Jump to content

guilluamezenz

Member
  • Content Count

    6,435
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • Political Party:
    Socialist

Profile Fields

  • Website URL
    https://www.facebook.com/peoplesfrontofjudya

Profile Information

  • Gender
    male
  • Location
    cleveland
  • Interests
    politics history

Recent Profile Visitors

1,176 profile views
  1. Oh is that a fact? you saw it with your own eyes did you? well so did i The Rashomon effect is a term related to the notorious unreliability of eye witnesses. It describes a situation in which an event is given contradictory interpretations or descriptions by the individuals involved. The effect is named after Akira Kurosawa's 1950 film Rashomon, in which a murder is described in four contradictory ways by four witnesses.[1] The term addresses the motives, mechanism and occurrences of the reporting on the circumstance and addresses contested interpretations of events, the existence of disagreements regarding the evidence of events and subjectivity versus objectivity in human perception, memory and reporting. The Rashomon effect has been defined in a modern academic context as "the naming of an epistemological framework—or ways of thinking, knowing, and remembering—required for understanding complex and ambiguous situations".[2] The history of the term and its permutations in cinema, literature, legal studies, psychology, sociology and history is the subject of a 2015 multi-author volume edited by Blair Davis (DePaul University), Robert Anderson and Jan Walls (both of Simon Fraser University).[3] Valerie Alia termed the same effect "The Rashomon Principle" and has used this variant extensively since the late 1970s, first publishing it in an essay on the politics of journalism in 1982.[citation needed] She developed the term in a 1997 essay "The Rashomon Principle: The Journalist as Ethnographer" and in her 2004 book, Media Ethics and Social Change.[4][5] A useful demonstration of this principle in scientific understanding can be found in Karl G. Heider's 1988 journal article on ethnography.[6] Heider used the term to refer to the effect of the subjectivity of perception on recollection, by which observers of an event are able to produce substantially different but equally plausible accounts of it.
  2. we nned to fire everyone on the supreme court and when we have the house and the senate and the presidency we decide who sits thre, this is war, there are no rules anymore iether we kill them or they kill us, they threw down the gawnlet we have no choice but to play be the right wings rules or lack of them
  3. an angry mob needs to lynch the supreme court.. after a fair and legal trial.. of course wouldnt want to violate brandenburg there
  4. this is no longer your country man, we decide who the traitors are and yeah i'm looking right at you!
  5. the left is unarmed in order to get effective gun laws every leftists every gay trangender minority lesbian must arm.. only then will we have efective gun laws if you cantbeet them join them by a gun and shoot back once we seize power we can take about gun cotrol
  6. in defense of the rednacks they are correct even though most people feel its over kill it isnt just negores they shot they shoot everyone and everything puppies kitten babies each other thats what happens when everyone has a gun
  7. anyone anyone? this movie was so good it made ben stien funny
  8. shame on all of you for not mention ing ferris bueller s day off
  9. okay but has anyone gonna mention roshoman? or deven samaria jojimbo ?? anyone anyone?
  10. Sunset boulevard 100% spot on maltes falson third man yep good list
×
×
  • Create New...