We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon
Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
James Flynn talks about we humans having gone from concrete thinking to abstract thinking over the last century because of public education. And abstract thinking being about universality i.e. the ability to classify the concrete world. So what you are seeing as dogma, I think, or what many people see as generalizations, I see as demographic abstractions.
I do consider the arguments of moderates and if you want to put a few out there we can discuss them with specificity.
You are attributing conservative thinking that I just do not think is there, and is mostly vacuous e.g. your point that conservatives worry about a totalitarian government.
They are not thinking that deeply, or logically, and in fact, the great irony is that it is the very conservatives themselves fomenting an authoritarian government by supporting the Republican party which is engaging in direct efforts to undermine our democracy.
Generally the Democrats are the abstract thinkers and the conservatives are the concrete thinkers in our society e.g. Democrats generally recognize Socrates "Social Contract', Republicans do not:
"Social contract theory says that people live together in society in accordance with an agreement that establishes moral and political rules of behavior. Some people believe that if we live according to a social contract, we can live morally by our own choice and not because a divine being requires it "
PS I took an hour and penned an elaborate response and deleted it as I realized it would be misunderstood and seen as dogmatic :)>.
This is a very enlightening 18 minute video.
cheers
<<Message #480639 from JohnM at 10/4/2021 12:04:47 AM
To me a liberal is a person who judges things on their merits and not on dogma.
Don't know a nonharsh way to say it, koan, but when you don't consider the arguments of "moderates" and "conservatives" as genuine arguments to be addressed on their face rather than dismiss them as inhumane, that's coming from dogma. No other way to say it.
To move away from dogma and judge things on their merit, a very noble aim, you must consider arguments without dismissing them in terms of some hypothetical somewhat sick motives you attribute to them.
Let's say, just for starters, that "moderates" consider serious negotiations produce a wider consensus and results with more longevity than dogmatic, in your face ones. Thus, they look for the political center.
And let's consider, for starters, that "conservatives", worry deeply about the possible totalitarian threat inherent in strong government, one in which the citizens are so dependent for fiscal support they will not fight for zones of personal independence. For instance, a government that threatens to take away social security and medicare from citizens with the wrong views or the wrong residences, can easily cow them into submission. So the argument goes.
Those are reasonable positions, ones that argue mustering other concerns. To do so is not dogmatic. To dismiss them as inhumane is dogmatic.
