ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-28-2017, 10:20 AM)SomeGuy Wrote:

Bob Butler Wrote:In any given conversation between extreme partisans, each side will believe it has facts, while perceiving the other as making partisan assertions.  This dichotomy is the basis of much of the lack of communication and comprehension.  As long as everyone is dead certain that they are right and the other has no basis, the conversation goes in circles.

All the more reason to understand the difference between the two.  If they are actual facts, then they can be demonstrated empirically, you can establish a common basis for discussion, and where your political philosophies diverge on the conclusions to be drawn you will know where and why.  This continued willingness to blur the lines between fact and opinion is not conducive to having an actual discussion, and leads to the sort of group-think, distrust, narrow partisanship, and other ills that you and your ilk regularly wring their hands over.  If you're going to continue doing it, you might as well admit that what you really dislike is people who have the temerity to disagree with you.

If everyone had a scientific world view, the above paragraph would be reasonably valid. Alas, people have a wide variety of world views.

At one point we had a fundamentalist on the board. Truth was obtained through literal interpretation of the bible. Evolutionary biology was garbage, and could be dismissed by ignoring facts. The means for winning any sort of moral or political question was the ability to quote selectively from the Bible better than the other guy.

World views and values define how one perceives and analyzes the world, and what goals one should strive for. Many people do not understand or appreciate the degree to which conflicting world views and values make this world very different than a world where scientific values predominate and decisions are made on fact.

We have had many many visitors here with political values as strong and as blinding as a Fundamentalist's. Mein Kamph or A Communist Manifest can replace the Bible quite well as a basis for determining Truth and perceiving the world. Modern US red and blue values system are better than those, but any political doctrine ought to be questioned.

Facts? I don't believe you were on the old boards when the gun policy question was being debated. Each faction had their own set of facts and would find excuses to dismiss the other folk's facts. You likely observed Warren Dew and Mikebert attempting to establish 'fact' with regard to modern economic policy. In either case, political prejudices trumped the ability to agree on objective fact. We've also discussed climate change, and there is a clear correlation between strong conservative partisan world views and the ability to accept the science. In general, with the possible exception of those truly dedicated to scientific values, people will disregard and be unable to comprehend facts which would force them to rethink their base values. Humans are just like that.

That's where I get frustrated. It is generally easy for someone to recognize that the Fundamentalist or doctrinaire Marxist is locked into an internally consistent but fact deprived version of reality. It is far less easy, even if one accepts that one's world view is more political than scientific, to question base assumptions and verify one's facts.

Anyway, you have a belief that it is possible to agree on fact. In my experience, this is not so. You can disprove my point of view by getting everyone to agree on facts. Lotsa luck. Seriously. It would be a quite worthy endeavor. Alas, I suspect you will end up dealing with humans and getting frustrated.