The Moderate Voice - Latest Comments in NOTA: Addendum #2

Re: NOTA: Addendum #2

domajot — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 01:39:17 -0000

I must say I've never understood the need to define man as essentially either good or evil. I've never spotted the slightest clue suggesting that this is an either/or dilemma., except in the minds of those who appear to need to sort everything in neat black and white pigeon holes.
That anyone would base his life view on either asspumption is incomprehesible to me.

What purposte does it serve to say than man is essentially good, or essentially bad?
Say what you want, but we have to deal with both varieties, every day. Most commonly, the people we meet are a combination of both good and bad tendencies.
I'm perfectly happy to let it go at that.

Re: NOTA: Addendum #2

cosmoetica — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:02:29 -0000

And that's why O is my choice. He brings a grassroots bottoms up approach to prob solving. Hill and Mac are old time top downers.

Re: NOTA: Addendum #2

PaulSilver — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:48:38 -0000

"As long as the flexibility does not impinge on basic civil liberties"

That a good criteria for how to pick a candidate to support..

Re: NOTA: Addendum #2

cosmoetica — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:11:56 -0000

As long as the flexibility does not impinge on basic civil liberties- like separate but equal school systems, or the gov't supporting religion, that's ok, but too often 'conservative means are merely masques for destroying civil liberties.

Re: NOTA: Addendum #2

PaulSilver — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:23:33 -0000

I usually enjoy Mamet's plays about the clash of intellect and emotion. One called "Edmund" scared the crap out of me because it provoked my own fears about repressed rage. Also I don't think his article was intended to be a intellectual analysis but a personal reflection about labels.

Nevertheless I am getting a lot out of reading Mamet and the Roger Simon piece.

I notice one distinction is that we often conflate means and ends. I might support liberal ends but also conservative means. For example I support the dramatic reduction of all pollution including green house gases. Meanwhile I support using the trading of carbon credits or a carbon tax to influence the market place.
Likewise I prefer better schools but also think that vouchers should be given a more through test.
I think a lot of us in the middle of the political spectrum share and prefer this kind of flexibility.

Re: NOTA: Addendum #2

cosmoetica — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:34:03 -0000

Have you ever read Sowell: He's not called Uncle Thomas for nothing? He's the Clarence Thomas of the Fourth Estate, and about as well-reasoned as Michelle Malkin on the Japanese Internment.

That Sowell would be called a philosopher when he is a political columnist, and then appended with 'greatest'- not even mere 'great', pretty much undermines the intellectual credibility of Mamet's argument; a man who, himself, is not particularly known for his great philosophic stances in his writing, short of profanity and stereotypes.

Re: NOTA: Addendum #2

PaulSilver — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:20:33 -0000

Cosmoetica,
Why guffaw-inducer?

Re: NOTA: Addendum #2

Guest — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:17:18 -0000

Each to his own, Cosmo.

Re: NOTA: Addendum #2

cosmoetica — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:13:34 -0000

He was ok till here:

I began reading not only the economics of Thomas Sowell (our greatest contemporary philosopher)

That's a guffaw-inducer.