Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (80615)	6/2/2000 6:36:00 AM
From: Edwarda	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

I do see that Neocon has a point in that so much of our world is influenced deeply by ideas of which we may be only marginally aware, if at all, in their relatively pure state as ideas. When considering the viability of an idea, it is worthwhile to recognize that the context in our minds against which we set the idea has been shaped by a whole environment of ideas embodied--to use his examples--in schools, in architecture, etc., even in the meanings assigned to the words in which we convey and consider ideas.

To: epicure who wrote (80615)	6/2/2000 8:46:00 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 108807

I will tell you a story: my junior year at St. John's, we had a seminar on the Constitution where a couple of people started rhapsodizing over how wonderfully democratic it was. I responded by pointing out that the Senate was not proportionally representative; that senators originally were elected by state legislatures; that the electoral college could buck the popular vote, and did on one occasion; that originally whole classes of people were disenfranchised, particularly women and blacks, but also, in most states, those without property; and that elements like the bicameral legislature and the veto were intended to thwart popular sentiment, and make it hard to make rash decisions. Then, I was attacked, not because anyone could deny what I was saying, but because, by pointing out that these things diluted democracy, and saying that the Constitution was not, especially originally, very democratic, I was defaming the Constitution. As the argument went on, I began to see that these people had no clear idea of what the word democracy meant, and that in their minds, it was a simple matter: Democracy= Politically Good. Rather than an idea, or rather, constellation of ideas about democracy, they mostly had attitude..........