LIARS AND BULLSHITTERS !!!

I'm referring here to mostly Arab regimes now in conflict with their people ie; the Syrian or Bahrainy regimes to name a few in the Arab world, but by no means the only example of bullshit regimes in the world, North Korea with it's own news and ways, is another very descriptive case of the bullshit regime in our world today. People and leaders are victims of the two categories as well.

Someone who lies and someone who tells the truth are playing on opposite sides, so to speak, in the same game. Each responds to the facts as he understands them.

For most people, the fact that a statement is false constitutes in itself a reason, however weak, not to make the statement.

What a bullshitting regime essentially represent is not the state of affairs to which the regime refers to nor the beliefs of the regime or it's leaders.

The bullshitter regime ignores these demands( whether from it's people or it's own) altogether. It does not reject the authority of the truth, as the liar regime does and oppose himself to it. The bullshitter regime pays no attention to truth at all, nor is such a regime interested in the truth. By virtue of this, bullshit regimes are a far greater enemy of the truth than liars are.

This same unfortunate state of affairs apply today very well to the United States own affairs, I'm of course referring to the electoral mood and arguments of a good number of Americans, republicans and others, voters or leaders, regarding the reelection of the actual President for office in 2012.



Thanks as usual for your time and patience, your comments are always welcome, salamat.

BEGGING THE QUESTION !!

Many hold political, religious or social opinions not because they have any reason to think them true, but just because they like the associations.

We live in mobile and complex societies, there is no need to feel bound to one style of thinking forever.

I must confess that since I started blogging and putting down my opinions and ideas, there has been no deep reform of my character. I still want to write those lines. It's just that what gets me so irritated and sometimes even angered doesn't seem to be of the least interest to the readers of my blog. Nor to my increasingly fewer friends, who yawn and roll their eyes as I explain my concerns.

What bothers me so much ??

Errors in reasoning, misconceptions, faulty or misleading reasoning, unsound arguments, confused or mistaken beliefs, call it what you want, you know the kind of thing I mean.

Why are we protesters so lonely ?? why don't we all complain to whoever else will listen ?

The simple answer is that most people don't notice the problem. When a car for instance, breaks down, anyone can see that it has, even if he or she knows nothing about how cars work. Reasoning is different. Unless you know how reasoning can go wrong, you can't see that it has. Which makes for huge numbers of innocent suckers, unable to resist the fake reasoning of those who want something from them, such as votes or money or devotion.

Covering those errors in reasoning that are commonly encountered, when discussing or debating controversial topics, drawn from politics, theology, business or the social, and wherever people engage in reasoned debate. Is what we ought to aim for.



Thanks for your time , and your understanding, and as usual salamat to all.

I'VE GOT A SIXTH SENSE ABOUT RESTAURANTS !!

Once inside they realised that the place specialised in crab dishes. The menu was written in English and Portuguese. Most of the customers were locals, and the prices were quite reasonable. According to the menu the area boasts dozens of varieties of crabs, with more than a hundred types of crab dishes. The man and the woman ordered local white wine, and after looking over what was available, selected several crab dishes and shared them. The portions were generous, the ingredients all fresh, the seasoning just right.

This is really good, the woman said impressed.

See? what'd I tell you?? I told you I have the power to find the best. now do you believe me?

Yup. Have to say I do, the woman admitted.

This kind of power really comes in handy, the man said. "you know, eating's much more important than most people think. There comes a time in your life when you've just got to have something super-delicious. And when you're standing at that crossroad, your whole life can change, depending on which one you go into - the good retaurant or the awful one, the good meal or the bad one. It's like, do you fall on this side of the fence, or the other one.

"Interesting", she said. Life can be pretty alarming and interesting, can't it?

"exactly" he said, and held up a mischievous look. "Life is an alarming and interesting thing. More than you can ever imagine".

The woman nodded. "And we happened to fall on the inside of the fence, didn't we"??

"exactly."

"That's good" the woman said dispassionately. "Do you like crabs?"

Mmm, I've always loved it. How about you?.

I love it, I wouldn't mind eating crab every day.

A new point we have in common, he beamed.

The woman smiled, and the two of them raised their glasses in another toast.

"We've got to come back tomorrow", he said ," there can't be many places like this in the world. I mean, it's so delicious - and look at the prices !!".




Haruki at his best, with some inspired amendments by me, salamat.

THE ARAB REGIMES !!!

The totalitarian regimes, like the fascists, or the fundamental Islamists, they all see force as necessary to effect the rule that they desire, reason is impotent; therefore force is the only instrument for survival.

The transformation of the countries into a totalitarian gangs saviors led regimes (Shabbiha) is bad news to the majority of Syrians, or similar Arab populations in other countries, and not only to them but to the international community and the west.

In this respect, a regime powered by it's armed and mostly semi legalized gangs is a form of neobarbarism. Civilisation is defined by the act of recognising another person as a human being. The definition of a barbarian is someone who cannot perform this act. Often because he has either come from or chosen a universe of meaning that does not contain the term "human being." If one is unable to recognize another person as a human being, then one does not know the difference between the human and the animal, confusion over these matters leads to slavery,human sacrifice, cannibalism, genocide and other horrors, such a regime is an engine of dehumanization, of turning other people into animals or less, in the name of this dark, neotribal leadership, one becomes a barbarian.

The regime's justice is not to be compared with the justice of man, a man may be considered to act unjustly by invading the position and rights of another, but no injustice can be conceived on the part of the regime or its leader. It is in his power as a leader to pour down torrents upon his people and mankind, and if he is to do this, his justice would not be questioned, there is nothing he can be tied to, nor can any injustice be supposed of him, nor can he be under any obligation to any person whatever.

It also means that the "moral" obligations that the regime sets upon man do not originate in reason, nor is there anything that the regime is obligated to do by reason. The leader can command what is evil to be good, or good to be evil. Reason has nothing to do with justice or morality. Only absolute regime will does matter.

Independent human reason implies a limit on the power of a regime or a leader, for if man could judge what is right and wrong, he could rule on what the regime in power could rightly prescribe for its subjects, and this in Syria and most of the Arab world,(including all of the gulf kingdoms and emirates)would be presumptuous and blasphemous.


Thanks for your time and patience, and my as always, salamat.

WE NEED TO ......

And yes, we need to rebuild America, and not Afghanistan and Iraq, or Israel for that matter, that's a very true statement, it's high time to start looking at our problems, and not everyone else, and not our so called allies who could turn into our enemies any time we don't suit their policies.


Again thanks for listening.

THE NATION"S SITUATION !!!

The US. government regularly prints money, as it is doing now to finance a colossal national dept, a direct result of a huge tax cut and a disastrous policy of waging wars. This is not a partisan rivalry or dispute; it is a condition decried by both liberal and conservatives alike, our children will pay for these decisions, and poor children will pay twice.

The idea that "for those able, the virtuous thing is to give voluntarily to the needy, unlucky or unable" is bogus, unproductive and unrealistic in a country and society as complex and large as ours. You can do this only with the help of institutions. Social planning is neither desirable nor undesirable; it is unavoidable and an absolute necessity in our world.

A decent society would order national priorities, it would make explicit decisions in diverse contexts and format, about national security, economic growth and employment, caring for the poor and sick, and for the environment.

We could for example, track existing experiments and policies in countries comparable to the United States that had nationalised health care, strict gun control, and social-protection programs.

Begging and charitable giving is not and should not be the policy nor part of the solutions.

What would happen if we took seriously the state-of-nature view romanticised by critics of social protection programs ?? Imagine the unregulated state, it is a dark and an impossible world, a world of food poisoning,drug fatalities, rampant crime,deceptive marketing, a world of unlimited ponzy schemes, chaotic highways, unaccountable sexism and racism, financial ruin caused by unscrupulous entrepreneurs, and constant fear in response to it all.

In a nation whose average household income, so far, exceeds basic needs, it would be a wonder if we weren't among the happiest of nations, and that should make us wonder why more than 70 percent of the US. population - mostly the poor and middle classes- struggle to ensure some of the most basic achievements of modern democracy, and why other liberal democracies are happier with far lower mean household incomes.

Now a days the administrative obstacles to construct a good and better society are greater than ever before. Again, there is a big difference between democracy in an early American village and democracy in a multi cultural, technologically sophisticated country of 300 million citizens.

In order to recover our trust in government, we need to see public officials constantly proposing enterprising ways to make our lives better, proposals to make us healthier, provide more leisure and vacations, more health protection, and in general, more real and effective opportunities and policies to correct the actual huge imbalances between the lower and higher echelons of citizenry, rather than mere freedom from the interference of others.



As usual I'm grateful to J. D. for his insight and inspiration, thanks and salamat

WE'RE ALL ENTITLED TO OUR OPINIONS

The slogan "you are entitled to your opinion" is so often repeated that it is almost impossible for the brain of a modern person not to have absorbed it. Before showing that this cliche is very tricky at best "Of course you're entitled to your opinion, but...." Here is a simple way of putting it, if the opinions to which we are entitled might be false,the entitlement cannot properly be invoked to settle a dispute. It adds no new information on the original matter, it does nothing to show that the opinion in question is true.It does not in fact make the entitlement to an opinion relevant in deciding who is correct in any dispute.

You are entitled to an opinion, in this sense, only when you have good reasons for holding it, evidence,sound arguments, and so on.

It is increasingly a part of a mindset that obstruct the free flow of ideas and their robust and correct values. Many people seem to feel that their opinions are somehow sacred, so that everyone else is obliged to handle them with great care. When confronted with counterarguments, they do not pause and wonder if they might be wrong after all, they take offense.

Does your right to your entitlement to your opinion oblige others to agree with you? NO, as others too, are entitled to their opinions, which might contradict yours. Just think of the practical implications. Everyone would have to change his mind every time he met someone with a different opinion, changing his religion, his politics, his eating and drinking habits.

Does your right to your opinion oblige me to listen to you ? NO, many people have many opinions on many matters. You cannot walk through your normal day without hearing some enthusiast declaring his opinions on God or the Christian religion or the Zionist and imperialist conspiracy or some other topic of pressing concern, listening to them all is practically impossible, and not a duty.

Does your right or your entitlement to your opinion oblige others to let you keep it ? This is the closest to what I think most people mean and want when they claim a right to their opinion. They do so at just that point in an argument when they would otherwise be forced to admit error and have to change their position.

It's just that, on some topics, many people are not really interested in believing the truth. They might prefer it if their opinion turns out to be true.

Many of my friends, though not practicing members of their religions or not even accepting the many absurd details of their different sects, claim to believe in a "superior intelligence"or " something higher than us." Yet they will also cheerfully admit the absence of even a shred of evidence. Never mind. As truth really is not always the point,and it is very annoying to be pressed on the matter.

Finally to register all this, and to make it clear that truth is neither here nor there, they declare, " I am entitled to my opinion." Once we hear these words, one should realize that it is rude and inefficient to persist with the matter. You may be interested in whether or not their opinion is true,but accept that they are not.

As usual my thanks go to Jamie for inspiring and contributing to these ideas, and as always thanks for your time and patience, salamat.