|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 47 (9216 total) |
| |
KING IYK | |
Total: 920,660 Year: 982/6,935 Month: 263/719 Week: 51/204 Day: 35/16 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Ann Coulter (Is she hateful?) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4083 Joined: Member Rating: 7.9
|
Much of the "debate" thus far has revolved around a basic tu quoque fallacy. The line of reasoning is that Ann COulter's hateful rhetoric is somehow "excused" or "justified" because it is a "response" to other hate from the "left."
This is irrelevant. When you say that you hope or wish for someone to die, when you call someone a "retard," you are being hateful. Whether your target was or was not previously hateful is irrelevant. Ann Coulter is absolutely hateful, or rather, she espouses hateful rhetoric.
quote: quote: quote: quote: quote: quote: quote: quote: I could go on. Generally what she's doing it an attempt to "humorously" phrase her arguments, and typically she's addressing a specific audience - "preaching to the choir," basically. The primary audience of Fox News likes to get all riled up against "liberals," not entirely unlike how a lot of liberals (myself included) used to enjoy getting a little riled up by Olberman when he was on MSNBC (though, to my recollection, Olberman never suggested that an entire subset of Americans lose their right to vote, or expressed a wish that Fox News would be bombed). Is there "hateful rhetoric" on "both sides?" Of course there is. We all call each other idiots and worse. Some of us are worse about it than others. But at the end of the day, what matters is not who said the most insulting words, or who was more angry. What matters are the policies themselves, and the world that they would bring. Politics, especially American politics, has long been something like competing soccer hooligans, a simile I've used often. We have our sides; what the other side says is wrong, and what our side says is right, and we don;t really think at all about what's actually being said so much as who said it and in what way. Look at the Presidential debates - we hat talking heads going on for hours about how the electorate would respond to which candidate was too nice or too mean, as if that matters one bit for the running of the country, whether the government should be able to regulate environmental emissions, the future of the "War on terror," or how best to continue or speed up economic recovery! The only way to stop all of the partisan bickering and nonsense is for everyone to recognize that we really do all have the same goal: we want the country we live in to prosper, and we just have different ideas about how that can be achieved. Pursuant to that, we need to sit down and talk about actual discrete policies and their measured results. We need to think about our support of policies beyond the basic snap-judgement used in politics today, and actually look at the effects of a policy. We know with certainty, for example, that "abstinance-only" sex ed does not work; rather, counties using "abstinance-only" suffer from significantly higher teen pregnancy rates than do districts teaching sex ed in a more comprehensive manner including use of condoms. It's not a matter of moral judgement, you enforce your morals on your children as parents, not as voters for the school board. It's not a matter of condoning teen sex. It's a matter of deciding which world you'd rather live in: the one with more, or fewer teen pregnancies. That's it. Choose your policy based on the results you want, and to hell with which "side" thinks what. Focusing on which political blowhard is the "most hateful" just feeds into the cycle and worsens the distraction away from actual policy decisions and their expected results. We're choosing the politics of personality instead of intelligently analyzing policy proposals and determining our support through the use of projections created with the use of real-world data. Of course, I don't think humanity as a species is ready for that. Our culture thrives on the drama of personality politics and tribalistic separations. There is "us" and there is "them." But I'd really, really like to be surprised.The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus "...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds ofvariously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4083 Joined: Member Rating: 7.9
|
It has absolutely nothing to do with us and especially nothing to do with our actions. ...really? All that stuff about "what you do to the least of these, you do to me," and "turn the other cheek," and "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," all that is irrelevant to Christianity?The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus "...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds ofvariously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4083 Joined: Member Rating: 7.9
|
quote: The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus "...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds ofvariously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4083 Joined: Member Rating: 7.9 |
Hey mods - I know this is the Coffee House and all, but there was at some point a topic in this thread, and I'm fairly certain that is was not in fact related in any way to Jesuits or the Protestant Reformation or calling the Pope the Antichrist (we all know the current Pope is Emperor Palpatine, and he cannot be two fictional characters at once).
The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus "...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds ofvariously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4083 Joined: Member Rating: 7.9
|
Re: Another case of cognitive dissonance They don't produce cognitive dissonance in me; they produce anger. I can't repeat the thoughts that go through my head after reading posts on here. There is lots of blood involved for sure. I get angry because the way you argue and debate on here is deceitful in the extreme and often hateful and mocking. Hi FEY. I understand what you mean - I feel something similar when you slander "liberals" and call them all "liars" and "biased" without a shred of evidence to support such claims. You're far from the only one to make me feel those things around here, either - just to throw a few names out, crashfrog and RAZD have both been able to make me feel pretty damned angry. Not enough to involve blood, of course. But when I get too upset, I stop reading for a bit. Sometimes I go and get laid - that always helps. I remember that, whatever happens, this is just an internet debate site. In the end, arguing on the internet is akin to the Special Olympics - even if you win, you're still retarded (hopefully others will excuse the somewhat offensive joke in favor of its intent). This debate board can never hurt you, and none of the participants can cause you any harm except that which you allow by getting all riled up. Just relax.
It's the same kind of anger servicemen would feel in world war 2 while listening to tokyo rose. It is nothing but deceitful propaganda. I feel that sort of anger every time I listen to Fox News. How should we determine which of us is listening to absurdly biased media, and which is closer to the facts? I doubt a screaming fit, trollish nonsense, or "blood" will resolve the disparity. What do you think we should do? Personally, I'd suggest looking at issues one at a time and comparing the spin to objective evidence. What do you think?The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus "...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds ofvariously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4083 Joined: Member Rating: 7.9
|
Just putting this in the public arena. Foreveryoung responded to my previous post with a PM that said only this:
quote: He then began jeering all of my posts from today. And GDR's as well, for some reason.The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus "...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds ofvariously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4083 Joined: Member Rating: 7.9
|
For the record, I have 6 PMs from foreveryoung. As a matter of principle, I think it better to keep private messages private, so I didn't post any of them here. I am interested in an open and honest public discussion with foreveryoung and attempting to publicly embarrass him does not seem likely to help. My goal was not to embarrass him - though if he feels embarrassed by his own words, perhaps next time he should not send messages he would find embarrassing. My intent was to show foreveryoung that, whatever he wants to say to me, he can say it as a public reply for all to see. By simply posting his PM in public, I discourage him from sending future "Fuck you" PMs.The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus "...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds ofvariously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4083 Joined: Member Rating: 7.9
|
Hi Faith,
I suppose this is just one of your typical rhetorical put downs that you don't expect an answer to but those are not my words that you impute to me. I don't recognize such terms at all. "Hateful, reactionary and homophobic" are all liberal flag words that pack a liberal agenda, starting with discrediting conservatives, which is how you are using them too. I think I understand what you are saying, so please correct me if I'm wrong. You think that words like "hateful, reactionary, and homophobic" aren't used to convey actual arguments, but are instead simply used to cause an emotional reaction and vilify conservatives. Essentially you view those words as ad hominem attacks on the person that typically mean that the person using them has no real argument. Is that about correct? I can understand that. I've had people attach emotionally charged labels to me so as to completely dismiss my arguments, and I've found it frustrating. I imagine that, in your case as an example, someone just replied to one of your posts saying that you were a "reactionary" (I'm just picking the least offensive of the words above) and didn't address a single point you made, that this would be frustrating, even infuriating if it happened with regularity. I'm honestly trying to see this from your perspective, Faith, so I'd appreciate an honest attempt to see things from mine as well. What I'm seeing here is more soccer hooliganry. It's like one side is just screaming "Commie!" and the other side is screaming "Corporate pig!" and nobody is actually listening to each other or addressing each others' points. It just boils down to each side screaming "you're on the other side!" and that's it. Not very productive or even very interesting. What I think you aren't understanding is that you're throwing the word "liberal" around as if it's some sort of insult - basically you seem to be using the term as an emotionally charged label that allows you to dismiss your opponent without addressing any actual points. This may not, however, be how you're intending to use the word - it's just the way it's coming across. I think that's part of why you see such opposition - intentionally or otherwise, you're conveying that you thing "liberalism" is a bad thing in its entirety, and many here are self-identified liberals. We're all just drawing a nice big line for our sides so we can disapprove of each other while never actually talking about anything of substance. It's a microcosm of what some of us feel that Ann Coulter and those like her do (and there are examples on the "left" as well) - rile up the "sides" against each other, get everybody screaming "liberal!" and "conservative" as if they're insults, and the whole thing turns into a nice big soccer hooligan riot where we all trample each other, not for actually being bad people, but for having the temerity to have a difference of opinion.
Again what ARE you guys objecting to in my characterization? It IS a liberal institutional position, those ARE "liberal flag words," a conservative institutional agenda would not have any of that in it. In today's political environment they no doubt have to address some of those questions from a conservative perspective, but otherwise, as I said, in the place of such an agenda I would expect them to have more academic and practical community focused extracurriculars. Again, what on earth ARE you guys objecting to in all this? It looks to me like a simple factual matter. I think here you're just running into the complexity of assigning a binary label (liberal vs not-liberal) when political leanings are a much larger spectrum. For example, you and many others will identify Obama as a "liberal," and compared to you or Mitt Romney or George W Bush, he certainly is. But compared to me, he leans pretty far to the right, and I have trouble calling him a "liberal" because I view him as far more moderate...from my perspective. Personally, I think that political discourse cannot be improved by continuing to identify each other with such simple labels as "liberal" and "conservative." Those labels certainly don;t encompass all of our views - I know there are conservatives who would disagree with you just as there are liberals who would disagree with me - I'm a huge supporter of nuclear power, for example, and a lot of Earth-conscious people oppose me even as I self-identify as more on "their side." I think that the "liberal" vs "conservative" shouting matches get us nowhere, and I'd rather have real discussions about actual policies and societal issues. Instead of just lining up according to who's a hippie and who's a Captain Planet villain, I'd like to actually discuss the environmental and economic situation of the world and explore solutions that address both jobs and cleaner air. I think that "homophobia" is more than just a "liberal flag word," and that hatred of homosexuals is a real societal problem just like racism, as we still occasionally read in the news about some poor kid who was bullied to the point of suicide for being gay, and I think that's a real problem that needs to be addressed. I think that "hateful" rhetoric is a real problem...and I think the solution is to stop shouting labels at each other and to start talking with each other to find new solutions from our shared perspectives. You and I are never going to agree on some things, but I bet you'd agree that it'd sure be nice if we could lower the unemployment rate. What do you think? The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus "...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds ofvariously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4083 Joined: Member Rating: 7.9 |
Hi Faith,
You know, this would be an extremely difficult undertaking for both of us - attempting to discuss an issue without turning the discussion into a shouting match about each other and our "sides," just focusing on the problem and solutions from our differing perspectives. If you're willing to try it, then I am as well.
Quite. And it DOES happen with regularity. There is no OTHER kind of argument I've ever encountered when I'm in a liberal camp though much of the time, as on this thread, I fail to anticipate it since I think I'm simply speaking factually. I think the problem here is that we (and I absolutely include myself in this) often "speak factually" when the facts we are presenting need to be supported with evidence because they are not self-evident. I can't just tell you that the Earth is billions of years old, even as I understand that to be an established scientific fact - you certainly don;t see it that way, and just saying it is just another assertion unless I can back it up. Likewise when you "speak factually;" sometimes you're presenting a fact that doesn't match up with my understanding of the facts, and so evidence and argument is needed to show me that it is a fact. We would both do well to remember at all times that neither of us is omniscient or has all of the facts. If the information upon which we build our understanding is wrong, then our understanding will be wrong as well, and that goes for both of us.
I appreciate your effort very much and hope it might be possible to pull this discussion up out of the emotional quagmire which seems to be your aim. If we go through with this, I will absolutely take no offense if you tell me to stop, slow down, and center myself on the issue again...and I hope you'll expect the same from me. Neither of us is perfect, and emotions are kind of built in to human minds, so this is really going to be rough. But I'll try to avoid harping about the "Neo-Con agenda" if you try to avoid dismissing my words as a "liberal agenda." And I won't call you a liar even if you say something I think is wrong - I think we can both agree that at worst one or both of us might speak an untruth that we honestly think is true because it's something we've heard or read; we need not be liars if we have ourselves been lied to. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt if you'll do the same for me.
This would take some very careful reconsideration of what has been said on this thread all the way back. I can accept that you are describing how I am READ but I'm not ready to accept that it's what I've been DOING. "Liberal" CAN be used that way and I probably use it that way sometimes, but it's ALSO a simple factual label, like "conservative." You may want to dispense with these labels but I don't think they can be dispensed with, we simply have to aim to rigorously exclude the emotional baggage if we're serious about what you seem to be aiming for here. This would probably require a new thread. I'm quite familiar with a mismatch between what is intended and what is actually conveyed; I have a tendency to come across as condescending and rude even when I'm just trying to be helpful. I believe you when you say that you don't intend to use "liberal" as some sort of curse, and I appreciate that you accept that this is the way that you're being read even if it's not what you intend. Rather than going point-by-point for the rest because I need to head to work... The examples I gave we just that, examples. They weren't necessarily intended to be debate topics - just to illustrate my points. I'm not particularly attached to using any one of them as the topic for a debate, particularly if you don't feel particularly interested in them. You mentioned what you term the "Culture War." Would you like to pick a specific topic from under that umbrella, something that you see as a problem that our society needs to address, and then we can try to discuss that problem and potential solutions? We could set it as a "Great Debate" if you like, and possibly request moderator assistance if one of us thinks the other is starting to lose focus on the issue. What do you think?The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus "...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds ofvariously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4083 Joined: Member Rating: 7.9
|
You seem to have something else in mind than the example of executing a traitor. At issue is your comparison of liberals to traitors; that somehow we had better be intimidated and put in our place before we turn into full traitors. Liberalism is not at all congruous with treason, faith. The comparison itself is beyond insulting. Liberalism leads to treason in the same way that conservatism does - that is, they do not, not by themselves. Amusingly, the actual traitor in Coulter's quote was a Muslim theocratic extremist - by any definition of the term, he would have been considered an ultra-conservative, not remotely a liberal, unless you think that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are secretly huge supporters of women's rights, gay marriage, and religious freedom. Executing a traitor should provide exactly as much of a "warning" to conservatives as to liberals...but curiously Coulter, and you in defending her, apply it only to liberals. Because you disagree with us. Even vehement political disagreement is not treason. One can be a full-on Communist without being a traitor, Faith - treason requires giving aid or comfort to an enemy in a time of war. Simply being a liberal (or even a radical) is protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution. The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus "...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds ofvariously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4083 Joined: Member Rating: 7.9 |
I think that may be more of a commentary on the problems inherent with a "winner take all" two-party representative political system like what exists in the United States than a clear picture of whether Fordham Jesuits are "conservative" or "liberal."
The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus "...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds ofvariously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025