Create an Account
username: password:
 
  MemeStreams Logo

RE: Help, I need to invent a new word.

search

Decius
Picture of Decius
Decius's Pics
My Blog
My Profile
My Audience
My Sources
Send Me a Message

sponsored links

Decius's topics
Arts
  Literature
   Sci-Fi/Fantasy Literature
  Movies
   Sci-Fi/Fantasy Films
  Music
   Electronic Music
Business
  Finance & Accounting
  Tech Industry
  Telecom Industry
  Management
  Markets & Investing
Games
Health and Wellness
Home and Garden
  Parenting
Miscellaneous
  Humor
  MemeStreams
Current Events
  War on Terrorism
Recreation
  Cars and Trucks
  Travel
Local Information
  United States
   SF Bay Area
    SF Bay Area News
Science
  Biology
  History
  Math
  Nano Tech
  Physics
Society
  Economics
  Politics and Law
   Civil Liberties
    Internet Civil Liberties
    Surveillance
   Intellectual Property
  Media
   Blogging
Sports
Technology
  Computer Security
  Macintosh
  Spam
  High Tech Developments

support us

Get MemeStreams Stuff!


 
RE: Help, I need to invent a new word.
Topic: Miscellaneous 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.



 
 
Powered By Industrial Memetics
RSS2.0