?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile Previous Previous Next Next
Someone please argue rationally! - A little less than a happy high — LiveJournal
komos
komos
Someone please argue rationally!
26 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
hfx_ben From: hfx_ben Date: February 13th, 2004 09:49 am (UTC) (Link)

Re:

"''"the ends justify the means''"
And we get Enron accounting all along with way, presented using the dehumanizing rhetoric of "collateral damage".

"... the necessity of the firebombing ..."
To call a rose a rose, the /desirability/, or advisability, neh?
;-)

"as I see it, is that "the greater good" is almost always determined by the victors, and rationality can be wrapped around it."
IMHO the only way to strip the debate of the worst sophistries is to have the "facts" and their relationship as clearly in sight as possible ... then let the jury do its work, with the reasonable knowledge that good folk will do what good folk do; the freedom from threat and promise is great ... now, if we could also kindle the spirit of fraternity ...
komos From: komos Date: February 13th, 2004 12:13 pm (UTC) (Link)
I don't disagree in the least.

The question is just how you define the data set. Americans in particular seem all too willing to look at a truncated data set that is used to support a faulty conclusion. As the neo-cons have demonstrated, if you limit your data to 1992 and forward, Hussein was an irrevocably evil man who behaved erratically and posed an imminent threat to world peace. Extend back to the 1980s and suddenly the US is implicated not only for propping him up but also for supplying him with the means to create WMD and giving him the encouragement to use them. Bring that up and Ends Justify the Means is again used - "Global geopolitics are very complex, and sometimes you must do evil to do good."
hfx_ben From: hfx_ben Date: February 13th, 2004 06:55 pm (UTC) (Link)
Sure ... good stuff.
Back to Enronism for a moment: apparently, according to the PoMo school of thought, the aim is to convince and persuade.
Soooo ... it's all one big game of sophistry.
komos From: komos Date: February 14th, 2004 09:42 am (UTC) (Link)
That being the case, how does one then change the focus to the 'big picture'?
hfx_ben From: hfx_ben Date: February 14th, 2004 10:20 am (UTC) (Link)

Re:

My immediate reaction is to concentrate on self-interest; the gang dynamic and mob mentality have the advantage of benefits that are immediate and tangible, however superficial and short-sighted they might be ... what aspect of personal desire might compel the individual to strive for more?

The old books say that real happiness comes from not only having the freedom to act, but to know after acting that one chose rightly. But they also lament that most are easily pleased with the more superficial and immediate.
Seems to me we have to preach of the commons ... how we should strive for the best in order that all can have even some slight good. (The slogan I've been trying for years to formulate elegantly runs something like, "To do what we can here and now in order to avoid a future that's horrid beyond imagining.")
26 comments or Leave a comment