Difference between revisions of "Liberals and reason"
(Of course, not all liberals are hostile to reason. The problem is just that they discard it whenever it gets in their way.) |
(Dedication to reality at all costs - the conservative alternative) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Liberals and reason''' do not mix, because as soon as the conversation turns toward reason and rationality, liberalism is on shaky ground. The typical liberal reaction to an argument which refutes a liberal position is to attack the character of the person making the argument (see [[ad hominem]]), complain that the argument is too short, too long, that the argument was expressed the wrong format or venue, etc. Anything but actually addressing the points being made. | '''Liberals and reason''' do not mix, because as soon as the conversation turns toward reason and rationality, liberalism is on shaky ground. The typical liberal reaction to an argument which refutes a liberal position is to attack the character of the person making the argument (see [[ad hominem]]), complain that the argument is too short, too long, that the argument was expressed the wrong format or venue, etc. Anything but actually addressing the points being made. | ||
| − | Of course, not all liberals are hostile to reason. The problem is just that they discard it whenever it gets in their way. | + | Of course, not all liberals are hostile to reason. The problem is just that they discard it whenever it gets in their way. This is in sharp contrast to conservatives, whose motto may be summed up in these words by Christian [[psychiatrist]] [[M. Scott Peck]]: |
| + | |||
| + | :Dedication to reality at all costs! | ||
==A feminist example== | ==A feminist example== | ||
{{quotebox|“Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend.” — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }} | {{quotebox|“Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend.” — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }} | ||
Revision as of 22:54, March 27, 2008
Liberals and reason do not mix, because as soon as the conversation turns toward reason and rationality, liberalism is on shaky ground. The typical liberal reaction to an argument which refutes a liberal position is to attack the character of the person making the argument (see ad hominem), complain that the argument is too short, too long, that the argument was expressed the wrong format or venue, etc. Anything but actually addressing the points being made.
Of course, not all liberals are hostile to reason. The problem is just that they discard it whenever it gets in their way. This is in sharp contrast to conservatives, whose motto may be summed up in these words by Christian psychiatrist M. Scott Peck:
- Dedication to reality at all costs!
A feminist example
“Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend.” — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [1]