by Chris Alexion, Copyright October 17, 2006, all rights reserved. 335 views
Contemporary ignorance of presuppositions keeps on amazing me. I had to laugh at the recent radio spot for Delaware congressman Mike Castle. The ad quoted several newspapers which had ranked Castle as the tri-state area's "best congressman," a man who spurned "partisan politics" in favor of "getting things done."
The hilarious thing is that the ad treats politics like breakfast cereal or AA batteries–let's just judge performance, not ideology. But qualitative judgments about congressmen are inherently ideological! How do we create a standard of what a "good" congressman is? What "things" should our guy be "getting done"?
Our underlying concept or standard of ethics determines our view of what a "good" statesman should "get done." Yet this is precisely what divides different voters.
Asking us to put our philosophies of ethics and politics aside at the polls is like asking Alabamans and Georgians to simply sit back and enjoy the Auburn-Georgia game. It just ain't gon' happen.
1 • Jlee • October 18, 2006 • 8:30 AM
No it ain't. WAR EAGLE! any Vandy fans out there?
2 • DocTrinsOGrace • October 23, 2006 • 11:21 PM
I was asked today to evaluate a web site entitled the Integral Institute (www.integralinstitute.org). Clearly they suffer from the same blindness you've described here. They refuse even to articulate their presuppositions. I'm certain the congratulate one another on the sagacity of the fundamental assumptions that include such things as syncretism and pluralism. They believe that the combination of all their many perspectives will generate some sort of Hegelian synthesis that will solve the world's problems. As I read the various discussions at the web site, I couldn't help but wonder: How might Mathematics be benefited by mixing together all of the wrong answers in that field into one huge pile? In Him, Doc PS Thank you for your own web site!
——-