To: koan who wrote (135228 ) 7/29/2013 9:13:33 PM From: one_less 1 RecommendationRecommended By ChinuSFO
Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 149317 I think you are confusing science and reason with dogma. I don't agree. We can look at any modern cultural norm disputed between the left or the right and determine a script which one side or the other adopts. Take the very essence of being human if you like. Each side has taken a position which is not based on science or reason to establish some legal right to claim personhood or not. When all else fails you just pick a point of passage... a heart beat, third trimester, first breath, demonstrable self awareness. If whatever your side picks, you can be counted upon to commit to the rhetorical fight against opponents, according to the left or right script, then the position is dogmatic and based in belief. Either side is capable of laying out some logic to support their position and some science to back their view. Neither side can claim ownership over absolute proof....so the two populations are fundamentally different. Things can only be observed as different when their existence is clearly definable as distinguishable, one from the other. When something is clearly definable it is defined by its limits not by its freedoms. Fortunately there is no such thing as a genuinely forced choice. Bonds to one side or the other are artificial. The distinctive descriptions used to define commitments to left wing positions vs right wing positions reveal the very scripts based on fundamental beliefs. Of course it is easy to deny being bound to script but when the right wing or left wing politic is laid out and the folk find no wiggle room in their current commitment, then they are following a prescribed script and it is undeniable. The extent to which anyone attempts to delude themselves about their opponents (being unscientific, unreasonable, wacko, etc) further justifies their narrow and dogmatic bondage. A person who is not bound by either right or left wing script is free to be.