tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4128541805470489686.post1794851407788145099..comments2023-06-18T03:21:24.102-05:00Comments on Lowercase profanity: Dumb enough to think it's importantMatthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00290436690466851003noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4128541805470489686.post-22486746199647690592009-01-10T13:37:00.000-06:002009-01-10T13:37:00.000-06:00Let me answer your first question in a little more...Let me answer your first question in a little more detail. I do believe that occasionally there are issues with a solvable Right Answer, but that those issues are few and far between. The rest of the issues fall into one of two categories (maybe more than two, but this is all I can think of right now):<BR/><BR/>(1) A question of priorities. Using a game-theoretic analogy, the argument is over where on the Pareto frontier we should shoot for. Is the potential increase in national security worth the loss of privacy associated with NSA wiretaps? Is the potential increase in economic security worth the loss of economic freedom associated with expanded entitlement programs? We can argue, based on our priorities, where the compromise should fall, but it's typically impossible to point to a spot on the Pareto frontier and say "This is the right place".<BR/><BR/>(2) A question of uncertainty. Sometimes there is a Right Answer, but no one can say what it is because our observations are too noisy. Economic questions--where the mechanics are too complicated to make precise predictions--often fall under this heading, too.<BR/><BR/>In either case, it's wrong to proclaim you have the Right Answer.<BR/><BR/>I agree that "I am right that no one is right" is technically a self-contradictory statement, and perhaps I'm in danger myself of trying to dole out absolute truth where there is none. But I'm convinced that the essence of that statement (I do think the "almost surely" is significant) is one of the few reliable political truths. If most every issue comes with a heavy dose of compromise and/or uncertainty, then anyone who claims to have the Right Answer is probably being dishonest with himself and others.<BR/><BR/>You might argue that my mindset can lead people to apathy and prevent anyone from having or expressing a strong opinion. But I think it'd be wonderful if people came to strongly-held conclusions based on their own convictions and analysis, and then said something like "This is my position, based on these convictions and analysis. I strongly think that this is what we should do, but I acknowledge that someone with different priorities might feel differently." That mindset doesn't have to diminish our convictions at all. It just helps us give legitimacy to the convictions of others and helps us to be honest with ourselves.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00290436690466851003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4128541805470489686.post-26741469931510926672009-01-09T16:38:00.000-06:002009-01-09T16:38:00.000-06:00You already answered that question in your post."I...You already answered that question in your post.<BR/><BR/>"I do believe in absolute truth. I just don't think we encounter it very often. And almost surely we do not encounter it in the political arena."<BR/><BR/>I agree with the incredible damage caused by egotistical, prideful party bickering. But it is also incorrect to claim, "I am right that no one is right."<BR/><BR/>I recognize that I converted your "almost surely" to "surely", but you understand that there is only an infintesimal difference between the two.Warrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04506448957447983131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4128541805470489686.post-82806707679739187792009-01-09T16:25:00.000-06:002009-01-09T16:25:00.000-06:00As a point of clarification, do you mean that ther...As a point of clarification, do you mean that there is no correct answer in politics, or do you mean that you don't like people claiming it.Warrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04506448957447983131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4128541805470489686.post-68768904183974258952009-01-09T16:18:00.000-06:002009-01-09T16:18:00.000-06:00Warren: Thanks for your contribution. Ol' Alexand...Warren: Thanks for your contribution. Ol' Alexander sure earned his spot on the ten-dollar bill. But I want to go even further than Hamilton. I'm not just trying to say that good, smart people might end up on the "wrong" side of the issue. I'm trying to take the idea of being in the "right" away from both parties (to be fair, my personal focus is to take that idea away from Republicans; probably that's because I know more conservatives than liberals, so naturally I've seen more conservative dogmatism).<BR/><BR/>Josh: Nice to hear from you. It is hard to abandon the search for absolute truth throughout our lives when we believe it exists in the religious realm. But I won't lie: confining Truth to the religious domain has been wonderfully liberating.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00290436690466851003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4128541805470489686.post-61879126416783872352009-01-05T14:29:00.000-06:002009-01-05T14:29:00.000-06:00Brilliant. I totally sympathize, and am likewise t...Brilliant. I totally sympathize, and am likewise tired of the pointless antagonism and mutual vilification that is most of American politics today, especially as I become more aware of how hard it is to determine "absolute truth" (in spite of believing that there <I>is</I> such a thing.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4128541805470489686.post-65499650217415106462009-01-02T17:55:00.000-06:002009-01-02T17:55:00.000-06:00Great post!I would like to add a small section of ...Great post!<BR/><BR/>I would like to add a small section of the first Federalist Paper, by Alexander Hamilton (complete paper found here: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed01.asp).<BR/><BR/>"So numerous indeed and so powerful are the causes which serve to give a false bias to the judgment, that we, upon many occasions, see wise and good men on the wrong as well as on the right side of questions of the first magnitude to society. This circumstance, if duly attended to, would furnish a lesson of moderation to those who are ever so much persuaded of their being in the right in any controversy. And a further reason for caution, in this respect, might be drawn from the reflection that we are not always sure that those who advocate the truth are influenced by purer principles than their antagonists. Ambition, avarice, personal animosity, party opposition, and many other motives not more laudable than these, are apt to operate as well upon those who support as those who oppose the right side of a question. Were there not even these inducements to moderation, nothing could be more ill-judged than that intolerant spirit which has, at all times, characterized political parties. For in politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. Heresies in either can rarely be cured by persecution."Warrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04506448957447983131noreply@blogger.com