What Next ?

I've come to the conclusion that focusing on current events serves only a transient need. The dynamic nature of world politics renders my articles very quickly irrelevant. The only benefit of retaining the old posts is for the personal satisfaction of saying (to myself) "I told you so." Then followed by a frown or grimace, shaking my head, "too bad no one listens". So I am going to migrate to a focus on philosophical subjects, hopefully of a more enduring nature, though equally irrelevant in the eyes of the majority.

On the international front, the truth is coming out gradually, as it always does. The problem is, most people have a selective memory of even the most recent history; thus opinions tend to represent a "knee-jerk" reaction to an event from a warped perspective; or more likely just a repetition of something heard down at the barbershop or local tavern. Did you ever notice that when somebody makes a statement in an authoritative tone it is usually accepted as fact? In other words, If he talks like a tough guy, he must be right.

The following would surprise some who might have assumed I have a "liberal" bent.

1. I am opposed to withdrawal of troops from Iraq, or even publishing a timetable for such, anytime soon, for essentially the same reasons I was opposed to going to war. From the outset, my position was that the cost was too great for what was at stake. My position is also based on what I heard referred to as the pottery barn principle: "we broke it, now we own it." It would be a terrible injustice to the Iraqi people, and to the rest of the world, if we were to withdraw before the new government and military were cable of keeping the peace. I do believe that since we created the mess, we need to stay there until we can turn things over in a manageable state.

2. I am in favor of re-activating the military draft. I could be persuaded into substituting another type of national service for those who are not able or suited for military service. I believe that mandatory service would be beneficial to the vast majority of conscriptees, providing discipline and instilling a sense of national identity. I also believe that with more at stake, the general populace would be less apt to favor war if other options were available. When deliberating a decision to go to war, each citizen should ask himself "Is it worth [me or a family member] dying for?"

I like to believe that I am a patriot, and a pragmatist. Our nation, as would any, must put our interests first, but in a global context with respect for human dignity.

Why is there air ?

The following is dialog between myself and my son Robert, in response to his blog post whic follows:

A Fairy Tale World
Why, people? Why are you trying to promote the world's best known fairy tale as something more than it is? Let's teach our kids science in schools, and keep the bible-thumping limited to Church and Sunday School. Thanks!

posted by Rob at 10:40 PM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 Comments:
t.h.e. Brig said...
If you propose to have an open mind, you must be open to ALL ideas. You are displaying "contempt prior to investigation". Until you have an understanding of the book which is referred to "the Bible", do not dismiss it as a fairy tale. I have a rudimentary knowledge of the bible, have read parts of it, also many references to and excerpts from. Know that it contains much documented historical data, and is regarded even by non-believers as one of the greatest pieces of literature of all time. The tale of creation in the Book of Genesis takes up approx 1 page, and has many interpretations. The Bible runs over 1000 pages.
I studied portions of the Bible in College(Hobart) as part of my 5 semester "Western Civ" requirement. I also took a course on the history of religion. Understand that the history of religion is inseparable from the history of mankind. No facet of life has had as much influence through the ages.
I have not studied the creationist theories that are being circulated today. Therefore I have no opinion. Thanks for listening. DAD.

3:45 PM
Rob said...
I probably wasn't specific enough in that post. I was referring specifically to the "theory" of Creation and the the recent attempts in some parts of the country to add it to grade-school curricula. If the Bible is ever introduced into our public schools system, it should be considered nothing more than a literary work. I don't think the story of Creation has a place being taught, or even mentioned alongside evolution. If we start allowing that, how long will it be before Creation/Intelligent Design replaces evolution as the primary explanation for our origins?

Intelligent Design presents itself as a more "scientific" way to counter the theory of evolution. I don't know much about it myself, but it's a non-specific, non-demoninational way of saying that we were created, and did not evolve. It seems to focus heavily on the idea that certain recurring patterns in the universe are too complex to have simply evolved over billions of years.

I think these ideas are interesting fodder for discussion, but don't belong in an academic setting, other than as part of a literature course.

5:40 PM
Rob said...
As an additional note, I no longer claim to have an open mind about everything. I'd like be able to say that my mind is open, and that I embrace every idea and every person, but some things that I hear coming from people these days have to be some of the dumbest things I've ever heard. I will not embrace things that I find to be completely absurd.

5:50 PM
t.h.e. Brig said...
Remember that having an open mind doesn't mean that you accept or embrace all ideas, it just means that you do not comletely shut them down. By all means, question everything and take a stand, but be objective. I think that in order for one to have a meaningful opinion it must be an educated opinion.(this is obviously not the way of the majority).
I agree with most of your statements. I think the idea of "intelligent design" has merit. There are many theories and beliefs, [regarding man's beginnings & development] all which will remain forever unproven. Remember that almost every principle pertaining to history is a theory. "Scientific" theories are constantly changing as we discover more. Some principles stand the test of time, but how much time is that? Many of Darwin's postulates are no longer accepted by "the scientific community"; although I believe that the evidence coupled with logic [to support the principle of evolution] is overwhelming. Einstein's Theory of Relativity, which blew open Newton's Laws of Motion, is no longer accepted in its entirety. The introduction of these two theories were tremendous breakthroughs in the evolution of scientific theory. What they did was allow more avenues for discovery.

So you see where I'm going.

"God does not play dice with the universe." - Albert Einstein. (many would agree, many would disagree).