<blockquote> floating solar power looks to dramatically lower the cost of mechanical support, once it starts to mature.</blockquote>
Really? Making these things seaworthy and resistant to corrosive saltwater will reduce cost?
Comment on Is climate change a ‘ruin’ problem? by Canman
↧
↧
Comment on Is climate change a ‘ruin’ problem? by mwgrant
That’s all? So just what would be the cause? So far not much of a thought–no legs showing.
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by GaryM
“The closing of minds on the climate change issue is a tragedy for both science and society.”
The closing of minds isn’t a tragedy, it is a tactic. And it isn’t limited to the climate debate. The general political tenor of progressivism in the west is the stoking of hatred by low information voters as the primary source of widespread political power.
A progressive scientist begins to doubt the exaggerated claims of certainty by the IPCC, and is labelled a ‘denier’ in the grand tradition of holocaust denial.
A police officer who defends himself is falsely accused of shooting a man who had his hands up and was trying to surrender. The Democrat party’s designated race hate mongers are still busy ginning up their get out the vote effort on this one for 2016.
Those who support the traditional definition of marriage, as our own deified president did just 2 years ago, are homophobic haters.
Those who would dare to suggest that the socialist “welfare” system that does more to maintain poverty than any other government program, should be reformed, are labelled racists who want children to die.
National media giants, masquerading as journalists, declare certain thoughts off limits.
Universities that pushed for ever expanding sexual hedonism on their campuses now redefine rape to include virtually any remotely sexual conduct between their students.
Universities built on the concept of freedom of expression become the primary centers for speech codes throughout the west.
Elementary schools, high schools and universities virtually uniformly teach a deconstructionist view of history, economics, literature, and yes, science, designed to ensure propagation of the dominant progressive political culture.
The Judeo-Christian religion, that made the free market possible, is now defined as racist, homophobic and sexist. Precisely because that religion makes liberty and a free market more probable.
The climate debate is not the problem. It is just one of the more obvious symptoms of the disease of vanity that calls itself progressivism (when it is honest).
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by Joshua
Hi Mark –
So this is one of those exchanges I said I was looking forward to!
==> “I haven’t finished sorting it out yet, but I think a lot of my values fundamentally conflict with the values of the Left. But I’m not sure. Maybe it’s not values and it’s just ingrained ideology.”
My own belief is that it is not an issue or values (or morality). I think that people try to reverse engineer about values and morality on the basis of assessing someone’s political ideology – but that is mostly identity-protective mechanisms (that take the form of identity-aggression and identity-defense) that are in play.
I happen to believe that most of the folks in these threads, for example, have fundamentally very similar values. They value family. They value doing right by others. They value freedom and free speech. They value equality and non-discrimination. They value sound reasoning and good science. They value helping those in need.
I would say that the variety of values within groups people of similar ideological orientation is no less than the differences in values across ideological orientation.
My view is that the hostilities originate in something very much like what you described – ingrained ideology. As an example, take views on the size of government. Like many of my much beloved “denizens” here, I value a limited government – that should only be as large as it needs to be to ensure the most benefit for as many people as possible. I think that there is always the danger of a larger government tending towards authoritarianism or totalitarianism.
But I am often told here, among other places, that I am a statist who desires totalitarianism and authoritarianism who wants a nanny state to tell me what to do and to reward slouchers by punishing achievers because I’m “envious” of other classes and I have a guilt complex about being white. That is an amusing and complete misreading of my values. If anything, I am anti-authoritarian, for example.
But because of an acculturated identification, people rather randomly come down on one side or another of complicated issues that require a balance between competing interests and then project from different positions on these issues to assume that people have different interests and values. The confusion of interests and values is key, IMO, there.
So what we get are situations where a few years ago, the individual mandate was a mark of “personal responsibilty” for many Republicans – an important value, while now it is a mark of totalitarianism and tyranny – obviously odious values. In reality, what changed were not peoples values, or even their interests, but their positions – because of ideological orientation and not because of deep values. Of course, my example was with Republicans, but the same forces are in play with lefties.
I’ll leave it here for now…
Cheers.
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by cris cornell
“it’s tough to make predictions, especialy about the future”—– pretty much sums up the current state of climate science.
↧
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by Mark Bofill
Joshua,
I happen to believe that most of the folks in these threads, for example, have fundamentally very similar values. They value family. They value doing right by others. They value freedom and free speech. They value equality and non-discrimination. They value sound reasoning and good science. They value helping those in need.
I agree with this. I wondered if assigning different priorities to our values might have something to do with it. I’m still not sure.
Like many of my much beloved “denizens” here, I value a limited government – that should only be as large as it needs to be to ensure the most benefit for as many people as possible. I think that there is always the danger of a larger government tending towards authoritarianism or totalitarianism.
Aww, see darn it! You’re not supposed to be a member of my tribe! How the heck am I supposed to use you to detect my biases if you share them?
I’m extremely disappointed in you Joshua.
;)
Thanks for your response. Actually despite my lame joke I appreciate it, that was illuminating.
↧
Comment on Is climate change a ‘ruin’ problem? by JCH
First, it’s not my view; it’s the viewpoint of Nassim Taleb, about whom one can read wildly varying opinions.
Where is the evidence the past perfectly predicts the future of a nonlinear, complex, dynamical, and chaotic system?
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by michael hart
“Criticism is a privilege that you earn — it shouldn’t be your opening move in an interaction…”
Fortunately, people are still entitled to vote while waiting for his permission to criticize.
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by jim2
Also, Mark, isn’t Wagathon more a libertarian than a conservative per se?
↧
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by Mark Bofill
I didn’t ignore the rest of your post Joshua, I didn’t respond because it pretty much mirrors what I’d been thinking, the point about ideology. I’m pretty sure it’s got a lot to do with the matter as well.
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by Joshua
Mark –
==> “1) If I value objectivity, and I do, because I like to be right, then I ought to give some thought on how to reduce the impact of my blind spot. I don’t know about tolerance for the sake of tolerance, but I can certainly condone cautiously exploring the idea of tolerance for the sake of objectivity.”
I think this is a very interesting point. Thinking about it, I realized that I tend to think of tolerance as being an attribute that makes one person superior to another. Heh. I like to call that unintentional irony. I use tolerance as a tool to manifest intolerance.
Knowing the subjectivity intrinsic to assessing altruism in myself relative to others – maybe it is more functional to think of tolerance as being a way to make a more objective person. I know that my life is improved by my the measure of my ability to approach situations objectively. I encounter that on a daily basis. Bias does not necessarily always result in negative outcomes, but I do believe firmly that in balance, the more objectivity I can integrate into my life, the happier I am, the better my relationships are, etc.
==> ” Listen closely to and engage politely with your tribal enemies, not to defeat them in ClimateBall, but to get a glimpse of what’s in your blind spot. ”
Listening is such a valuable tool, and it is something that is in short supply around here. Granted, the medium is difficult; alternating discourse through the the written word has advantages (time for reflection, the ability to prevent unproductive messages through voice or expression), but it is very bulky and unwieldy. I have heard that some 90% of what we communicate comes through the non-verbal channels that trading written comments does not provide.
==> “With respect to this idea, Joshua and Willard and ATTP aren’t my best friends, they are my only friends.”
Nice! With good faith exchange, you can provide a benefit to me that none of my tribe mates can give me.
==> “. I don’t suggest holding hands and singing Kumbyama with them.”
I’m so disappointed!! :-)
==> ” The Hard Way. I don’t like being dependent on others to help see in my blind spot. ”
I don’t think what you’re seeking to achieve can ever be obtained through “dependency.” You are using a tool in the process of self-examination. (and indeed, many people on this forum have called me a “tool’ many times!!)
==> ” It’s like deliberate obsessive compulsive disorder, and trying to sort through the chaos gives me a headache every time I get going.:
Tell me about it!
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by jim2
Mark. You dodged the point, I see. I wasn’t talking about me, I was talking about Joshua’s lack of proof to back up his point. He just spouts this or that without regard to the truth of it. It’s an easy way to produce “rhetoric” although those back-country, gun-totin’, Bible-thumpin’ people in flyover country have a more bucolic word for it.
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by MichaelS
“An entire generation will soon be ready to strangle you and your kind while you sleep in your bed’’ – Joe Romm’s Climate Progress blog June 2009
↧
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by Mark Bofill
Is he? I wouldn’t know. Possibly I made a mistake due to an unchecked assumption.
Thanks Jim.
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by jim2
Joshua makes another unsupported statemtent: “My view is that the hostilities originate in something very much like what you described – ingrained ideology. ”
I think what drives the differences between the warmists and skeptics is that warmists accept half-baked science and skeptics want to see more data before any government action is taken.
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by GaryM
Mark Boflll,
“The study in question about social psychologists reporting a willingness to discriminate against conservative colleague candidates and the associated discussion in the links Joshua supplied frankly discussed a problem that is by no means limited to progressives or liberals.”
Not to rain on your Kumbaya parade, but I am truly interested in the sources of your knowledge about the larger political debate you are discussing. You seem to feel there are equal efforts to stifle opposing speech by “both sides.”
I read from the New York Times, Washington Post, Huffington Post, Slate, Real Climate and other progressive sites to see what progressives think. Where do you go to find what conservatives and skeptics think? What are some of the examples you have seen of conservatives trying to silence progressives, on any aspect of the larger political debate, and where did you see them?
As for your quandary about this: ” I don’t like being dependent on others to help see in my blind spot. I’d like to come up with some practicable methodology to help me address this.” There is already a well developed process for this. It is called critical analysis. It just isn’t taught or practiced anymore in academia. They are now all about criticism of dissenting speech, not critical analysis of all arguments, including their own. Think John Stewart with a PhD.
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by Mark Bofill
Jim,
<blockquote>Mark. You dodged the point, I see. I wasn’t talking about me, I was talking about Joshua’s lack of proof to back up his point. He just spouts this or that without regard to the truth of it. It’s an easy way to produce “rhetoric” although those back-country, gun-totin’, Bible-thumpin’ people in flyover country have a more bucolic word for it.</blockquote>
I'm sorry Jim, you are correct. I didn't mean to dodge your point. I <i>did</i> deliberately hijack it to say something else, and did so thoughtlessly. My apology.
When I said <i>'True enough'</i> I thought I was conceding the point; I don't know if Joshua is correct about there being many examples of his point on these threads or not, and didn't intend to check.
↧
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by Joshua
Mark –
==> “I wondered if assigning different priorities to our values might have something to do with it.”
That’s a fair and interesting point. Makes me think that what described earlier was too binary.
Indeed, while the values in general may be shared, there might be, to some extent at least, differing hierarchies of those values. Something to give some thought to. But my immediate reaction is that those hierarchies are not usually static – they shift and flow based on context, and to some degree, experiential interference (which can cause them to shift). And teasing out the ways that ideological identification creates an illusion of substantively different hierarchies is, IMO, likely to be extremely difficult.
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by GaryM
I was apparently gone waaayyyy too long. When did Mosher’s mini-mes become the standard for proper blog etiquette and critical thought?
Good. Lord. In. Heaven.
If this place turns into Willard/Joshua, Etc. … I’m gonna hurl.
↧
Comment on Criticism, tolerance and changing your mind by kim
Yes, it is astonishing, particularly when you consider the freedom with which information can now be disseminated. Who’d a thunk it?
================
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
