Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Update for The week
It's been quiet here on the blog - partly because I've been so busy doing other stuff, partly because of a creeping malaise - probably brought on by equal parts sleep deprivation, discouraging situations that several friends are in, strange conditions at work, too much work of my own, and the regrettable tendency to listen to too much news coverage on the radio.
Is it just me, or too many people talking too much?
There are some gifted and impassioned writers out there, each convinced that their own point of view is the correct one. There are some hacks who prevail because they are loud or influential for whatever reason. I'm pretty well able to filter that kind of noise out. What bothers me most about political discourse generally is the presumption that the other person or party must be wrong.
Now, I'm not a relativist, and I definitely believe in clear definitions of right and wrong. Further, I believe that a person CAN know or infer a moral system and can live by one. Most of us know much better than we let on, but that's another subject.
I reject the current idea that there is some greater good to be served by considering all viewpoints as equally valid, but I still recognize that my own viewpoint may be skewed, limited, or just plain wrong. That leaves open that yours may be, if not right in all points, at least worth listening to.
Isn't it possible that there are several varieties of worthwhile ideas? For example:
1. Ideas that are demonstrably and ontologically true. E.g., If I drop a ball from a tree, it falls to the ground, at least on our home planet.
2. Ideas that give strong evidence of being true, but cannot be demonstrated with the physical evidence you have in hand. E.g., A card that I receive from my sister bearing her handwriting and postmarked with her city is strongly likely to be from her, but I did not actually watch her address it and deliver it to my mailbox.
3. Ideas that may not give strong evidence of being true, but make sense as an inference, given related evidence. If my son buys me a necktie every christmas, and this christmas I receive a necktie in an unmarked box, whom will I suspect of the gift?
Now you'll note that I slipped in the value of "truth" as a synonym for "worthwhile". And for our working purpose, that is a useful tool. It remains to be seen if it truly works.
true=worthwhile -----------false=not worthwhile
More on this subject tomorrow.
Is it just me, or too many people talking too much?
There are some gifted and impassioned writers out there, each convinced that their own point of view is the correct one. There are some hacks who prevail because they are loud or influential for whatever reason. I'm pretty well able to filter that kind of noise out. What bothers me most about political discourse generally is the presumption that the other person or party must be wrong.
Now, I'm not a relativist, and I definitely believe in clear definitions of right and wrong. Further, I believe that a person CAN know or infer a moral system and can live by one. Most of us know much better than we let on, but that's another subject.
I reject the current idea that there is some greater good to be served by considering all viewpoints as equally valid, but I still recognize that my own viewpoint may be skewed, limited, or just plain wrong. That leaves open that yours may be, if not right in all points, at least worth listening to.
Isn't it possible that there are several varieties of worthwhile ideas? For example:
1. Ideas that are demonstrably and ontologically true. E.g., If I drop a ball from a tree, it falls to the ground, at least on our home planet.
2. Ideas that give strong evidence of being true, but cannot be demonstrated with the physical evidence you have in hand. E.g., A card that I receive from my sister bearing her handwriting and postmarked with her city is strongly likely to be from her, but I did not actually watch her address it and deliver it to my mailbox.
3. Ideas that may not give strong evidence of being true, but make sense as an inference, given related evidence. If my son buys me a necktie every christmas, and this christmas I receive a necktie in an unmarked box, whom will I suspect of the gift?
Now you'll note that I slipped in the value of "truth" as a synonym for "worthwhile". And for our working purpose, that is a useful tool. It remains to be seen if it truly works.
true=worthwhile -----------false=not worthwhile
More on this subject tomorrow.
