I get that a lot of conservative blogs want to appeal to principled thinkers and avoid giving ammo to those who are looking for ways to discredit principled, conservative thought. While a conservative blog may not be a proper forum for deflecting the opposition's sludge back on itself, Conservatives do need some such outlet. Otherwise, we continue unarmed in a food fight --- one we are losing.
I sympathize with the ideals of avoiding name calling and being fact based in order to judge the person or idea, and not the stereotype. That's an ideal highly valued. Unfortunately, it does not much apply to war. While we are not at war with our fellow citizens, we are in a befogged twilight zone, and those who would conserve the fundamental ideals of America appear to be losing --- big. While I don't advocate ignoring facts, I don't see how we can pretend to be objectively indifferent slaves to them. To keep us on retreat, the oppositon deploys a variety of fronts. Just surf the net to see the vile, name-calling methods of the advancing column of commies!
Reagan once noted that "facts are stupid things." However, it is only those facts that are least dependent upon human interpretation that seem most predictably "stupid." Is there anyone who does not delude himself that he can objectively subordinate meta values to science merely by cherrypicking in order to characterize as "facts" only that data that is consistent with his biases and priorities of pleasure? Can such "facts" really be divorced from how one is conditioned or inclined to apply one's insight, intuition, empathy, and receptivity to values that are dear to ones immediate self justification? Computerized organization of our "facts" will avail means to "justify" any desire. For those we promote to "lead from behind," we will select those with talent for sensing the unfolding, base desires of the masses, who have Soros-like command of media and "facts" to rationlize such desires.
To twist some common metaphors: Slavish devotion to minor facts may hobgoblin us, for, without vision, our moral science will be lost. First thing we do, let's kill all the facts. lol.
I sympathize with the ideals of avoiding name calling and being fact based in order to judge the person or idea, and not the stereotype. That's an ideal highly valued. Unfortunately, it does not much apply to war. While we are not at war with our fellow citizens, we are in a befogged twilight zone, and those who would conserve the fundamental ideals of America appear to be losing --- big. While I don't advocate ignoring facts, I don't see how we can pretend to be objectively indifferent slaves to them. To keep us on retreat, the oppositon deploys a variety of fronts. Just surf the net to see the vile, name-calling methods of the advancing column of commies!
Reagan once noted that "facts are stupid things." However, it is only those facts that are least dependent upon human interpretation that seem most predictably "stupid." Is there anyone who does not delude himself that he can objectively subordinate meta values to science merely by cherrypicking in order to characterize as "facts" only that data that is consistent with his biases and priorities of pleasure? Can such "facts" really be divorced from how one is conditioned or inclined to apply one's insight, intuition, empathy, and receptivity to values that are dear to ones immediate self justification? Computerized organization of our "facts" will avail means to "justify" any desire. For those we promote to "lead from behind," we will select those with talent for sensing the unfolding, base desires of the masses, who have Soros-like command of media and "facts" to rationlize such desires.
To twist some common metaphors: Slavish devotion to minor facts may hobgoblin us, for, without vision, our moral science will be lost. First thing we do, let's kill all the facts. lol.
2 comments:
I love how commies like to say that Reagan, as a matter of fact, did not know what he meant when he said, "Facts are stupid things." I like to counter, "Is that a fact, or is that just your stupid opinion?"
Facts, in themselves, being set in the sequence, momentum, and geometry of space-time, seem not to express any particular perspective of conscious will, purpose, or intelligence. In that respect, Reagan was not wrong, and facts certainly are "stupid." That is, non-trival facts, in themselves, do not summon us to direction or purpose, without our first having come to be disposed to identify with some worldview for interpreting and giving meaning to such facts. As to whether such "stupid facts" may, on holistic level, be not stupid, but the unfolding logos of God, we mortals are hardly equipped to say. In any event, I decline the commie invitation to take my interpretation of facts from a worldview that promotes pagan worship of dumb materialism and immediate pleasure over a receptivity to higher consciousness.
What is it that we want to raise in the garden that is America? If facts are the fertilizer of our ambitions, then the orientation from which we interpret such facts affects our dispositions. Are we disposed to want to produce a ball of drug crazed, sex addled zombies, or do we want to produce a next generation of decent human beings? Once we produce a generation of co-dependent collectivists and money printing zombies, hope for anything better is likely lost for a long time. To my intuition, it is more than mere opinion that the orientation that colors each interpretation of facts becomes a substantial and self fulfilling part of the facts that govern our relations. Call that a meta fact. In any event, meta inclinations are deeply tied to the facts we sew on the ground. It would be well to consider, as a matter of fact, how the drumbeat for instant gratification is dissolving hope for a sustainable, decent civilization.
Post a Comment