Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

    Originally posted by FreshFish View Post
    I had developed a similar grid a few years ago without using the "left-right" concept at all. I had a similar vertical axis of Centralized Control on top and Individual Liberty on the bottom (their Authoritarian / Libertarian axis), but the horizontal axis was Radical - Conservative ("left" / Radical was "don't trust your elders, invent new things" and "right" / Conservative was "we've tested these ideas for a long time and empirically we generally have found them to be pretty effective over time").

    In this grid, "progressives" would be upper left, "monarchists" would be upper right, "liberals" would be lower right, and "anarchists" would be lower left.

    It was surprising to me to see liberals and progressives as polar opposites in this terminology since so many people use the two words interchangeably.

    To me a "liberal" was individual liberty and (mostly) free markets while a "progressive" is all about government control and "we are smarter than anyone who ever lived" superiority.

    If you want to place a "classic" thinker on each axis, you'd have Hobbes or Plato on the top, Marx on the left, Burke on the right, and Jefferson or Adam Smith on the bottom.
    I always thought of myself as a progressive. I was thinking about the above post. I questioned your position of...not specifically liberal (although others here probably will)...but rather of progressive. So I went to wiki on the matter:

    Progressivism is a broad political philosophy that asserts that advances in science, technology, economic development, and social organization can improve the human condition.

    Ah yes...that's the real deal. Im enamored by change. I guess I would call myself a Christian progressive...adding that all scientific/technology/economic change above is supplemented by societal change (which has been for centuries driven by Christian values). Doesn't quite fit your definition tho.
    Go Gophers!

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

      Originally posted by 5mn_Major
      Ah yes...that's the real deal. Im enamored by change. I guess I would call myself a Christian progressive...adding that all scientific/technology/economic change above is supplemented by societal change (which has been for centuries driven by Christian values). Doesn't quite fit your definition tho.
      Ah yes, Christian values are exactly what pushed Einstein, Max Born, Oppenheimer, Haber, and any number of Jewish scientists who have completely revolutionized our scientific knowlege over the years, they've all been driven by their Christian values.
      "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

      "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

      "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

        Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
        Ah yes, Christian values are exactly what pushed Einstein, Max Born, Oppenheimer, Haber, and any number of Jewish scientists who have completely revolutionized our scientific knowlege over the years, they've all been driven by their Christian values.
        There's plenty of scientists that have been Christian and non-Christian and who have contributed to scientific advancements, obviously.

        Of course, just to even things out, here are a few Christian scientists off the top of my head: Newton, Bacon, Pascal, Boyle, etc.
        Last edited by Bob Gray; 06-18-2014, 09:19 AM.
        Originally posted by Priceless
        Good to see you're so reasonable.
        Originally posted by ScoobyDoo
        Very well, said.
        Originally posted by Rover
        A fair assessment Bob.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

          Originally posted by 5mn_Major View Post
          I always thought of myself as a progressive. I was thinking about the above post. I questioned your position of...not specifically liberal (although others here probably will)...but rather of progressive. So I went to wiki on the matter:

          Progressivism is a broad political philosophy that asserts that advances in science, technology, economic development, and social organization can improve the human condition.

          Ah yes...that's the real deal. Im enamored by change. I guess I would call myself a Christian progressive...adding that all scientific/technology/economic change above is supplemented by societal change (which has been for centuries driven by Christian values). Doesn't quite fit your definition tho.
          there are "progressives" and then there are "Progressives." the former is how you see yourself. The latter is specifically a political movement, that maintains we need extensive government control over all life activities because no one else can be trusted. the Progressive movement (uppercase P) goes back to Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.

          It has done a lot of good, in that we have a Food and Drug Administration, workplace safety, etc. The problem, of course, is not "whether" we need these things but where is the appropriate balance point between too much and too little. Progressives (uppercase P) seem to think that no amount of government control is ever too much.

          Lots of progressives (lowercase p) believe we are better served by interacting directly with those in need and do not agree that government always has to insert itself into every social interaction.
          "Hope is a good thing; maybe the best of things."

          "Beer is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin

          "Being Irish, he had an abiding sense of tragedy, which sustained him through temporary periods of joy." -- W. B. Yeats

          "People generally are most impatient with those flaws in others about which they are most ashamed of in themselves." - folk wisdom

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

            Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
            Ah yes, [Judeo-]Christian values are exactly what pushed Einstein, Max Born, Oppenheimer, Haber, and any number of Jewish scientists who have completely revolutionized our scientific knowlege over the years, they've all been driven by their [Judeo-]Christian values.

            .
            "Hope is a good thing; maybe the best of things."

            "Beer is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin

            "Being Irish, he had an abiding sense of tragedy, which sustained him through temporary periods of joy." -- W. B. Yeats

            "People generally are most impatient with those flaws in others about which they are most ashamed of in themselves." - folk wisdom

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

              Originally posted by Bob Gray View Post
              There's plenty of scientists that have been Christian and non-Christian and who have contributed to scientific advancements, obviously.

              Of course, just to even things out, here are a few Christian scientists off the top of my head: Newton, Bacon, Pascal, Boyle, etc.
              I'm just tired of Christians inserting their religion into the advancements of science, as though none of it could happen without the Church's blessing. Historically, the Church was the biggest supporter of scientific discovery in the Western world. Why would that be? Ah, yes, because for 1,000 years anything done outsie of the Church would get you excommunicated, essentially a death sentence. Who in their right mind would challenge such orthodoxy except for those few exceptionally brave people? How much more would we know now if the Church had just stepped aside and let scientists work unencumbered? How much further would science had progressed if we didn't have to REdiscover so much knowledge becuase the Church expunged so much pre-Christian knowledge the world had gained because it wasn't sanctioned?
              "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

              "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

              "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

                Originally posted by FreshFish View Post
                .
                That's not even cute, just sad.
                "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

                "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

                "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

                  Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
                  I'm just tired of Christians inserting their religion into the advancements of science, as though none of it could happen without the Church's blessing. Historically, the Church was the biggest supporter of scientific discovery in the Western world. Why would that be? Ah, yes, because for 1,000 years anything done outsie of the Church would get you excommunicated, essentially a death sentence. Who in their right mind would challenge such orthodoxy except for those few exceptionally brave people? How much more would we know now if the Church had just stepped aside and let scientists work unencumbered? How much further would science had progressed if we didn't have to REdiscover so much knowledge becuase the Church expunged so much pre-Christian knowledge the world had gained because it wasn't sanctioned?
                  I'm not a big fan of a lot that the Catholic Church has done in the distant past, as you may have noticed, so no argument that they did a lot of stifling in many ways. That said, there's a lot more to Christianity and Christian history than what a bunch of popes have done. You read the writings of folks like Newton, Pascal, etc. and they viewed their faith as integral to their scientific endeavors. You have a guy like Boyle who said that he felt his scientific efforts glorified God.
                  Originally posted by Priceless
                  Good to see you're so reasonable.
                  Originally posted by ScoobyDoo
                  Very well, said.
                  Originally posted by Rover
                  A fair assessment Bob.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

                    Originally posted by Bob Gray View Post
                    I'm not a big fan of a lot that the Catholic Church has done in the distant past, as you may have noticed, so no argument that they did a lot of stifling in many ways. That said, there's a lot more to Christianity and Christian history than what a bunch of popes have done. You read the writings of folks like Newton, Pascal, etc. and they viewed their faith as integral to their scientific endeavors. You have a guy like Boyle who said that he felt his scientific efforts glorified God.
                    Einstein and other non-Christians have said as much, too. In fact, he thought that physics was trying to solve God's logic. Just because individuals have ascribed their personal motivation to their religious convictions does not give a faith the right to co-opt the credit for discovery. It's petty and it's falacious.
                    "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

                    "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

                    "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

                    Comment


                    • Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

                      Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
                      Einstein and other non-Christians have said as much, too. In fact, he thought that physics was trying to solve God's logic. Just because individuals have ascribed their personal motivation to their religious convictions does not give a faith the right to co-opt the credit for discovery. It's petty and it's falacious.
                      I'm not sure why you're so upset about this. It doesn't have to be an either or situation. Some of the great scientific discoveries in history have been made by Christians who to probably varying extents tied their scientific endeavors with their religious beliefs. You have a guy like Newton who wrote more on religious matters than scientific matters. If those scientists credit their faith as playing a role, leave that to them. And those who don't, the same. I see Christian values and principals as being supportive of scientific endeavors so to me it makes sense that Christians would play a role in moving science forward. That in no way degrades the efforts of those who are Jewish or non-believing or whatever, as there obviously are many of those folks also.
                      Originally posted by Priceless
                      Good to see you're so reasonable.
                      Originally posted by ScoobyDoo
                      Very well, said.
                      Originally posted by Rover
                      A fair assessment Bob.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

                        Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
                        Ah yes, Christian values are exactly what pushed Einstein, Max Born, Oppenheimer, Haber, and any number of Jewish scientists who have completely revolutionized our scientific knowlege over the years, they've all been driven by their Christian values.
                        Doesn't appear that I was clear.

                        Most progress improves mankinds condition - scientific, technological, economic, and social. Scientific improvements were not specifically driven by Christian values IMO, neither were technological, nor economic. On the other hand, western social change from medieval times was heavily influenced by Christianity. As discussed on here many times, examples include child labor, slavery, womens suffrage, healthcare, societal assistance, charity (9 of the top 10 US charitable organizations are Christian or have Christian roots)...Christianity has shaped what society looks like today. Scientific, technological and economic change in my mind was mostly independent of Christianity. Although having such a dynamic resulting society has probably helped foster other sorts of change and set the course for other societies.
                        Go Gophers!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

                          There is a vibrant, productive history of doubt that is exactly as old as religious history (Jennifer Michael Hecht's wonderful book is a great introduction for doubters and believers alike), and it as much a driver of science and technology as religion. Religions come and go and the doctrine of a given religion waxes and wanes between accepting science and violently attacking it. During those times when religion hides under the covers, innovation and research proceed (carefully, under the threat of theological terrorism) outside of it; when religion is confident in its place and comfortable with science as tying up all the annoying and inconsequential details of the material world, believers make enormous contributions to science.

                          The problem is not religion, per se, but the cyclical attempts by authoritarians in religious garb to bring all human experience under their heel. There's always a mob of fanatics looking to murder Hypatia. When they're in charge religion is useless to the advancement of knowledge. When they're safely locked away in the loony bin the energy and sincerity of religious conviction are huge assets in the search for truth.
                          Last edited by Kepler; 06-18-2014, 12:34 PM.
                          Cornell University
                          National Champion 1967, 1970
                          ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                          Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                          Comment


                          • Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

                            Originally posted by Kepler View Post
                            Religions come and go and the doctrine of a given religion waxes and wanes ....The problem is not religion, per se, but the cyclical attempts by authoritarians in religious garb to bring all human experience under their heel.
                            My terminology would be more along the lines of "religion" is wonderful and "doctrine" is the problem.

                            Does God exist? What difference does it make, really....would we really behave any differently toward our fellow humans one way or the other?

                            "religion" would say no, it doesn't really matter whether God "exists" or not: every "religion" has a version of the Golden Rule.

                            "Doctrine" is where arguments about God's existence or lack thereof reside.



                            Secular "doctrine" can be just as tyrannical as "doctrine" in the name of religion. There are fanatics of all stripes.
                            "Hope is a good thing; maybe the best of things."

                            "Beer is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin

                            "Being Irish, he had an abiding sense of tragedy, which sustained him through temporary periods of joy." -- W. B. Yeats

                            "People generally are most impatient with those flaws in others about which they are most ashamed of in themselves." - folk wisdom

                            Comment


                            • Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

                              Originally posted by Bob Gray View Post
                              I'm not a big fan of a lot that the Catholic Church has done in the distant past, as you may have noticed, so no argument that they did a lot of stifling in many ways. That said, there's a lot more to Christianity and Christian history than what a bunch of popes have done. You read the writings of folks like Newton, Pascal, etc. and they viewed their faith as integral to their scientific endeavors. You have a guy like Boyle who said that he felt his scientific efforts glorified God.
                              Yes, their religious beliefs were important to them, personally, but I fail to grasp exactly which term of F = Ma accounts for divine intervention (or even interest) in the universe.

                              Nearly every single great Western composer produced Christian music, but is that because God inspired their music, or is it because the Church happened to be the organization that paid the best during the "period of great discovery" in western music (1650-1850), so the best composers gravitated that way?
                              If you don't change the world today, how can it be any better tomorrow?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

                                Originally posted by Kepler View Post
                                There is a vibrant, productive history of doubt that is exactly as old as religious history (Jennifer Michael Hecht's wonderful book is a great introduction for doubters and believers alike), and it as much a driver of science and technology as religion. Religions come and go and the doctrine of a given religion waxes and wanes between accepting science and violently attacking it. During those times when religion hides under the covers, innovation and research proceed (carefully, under the threat of theological terrorism) outside of it; when religion is confident in its place and comfortable with science as tying up all the annoying and inconsequential details of the material world, believers make enormous contributions to science.
                                Faith either way has been largely independent of breakthrough scientific innovation. Read the book the history of science to get that. But faith has had a big hand in social innovation.

                                Originally posted by Kepler View Post
                                The problem is not religion, per se, but the cyclical attempts by authoritarians in religious garb to bring all human experience under their heel. There's always a mob of fanatics looking to murder Hypatia. When they're in charge religion is useless to the advancement of knowledge. When they're safely locked away in the loony bin the energy and sincerity of religious conviction are huge assets in the search for truth.
                                Pretty much. Extremists have always found a home...nationalism, racism, economics, and yes Christianity. One has to understand the problem in order to have a chance at finding solutions to our problems.

                                Originally posted by FreshFish View Post
                                My terminology would be more along the lines of "religion" is wonderful and "doctrine" is the problem.

                                Does God exist? What difference does it make, really....would we really behave any differently toward our fellow humans one way or the other?
                                Largely agree. But again, the fact that there were believers has resulted in some pretty amazing social/societal advances. And regardless of Papal ancient history, that makes Christianity a big win.
                                Go Gophers!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X