Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

The End of Reasonable Debate

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

From this 2005 interview:

“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.” – Dr. Theodore Dalrymple

By cleverly utilizing dishonest terms and phrases, we have been manipulated into conceding the debate to leftists/Marxists before it is begun simply because of words are redefined to frame the debate. “Corporate Tax Loophole” and “Legalized Tax Fraud” (see article here) are phrases used by liberals and socialists to make it seem like taking completely legal advantage of tax law is somehow immoral or unethical. Like anyone utilizing tax deductions or laws to pay as little tax as possible, corporations are demonized for doing the same, as if it is somehow their moral obligation not to find ways to pay as little tax as possible.  They are being demonized by the left by the lie of mischaracterization when they use a term to describe something that is not what that term means.

Take the term “hate”.  The left paints anyone that doesn’t agree with their social agenda as espousing “hate”, or “violence”, against some protected group.  Using their domination of the major media and entertainment market, and employing rabid gangs of “Social Justice Warriors”, anyone that simply disagrees with them and states their disagreement publicly is attacked as a “hater” or a “bigot”.  If you call an illegal immigrant “illegal”, you’re a racist – it doesn’t even matter the race of the immigrants in question.  If you express concerns about public bathrooms becoming gender neutral, you can be fired, like Curt Schilling.  In this way, honest debate is avoided and supplanted by emotionally charged false terminology that frames the debate in an entirely dishonest way.

Such as “tax cuts” “budget cuts” [corrected thanks to hrun].  With baseline budgeting, “cutting taxes the budget” can only mean “reduction in the rate of tax budget increase”.  Thus the debate is lost before it begins; the debate is never about actually cutting taxes the budget, but only about reducing the amount of increase.  Your “rights” can mean anything a leftist/progressive thinks you should get for free from the government, or provide you with whatever protections they think one ought to have.  Requiring a photo ID to vote becomes “racism” and “disenfranchisement”.  Refusing to force the public to pay for women’s contraceptives and abortions becomes a hate-filled “war on women” or being “against women’s rights” (while the real war on women, being conducted by Islamists worldwide, goes on unnoticed by leftists).  Performers boycott North Carolina for it’s “anti-LGBT” bathroom law, while the same performers gleefully perform in Dubai where homosexuals are executed.  Those who simply doubt a particular view held by many scientists are framed as “anti-science”.  The term “skepticism” now only applies if one ridicules that which it is politically correct to ridicule and dismiss; if you are skeptical of the wrong things, you are no longer a skeptic, you are a “denier”.

We live in a time where telling truths against the politically correct narrative, or simply voicing an opinion that contradicts it, is dangerous, because truthful terminology has been politically re-characterized by the leftists in media, politics and academia as hate speech.

“In times of deceit telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” – George Orwell.

 

 

Comments
StephenB: A ten-year-old “child” is not innocent. You put "child" in scare-quotes!? That is bizarre. You don't think a ten-year-old is a child?Zachriel
May 7, 2016
May
05
May
7
07
2016
05:37 AM
5
05
37
AM
PDT
Of watersheds and double, mutually polarised slippery slopes: https://uncommondescent.com/ethics/science-worldview-issues-and-society/the-perils-of-prolonged-march-of-folly-triggered-crisis/kairosfocus
May 7, 2016
May
05
May
7
07
2016
03:07 AM
3
03
07
AM
PDT
ZL, failure or refusal to look at a visually communicated concept . . .
of narrowing down options to a prolonged crisis (navigating a ridge line) and/or a circumstance where such a watershed can trigger a double slippery slope and divide, domineer and destroy end-game
. . . on your part is not a fault on my part. KF PS: As it is now coming on two days since SB raised the challenge for you to document grave and insistent accusations, only to be met with patently studious silence, that silence also speaks.kairosfocus
May 7, 2016
May
05
May
7
07
2016
12:55 AM
12
12
55
AM
PDT
KF -- "Added remarks (and an image) on a plateau wedging down at a critical point/issue to ridges with two slippery slopes that cause accelerated polarisation as we slide to mutually alienated ruin:" Once more? This time in English?ziggy lorenc
May 6, 2016
May
05
May
6
06
2016
02:12 PM
2
02
12
PM
PDT
StephenB: Her religion has not been established and I have not assumed anything about it, so you are obviously in error. Zachriel
You just said, “For one thing, she can make her peace with God if she knows the truth.” She’s a child. She’s innocent.
Her age has not been given. A ten-year-old "child" is not innocent. If she was three years old, that would be a different story. Since it was not given that she has reached the age of reason, I am treating her situation as if she had. StephenB: If she is in great pain and wants it to end, she will not be comforted with the lie (that she is not dying).
Add children and human nature to the things you don’t know much about. If she’s the wrong religion, be sure to tell her she’s going to hell if she doesn’t convert.
Bad logic. Your response doesn't address the above point. Each time I refute you, you change the subject.StephenB
May 6, 2016
May
05
May
6
06
2016
09:12 AM
9
09
12
AM
PDT
Z:
Another example: If the Nazis come to your home looking for Jews, don’t tell them about the hidden closet.
Or do, and, as Corrie Ten Boom's niece discovered, watch God use your honesty to save them. http://characterqualitystories.com/cqs/node/21Phinehas
May 6, 2016
May
05
May
6
06
2016
08:24 AM
8
08
24
AM
PDT
StephenB: Her religion has not been established and I have not assumed anything about it, so you are obviously in error. You just said, "For one thing, she can make her peace with God if she knows the truth." She's a child. She's innocent. StephenB: If she is in great pain and wants it to end, she will not be comforted with the lie. Add children and human nature to the things you don't know much about. If she's the wrong religion, be sure to tell her she's going to hell if she doesn't convert.Zachriel
May 6, 2016
May
05
May
6
06
2016
05:28 AM
5
05
28
AM
PDT
F/N: Added remarks (and an image) on a plateau wedging down at a critical point/issue to ridges with two slippery slopes that cause accelerated polarisation as we slide to mutually alienated ruin: https://uncommondescent.com/ethics/science-worldview-issues-and-society/fyi-ftr-addressing-ruthless-radicalism-tied-to-evolutionary-materialist-scientism-and-radical-secularism/ Divide and dominate, on steroids. KFkairosfocus
May 6, 2016
May
05
May
6
06
2016
05:17 AM
5
05
17
AM
PDT
StephenB — “Also, you have not provided me with the information I asked for concerning kairosfocus. Which of his words, phrases, or claims were, in your judgement, uncivil. I would like to evaluate them." ziggy
I must admit, you have a great sardonic sense of humour. Please don’t ever lose it.
Excellent. Why not humor me so that we can both have a good laugh. So far, you have said that kairosfocus is irrational, a hater, and a coward. At the same time, you have invested many hours on this thread telling us how uncivil and abusive he is. Naturally, I am curious about what he could have said that would top your act. Presumably, you can provide a few examples.StephenB
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
10:44 PM
10
10
44
PM
PDT
Here we go again. Ziggy is totally obsessed with homosexuality. Why Ziggy?Eugen
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
10:04 PM
10
10
04
PM
PDT
StephenB -- "By the way, I haven’t heard from you lately on the subject of gays trying to intimidate those who disagree with them by using the tactic of “jamming.” I gather you are for it. Right?" Off topic. We were discussing the evidence of a reduction in freedom of speech that resulted from SSM. Not a tactic used by activists to gain attention. Do you really want to get into a dick measuring contest on which side of this issue plays dirtier? Which side calls the other side deviants, perverts, sexual predators, pedophiles, etc.? I realize that this is a minority fringe, but it is a very vocal one. Which side involved a homophobic lawyer to prevent a class valedictorian from giving the valedictorian address simply because he was gay? StephenB -- "Also, you have not provided me with the information I asked for concerning kairosfocus. Which of his words, phrases, or claims were, in your judgement, uncivil. I would like to evaluate them" I must admit, you have a great sardonic sense of humour. Please don't ever lose it.ziggy lorenc
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
08:49 PM
8
08
49
PM
PDT
ziggy
And Barry. He was the one who coined the phrase.
ziggy, please do not claim that Barry is so stupid as to think that asking someone to define terms is an example of the Definition Deficit Disorder. I am offended on his behalf. Apparently, you are incapable of rational thought.StephenB
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
08:34 PM
8
08
34
PM
PDT
StephenB -- "Only ziggy thinks that asking someone to define his terms constitutes Definition Deficit Disorder." And Barry. He was the one who coined the phrase.ziggy lorenc
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
08:15 PM
8
08
15
PM
PDT
StephenB: For one thing, she can make her peace with God if she knows the truth. zachriel
Geez. You just said her religion hasn’t been established.
That is correct. Her religion has not been established and I have not assumed anything about it, so you are obviously in error.
Now, you’re making decisions about what to tell a dying child based on your own predilections rather than the comfort of the dying.
Bad logic. Everyone bases that decision on his own predilections. Not just me. You act as if your decision to tell her a lie for the sake of comfort is not based on your predilections. You are also assuming that she would prefer not to die. If she is in great pain and wants it to end, she will not be comforted with the lie.StephenB
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
06:08 PM
6
06
08
PM
PDT
StephenB — “First, You have not provided your definition of truth.” ziggy
Isn’t Definitiin Deficit Disorder one of the Darwinian Debating Devices? You should be ashamed of yourself.
Only ziggy thinks that asking someone to define his terms constitutes Definition Deficit Disorder.StephenB
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
05:57 PM
5
05
57
PM
PDT
StephenB: For one thing, she can make her peace with God if she knows the truth. Geez. You just said her religion hasn't been established. Now, you're making decisions about what to tell a dying child based on your own predilections rather than the comfort of the dying.Zachriel
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
05:45 PM
5
05
45
PM
PDT
SB: For one thing, she can make her peace with God if she knows the truth. If I lie to her, she loses her opportunity to do that. In the name of false compassion, you would misled her.” ziggy
But that assumes that she is religious, which may not be the case. I just know that I couldn’t tell her that she is going to die.
Bad logic. It doesn't assume she is religious in any way. It simply provides her with the opportunity to make her peace with God, either if she is already "religious" (whatever that means) or to change her mind about being non-religious. She can say either yes or no. If you are on the scene, she is given no choice because you presume to make if for her---in the name of false compassion. By the way, I haven't heard from you lately on the subject of gays trying to intimidate those who disagree with them by using the tactic of "jamming." I gather you are for it. Right? Also, you have not provided me with the information I asked for concerning kairosfocus. Which of his words, phrases, or claims were, in your judgement, uncivil. I would like to evaluate them>StephenB
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
05:41 PM
5
05
41
PM
PDT
SB: For one thing, she can make her peace with God if she knows the truth. If I lie to her, she loses her opportunity to do that. Zach
Geez. You might want to let her know she’s going to hell because she’s the wrong religion while your at it.
Bad logic. Her religion has not been established. Zach
If the Nazis come to your home looking for Jews, don’t tell them about the hidden closet.
Bad logic. The argument is that truth itself is better than error. No one said that telling the truth is always better than not telling the truth. If Nazi's come to your house looking for Jews, then you tell them nothing. If someone wants you to spread gossip to hurt someone's reputation, then tell them nothing.StephenB
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
05:36 PM
5
05
36
PM
PDT
StephenB -- "Truth is always better. If I don’t know the truth (she is going to die) then I can’t even make an informed decision, can I? For one thing, she can make her peace with God if she knows the truth. If I lie to her, she loses her opportunity to do that. In the name of false compassion, you would misled her." But that assumes that she is religious, which may not be the case. I just know that I couldn't tell her that she is going to die.ziggy lorenc
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
04:26 PM
4
04
26
PM
PDT
Eugen: We ask Zachriel if this is wrong or right. We are against terrorism. StephenB: You have not provided your definition of truth. We use the usual definition of truth: the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality. StephenB: Consequently, you don’t know what you are preferring. Sure we do. We prefer wisdom to foolishness. StephenB: For me (and for everyone) truth is the correspondence between the mind and reality. That's the common definition. StephenB: Second, it is irrational to say that your reason for valuing wisdom is that you value it. As we already explained, we value wisdom because it often leads to greater happiness and contentment for people (but not always!). Why do we prefer people to be happy and content? Well, we're rather fond of Homo loquens. A personal preference, if you will. StephenB: For one thing, she can make her peace with God if she knows the truth. If I lie to her, she loses her opportunity to do that. Geez. You might want to let her know she's going to hell because she's the wrong religion while your at it. ziggy lorenc: If you are in the middle of a war zone and you come across a child who’s injuries are not survivable, and she asks you if she is going to die, how would you answer? Another example: If the Nazis come to your home looking for Jews, don't tell them about the hidden closet.Zachriel
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
04:17 PM
4
04
17
PM
PDT
Sobering viewing on the headlined issue https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7UxYM4aIptckairosfocus
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
04:08 PM
4
04
08
PM
PDT
I don’t always agree that truth is always better than falsity. If you are in the middle of a war zone and you come across a child who’s injuries are not survivable, and she asks you if she is going to die, how would you answer?
Truth is always better. If I don't know the truth (she is going to die) then I can't even make an informed decision, can I? For one thing, she can make her peace with God if she knows the truth. If I lie to her, she loses her opportunity to do that. In the name of false compassion, you would misled her.StephenB
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
03:41 PM
3
03
41
PM
PDT
Ari, in Metaphysics 1011b: truth says of what is that it is; and of what is not that it is not. If an implied or explicit definition of truth materially differs, trouble will come of the difference.kairosfocus
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
02:46 PM
2
02
46
PM
PDT
StephenB -- "First, You have not provided your definition of truth." Isn't Definitiin Deficit Disorder one of the Darwinian Debating Devices? You should be ashamed of yourself. :) I don't always agree that truth is always better than falsity. If you are in the middle of a war zone and you come across a child who's injuries are not survivable, and she asks you if she is going to die, how would you answer? Is the truth better, or is a falsity?ziggy lorenc
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
02:13 PM
2
02
13
PM
PDT
Zach
So we agree that truth more valuable than falsity. Given that, it is quite possible to have a discussion about truth and falsity, without having to agree that truth is “intrinsically” the more valuable.
Under the circumstances, we can certainly agree that truth is more valuable than falsity, but it is not possible to have a rational discussion about it. First, You have not provided your definition of truth. So it is impossible to have a rational discussion about it until you do. To say that it is "peccadillo" wisdom is a meaningless statement. No one knows what peccadillo means in that context. There is no way to connect the correct definition of the word with the reason one might value wisdom. Consequently, you don't know what you are preferring. Consequently, so can't know why you prefer it. For me (and for everyone) truth is the correspondence between the mind and reality. A true statement is one that describes the world as it really is. Accordingly, I can know why I value it. Second, it is irrational to say that your reason for valuing wisdom is that you value it. It doesn't get at the why. As indicated, one cannot know why he prefers or values something if he doesn't know what he is preferring or valuing. What you are projecting is subjectivism, which is irrational. It defines truth as personal preference.StephenB
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
01:58 PM
1
01
58
PM
PDT
So Christian is to be beheaded by terrorists. We ask Zachriel if this is wrong or right. He will check his pecadillo and come back to us :-)Eugen
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
01:56 PM
1
01
56
PM
PDT
StephenB: Wisdom is an intrinsic good. Bread is not always to the wise. StephenB: Of course. So we agree that truth more valuable than falsity. Given that, it is quite possible to have a discussion about truth and falsity, without having to agree that truth is “intrinsically” the more valuable.Zachriel
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
12:38 PM
12
12
38
PM
PDT
Zach
That just turns it into a question as to the value of wisdom. Sure, we value truth because it helps lead to wisdom. We value wisdom because, well, consider it a peccadillo, if you like.
Wisdom is an intrinsic good. I don't understand what you mean by "peccadillo" wisdom. That is not a clear statement.
Or, ah, wisdom leads to better results on average. What do we mean by better?
Better means higher on the scale of good/bad.
What about you? You didn’t answer. Do you value truth over falsity?
Of course. Truth is an intrinsic good. Falsehood is an intrinsic evil. Evil is the privation of good. Falsehood is a privation of truth. Therefore, I value truth over falsehood.StephenB
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
10:14 AM
10
10
14
AM
PDT
Phinehas: The vast majority of people have something we’ve labelled a “conscience” to help describe our innate ability to recognize both good and evil, not just in our own actions, but in the actions of others. So we agree that truth more valuable than falsity. Given that, it is quite possible to have a discussion about truth and falsity, without having to agree that truth is "intrinsically" the more valuable.Zachriel
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
10:07 AM
10
10
07
AM
PDT
P, Z is a collective. KF PS I see we are in the Boeing range.kairosfocus
May 5, 2016
May
05
May
5
05
2016
10:01 AM
10
10
01
AM
PDT
1 2 3 27

Leave a Reply