text posted at: http://ilcapoluogo.com/site/Blog/Il-Capoluogo- dei-lettori/Il-valore-dei-termini-mancato-allarme-o-rassicurazione-disastrosa
undetermined
In order to frame any issue in an effective manner should be defined through an appropriate period. Use the right words, and choose the best ones, is a prerequisite for efficient communication. This general statement can be useful to pay attention to the processes of formation of common sense catastrophic event that hit the city of L'Aquila, we are faced with a continuous skimming of cardinals terms of discourses which emerge from the tsunami that hit the place after the earthquake to spread at the level of common sense as the general categories of orientation.
These terms are found often polarized around semantic oppositions that define the positions and orbits of agreement / disagreement with the perception of the event: 'Earthquake Abruzzo' / 'earthquake' Aquila ', '5 .8 Richter magnitude' / Moment magnitude '6 .3 ',' miracle '/' profit ',' efficiency / corruption ', and so on. These terms produce the basic definitions that establish shared visions, or disapprove, but - especially in the case of the Eagle one year after the earthquake that has destroyed - can lend itself to the construction of stereotypes harmful to the community, as stigmatizing. This premise
up with some aspects, but hints about a crucial issue, we are sure that the definition in terms of no-warning "of communication implemented by the National Commission Major Hazards a week before the earthquake to be effective? The category of "Failure Alarm" has now entered into common use when the local minimum is a summary describing the work of the Commission, is an expression that we hear on the street, it is stated on the sites of online newspapers and blogs of those who in various ways to make active citizenship. After more than a year after the tragedy, and this is more important, every newspaper stories that the public prosecutor investigating the "missed alarm" formula and the assumption of charge of "manslaughter" for seven famous, powerful and - probably - protected members of that committee. Committees, advocates, active citizens have learned to say that 'the Board has not provided an earthquake ", underlining that" earthquakes are not predictable and one can not assume that nothing will happen and wave to the people' but unfortunately you do not notice dell'inappropriatezza the category of "no alarm", which is chosen to formulate the elements of an offense, now it seems to me significant in the charge of manslaughter, could hardly be envisaged. Probably reformulating the hypothesis of crime in a more appropriate it may be more feasible charge of "manslaughter in killing competition arising from natural disaster." If the question pertains to a specific legal framework, the definition of its details about a problem that must be addressed with a series of semantic premises.
Here you have to focus on one thing: the definition of "missed alarm" is wrong in our case since it produces a sense misleading with respect to the referent. On this we must be careful. 'Failure alarm' means not (pre) to say that there will be a disastrous event, and this is totally different from the (pre) say that there will be a disastrous event. In the first case does not prevent an outcome in the second worsen its consequences. Syntactically everything is played from the position of negation in the first case involved a lack of capacity in the second case is about the presence of an error.
rousing public opinion on the definition of "non-alarm" a habitat to produce meanings that can take punch to the accusations, incisiveness needed in a path of legitimate civil and search for "truth and justice, and above all exposes the counterparty - over 300 dead and a city destroyed by an earthquake that rots after a year living in the midst of an archipelago of heterotopias of crisis - the usual risk of being accused of pretentiousness to the institutions. That is why, given that the statement and the use of this definition by those seeking truth and justice produces a paradoxical form of self-disinformation, I think it might be better to replace it with "reassurance disastrous."
THE SITUATION 'FAVORABLE
proceed by articulating a cardinal point of the debate: the earthquake was preceded by a gradually growing swarm dell'estenuante period of four months and one week before the tragedy, the National Commission met Aquila Major Hazards, which reassured the people in this very way, "the scientific community confirms that There is no danger, because there is a continuous discharge of energy. The situation is favorable. " This message led most people to stay home, even after two strong tremors that occurred just before the earthquake. These assurances have contributed in a decisive manner to produce a negative outcome of over three hundred victims, who by chance (the duration and intensity of the earthquake destroyed the city without scrape it off the ground, stopping the catastrophe was lenient on the edge of the edge of destruction total) were not 3,000 or 30,000.
clarify one point: there was failure to alarm, but there was worse, there was, in fact, a "Reassurance disastrous", as such, this communication has informed - in a superficial, unfounded, misleading and deadly - the population that there would be a disaster. I say "the fact" because I believe that the high-flying science that has appealed - by title and statement - this committee has contributed significantly to the prediction confer an aura of factuality in the making. The "no warning" there was no trouble or not the alleged precursors such as radon, in terms of awareness of historical seismicity and a series of statistical and predictive models, but to kill people have contributed so decisive a "disastrous reassurance." All citizens of the affected areas have had reports of victims who were killed not only by the earthquake, but the complicity of a "disastrous reassurance." Direct witnesses know they killed people who had phoned a dear little 'before saying he would stay home because "they said that the earthquake does." The earthquake was a necessary condition of death, but not enough: to eject people from the houses would have been sufficient not only to say "warning", but also not to say anything like that would not have undermined the kind of cultural instinct unsettled on-site, fueling doubt, call the traditional custom of leaving the house after strong shock. It is grotesque to think that the doubt, the halls of science, had little chance for asylum in the scientificissima committee.
E 'blame
As is well known in defining the cunning of Odysseus' No' against Polyphemus is revealed when it denounces the other Cyclopes that no one has blinded him. Given that the words are tools of language to construct definitions of reality, and that these definitions produce social representations, you may want to linger in another semiological type of observation: the current language does not have a pure contrast against the term 'scaremongering'.
The term is composed of 'warning' (meaning "emergency alert") and the suffix "-ism" (which means in this case "dottrinarietà " unreasonable determination often linked to the collective attitudes) that together paint a meaning of " tendency to give rise to concern and fear for others in the absence of compelling reasons. " And 'the suffix'-ism 'to give the connotation dell'immotivatezza reporting emergencies. Conversely, a term that means "alert unmotivated normal "does not exist: terms such as 'calming', 'reassurance' does not necessarily lead to the connotation dell'immotivatezza. The term 'rassicurazionismo' would be appropriate, but today is not in use, and without some 'usual terms, especially composites, tend to have a hazy sense. The absurdity of this situation is revealed in its being ipso-facto indefinable through a simple attribution of meaning of terminology. The point is that the absence of the terms or exceeded with a new term that requires affirmation, or avoid the construction of compound terms, or meets with an unfortunate disadvantage: not being able to define a phenomenon increases the risk of suffering the consequences.
Explanatory information SURFACE, unfounded FUOVIANTE, LETHAL
clearly a situation that did not include a single word in common use, that would be only to find, but that is hidden somewhere in the ready-made language to describe this situation in an appropriate manner (as they say exactly, allowing to reduce it "to reduce"), requires the exercise of identifying elements considerations which could reveal the understanding of the significant features, explanation of the "emergent properties". It may be useful to explain why on the "reassurance disastrous" produced by the National Commission Major Hazards that is what is precisely because it communicates information perceived as superficial, unfounded, misleading, lethal. Let's see each of these four points.
The superficiality comes first from the ease with which the Commission was convened: the individual little shocked that the mass of the Italian public, but is now very well known as the Civil Defence had undertaken, in spite of its name, to organize the G8 in Sardinia, between more or less overt suspicion of contracts and interest that has landed from a definition of an emergency government decree (it seems also to expand areas of influence of that institution). And on this much research, although not without difficulty. Superficial because the committee has met in a hurry, seems to half an hour, and mostly likely thinking to another (although there are those in town suspect that if they are ripped off, the idea that if there was an earthquake would have been an occasion in many ways, I guess, but certainly can be). As mentioned before, refers to the superficial, in addition to careless transience of the meeting, also the carelessness against a series of studies on historical seismicity, forecasting models, statistical data, many studies already published and well-known specialist in amibito that would unequivocally invoked all'allerta. These aspects are shared with the question of groundlessness, that is, to be precise, unfounded Compared with a plan admittedly authoritative and scientific. If the superficiality of
communicate a forecast inadvertently treating a number of parameters sensitive data from a series of studies presents an action, is unfounded, as the inaccuracy from a scientific perspective is actualized in practice as set out in the affirmation of "the earthquakes can not be expected" (a term repeated several times those days and through the commission). The cardinal point for understanding these aspects concerns the erroneous treatment of the category of 'prediction', represented as a binary variable. This is inappropriate when you are dealing with stochastic processes. This concerns us because an earthquake is configured as a single event within a morphogenetic process that generally takes place in a very long time and has a type of stochastic trend. A stochastic process is a kind of process where the outcomes of a phenomenon determined by a coexistence and a structured interpenetration and quantitative variables and variables defined term, of certainty and uncertainty. A stochastic process is the more complex is the result of a more dense presence of cause and articulated the case, Gaussian distributed in many forms. That is a stochastic process can never be completely predictable or - in a complementary and opposite - totally unpredictable for this category of predictability in these cases can not be narrowly in terms of either / or binary. That is not a probability value expressed as a percentage, but with a "yes" or "no" is dry, in such cases to be considered wrong. We must sometimes to remember that in nature is around a few processes that happen or not happen with absolute certainty, and into a tangle of processes that have some chance of realization, and therefore - and mirror reversed - not to be realized.
Instead, this is an either-or, here there is no middle way: if a scientist is expressed publicly in the formality of an official conclusion by saying that "we can not predict earthquakes," then the cases tend to be heavily describable in net two options: either do not remember these things (and then not really a good thing that occupies a top institutional), or, for some reason to be clarified, is in bad faith. On it should be noted that, immediately after the earthquake and subsequent days, the experts concerned in their oral information disclosed in the mass media began to replace the statement "you can not predict earthquakes" with that "you can not predict earthquakes deterministically.
In anticipation of stochastic processes has the difference in complexity between model forecast and observed system, and that difference matters as a determinant of the level of approximation inherent in the forecast. The precise about the time of occurrence and intensity of the event. This point must be included, so you may want to explain with some examples: the scientific community has established a causal link between smoking and lung cancer, but did not produce a forecasting model that is able to determine exactly how many cigarettes a date after a person contracts cancer. Can not, but the forecast depends dall'approximation: saying that Mr. Rossi to 421,234 will develop cancer is cigarette - now and maybe in the future - unthinkable, as overly deterministic, but to say that Mr. Rossi after 400,000 cigarettes have a high probability of developing cancer is highly plausible and scientifically correct.
Similarly the statement "100 years from now in Italy there will be a disastrous earthquake" is scientifically plausible as it is based on a projection inductive historical data, but is inconsistent because it is given by an approximation too. This on the assumption that earthquakes occur due to the displacement of plates of the Earth's surface and that this displacement causes periodic jump threshold and within a limited variation of intensity, where - by zone - the randomness to the level of uncertainty of that time and the force resulting from the event. This makes it difficult but not impossible to predict "when" and "how", and that's why the warning is feasible in situations of high probability of occurrence of an earthquake of high intensity likely.
Or, continuing with an example derived from the post-seismic Aquila, to want to mention, not surprisingly, a local case: Giampaolo Giuliani - the technical and independent researcher who studies the relationship between the variation of radon gas and the occurrence of events seismic and has been treated as a low-ranking local shaman - says, summing up that 6-24 hours after a peak of Radon gas has about 80% chance that there would be a seismic event of intensity proportional to the difference of the peak. Without getting into arguments about which is not directly here you can see that in a situation of this earthquake swarm model is redundant because the average attendance of 2 or 3 events a day makes audible the interval approximation (6-24 hours) too. It would be like to get in the middle of a monsoon in India and expect that it will rain in a week: in the middle of the monsoon is too easy, no it is not, and that makes a difference in terms of effectiveness.
Another aspect of the matter is that the presence of random variation makes it possible to decrease the accuracy of the forecasts only by increasing the complexity of the models. More complex models are more accurate. For the weather forecast was made, in fact in recent years, research has developed weather through mammoth forecast algorithms, a level of confidence in the short time high, with earthquakes is more difficult since a very long time with the dynamics of plate tectonics is not very possibility of empirical testing that allow the clouds. This comparison may be useful to clarify that certain limitations do not render obsolete approximate probabilistic forecasts, but above all - mirror - lay out of any claim to scientific predictions of the absence of certain events come to realize that phenomena depend on a presence of cause and event.
Moreover, one must consider a fundamental issue that raises a possibility of distinguishing the scientific prediction from various magical arts of divination: the evaluation of a result important scientific falsifiability, just a flaw in the theory to make it obsolete, the magical-religious thought has a chance to represent the data that confirm the hypothesis and to hide those who deny it. The scientist is careful what does not, the magician hides it, try not to notice and do not become aware of others, the occult. In this, and given the results, the National Department seems to me to take more risks the appearance of a clique of tele-magicians trying for months to hide a divination catastrophic distraction of playing with the various special effects (the "miracles" of the "reconstruction ") and changing the cards on the table (here referred to the minutes of the Commission, in accordance with the sensational revelation by Professor Enzo Boschi, one of its members, wrote a shameful week after the meeting, that a handful of hours after the earthquake).
The question of serious self-incrimination (as produced by an internal member to the Committee) of the posthumous editing of the report opens with the hypothesis that the formalization of this document we have tried to reinterpret, to the extent possible that the plausible reassurance to the population disastrous dates. No longer able to pretend you try to patch to save goats (scientists) and cabbage (the statements), as follows: to reiterate the impossibility of prediction. In fact, the crux of the statement resides in the declaration of Barbieri, who says: "There is no reason why we can say that a sequence of shocks of low magnitude can be regarded as a precursor to a big event." This statement tries to weave a thread of consistency with what was said in substance before the earthquake (the earthquake there will be), but backs away from the nefarious prescriptive statements given to the population, which stops at valutatività , the "non-alarm "trying to subtly weaken the error through a declaration of the supposed impossibility of prediction. However, to see well, the statement reported in the minutes is scientifically incorrect, due to the inappropriate use of the category 'probably' just explained, implemented with respect to property phenomenon under consideration (an earthquake). That would have been appropriate to claim "there is no reason why we can say that a sequence of shocks of low magnitude can be regarded as a precursor SOME big event," but so would the ability to castle lost its credibility the alleged impossibility total (ie outside chance) of the forecast.
If the scientific approach to Giuliani, there are many questions to be clarified (but everyone knows that an increase of radon can be correlated probabilistically the occurrence of an earthquake) on non-scientific communication - both oral and written, and after that posthumous - given by the committee of scientists told us to stay in bed I think that the doubts are, in hindsight, very difficult to detect . I say this as a citizen, deeply shocked. If some doubts prove true, and it seems highly likely, I think that faced with such a spectacle of human misery is blasonatissima better pay attention, so use the appropriate terms becomes not only desirable but necessary, as long as you want to defend dall'escrementizia ability to download the blame on the spot (the offensive version that a "terremotino" would have caused many dead just because of bad homes built) in exempting national institutions from liability that seem more and more clear every day.
But putting on one side of the balance on the Commission and Giuliani do not tell the whole story: do not tell the whole story because it gets worse. In this sense, another example may be appropriate to clarify better the nature of these processes and systems of understanding that from time immemorial, man has put in place in an attempt to predict them. It is known that in places with high seismicity, as a result of the periodicity of events, developed in the course of history a reservoir of traditional knowledge that seen in domestic animals or less often wild, a possibility for use in the function of precursors of seismic events.
These folk use but can be understood in terms of science since unknowingly rely on deposit passed down from empirical cases (transmission through oral memory of remote events before an earthquake in which certain species have shown signs of agitation) and on an implicit premise of the inductive type (if it has happened so far can still happen). This is what makes these procedures are examples of scientific folklore. Are examples of an oxymoron because, obviously, is not totally streamlined procedures, but practices entrusted with a provision by passing on sensitive data intergenerational interlocal from transmitting a series of direct and indirect experiences.
If Japan is now widely documented case of wealthy families often that having domestic space available, home-grown specimen of a goat used to own such a function, in L'Aquila in this speech is absolutely mind that April 6, 2009 Roio an elderly lady was saved because, despite having received invitations to be quiet repeatedly reported by our scientists through television, decided not to be considered reliable, because they prefer to listen exceptional agitation shown by his chickens, so that night and left the house, which Thus, when at 3:32 collapsed in the earthquake, he could not bury her alive. All this means that the forecast of the National Commission Major Hazards proved false light of the facts, and saw the good lady Maria di Roio to listen to his chickens.
want to reduce everything to the simplification of the balance we have on a plate - the error - our seven expert interpreters of a centuries-old tradition of mainstream science, and on the other - the one the hypothesis confirmed by the facts - the unconscious and spontaneous scientific folklore of Mrs. Mary, with her chickens. If there is no doubt that scientific progress has given great opportunities to mankind (even if exposing a large risk, just to borrow a term fatal) hard to believe that the dignitaries of this journey - from Archimedes to Einstein, through Galileo, Newton and many others - would feel in good company if you approached the Commission with which we was lucky to get to L'Aquila with the task of protecting us. I think they would much prefer the company of hens than that of these "highest scientific authorities of the seismic industry, can provide the most current and reliable picture of what is happening" (and these are the exact title that reads the report prepared by themselves that you just said above).
Cause and if so, factors inextricably simultaneously present in many processes, including earthquakes, and was also for this reason that thousands were saved in L'Aquila from buildings damaged by the disaster that has left at the edge of collapse, the buildings, in the opinion of the experts (but this time not those of the Commission), on average, have a right handful of seconds more, or at most a few tenths of magnitude, before collapsing. And not because poorly constructed, but, that is because of the violence of the shock, in relation to its shallow depth and epicenter conjunction with the city. Yeah, the earthquake has stopped, at some point it stopped, just in time, for many thousands of lives hang by a thread, even to the complicity of the nonsense of this committee. And that night, assuming a purely abductive that supports those who by faith to the sacred, they believe in a world dominated by supernatural forces, in that half-minute prayed many older women who jumped into bed in the room, including furniture and rubble falling everywhere. They prayed in the dark invoking the intercession of St. Emidio, protector - not civil sacred time - by the earthquake, desperate, pleading to stop the earthquake. Many of these believers are saved, and assign the case to the intercession of the saint, someone is dead, because, according to a certain way of seeing the world, the cause is attributed to the fact Sant'Emidio that did not arrive on time.
If religion relates to a speech not fully commensurable with respect to what I write, these words are used in this speech to remember an episode of the sacred and the earthquake: a case of total destruction of the Avezzano earthquake of 1915, the city decided to suspend the solemn veneration paid tribute to the saint until then, in short, decided to remove it, because, according to the popular interpretation then sanctioned by the decision of local ecclesiastical institutions, was wrong. As a layman I stop and approach at this point clear, and I wonder why some people still in L'Aquila pays some secular and veneration to the subjects that are of enormous doubts cialtroneria and corruption. The answer I give is that, in fact, the earthquake has left many living Aquila, and - similarly to what happens in wars and the opposite of the allegory of "level" - many of those alive have done and are making a fortune . These will be mostly of the ultras certain people. Sure, there may be more, but concerned over selfishness, cowardice, a naive from "Stockholm syndrome", the simple idiocy I can not find reasons to certain excesses of gratitude.
After this journey through illness, earthquakes, gas precursors, animal horns, magicians, and saints, prophets, charlatans and criminals, perhaps a bit gain greater understanding of 'the vicissitudes through which certain processes that combine cause and enter the event in the lives of those who lived through those times, it is appropriate to say, "on their skin," is the time to latch on to specific discourse on the four main aspects related to this "reassurance disastrous." In this sense, one can conclude by saying that after the effect is shallowness el'infondatezza chain: the alleged scientific nature of this frenzy was the astrology brand, quality assurance, the property that made misleading once it was communicated to the population Aquila: the mimesis of cialtronaggine through a solemn and authoritative scientific cloaked in a fairy tale has been passed off as dogma, and this - before fatal conditions that have occurred - has made it a lethal weapon.
The superficiality comes first from the ease with which the Commission was convened: the individual little shocked that the mass of the Italian public, but is now very well known as the Civil Defence had undertaken, in spite of its name, to organize the G8 in Sardinia, between more or less overt suspicion of contracts and interest that has landed from a definition of an emergency government decree (it seems also to expand areas of influence of that institution). And on this much research, although not without difficulty. Superficial because the committee has met in a hurry, seems to half an hour, and mostly likely thinking to another (although there are those in town suspect that if they are ripped off, the idea that if there was an earthquake would have been an occasion in many ways, I guess, but certainly can be). As mentioned before, refers to the superficial, in addition to careless transience of the meeting, also the carelessness against a series of studies on historical seismicity, forecasting models, statistical data, many studies already published and well-known specialist in amibito that would unequivocally invoked all'allerta. These aspects are shared with the question of groundlessness, that is, to be precise, unfounded Compared with a plan admittedly authoritative and scientific. If the superficiality of
communicate a forecast inadvertently treating a number of parameters sensitive data from a series of studies presents an action, is unfounded, as the inaccuracy from a scientific perspective is actualized in practice as set out in the affirmation of "the earthquakes can not be expected" (a term repeated several times those days and through the commission). The cardinal point for understanding these aspects concerns the erroneous treatment of the category of 'prediction', represented as a binary variable. This is inappropriate when you are dealing with stochastic processes. This concerns us because an earthquake is configured as a single event within a morphogenetic process that generally takes place in a very long time and has a type of stochastic trend. A stochastic process is a kind of process where the outcomes of a phenomenon determined by a coexistence and a structured interpenetration and quantitative variables and variables defined term, of certainty and uncertainty. A stochastic process is the more complex is the result of a more dense presence of cause and articulated the case, Gaussian distributed in many forms. That is a stochastic process can never be completely predictable or - in a complementary and opposite - totally unpredictable for this category of predictability in these cases can not be narrowly in terms of either / or binary. That is not a probability value expressed as a percentage, but with a "yes" or "no" is dry, in such cases to be considered wrong. We must sometimes to remember that in nature is around a few processes that happen or not happen with absolute certainty, and into a tangle of processes that have some chance of realization, and therefore - and mirror reversed - not to be realized.
Instead, this is an either-or, here there is no middle way: if a scientist is expressed publicly in the formality of an official conclusion by saying that "we can not predict earthquakes," then the cases tend to be heavily describable in net two options: either do not remember these things (and then not really a good thing that occupies a top institutional), or, for some reason to be clarified, is in bad faith. On it should be noted that, immediately after the earthquake and subsequent days, the experts concerned in their oral information disclosed in the mass media began to replace the statement "you can not predict earthquakes" with that "you can not predict earthquakes deterministically.
In anticipation of stochastic processes has the difference in complexity between model forecast and observed system, and that difference matters as a determinant of the level of approximation inherent in the forecast. The precise about the time of occurrence and intensity of the event. This point must be included, so you may want to explain with some examples: the scientific community has established a causal link between smoking and lung cancer, but did not produce a forecasting model that is able to determine exactly how many cigarettes a date after a person contracts cancer. Can not, but the forecast depends dall'approximation: saying that Mr. Rossi to 421,234 will develop cancer is cigarette - now and maybe in the future - unthinkable, as overly deterministic, but to say that Mr. Rossi after 400,000 cigarettes have a high probability of developing cancer is highly plausible and scientifically correct.
Similarly the statement "100 years from now in Italy there will be a disastrous earthquake" is scientifically plausible as it is based on a projection inductive historical data, but is inconsistent because it is given by an approximation too. This on the assumption that earthquakes occur due to the displacement of plates of the Earth's surface and that this displacement causes periodic jump threshold and within a limited variation of intensity, where - by zone - the randomness to the level of uncertainty of that time and the force resulting from the event. This makes it difficult but not impossible to predict "when" and "how", and that's why the warning is feasible in situations of high probability of occurrence of an earthquake of high intensity likely.
Or, continuing with an example derived from the post-seismic Aquila, to want to mention, not surprisingly, a local case: Giampaolo Giuliani - the technical and independent researcher who studies the relationship between the variation of radon gas and the occurrence of events seismic and has been treated as a low-ranking local shaman - says, summing up that 6-24 hours after a peak of Radon gas has about 80% chance that there would be a seismic event of intensity proportional to the difference of the peak. Without getting into arguments about which is not directly here you can see that in a situation of this earthquake swarm model is redundant because the average attendance of 2 or 3 events a day makes audible the interval approximation (6-24 hours) too. It would be like to get in the middle of a monsoon in India and expect that it will rain in a week: in the middle of the monsoon is too easy, no it is not, and that makes a difference in terms of effectiveness.
Another aspect of the matter is that the presence of random variation makes it possible to decrease the accuracy of the forecasts only by increasing the complexity of the models. More complex models are more accurate. For the weather forecast was made, in fact in recent years, research has developed weather through mammoth forecast algorithms, a level of confidence in the short time high, with earthquakes is more difficult since a very long time with the dynamics of plate tectonics is not very possibility of empirical testing that allow the clouds. This comparison may be useful to clarify that certain limitations do not render obsolete approximate probabilistic forecasts, but above all - mirror - lay out of any claim to scientific predictions of the absence of certain events come to realize that phenomena depend on a presence of cause and event.
Moreover, one must consider a fundamental issue that raises a possibility of distinguishing the scientific prediction from various magical arts of divination: the evaluation of a result important scientific falsifiability, just a flaw in the theory to make it obsolete, the magical-religious thought has a chance to represent the data that confirm the hypothesis and to hide those who deny it. The scientist is careful what does not, the magician hides it, try not to notice and do not become aware of others, the occult. In this, and given the results, the National Department seems to me to take more risks the appearance of a clique of tele-magicians trying for months to hide a divination catastrophic distraction of playing with the various special effects (the "miracles" of the "reconstruction ") and changing the cards on the table (here referred to the minutes of the Commission, in accordance with the sensational revelation by Professor Enzo Boschi, one of its members, wrote a shameful week after the meeting, that a handful of hours after the earthquake).
The question of serious self-incrimination (as produced by an internal member to the Committee) of the posthumous editing of the report opens with the hypothesis that the formalization of this document we have tried to reinterpret, to the extent possible that the plausible reassurance to the population disastrous dates. No longer able to pretend you try to patch to save goats (scientists) and cabbage (the statements), as follows: to reiterate the impossibility of prediction. In fact, the crux of the statement resides in the declaration of Barbieri, who says: "There is no reason why we can say that a sequence of shocks of low magnitude can be regarded as a precursor to a big event." This statement tries to weave a thread of consistency with what was said in substance before the earthquake (the earthquake there will be), but backs away from the nefarious prescriptive statements given to the population, which stops at valutatività , the "non-alarm "trying to subtly weaken the error through a declaration of the supposed impossibility of prediction. However, to see well, the statement reported in the minutes is scientifically incorrect, due to the inappropriate use of the category 'probably' just explained, implemented with respect to property phenomenon under consideration (an earthquake). That would have been appropriate to claim "there is no reason why we can say that a sequence of shocks of low magnitude can be regarded as a precursor SOME big event," but so would the ability to castle lost its credibility the alleged impossibility total (ie outside chance) of the forecast.
If the scientific approach to Giuliani, there are many questions to be clarified (but everyone knows that an increase of radon can be correlated probabilistically the occurrence of an earthquake) on non-scientific communication - both oral and written, and after that posthumous - given by the committee of scientists told us to stay in bed I think that the doubts are, in hindsight, very difficult to detect . I say this as a citizen, deeply shocked. If some doubts prove true, and it seems highly likely, I think that faced with such a spectacle of human misery is blasonatissima better pay attention, so use the appropriate terms becomes not only desirable but necessary, as long as you want to defend dall'escrementizia ability to download the blame on the spot (the offensive version that a "terremotino" would have caused many dead just because of bad homes built) in exempting national institutions from liability that seem more and more clear every day.
But putting on one side of the balance on the Commission and Giuliani do not tell the whole story: do not tell the whole story because it gets worse. In this sense, another example may be appropriate to clarify better the nature of these processes and systems of understanding that from time immemorial, man has put in place in an attempt to predict them. It is known that in places with high seismicity, as a result of the periodicity of events, developed in the course of history a reservoir of traditional knowledge that seen in domestic animals or less often wild, a possibility for use in the function of precursors of seismic events.
These folk use but can be understood in terms of science since unknowingly rely on deposit passed down from empirical cases (transmission through oral memory of remote events before an earthquake in which certain species have shown signs of agitation) and on an implicit premise of the inductive type (if it has happened so far can still happen). This is what makes these procedures are examples of scientific folklore. Are examples of an oxymoron because, obviously, is not totally streamlined procedures, but practices entrusted with a provision by passing on sensitive data intergenerational interlocal from transmitting a series of direct and indirect experiences.
If Japan is now widely documented case of wealthy families often that having domestic space available, home-grown specimen of a goat used to own such a function, in L'Aquila in this speech is absolutely mind that April 6, 2009 Roio an elderly lady was saved because, despite having received invitations to be quiet repeatedly reported by our scientists through television, decided not to be considered reliable, because they prefer to listen exceptional agitation shown by his chickens, so that night and left the house, which Thus, when at 3:32 collapsed in the earthquake, he could not bury her alive. All this means that the forecast of the National Commission Major Hazards proved false light of the facts, and saw the good lady Maria di Roio to listen to his chickens.
want to reduce everything to the simplification of the balance we have on a plate - the error - our seven expert interpreters of a centuries-old tradition of mainstream science, and on the other - the one the hypothesis confirmed by the facts - the unconscious and spontaneous scientific folklore of Mrs. Mary, with her chickens. If there is no doubt that scientific progress has given great opportunities to mankind (even if exposing a large risk, just to borrow a term fatal) hard to believe that the dignitaries of this journey - from Archimedes to Einstein, through Galileo, Newton and many others - would feel in good company if you approached the Commission with which we was lucky to get to L'Aquila with the task of protecting us. I think they would much prefer the company of hens than that of these "highest scientific authorities of the seismic industry, can provide the most current and reliable picture of what is happening" (and these are the exact title that reads the report prepared by themselves that you just said above).
Cause and if so, factors inextricably simultaneously present in many processes, including earthquakes, and was also for this reason that thousands were saved in L'Aquila from buildings damaged by the disaster that has left at the edge of collapse, the buildings, in the opinion of the experts (but this time not those of the Commission), on average, have a right handful of seconds more, or at most a few tenths of magnitude, before collapsing. And not because poorly constructed, but, that is because of the violence of the shock, in relation to its shallow depth and epicenter conjunction with the city. Yeah, the earthquake has stopped, at some point it stopped, just in time, for many thousands of lives hang by a thread, even to the complicity of the nonsense of this committee. And that night, assuming a purely abductive that supports those who by faith to the sacred, they believe in a world dominated by supernatural forces, in that half-minute prayed many older women who jumped into bed in the room, including furniture and rubble falling everywhere. They prayed in the dark invoking the intercession of St. Emidio, protector - not civil sacred time - by the earthquake, desperate, pleading to stop the earthquake. Many of these believers are saved, and assign the case to the intercession of the saint, someone is dead, because, according to a certain way of seeing the world, the cause is attributed to the fact Sant'Emidio that did not arrive on time.
If religion relates to a speech not fully commensurable with respect to what I write, these words are used in this speech to remember an episode of the sacred and the earthquake: a case of total destruction of the Avezzano earthquake of 1915, the city decided to suspend the solemn veneration paid tribute to the saint until then, in short, decided to remove it, because, according to the popular interpretation then sanctioned by the decision of local ecclesiastical institutions, was wrong. As a layman I stop and approach at this point clear, and I wonder why some people still in L'Aquila pays some secular and veneration to the subjects that are of enormous doubts cialtroneria and corruption. The answer I give is that, in fact, the earthquake has left many living Aquila, and - similarly to what happens in wars and the opposite of the allegory of "level" - many of those alive have done and are making a fortune . These will be mostly of the ultras certain people. Sure, there may be more, but concerned over selfishness, cowardice, a naive from "Stockholm syndrome", the simple idiocy I can not find reasons to certain excesses of gratitude.
After this journey through illness, earthquakes, gas precursors, animal horns, magicians, and saints, prophets, charlatans and criminals, perhaps a bit gain greater understanding of 'the vicissitudes through which certain processes that combine cause and enter the event in the lives of those who lived through those times, it is appropriate to say, "on their skin," is the time to latch on to specific discourse on the four main aspects related to this "reassurance disastrous." In this sense, one can conclude by saying that after the effect is shallowness el'infondatezza chain: the alleged scientific nature of this frenzy was the astrology brand, quality assurance, the property that made misleading once it was communicated to the population Aquila: the mimesis of cialtronaggine through a solemn and authoritative scientific cloaked in a fairy tale has been passed off as dogma, and this - before fatal conditions that have occurred - has made it a lethal weapon.
should be careful
In this earthquake, role in the earthquake, the part that concerns us is to be expropriated, city, of the rights that others have had earthquakes, possibility of dissent, where new and expensive homes on a free loan given to a minority of displaced subsume propagandistically speculation, profiteering and malfunctions different, where it took two hundred yards to reopen the road to say that the center was reopened, where he spoke awkwardly of "miracles" and "reconstruction" hiding the reality of a devastated city. These "expropriation materials" are a clear set of "symbolic expropriation." These expropriations in the language, hidden but necessary premise to the deprivation of autonomy, are accomplished by means of definitions that are misleading and linked together by a relationship of consequence: lower the magnitude, blaming a housing deemed unreasonable, taking responsibility away from a State Commission has reassured that instead of protecting an institution a government that has come before - to want to describe in rough summary - to assist commanding, that is, not making themselves available to help, but to give unidirectionally provisions, certainly help, but also to help themselves. Even as they tried to take away from this earthquake: not "earthquake Eagle" for months has been imposed on the term "earthquake d'Abruzzo," and thus still called the Decree of the Government to support the population earthquake (with a name like that at a regional level increases the possibility of having arbitrarily funds to spread throughout the country, as it seems to have tried to do in recent months, several times, those who command us).
If we reclaim our right to exist locally, we must understand that the first instrument for self-reliance is the language. Autonomy means give the name, which is developing a capacity for self-centered attribution of meaning in the world, this is the only antidote to avoid being passively processes of hetero-direction. The world is (re) founded from the denomination. And the city is not (re) build (physically) if the first is not (re) based (symbolic). Who lives in a world of quantity, governed by time and short-sighted economic policy does not reflect the inherent difference in quality social and cultural time-consuming. However, it will be the history to judge the truth of facts that now seem plausible because of television, the tyranny can inflate the likely true, but in general we can not for long. It is no getting around it, this earthquake may be remembered as the first earthquake of the propaganda we are in the midst of a war of symbols in which, as in any war, the feeling between the parties tends to be reduced to autism-aut. A conflict of symbols whose stake in the colonization of the collective national sense of a disaster on the local landmark, where more and more risk is a polarization of the significance of the event, a tug of war or when you are unable to Aquila buckle to the stigma of ingratitude and pretentiousness, or the King is discovered naked, and shows that the Government, through the help, he used an earthquake as a tool for propaganda and profit, more as an opportunity to play the world order and as a moral obligation to treat a place injured.
This conflict is propaganda in the middle of speeches produced by the tsunami earthquake disaster disrupts the normal mechanisms inertia of the place affected, the absurdity tends to become normal and generate a unique secretion of speeches in the function of healing the breach between product the "before" and "after." Being inundated with signs is more difficult to find relevance of sense, identify priorities of issues that can help a better understanding of the events. However, in what must be clear that if the sentences are a tide that engulfs us, the words that compose them are in small numbers, and educate key terms to filter with which to build an effective collective discourse that is able to re-establish the flow of identity of the place. The speeches that float on the ruins of the city are numerous and are increasing with each passing day, but the terms they contain must be understood in the same way as bricks, if well chosen, may in time make a difference.
Anyway, back to the specific discourse of these lines is necessary to reaffirm in conclusion the importance of careful not to speak the work of the National Commission Major Hazards only in terms of "missed alarm" and, mind you, not for a questionable matter of personal preference but a matter of semantic correctness. It is worth watching with his heart - one by one - who served more than three hundred dead listening to those scientific assurances, to become aware of the fact that one hundred thousand live that did the same are most often live by chance, and then to understand - and fully out of rhetoric - the ones that were first "disastrous assurances" which was put in place "in a contest wrongful murder arising from a natural disaster."
The terms are the building blocks of language, so the value of the terms is given that they have the ability to produce effective communication. Theories that are observed, gas, chicken or cults, that is the same principle: if you do not use the terms appropriate to put a structure capable of, the statements that were built with little resistance, and may collapse under stress.
L'Aquila 13/6/2010
0 comments:
Post a Comment