"The Insatiable Maw of Fascinet" <fascinet@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:1130270095.928372.119770@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [Second attempt: I had a pretty good reply set down before lunch that
> was eaten by google.
A hungry google it must be a sign.
>These things are never as good when
> reconstructed.]
regurgitated even.
>> > If you never have to deal with the real world, you're much more
likely
>> > to do well on the SAT.
>>
>> Ideal for academia.
>>
>
> And, apparently, for running countries.
>
> Fortunately, there's a second sort of person who's ideal for politics:
> the trust fund baby.
>
> Varieties of ignornace coincide for predominance in a democracy. We
> might call the basic building blocks of ignorance penes (political
> genes) in analogy to genetic evolution. Penes evolve through election
> selection, ensuring that the most ignorant belief and policies come to
> the fore ove time.
Self preservation is a priority for most specious I assume,
if you want promotion or a raise best not to complain about
the boss, better to agree, you should only ever complain about you're
underlings because that's what they're for.
> I am sensitive to Joseph's concerns, but his objections to the comment
> that "people think poorly because thinking poorly is advantageous" are
> based on an analogy and too quickly discard this dystopian theorem as
> Panglossian.
I supsectf it's possible to learn by thinking poorly, giving one an
advantage.
> The idea is that thinking forms a
> method of deciding upon life paths** that best enable an individual to
> live long and fruitfully.
I think you'll find the correct term is, live long and propser \\//
> We can differentiate between behavior that is individually deleterious
> and behavior that is socially deleterious. It's when we start to
> consider the value of the stupid to the intelligent that we go wrong.
> People have value to other people, and their death and maiming cost
> others who are often only marginally complicit in their idiocy.
>
> At that point, we allow society a veto in any given decision.
But a veto isn't a decision as such but a way of ignoring deciding.
|
