Monday, July 25, 2005

Creationism

I was pondering universal suffrage, and whether having absolutely everyone vote was the best approach. In my reasoning, I thought that there were clearly some groups who should not be allowed to vote, but then I thought, why should I be the one to make that determination? This line of thought led me to the realization that no one is qualified to determine who should or should not vote, because no one would exclude themselves from that category, even if they were eminently unqualified. Thus I determined that the only people who I would listen to with regards to the proper distribution of any privilege are those who exclude themselves from the privileged group. In a similar manner, when someone is critical of their own position, it greatly enhances their credibility to me. Thus I approve of the collection of articles, Arguments that Creationists Should NOT Use. On the other hand, the communists raised self-criticism to an art form, and I don't consider them very credible.

1 Comments:

Blogger Noumenon said...

Hey, I have a question. Which of these two approaches to a comment do you think is more interesting/constructive?

"I determined that the only people who I would listen to with regards to the proper distribution of any privilege are those who exclude themselves from the privileged group."

Response 1: "Kind of like leaving the decision to build a city pool up to the people who can't swim."

Response 2: "People who would exclude themselves from the right to vote must understand or value the right differently from those who would be exercising the right. They'd have their own systemic biases."

In this case I thought #2 first, but #1 is what I would actually post most times, because it is pithier and snarkier. Is that a good thing, in general and for discussing with you?

People I can think of who'd give up the right to vote:

-Nonvoters who aren't merely disgusted with the system but don't care at all
-Voters who have been convinced by upper-class propaganda that their opinion is uninformed and sucks (we have a lot of these right now)
-Monarchists and others who believe deferring to strong leaders is better than popular rule

When I think of people who raised self-criticism to an art form, I think Woody Allen and Kurt Cobain. Communists were self-critical? I suppose it's safer than being Stalin-critical...

I think this is why I read Slate instead of the Washington Post. They're so devoted to being counter-intuitive they must end up criticizing their own positions from time to time. But these days, instead of expecting someone to point out their own flaws, it's usually easier just to find a blog that has exactly the opposite opinion. Just today I ran across http://www.idisagreewithmaureendowd.com/ .

4:06 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home