Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Fig. 8.9
A region of the conceptual space of the interaction as determined by BETA's intervention
(26), concerning Valls, is a particular specification of a more general concept
involved in the very nature of democracy, which I note in (27):
The Game of Democracy (according to BETA)
(27) voters desire something THEREFORE the politician responds to this desire
Figure
8.9
schematises the way BETA's position can be described with a
conceptual specification, which respects the same pattern that we attributed to
ALPHA's position: a concept concerning Valls specifies a more abstract concept
defining a way of doing politics.
13
Now, what is the conceptual element common to both these positions? This
element stems from a subtle difference between ALPHA's and BETA's views:
the opposition between the verbs
to follow
(ALPHA) and
to respond
(BETA).
To
respond to the desire of the people
includes the possibility of not following popular
opinion. So that
to follow popular opinion
appears as a specific kind of
response
.
This means that BETA's
democracy
concept (which is about
responding
) appears as
a more abstract (or a less specific) concept than ALPHA's
populism
(which is about
following
). Put another way, by defining
democracy
by encompassing ALPHA's
concept of
populism
, BETA treats ALPHA's description of Valls as a particular
interpretation of democratic behaviour. In fact, if BETA can qualify ALPHA as
ill-intentioned, it is because she presents ALPHA as specifying the concept of
democracy in a way that makes
following popular opinion
the only possible kind
of
response
Valls can make to satisfy the desire of voters. Consequently, BETA
makes her own view of
democracy
function as the common conceptual frame for
both positions.
14
13
It is true that BETA does not mention Valls explicitly, but concept (26) is triggered by the fact that
BETA's post appears as a reply to ALPHA's, so the link to Valls is made by the textual association
of the two posts.
14
If we compare the three descriptions we have made, we can see that
specification
is the generic
name for a variety of possible relationships. In Sarkozy's case, the fact that Royal's position
appears as a specification of his own view, makes Royal's position appear to be partial in the sense
of
incomplete
. In the example of French hatred towards Arabs and Blacks, the most specific concept
appears as the “fact” to which the frame provides an interpretation. In the present interaction, to
include the opponent's position in a more comprehensive frame allows for it to be qualified as a
biased (ill-intentioned) position.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search