, Right. But that's by unique question when people say what am I supposed to write the disputation on? I'm like, whatever

you that moment,

that moment is what you read the disputation on that moment where you see something you go wait about, what about that? That unique thing that you unfold? Is your contribution to the conversation?

Some people might say the same thing. That's Okay.

But what you feel in the conversation is you recognise that there's a moment where there's a unique turn. For me, I'm doing the work up here, my unique moment is i'm not sure i buy into that one.

I think

I don't notice that I don't disagree with the claim. I don't agree or disagree with the claim. I'm not concerned with the claim. I'm concerned with this. This, to me is interesting. But there's somebody across the room, who might be really interested in this word. And they might ask, in their own paper, Is there a relationship? Between exposure and understanding?

For example, the more you

become familiar with it, the more you know it.

Somebody might come back in here and say, is there a relationship? between knowing and sexuality? You're thinking of? What are you talking about? Maybe there's something to me that I've seen that word know before, in my own religious tradition, that word is used to describe mating.

Right? He knew her.

They would say an old texts. Well, why? Why the ancient texts use the word know to describe union. Interesting, And How is that different than vision?

I don't see her know her.

I know her.

Whenever I come close to her. It's more skin oriented than it is vision oriented. You see what I'm doing here, you could go 1000 directions. What I'm trying to show you is that the disputation provides space for you to ask what you think needs to be asked, And what needs to be said, and I can't do that for you. The value of this disputation is your ability then to convert that back into a text and inside your text, guess what somebody could do with it.

They can analyse it,

Go over here, ask their questions,

Plot their answers,

Turn it back into their own text. That, in a nutshell, is what academic is, that process has been happening for hundreds of years, You come into be a student in 2019, you're entering somewhere like right here. In that chain, and Professor say, read 30 pages from your textbook, what they mean is, go back and see what the argument look like here. So you kind of know where you are, then they say write a research paper, what they mean is, find out what's been said, and tell me what you think needs to be said Next.

That's all they're doing.

It's that simple. The conversation is that movement, from analysis of synthesis, analysis, synthesis, analysis, synthesis, and are we moving forward? Or are we not? I use this example, the last class and I'll stop with this. For example, did you know you know, back, I would say, My guesses, I would say somewhere 16th century, maybe 17th century, The assumption about optics, when I say optics, you know what I mean, vision, essentially, about optics was often that something was coming out of your eyeball, not going into it. So our assumption now is that light goes into your eyeball, right? That's what our biology suggests, biology is a conversation. That wasn't always a conversation. At one point, something came out of it. What's interesting now is there there's a couple of people, One in particular, fella named Rupert Sheldrake, he's a, he's a British biologist. He's actually going back to that old model, because the

warrant right now

in biology is that vision comes into your eye. He's challenging that warrant. And he's saying, What if something goes out from your eye, and he said that she would explain one phenomenon that we've never been able to really tackle. And It's the sense of being stared at. So when you're being stared at You ever notice it? You just kind of like, it's this weird phenomena, and no one's able to explain why do we know what's happening on my skin? His son, he's actually going back and going to the old Warrington saying, in order for us to move forward and really understand staring? What if we have to revisit the warrant? What if something actually is coming out of our eyes? Maybe it's electrons. Maybe It's light rays that are reflecting back out of our eyes and going on to something. Maybe there is a different relationship between our eyes and things we're looking at that we've not yet understood? Well, you could see if he's right, it sounds zany to us right now. Because the same way would ascend zany to people when someone said, you know, the Earth is round? Right? There are moments where it does sound zany. But if we press it far enough, What could it teach us? You know, I don't know. We don't know yet. But it's an interesting thing. He does research in dogs, you would find this fascinating that somehow dogs know you know, in their owners coming home, he's done some really brilliant research,

where he will take a dog,

sit in a room, Make the owner leave at the wrong time to make sure that the dog doesn't know the schedule, come home at the wrong time. And leave in one car and drive in a different car with different drivers. So the all the dogs regulatory points are taken away, right? He doesn't even recognise a car. And it's amazing. He'll videotape the dog for hours. It's just sitting there. And then he'll he has a cross video in another place that the owner is getting in the car and starts driving home, the dog will get up and walk over the window. It's remarkable. He's trying to understand these phenomena like why what is the dog doing? Is there something happening over space that we don't know about? Because right now according to what our assumptions are, it's impossible, right? There's nothing that can be accounting for that. But he's saying there's clearly a phenomenon. There's clearly data there that we don't understand. And so we've got to play around with the warrant until we figure out what's happening, which is kind of a neat way to look at it. Here's my issue. Here's what I'm trying to show you is that this is so open to interpretation. That's The beauty of academia is that if you can get down the synthesis and analysis practice, If you can get down the General Arctic conversation of flexibilities happening here, Everything is open to question. And everything is open to text. Everything is open to new new possibilities. It's a good thing. But Do you see how this is drastically different than tell me what to do to make the grade

drastically different?

I can't make you choose one way or the other. I'm just presenting the CrossFit model. So that's where we're at. Any questions about that stuff? jumpin Yep.

Specific What problem?

prompt just the text. Just the