Articles by David Roberts

And more framing

It occurs to me that the two points in the post below -- that framing is deeper and more important than just tweaking terminology, and that the green pursuit of Lakoff is a waste of time -- might be seen to be in conflict, so a quick clarification.

Of course greens need to be cognizant of framing. Everyone does; even in a one-on-one conversation, it is helpful to be aware of the basic frames your interlocutor is bringing to bear, so that you can actually communicate instead of passing like ships in the night. That's the thing: Lakoff has not uncovered some super-top-secret political juju heretofore only possessed by the right wing. What he's done is helped clarify common sense. All you need to be "great at framing" is some empathy and a willingness to listen. (Try it at home!) It's great that he's brought some conceptual clarity to the area, but let's not lose our knickers over the whole thing.

Yes, greens need to frame their issues better. But -- much like, say, keeping your knees bent when you play tennis -- this is not an end in itself. You wouldn't go to a knee-bending camp, and you wouldn't pay someone $350,000 to show you how to keep your knees bent. Greens should be framing their issues well as a matter of course, as they go about doing other things -- like pursuing actual goals. What's been preventing them from doing so is a fairly complicated knot of issues: media access, well-funded disinformation campaigns by the other side, structural and cultural impediments in the way the movement operates, and -- let's not pretend -- some old, outdated, fusty, or otherwise unappealing positions on issues (you can't shine shit). What hasn't prevented them from framing well is some sort of arcane mystery about how framing works, or what frames are effective. An astute, empathetic observer of culture, backed by extensive poll data and personal experience interacting with those outside her immediate social/ideological circle, already knows how to frame the issues. The thing now is just doing it.

Framing

Amanda's article on Lakoff reminded me of two things I've been meaning to say about framing.

In being popularized, the concept of framing has basically been reduced to the search for magical words. It's become synonymous with spin. Molly Ivins sums it up this way:

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

The United Nations' Millennium Ecosystem Assessment was published today. I obviously haven't read it -- it's long -- but there's plenty of press coverage (though some of it is rather buried in U.S. papers). There's a nice summary on the MEA site, and you can dowload a full copy of the report there too (if you register). Here's the basic take-home message:

A landmark study released today reveals that approximately 60 percent of the ecosystem services that support life on Earth – such as fresh water, capture fisheries, air and water regulation, and the regulation of regional climate, natural hazards and pests – are being degraded or used unsustainably. Scientists warn that the harmful consequences of this degradation could grow significantly worse in the next 50 years.

I'm sure there will be much more to say, and much more said, about this in coming days.

Species essentialism

As one-time student of philosophy, I'm always happy to see it pop up in my non-academic life. So thanks to Jon Christensen for pointing to this short essay about species in Philosophy Today.

But I found it somewhat befuddling. The question on hand is, "what exactly is a species?" Geneticist Massimo Pigliucci says this: