I used a word in my previous post which I consider both important, and frequently misunderstood.
The word is disinterested; People often confuse it with uninterested.
Actually, uninterested is the opposite of its root, interested.
Disinterested instead means dispassionate, unbiased, or neutral.
This is precisely why I used it when discussing objectivity.
One of the most difficult thing for us mortals to do is to maintain objectivity regarding issues we consider important, and especially if they are likely to affect us significantly.
It would be impossible to offer anything approaching an accurate estimate of the number of people capable of maintaining their objectivity in such situations.
This poses one of the greatest challenges we face in communicating and cooperating with other people, and especially those holding differing opinions than our...
The simplest, and most productive way to view problems, is as obstacles interfering with our pursuit of something we value.
They are roadblocks along life's accomplishment highway.
I go into this at great length in my soon to be released book entitled 'How to Solve All Your Problems' subtitled 'Or at Least Come to Terms with Them'.
In the book I explain what constitutes a problem, how problems promote our growth, what all problems have in common, and then I offer a blueprint with general...
"The hardest thing to hide is something that is not there."
Eric Hoffer
Picture this. A new CEO is now at the helm of a major company and sends an email to all company employees requesting that they describe precisely their function at the company, what they are most proud of having accomplished there, and any suggestions they have for improving the company. And then, the employees not only refuse to comply, but instead, backed by their union, attempt to portray the request as some sort of...
It has been said that all success is based upon experience and that experience is based upon failure.
I believe we only learn from our mistakes when we understand why they were mistakes.
It is important for individuals as well as societies to comprehend the limitations of their capabilities if they are to avoid engaging in behavior which results in unintentional but completely predictable negative outcomes.
The Socialist FDR in a famous speech claimed that we Americans have four freedoms.
Rights are of essentially two types. Positive and negative.
Positive right claims are that we are entitled to something specific. Things like access to healthcare, a decent wage, affordable housing, respect etc.
Negative rights on the other hand, are our rights to be left alone and unharmed in our pursuits.
Negative rights can be rationally and morally supported while positive rights cannot.
Many things which may indeed be desirable are not rights. They are simply desirables.
Many of our...
The fact that most people are woefully ignorant of how political systems actually work is completely unremarkable in this day and age. A perfect example is the absolutely misguided belief that democracy can protect a people from tyranny.
Hello? Have you been living under a rock or on drugs?
Frankly, I cannot think of any other justification for such blatant blindness regarding what has been going on for a very long time in this country.
I know the boiling frog bit is a myth but the myth is...
It has become apparent in the west that important decisions are no longer left to the people at large or their elected officials.
Instead, unelected judges inclined to support the party that appointed them are increasingly flexing their judicial muscles to thwart the will of the people.
This is a very serious solution, and one for which I have no foolproof solution.
What is needed is a serious debate on the topic with the goal being to find a workable, if not perfect solution to minimize the...
The latest addition to the left's censorship arsenal is the term 'hate speech'. It is the twin sister of the term 'hate crime'.
Both terms are not only useless and unnecessary but provide an opportunity for one group to target members of an opposing group selectively.
The reason this is the case is because there is no objective and universally accepted definition for the term 'hate', let alone 'hate speech' or 'hate crime'.
As in so many such cases the whole thing turns on who gets to determine...
Some terms simply defy definition and thus can be twisted like a wax nose to mean whatever the twister so desires.
No concept probably illustrates this better than that of the 'General Welfare'. What in the world can such a concept mean? I don't think I can construe a more vacuous term than that.
There can be no such thing as a 'General Welfare' since only tradeoffs are available to men, and what is in the welfare of one will in all likelihood not be in the welfare of another.
There has been a good deal of discussion regarding the proposed Universal Basic Income (UBI). Much of these discussions have revolved around the moral and ethical reasoning in support of a UBI. Personally I don't think any moral or ethical argument for the right to a Universal Basic Income can hold water anymore than moral or ethical arguments for the right to health care do.
This leaves us with only the pragmatic or utilitarian arguments.
Several questions strike me as needing answers in...
The primary tenant of 'Classical liberalism' as opposed to the Continental (US) version which has turned the original on its head, is that under a universal rule of law intended to protect the private recognizable property of individuals, a spontaneous societal order would emerge which could not have been produced by planning and planners.
Order can come about in one of two ways. It can either be a planned or an unplanned order.
An example of a planned order might be the laying out of a street system in a new development.
An example of an unplanned or spontaneous order might be language.
The more complex the order, the more it is likely to be the result of an unplanned spontaneity. Other examples being money, markets and law.
If we compile the work of Gramci,, Bernays and Chomsky what emerges is a clear picture of how opinions are formed and cultures shaped. The tools are human psychology and words. The most important battle we are engaged in today is one of words, ideas and opinions. The authoritarians have been busy for some time in corrupting language in order to fool and manipulate us.
Antonio Gramsci argued that propaganda is the main fabric through which contemporary power asserts itself. For Gramsci, propaganda is central to cultural hegemony; in other words, the dominance of a particular worldview (often that of the ruling class or elite) that is so deeply internalized by society that it becomes ‘common sense’ and uncritically accepted as natural and inevitable.
When a group of people have for some significant period of time been indoctrinated into believing themselves victims, it is quite easy for them to see violence against their opponents as a form of self-defense.
This is what we are witnessing playing out asymmetrically in the political arena today.
These people are able to rejoice in harm if not death for those they hate as a wife might rejoice in harm if not death for her abusive husband.
A very bad concept has seeped into a significant portion of the public's consciousness via the sewer known as academia. It is the idea that retaliation is a perfectly acceptable, permissible and justifiable way to treat people of certain groups (primarily white heterosexual males).
The concept forces a person to reason that since some people no longer living once mistreated some people also no longer living, that people from the latter group living today who were never mistreated are entitled...
Identitarian means relating to or supporting the political interests of a particular racial, ethnic, or national group.
It's essential a fancy word for tribalism.
It pits one's own group against that of every other group. A war against all as Hobbs put it.