Ship in a bottle
POSTED BY: dreamtrove
UPDATED: Wednesday, July 3, 2024 17:57
VIEWED: 3328
PAGE 2 of 4
BSCM
I'm really not in favor of the half of this + half of that = truth approach. Often the truth is all of something.
I'm reminded of a post SignyM made two years or so ago. It had to do with testing your understanding (model) by making predictions. If your predictions are accurate, you can have more confidence that you are focusing on the important factors and drawing correct conclusions. If you cannot predict accurately, then you have errors you need to fix.
This economic mess ? Many of us supposed 'partisan' people were predicting it, not b/c of beliefs but based on the facts: that Bush was running the government into the ground; and that gap between the rich and everyone else (whose demand is the real driver of an economy) was widening.
Iraq ? Many of us supposed 'partisan' people were saying it was no threat, there were no WMDs, and it would be a difficult outcome. This was not based on any hatred, but on reading the reports, watching the gap between what Bush was saying and what he was doing, and crediting the experts with more expertise than the flaks.
Dismissing an opinion or position just b/c it's on 'one side' is a serious mistake. You need to be looking at who makes the better predictions. If you are not, then you're just drawing fact-free partisan conclusions of your own.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yeah, I do see that a bit.
Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
Often I'm struck with how one person will argue an issue and get it half right, then be rebutted with his/her opponent who has the other half right.
I find that when I let peeps know I agree with some portion of what they say, more often than not they roll thru as if they've won the argument, not takin' in to account that I was trying to get to an understanding, not necessarily 'win'.
It's not easy in the middle, is it Blue?
The balancing Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yes, that's true also IMO. Like torture- it's just wrong, and so-called good guys usin' it don't make it right. There are some absolutes, problem comes when absolutes are ALL one deals in.
Originally posted by rue:
I'm really not in favor of the half of this + half of that approach = truth. Often the truth is all of something.
The absolutely Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
BSCM
I'm really not in favor of the half of this + half of that approach = truth. Often the truth is all of something.
I'm not saying that it's a perfect model, but when I say "I often feel", that's exactly what I mean. I always look at the big picture, or rather the biggest picture I can when it comes to politics. I concern myself with:
The Constitution
Fundemental Rights of individuals
Fundemental Rights of States
What I abhore are arguements over political minutiae and how supposed "intellectual" posters would toss aside, or argue against large scale rights to statisify some particular perceved wrong. The thread "Sore Losers Dance" is a supreme example, where California's right to self-govern is trumped by a special intrest on a singular heated issue, prop 8. No thought is given to the impact on 49 other states. No thought is given to the "unintended consequences" of certain actions. Does anyone here even know about the growing movement in Texas to secede? Does anyone even care? Doubtful.
Rue, the general statement from all my libertarian friends is a wish that the Red-Blue partisians would come to understand and accept as truth the freedoms their opposition espouses.
--That "Blue" partisians would come to grips with the solid fact that economic freedom promotes prosperity.
--That "Red" partisians would freaking stop trying to impose a moral code on individuals and come to grips with another solid fact, that people know best how to govern themselves.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I can hover with those, in general.
Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
--That "Blue" partisians would come to grips with the solid fact that economic freedom promotes prosperity.
--That "Red" partisians would freaking stop trying to impose a moral code on individuals and come to grips with another solid fact, that people know best how to govern themselves.
However, in the former, some restrictions must apply, and in the latter, not always, due in part to lack of time and/or intelligent curiosity.
The qualifying Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Y'all crack me up. Though entertaining during my slow moments.
When in power, the point is to maintain, better yet, increase one's power over the commonpeeps. Symbiotically linked with the need to maintain power is following and controlling the money. What's so hard to comprehend?
There are renters and there are owners. The dynamic between the two is where the tensions occur. Make your peace with where you fall in that scenario, or fight for wealth, or fight against those who control wealth.
I've made my peace, due, at a best guess, to geographical circumstance. Easier for me and mine to live a good life here in the northern reaches of North America. So, lucky me. Trite as it may sound, ya can't save everyone, so you might as well save yourself and those you love, as best you can.
Kinda explains my reasoning for not wasting my time arguing here.
***
Oh, wait, ironic conundrum.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by cozen:
When in power, the point is to maintain, better yet, increase one's power over the commonpeeps.
Ya know, I'm really really glad this was posted. It hurts because it's true. Cozen makes a point I long ago came to grips with, and have been fighting my way up through the american lifestyle as a result. But what this bleak outlook doesn't perceve, is another direction. "up" as opposed to left-right, forward-back when you live in flatland. There is in fact a book written that addresses this very issue called "A more perfect constitution" by Larry Sabato. You can purchase a copy on amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/More-Perfect-Constitution-Proposals-Revitalize/d
p/0802716210
I've read this book cover to cover and the main focus is how to go about fixing the problems in the document to truely Form A More Perfect Union.
What's most interesting is that he lays out about 40 solutions to perfecting our union in the book (and makes awsome cases for each one) then conducts a Zogby poll and the result is that over and over an overwhelming population of americans disagree with him. By whopping margins of 80/20 or 90/10. But once you read the book, you wonder why. And the answer is that the overwhelming majority of people are not qualified to think honestly about their governance. They are either 1. Apathetic 2. Pre-programed by idology or 3. Part of the established power-stucture and thus oppose change.
Our founders forsaw that the document they created would not last unless they built in 2 ways to change it. We know well the 1st, to write an amendment. But hardly anyone knows the second. Call a new Constitutional Convention. If a majority of states call for a convention, one must be held. This is where the fundemental text of the document can be changed.
It will never happen. Ever. And in the book he makes a solid case that it must else these united states will slide into the cracks of history.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Aren't we slidin' now?
Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
he makes a solid case that it must else these united states will slide into the cracks of history.
The questioning Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, for my part I have an agenda, and am not shy in admitting that nor pursuing it - yet not at someone else's expense cause putting an end to that crap is a big part of it.
Thing is, I welcome alternative viewpoints, the more windows you have on a subject, the clearer the picture, yes ?
It's when folk start smearing mud (Re: Lies) on those windows that'll start me on a rampage, or when someone starts using their own free will to impinge on or deny that of someone else.
I also tend to give as I get - whereas some will get a polite and reasoned argument, others will recieve a verbal conflagaration, or mockery.
No sense pretending party politics, I only got one side in an issue - MINE.
And above all else, I ain't afraid of admittin that.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sorry, this is long. If I have time, I'll edit it. If you have time, read through and see if we can reach a path for future furtive discussion.
Whoa, this is a lot to digest. I'm glad this got such a response, you'll pardon me if I ignore the other threads for the moment, time constraints.
I'm just going to play casual observer here, and make some comments, I think everyone mostly has the idea, and I see some people actually starting to do it here, and I want to focus on this, and let the bickering fall by the wayside.
Quote:
THATWEIRDGIRL
Heck yeah?
It does bother me how quickly we turn to calling certain people out to the yard for a showdown. It upsets me when someone says, "How stupid do you have to be to believe the opposite of what I believe?" I don't want to get into that sort of thing. Not cool. I like it here because there are many intelligent people discussing interesting things. Yay for expression!
Always worth points when you bring the lurkers out.
If ten equal men combine their might, five pushing one way, and ten pushing the other, they accomplish nothing. we've all seen way too much of that here.
We disagree on certain points, let's accept that and move on
Thanks
Quote:
RUE
If that's all there was I'd agree. People arguing about things for which there is no proof, and never will be - now that is just stupid. But some people (not Rap) are bringing facts to the discussion. Nothing stupid in that.
Auraptor comes in for a lot of abuse, as does Pirate News. Let's try not to pull in personal attacks. I think that at times, a lot of members have posted informational pieces or partisan arguments with little factual basis. When they do, they are wasting everyone's time. I would suggest to everyone that you become your own editor and ask if you are doing this. About 20% of the time I think Auraptor has a point. I suspect that he has a point a higher % of the time than that, but that he spends too much time arguing. He is not alone.
Some of the things he says are insightful.
If any of us revisit old dead issues like WMDs, etc. from any angle, we're wasting everyone's time. In a firefly world, this would be like arguing for the existance or non-existance of either Reavers or Blue Sun.
If we take an example of what I would consider a pointless argument, let me stall for a moment and say a lot of nothing about WMDs:
1. We all know there were WMDs, and that they weren't found in Iraq. Why? Lots of possible explanations, but they are all irrelevant. Tyrannies often have them. The US and other powers, Russia, China, often supply them, to help keep their own puppets in power. IMHO.
2. No reason for war is ever the reason for war. We didn't go to war with Japan over Pearl Harbor, we attacked Japan in 1937. And continued to do so. It's not a theory, it's an established fact that Pearl Harbor was a retaliation for an attack on the Japanese fleet earlier that morning. The "reason for war" is always BS. The reason for war is greed, imperialism, etc. Always. And not just on our side. On the other side as well. Iraq could have avoided this war also. There was a lot of greed and stupidity and stubbornness, and plenty to go around. A lot of WMDs to go around also.
3. Who cares? I mean, does anyone on this forum have WMDs? Are you planning to get some? Sell them on ebay? Do you get into fights with people who have them? We're not starting wars, and most of us if not all have some problem with these wars we are in and how they were conducted. This is probably because the people in power are people not like us. We shouldn't get into these discussions defending Bush or Obama or anyone in the power structure because frankly, they're not worth the time. They're not worth your time.
Quote:
CHRISISALL
I'll toss in a Heck Yeah! as well.
Look, JewelStaiteFan, RiverLove, Finn- these peeps give good solid arguments for their beliefs- they are integral parts of this board. AU is an excellent addition to the entertainment side, but at RWED he is little better than a troll, twisNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME