MemeStreams | MemeStreams Discussion

Create an Account

This page contains all of the posts and discussion on MemeStreams referencing the following web page: RE: Help, I need to invent a new word. . You can find discussions on MemeStreams as you surf the web, even if you aren't a MemeStreams member, using the Threads Bookmarklet.

RE: Help, I need to invent a new word.
by Decius at 7:12 pm EDT, Jul 27, 2004

tina wrote:
] Derrr, anarchist?

No. Anarchist implies absense of government. For some it also implies left-socialist economics. I'm not arguing for either of those things either. These are both policital philosophies. I'm arguing against the idea of having a uniform phiosophy that you apply to particular political questions. You take each issue in kind and ask what works. You're not striving for any particular utopian system of organization. You're not associated with any particular thought group.

Consider how people approach questions of how the Universe came to be.

Religious people assume that their faith's story of creation is true. New information is either integrated into this beleif system or it is attacked as heretical. Never is the ultimate conclusion questioned.

Scientific people (at least, idealistically) do not assume to know what the answer to this question is. As new information becomes available they integrate it into their understanding. They can describe the story that their current information points to, but that story is always changing.

Its a question of whether the conclusions guide the interpretation of results or whether the interpretation of results guides the conclusions.

In politics everyone has religion. A proposal to, say shorten the length of time that people can receive welfare benefits is supported by the right, because they beleive in a smaller government, and opposed by the left, because they beleive that the poor ought to be supported by a safety net.

These reflexive conclusions really have nothing to do with whether or not, or at what level, welfare actually accomplishes the goal of fighting poverty. I want a more scientific approach. One that looks at actions and results rather then philosophies.

] I'd stick with neo-liberal. You believe that free-trade
] capitalism will lead to greater human rights and more advanced
] technology, correct? That was what I had gathered from our
] brief talks.

Thats because those are the questions that you asked me. That hardly sums up my political thinking. In fact, "free-trade capitalism" is not something that I spend a particularly large amount of time thinking about.

RE: Help, I need to invent a new word.
by noteworthy at 10:31 pm EDT, Jul 27, 2004

Decius wrote:
] Scientific people (at least, idealistically) do not assume to
] know what the answer to this question is. As new information
] becomes available they integrate it into their understanding.
] They can describe the story that their current information
] points to, but that story is always changing.
]
] In politics everyone has religion.
]
] These reflexive conclusions really have nothing to do with
] whether or not, or at what level, welfare actually
] accomplishes the goal of fighting poverty. I want a more
] scientific approach. One that looks at actions and results
] rather then philosophies.

The closest existing term approaching your description, although not without significant baggage, is perhaps scientism. In this sense, science is religion -- that is, the scientific method. You have faith in the scientific method. Or so some would argue. Others would say the analogy is strained, at best.

Begin at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism

This page includes links to an edge.org debate between Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker, as well as an article from Richard Dawkins entitled "Is Science A Religion?"

RE: Help, I need to invent a new word.
by Shannon at 12:32 am EDT, Jul 28, 2004

Decius wrote:
] tina wrote:
] ] Derrr, anarchist?
]
] No. Anarchist implies absense of government. For some it also
] implies left-socialist economics. I'm not arguing for either
] of those things either. These are both policital philosophies.
] I'm arguing against the idea of having a uniform phiosophy
] that you apply to particular political questions. You take
] each issue in kind and ask what works. You're not striving for
] any particular utopian system of organization. You're not
] associated with any particular thought group.
]

Free-Reasonist?