From: Arlo J. Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Fri Jul 08 2005 - 01:00:37 BST
On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 18:59:52 +0000, "Platt Holden" wrote:
> Arlo,
>
> > Historically, it is easy to show that people are easily placated by
> > immediate rewards and responsive to xenophobic manipulation.
>
> If it's so easy to show, why don't you show it? You keep asking others for
> "proof" of their statements, then fail to supply your own. Isn't that
> called "hypocrisy?".
>
> > This does not
> > make them "stupid" by any means. It simply means that people must both
> > learn how and decide to overcome their basic instincts. Isn't this exactly
> > what organized religion, Christianity, teaches people? Does Christianity,
> > too, purport that ordinary people are "too dumb" to know what is Good, that
> > they must rely on the Church to tell them?
>
> Didn't Pirsig say something to the effect that we know what's good without
> having to rely on others to tell us? I don't know what "Christianity"
> thinks about the wisdom of people, but I do know that democracies rely
> more on the goodness of "We, the People" than those who think they know
> better than the rest of us -- not to mention any names. :-).
>
> > > > (2) America offers more opportunity and social mobility than any other
> > > > country, including the countries of Europe.
> > >
> > > > This is, again, patently false. Study after study has shown that for
> > > > the *vast* majority, social mobility is a myth.
> > >
> > > What studies?
> >
> > I'm not going to do your homework, Platt. When you are interested in
> > seeking truth and not patriotic propaganda, you'll easily find them. Social
> > mobility studies have been conducted since the 50s.
>
> You make a claim, then refuse to support it. A good example of the Arlo
> argumentative style.
>
> > > You and Denesh simply disagree. My experience is that in the U.S. it's
> > > extremely rare for someone to consider plumbers, electricians,
> > > carpenters, etc. as "underclass."
> >
> > If its a "simple disagreement", that alone proves Denesh is not "right" but
> > merely "of the opinion". If that's the case, it hardly can be used as
> > "proof" by you that the majority of Americans are better off than the
> > majority of any other nation.
>
> A good example of Arlo's argumentative style, the non sequitur. From a
> difference of opinion about attitudes towards a certain class of workers
> he leaps to the conclusion that an educated opinion cannot be right.
>
> > Again, if you were interested in verifying such claims, you could easily
> > find them yourself. You are, of course, not interested, or you would not
> > have offered such a baseless piece of patriotic dribble as "proof" of your
> > point.
>
> Another Arlo argumentative technique -- the emotionally-driven smear.
>
> > Here's a lesson in Platt's reasoning for all who may be reading. He uses
> > D'Souza's aricle that claims, straight out, that Americans live longer
> > lives. Two studies clearly show this NOT to be the case, both placing the
> > U.S. way down the list (38th and 46th). Rather than realizing that this
> > shows D'Souza is "wrong", he says it shows statistics are unreliable and
> > that D'Souza is still "right".
>
> D'Souza's statement was "People live longer, fuller lives in America
> followed by a lengthy paragraph expanding on the point. Note is this
> example of an Arlo argument that the modifier "fuller" is completely
> ignored, a typical ploy. (Note he does not question the unreliability of
> statistics.)
>
> > > I fail to see any special value in "diversity."
> >
> > Why? D'Souza obviously does.
>
> So?
>
> > > Where are your statistics to show that diversity makes for a higher
> > > quality society?
> >
> > Statistics and measures are unreliable, Platt. I say it is "true" and so it
> > is. If you support D'Souza's use of this type of "logic", then why do you
> > ask me for critical proof? Especially when I am agreeing with your author.
>
> Because you're the one who seems to believe numbers are the only way to
> establish the "critical proof" of anything.
>
> > > > The remaining "assertions" I find so laughable as to be unworthy of
> > > > comment. For those that may not have viewed the article:
> > >
> > > I find your "unworthy of comment" comment to be laughable.
> >
> > Can you support ANY of his remaining comments in any way, using anything
> > OTHER than "this is my tenaciously held belief". If you find them worthy of
> > comment, as I did not, please feel free to show me ANY support for them
> > whatsoever.
>
> Dinesh D'Sousa has the credentials of a reliable commentator of the social
> scene, and what he says jibes with my direct experience.
>
> > > Again, statistics are unreliable measures of quality. For every study
> > > purporting to prove one thing you can usually find another study proving
> > > the opposite.
> >
> > Which means there is nothing but opinion. Which means that you can make no
> > claim that America is "better". You can only claim "I believe America is
> > better". And if someone claims, for example, in response "I believe Denmark
> > is better", all you can say is "We are of differing opinions. We cannot say
> > who is right. All we can do is believe what we want to believe".
>
> No. We can claim, based on the MOQ, that a country that is democratic and
> guarantees it's citizens certain inalienable rights such as freedom of
> speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, trial by jury, etc. is
> better than countries which do not. Further, we can claim, based on
> educated opinion and our own direct experience, that some countries are
> better than others.
>
> > > About the only statistic
> > > I find meaningful in terms of social quality are the numbers of men and
> > > women who have fought and currently fight the enemies of freedom, most
> > > especially the 3000 or so rag tag soldiers Continental Army who in 1776
> > > saved the revolution from defeat by a victory at Trenton.
> >
> > Really? Percent living below poverty says nothing about social quality?
> > Literacy rate? Homelessness? Disposable income? Free time? All mean
> > nothing? Very telling.
>
> Appealing to such statistics reveals the mindset of a central planner,
> someone who believes the government is responsible for curing all social
> problems. If you read the Declaration of Independence which described the
> the low social quality that the Founders risked their lives to overcome,
> you'll not find a single statistic to "prove" their point.
>
> If you care you should reread Pirsig's comments about modern anthropology
> to understand where I'm coming from on the question of using numbers as
> objective "critical proof" when people are the subject. I'm a Dusenberry
> man. :-)
>
> Platt
>
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
>
Arlo Bensinger
Project Associate, Coordinator of Technology
Center for Advanced Language Proficiency Education & Research (CALPER)
5A Sparks Building
University Park PA 16802
Office: 863-7041
Cell: 883-0435
email: ajb102@psu.edu
AOL IM: morosophos
Webpage: http://www.personal.psu.edu/ajb102
"Was aber gut ist, Phaidros,
und was nicht-
muessen wir danach erst andere fragen?"
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jul 08 2005 - 01:04:36 BST