This blog will only address national and state issues. There will be no discussion - period - or even comments - period about local politics.
I have always pushed the issue of critical thinking. I hate lemmings with a passion. Nothing will change locally or nationally until we as individuals take personal responsibility for our own decisions and minds.
What I hope to accomplish is a blog wherein people can come to think about issues of a national and state importance.
This is not a blog for the petty. I truly hate the grammar police. People who extol the fact they know where a comma is placed rarely have critical thinking minds. This is not how the brain works. I can proof read my work a 1000 times and each time catch more grammatical mistakes. I read for substance. My mind intuits the next sentence or concept even before the writer writes same. This is why when I write or proof read my own work I miss so many simple grammatical mistakes.
Words may have individual meaning, but in language by themselves they mean nothing. Words take on meaning in context. Context goes beyond a mere sentence. A well written topic sentence can impact how each and every word which follows is perceived.
Further, words have separate meaning based on regional, cultural, and personal experiences. Words take on even more meaning when linked together in sentences, paraphraphs and entire books.
A good reader learns to read from the perspective of the author or the character. Edward Said created the concept of Contrapuntal Analysis in literature. The reality is, it readily translates to a form of critical thinking in politics, and in fact life itself.
In its simplest form Edward Said wanted people to read colonial literature like Gunga Din while considering the perspective of the Indian character. It completely changes the story.
Bigotry at its core really comes from a failure to understand individual perspective and how ego blinds us from the concept that we do not all perceive things the same way. The essence of intellectual bigotry is the imposition of ones own perspective on others while analysing a question. I may have an opinion, but I do not see it as absolute. I fully understand how someone can arrive at a completely different opinion based on the same facts, data, or events. A critical thinker is always open to diverse conclusions based on the same facts, data, or events.
My posts will not be absolutes. They will be a starting point. A good response will be - "if we consider another perspective (which is defined) then the conclusion is different. " This is what I am looking for. These type responses will extend the discussion to allow my readers to consider other perspectives. This is how problems are solved.
In today's world we unfortunately have far too many poorly educated people who have decided to give their own meaning to words. Words like conservative, progressive, liberal all have meaning. But as MR CAPS proves over and over again - he has no clue as to their true meaning. A truly critical mind embraces all options and understands under the unique facts of the day what one day may call for a conservative solution another day may call for a liberal or progressive solution.
I am assigning to all my readers two text books. While it would be nice if many of you would buy the second book, I am not holding my breath.
The first is William Safires Political Dictionary
Do the search for conservative - you may learn something. Now mind you, words change meaning on a regular basis. But philosophical terms have true permanent meanings. If we can change the meaning of the term conservative every time someone comes along who wants to coop the term, then it is fair to say there is nothing truly conservative about the meaning of the term conservative.
The second book is Glenn Tinder's Political Thinking.
I do not care if you are a cashier or scientist - if you read this book it will make you a better problem solver. It will make you into a critical thinker.