Well Well
Well
“trusted system”
is in the same category as “logically linked” and “legal ethics”. A word
starting with “oxy” springs to mind. I would spell out the word but PA gets mad
when I use big words.
Official
truth, legal ethics, etc. all point to an interpretation of the truth. The
truth exists whether we can arrive at the historical truth without coloring
with our preconceptions etc. remains to be seen. I think that anytime you add a
work before a word like truth you move it from the moral imperative (I know PA
a big word) to an ethical question. Ethics could be just what the current group
decides is the truth, or acceptable behavior in the past, present, or future.
So as a
group we accept the government/IT idea that signatures are “logically linked”
to the record at that remains good enough.
We accept
that our system is good enough to ensure veracity?
The truth.
You can’t handle the truth
A lie
mister Spock, An omission
The government
never lied about Roswell. As long as you understand that lying for the good of
the country is not lying in the in the minds of those that told us the truth. My
head is starting to hurt.
As for
having the real truth, are truths held to be self evident?
PA save me
PA
Chris “I
need a vacation” Flynn
-----Original
Message-----
From: Moser, Dennis
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001
6:48 AM
To: [log in to unmask];
'Chris Flynn'
Subject: RE: UV light filters,
George II, and historical veracity
And then there are
some that hold that Truth comes in multiple versions, that there is no
"One Version" of The Truth.
So what does that say
for "trusted systems" and chains of custody? When photography
began to emerge as the medium of veracity, painting became suspect (well, it
was no longer considered to be The Truth). But as we know, photos were being
"manipulated" from the very beginning. And when moving pictures came
along, well, they became a "trusted" medium until we discovered that
they, too, could be altered. Video? Same story, though much more recently. And
the really cool thing about the Internet is that it allows us to use all of
these <mischievous grin>.
One of the
amusing/fascinating things about Roswell is visiting the local
"alien" museum downtown. There are lots of "official"
records and materials that attempt to provide "proof"...
It makes the behavior
of certain political figures suspect when they attempt to take actions that
contravene existing laws that provided us with a plottable course of action
that was taken by individuals...to do so would make "historical
veracity" forever dubious. The "official" truth? But then there
would always be someone claiming to have the "real" truth.
Think I'll go have
some more coffee.
Dennis "Everyone
has an Alien Friend in Roswell" Moser
----------
From: Chris Flynn
Reply To: Chris Flynn
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 18:16
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: UV light filters, George II, and historical veracity
Truth, like beauty, is
in the eye of the beholder. Should the children read
this and think it factual then they did not
read close enough. While it is
true that bold statements were made, I believe
that most was couched as
conjecture, speculation, and rumor. However
that is not to say they are not
all "true". Who am I to judge
another's delusion. My advise to you is go
back to your rainy day nap and let the less
informed believe all they read
to be "true". May the Force be with
you
Also, I don't believe I
have read the words veracity and historical in the
same sentence since my undergrad days. Cool
Chris "TGIF"
Flynn
-----Original
Message-----
From: Holly Hodges [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001
4:03 PM
To:
[log in to unmask]
Subject:
Re: UV light filters, George II, and historical veracity
In a message dated
12/13/01 3:58:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask]
writes:
> But we'll never
know for sure now! George the IInd has just invoked
> Executive Order 13233 (for this
story, go here:
>
http://www.channel2000.com/sh/news/stories/nat-news-112577320011213-111224.h
> tml ), so the records will NEVER get
released!
>
> Dennis
Great! I take a
nap on my afternoon off (it's raining here and in spite of
the drought real rain makes me sleepy) and wake
up to find the archivists at
play again! Tomorrow's RAIN (Ha!) will
includes headlines of "George II
threatens to behead the archival profession for
the trechery of revealing
the
classified secrets of laser technological
history." Okay, sounds like
something of of National Inquirer's front page.
Would NI qualify for RAIN?
What standards are there to address this?
We have descriptive standards,
encoding standards, digital imaging standards,
but what of historical
veracity?
Or did we hash that out
after the urban legends of 9-11?
Have pity on the poor
non-archival souls who tread this thread, as he may
not
recognise the twilight zone until the show's
over.
Holly Hodges
Lynchburg, VA
A posting from the
Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List!
To subscribe or
unsubscribe, send e-mail to [log in to unmask]
In body of
message: SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname
*or*: UNSUB ARCHIVES
To post a message, send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]
Or to do *anything*
(and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html
Problems? Send
e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>
A posting from the
Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List!
To subscribe or
unsubscribe, send e-mail to [log in to unmask]
In body of
message: SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname
*or*: UNSUB ARCHIVES
To post a message, send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]
Or to do *anything*
(and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html
Problems? Send
e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>