Close

Support Global Voices

To stay independent, free, and sustainable, our community needs the help of friends and readers like you.

Donate now »

See all those languages up there? We translate Global Voices stories to make the world's citizen media available to everyone.

Learn more about Lingua Translation  »

Reflections on Blogging with Fernando Flores

Chilean Senator Fernando Flores has been an active promoter of blogs in Chile. He's introduced them in a serious context. In this interview, he reflects about blogs, posts, comments, opinions, and how to build progressive common worlds through language.

Part 1

null

Fernando, lets talk about your blog and its difference from other types of blogs?

On occasions people write to me and ask, why don’t you give opinions on your blog, others complain about why I “copy and paste”?

The main feature of my blog is to disclose worlds, so I can bring into the blog issues with out making an opinion. My work is to disclose, not to be an opinionated person. My policy is not to give opinions. I choose themes, and even if I have a negative opinion of them, I have selected them because I think them important, worth mentioning to share them with others. I believe other people do other things, they have biased opinions, it’s not the style of my blog and not the style of me as a senator.

I think that I am good at watching what goes on in the world, so I share issues that I discern as important, within a certain line. So, I share 4 or 5 themes such as technology, education, digital vanguard. I read around 1000 posts per day; where I find a lot to share. I do a selection labour and a lot of readers appreciate it. The other reason for doing “cut and paste” is that I am a Senator and I don’t have time to write five articles per day.

Another phenomenon is that at times I post the complete text, and readers ask me, why don’t you just post the link? My readers are still in a junior stage of blogs, so if I only post the link, they will not click it, and the link will get lost, therefore, I feel obliged to post the full article.

Blogs must have a purpose, oriented to a community of readers that you are trying to reach. I do not have a diary blog, or a senator news blog, or a senator's opinion blog. I have not used my blog for political issues, even though -I am part of the power structure of the country – its not my way of blogging.

What would be the style of your blog?

Well, it is not only about posting, you need to have a strategy. And in this strategy there is always a permanent question mark, as we do not know which will be the events that will feed this strategy, what things are going to happen in the world.

For me, the blog philosophy is similar to editing a magazine. I have to be at the service of my readers and my potential readers and to write for their mentality, rather than just write for myself. There is a tension between writing for personal interest and writing for the reader’s mentality. That depends on the style that you have. I write for the mentality of my readers.

I would like to ask you about your point of view regarding comments and opinions?

I think people should think about on what is to give an opinion. Written language is more reflective than oral language. In oral language people tend to give fewer reasons on what they are saying. In the written language people give more reasons, about the things they say. It is a much deeper phenomenon, it is the ontological discussion between statements and judgments. People do not know that opinions belong to the family of judgments and therefore they cannot ask for evidence to settle them. On the other hand, affirmations can be settled through evidence. Every time we make a judgment we risk something. If you said that a person is talking bullshit, people can ask you, ‘why did you say that? And if you don’t have an answer, you will appear to be the “bullshitter.”

The bullshitter is the person who talks and is not careful with what he or she is saying, but that's not the same as being a liar. Bullshit says things as real without checking if they are true, they don’t care if that is going to affect others; it build castles in the air. The judgment of the liar is different, because the liar does give false statements knowing they are false. This is a failure of sincerity.

An example of this is the Google and China issue. Several people have judged Google, as if judging is the main matter. I believe that what is relevant is the fact itself and the recognition of it as an ethic dilemma. It is not an easy decision to abandon China. China, as any nation, has a principle of sovereignty therefore you have to negotiate trade agreements the best way possible. Anyway that’s good for China. I dare to say this now, as I had formed this opinion through all the discussion. Before, my opinion might have been a quick reaction. Quick reactions can become negative judgment.

The bull shittter makes careless promises, careless statements, (without evidence) but they dont have the deceit of the liars. It also happens with promises which cannot be denied through evidence, there’s always a gap, in the moment a promise is made and in the moment the promise gets achieved. If the gap is not defined ahead, that takes you into a bullshitter attitude. There is also the liar who makes promises knowing beforehand that he has no intention of achieving them.

Language has two components, one part of language represents reality and other part has to do with inventing worlds with another. The invention of worlds is done through offers, promises, requests, and statements. When a post is written, what the person is really doing is offering, promising, requesting and declaring. These conversations open the possibilities of building a collective world together. When these four actions are made carelessly (without evidence) and like biased opinions, they do not contribute to build a world together.

The concept of bullshit, is a reference from the book, “On Bullshit”, Harry G. Frankfurt. The book was on the table while the interview was taking place.

16 comments

  • […] This is the second part of an interview with Chilean senator, author, and blogger, Fernando Flores. The first part can be found here. […]

  • cgilbert

    Mr. Flores was using the concept of “bullshit” long before the book by Mr. Frankfurt was published. I doubt that the book had much to do with his distinctions in this interview.

  • Por lo menos una vez a la semana me interesa leer lo que publica el Senador Fernando Flores. hace años conocí su libro sobre la empresa del siglo XXI y el posible uso del software para el díalogo empresarial y me pareció muy útil para mi tesis de doctorado sobre el Análisis de Contenido (Content Analysis). Su blog es interesante por que recuerda la misma idea del RSS o sea conocer en un solo espacio varios asuntos que él seleccionada de la red. Además los comentarios enriquecen lo escrrito en el blog y de esa manera existe un diálogo.
    (At least once a week interests me to read what publishes the Senator Fernando Flores. Years ago I knew its book on the business of the 21st century and the possible use of the software for the diálogo business and seemed me very useful for my PhD thesis on the Analisis of Contenido (Content Analysis). Its blog is interesting because recalls the same idea of the RSS that is to say to know in a single space various matters that selected of the network. Besides the comments enrich his blog and of that way exists communication ).

    Alfredo Ascanio,PhD
    Universidad Simón Bolívar
    Caracas-Venezuela
    aascanio@usb.ve
    http://askain.blogspot.com

  • […] Estas cosas me las planteo a raiz de la meliflua meliflua entrevista que le hacen a Fernando Flores en Global Voices. La entrevista me recordó los mejores años de María Eugenia Oyarzún en dictadura. No sé ustedes. […]

  • Los blogs como un estado de diálogo

    Hace unos días escuché el programa de .NET Rocks sobre las iniciativas de administración de identidad con Kim Cameron como invitado y, como al pasar, mostró su asombro por cómo su blog le cambió la vida.

  • I had the pain, pleasure, and honor to be one of Dr. Flores’ adult students during his open-enrollment teaching career in the USA in the 1980s and 90s. It was THE most powerful, personal paradigm-shifting event of my life, and I will forever be indebted to him.

    Anyone interested in developing a grasp of the powerful insights he has synthesized might want to Google:
    (1) ‘the language/action perspective (L/AP)’; and (2)the work of one of his teachers and colleagues, Dr. Umberto Maturana (University of Santiago); and
    (3)consult one of the several books he has authored or co-authored, Computers & Cognition.

    What might escape the awareness of the casual or first-time reader is that his ideas, while different, are utterly practical. His work, in fact, opens the door to each of us to better manage our behavior and that of the groups of which we are a part. Which,in turn, makes cooperation, survival, and prosperity on issues from global-warming to economic development and peace more possible, even probable.

    Muchas gracias, Dr. Flores. Keep on blogging!

    Gary Blanchard, MPA Westampton, NJ USA

  • “I can bring into the blog issues with out making an opinion” This sounds so old fashioned, a long-long time ago people realized this is an impossibility. You can’t be objective… and if you try to be, you’ll sound dull and boring.

  • […] August 3rd, 2007 Conducted earlier this year by Rosario Lizana, the full text of the interview can be found here. […]

  • Joe Alberti

    I did some workshops with Flores in the 1980’s. I still have exercises from his advanced correspondence workshop and living in action…

  • I took a workshop with Fernando Flores in Cleveland, Ohio approx 1987. I was much younger and quite naive. I had just started my first business buying and selling silver jewelry but complained that I felt like I was paying too much for the wholesale rate. Fernando said something to me which was direct yet gentle:”Your problem is that you are not willing to walk away from a deal.” Best words ever spoken. It has given me much freedom not repeating that mistake. Now, I am a published author 3x over including being published in Brazil “Como Ser Irresistivel para a Sex Oposto”, have raised a beautiful independent daughter,and started and succeeded with many businesses. The most important part is that I am HAPPY with life! I have never forgotten those moments when someone like Fernando was willing to assess me in such a clear way. Now, I spend my life in Monterey,CA waking people up mentally, emotionally, and spiritually. Thankyou Thankyou Thankyou Fernando Flores.
    I would love to connect with others who took Fernando’s courses in the late 80’s.

    • Hello Susan. I happened by your comments, and was in Monterey a few weeks ago, so something “clicked.” What connected more deeply is that I had the privilege of working with, for, studying under, and teaching both with and for Dr, Flores, a gifted visionary, back at that time. So you might consider this as a circumstantial “hello,” ‘por casualidad,’ from “outer” space.

      Cordially, Roger.

    • Michael Morse

      Hi Susan,
      I did the last Fernando-led ODC (H I think) and have never gotten over it. Recently, it has occupied my attention like I just graduated, and I am struggling to build an offer out of my life and skills to teach language and it’s vast possibilities. Thanks for your comment.

      Michael Morse

Join the conversation

Authors, please log in »

Guidelines

  • All comments are reviewed by a moderator. Do not submit your comment more than once or it may be identified as spam.
  • Please treat others with respect. Comments containing hate speech, obscenity, and personal attacks will not be approved.