Stupid is as stupid does and stupidity votes Obama

[MRT144]

His punishment must be more severe?

More severe than living in the ****hole that is Atlanta? Let's not go nuts.

[Jaguar]

gribbler, you shouldn't be proud of being ignorant about the differences between conservative and liberal philosophy.

It would be easiest for you to just compare, say, Burke to Voltaire for yourself. You're in college, you're allowed to spend time reading this stuff and get course credit for it!

But I'll give you a little bit of a guide. It depends on what concepts they think about to reach their conclusions. Are they speaking in terms of virtue, or in terms of fairness? Do they talk about duties, or do they talk about rights? Do they think of legislators as part of a natural order, as statesmen who owe the people both their industry and their judgment? Or are legislators vessels for popular will, deriving their power from the consent of the governed? Do they think of our flawed human nature as more of a constant to be worked around, or more of a hurdle to be overcome?

These questions persist from century to century in a way that policy prescriptions don't. Now go take a political philosophy course or something.

[Jaguar]

Alternatively, you could also ask Imran, who obviously knows what he's talking about as well.

[Felch]

What does this mean? There are two different ways people think? Or only two different ways Americans think? And Conservatives actually think instead of using their reptilian complexes?

Have you seen Jonathan Haidt's TED talk on this?

[regexcellent]

More severe than living in the ****hole that is Atlanta? Let's not go nuts.

What's wrong with Atlanta?

[Imran Siddiqui]

FWIW, I think Jonathan Haidt's recent work on conservative and liberal mindsets is fascinating. I haven't read "The Righteous Mind" yet, but I really want to!

[Jaguar]

Have you seen Jonathan Haidt's TED talk on this?

Also highly recommended.

[giblets]

But I'll give you a little bit of a guide. It depends on what concepts they think about to reach their conclusions. Are they speaking in terms of virtue, or in terms of fairness? Do they talk about duties, or do they talk about rights? Do they think of legislators as part of a natural order, as statesmen who owe the people both their industry and their judgment? Or are legislators vessels for popular will, deriving their power from the consent of the governed? Do they think of our flawed human nature as more of a constant to be worked around, or more of a hurdle to be overcome?

I think the answer is often "none of the above". And they don't correspond very well to "liberals" and "conservatives". Are the liberals or the conservatives supposed to be the ones that talk about rights? Uhh they both do that. Or are we supposed to use 200-year-old definitions of these terms forever and ever?

[giblets]

Also highly recommended.

He isn't even making the same argument you made. He didn't tell people to go compare Voltaire and Burke and ask whether people talk about rights and duties or how they view legislators.

[Jaguar]

It's all interconnected. Most of those questions I asked deal with what Haidt's moral foundations theory refers to as the Authority/subversion axis.

But what do I know, you're already apparently ready to teach me about how Edmund Burke doesn't fit into Jonathan Haidt's framework, based on the last eight minutes of research you've done on the topic.

[giblets]

So far you've failed to convince me that Edmund Burke is even relevant today.

[Kuciwalker]

So far you've failed to convince me that Edmund Burke is even relevant today.

That's because you aren't very bright.

[giblets]

That's because you aren't very bright.

Of course not, the truly enlightened spout off something they saw in a TED video and read 18th century books.

[Imran Siddiqui]

He was trying to talk down to your level .

[Kuciwalker]

Of course not, the truly enlightened spout off something they saw in a TED video and read 18th century books.

Hardly. The truly enlightened (e.g. me) can tell at first glance when someone is talking about real ideas or nonsense, even if they aren't familiar with the source material.