17-02-2004 02:58									#241
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Agathon The exception is economics, where they have done well in the last 20 years. If there were such a left wing conspiracy, then economics departments would be very left wing.

Right you are. I find it incredible that Tories can still find something to complain about. For Christ's sake, look at how the world is being run!

	17-02-2004 03:00									#242
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Ned And yet, there is an admission that conservatives are winning the battle of ideas in economics.

They're winning on the field, not in the textbooks.

	17-02-2004 03:03									#243
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Ain't he been livin' in Texas?

He's originally from Wyoming and that is where he was a Congressman. He's only been in Texas for a few years relatively.

It's like a person who lives in New York and then moves to Florida when they turn 60. They ain't Floridians!

	17-02-2004 03:09									#244
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Conservatism, by definitition, seeks to defend the status quo. It deems the status quo to be superior and change to be an attack, a destruction, a negative.

No. The status quo is not always superior when confronted with excellent argumentation. The only requirement is that lacking sufficient rationale, one must go with the status quo. The burden of proof is on the innovators.

quote: They simply cannot afford honest intellectual thought,

Just the opposite. Because the burden of proof is on the innovators, this must be counterbalanced by freedom of speech and expression. Conservatives are not insecure about the status quo, but demand proof that the innovators are correct. In demanding such proof, the innovators must be allowed to speak their mind.

	17-02-2004 03:14									#245
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Ned By definition, conservativism has no ideas, no thought, no reason and no philosophy. So, by definition, liberals should win the battle of ideas even in economics as they are contending against semi-literate people, obviously unintelligent, uninformed and more than that, bigotted.

One doesn't have to be bigoted to be a conservative, nor does one have to be uninformed or stupid. Conservatism is a state of mind that is more supportive of the status quo than change. One can be a bigoted conservative, and refuse to accept any new thing that doesn't confirm your view, or one can be slightly affected by conservatism, and simply be cautious towards new ideas and concepts. And of course, one can be between both extremes.

Bigoted conservatives fare very badly in academia because they will not accept the questioning of their dogma. Slight conservatives can be very valuable academics, in that they can be willing to change their views after careful scrutiny of the new ideas. As such, some conservatives are an excellent asset for science (I'm thinking of Raymond Boudon, famous conservative French sociologist, who has spent his life criticizing the works of Pierre Bourdieu with a serious and honest method - I disagree with the guy, but I think he has helped the academia in this regard).

OTOH, extreme liberals, who'll embrass any new idea that opposes the old dogmas may fare well in the academia for short term, but they'll rarely be mentioned as serious sources in the future, once their hasty works get discredited.

	17-02-2004 03:54									#246
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: What is the function of judging? Why apply value to it? Personally, I disagree with gravity, and find it immoral. You don't judge that which is inevitable. You judge because you have a choice. That is bad, because I could have chosen something else, something better, something good.

	17-02-2004 03:58									#247
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Ned Another retarded post from the person who, according to his padded resume, represents all Americans, particularly the American right, and who is entiled by his personal coronation of himself as the sole enlightened American conservative (who btw, hates Bush and likes Kerry) to unrinate on fellow Apolytoners with whom he disagrees.

When in fact I never claimed to represent all Americans - I just asked Spiffor to realize that you don't, and not to judge us based on your peculiar delusions.

	17-02-2004 04:00									#248
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor I think Agathon's point in the opening post is sound. Academia is about presenting theories, and then checking them with facts. This is the scientific method the whole academia agrees upon, and there has been so far no breakthrough (however, a whole field of science is dedicated on how to improve scientific research). I don't think the scientific method applies to philosophy, because I don't think philosophy considers itself a science. Anybody who wants to use old ideological arguments in science is doomed to be very disappointed by the results. Conservative prejudices, much like leftist prejudices are doomed do scientific failure. Now, conservatives are keen on conserving millenia-old dogma. They rely on a very rich folklore that accumulated over the time. Liberals do have their folklore, but it is much younger (there is quite a gap between Moses and Marx), and as such liberals are more prone to question it. Besides, most of the liberal folklore is a consequence of Enlightenment, and as such has values of rationality deeply ingrained: if a liberal dogma is proven wrong, many *will accept to learn from the failure - OTOH conservative/religious dogma has been proven bullshit, or at least inconsistent for centuries, and yet you'll see "scientists" defending the most ludicrous of arguments, such as anti-evolutionism. Academia is about the progress of science, about discovering new things, and about proving wrong past certitudes. Many conservatives will try to argue with arguments that have been proven wrong by newer research. These kind of guys will not fare well, and only those conservatives able to throw their wrong prejudices to the bin will satisfy the demands of the job. *I know quite a few liberals will never accept to learn from their mistakes, even in Academia. But liberal folklore, being younger and putting more emphasis on rationality, will not know as many "defenders of the Word" as the conservatives.

Spiffor - "Conservativism" may be, for any specific time period, something from the past, but it is almost never justified on basis of tradition. Do you really think, for example, I am conservative because of my fond/nonexistant memories of the past?

	17-02-2004 04:08									#249
	Got spare money?

Things like:

quote: Conservatism, by definitition, seeks to defend the status quo. It deems the status quo to be superior and change to be an attack, a destruction, a negative.

and

quote: Conservatism is a state of mind that is more supportive of the status quo than change.

Are utterly IGNORANT statements. "Conservativism" is used to refer to a general set of policies (it is further split into social and economic conservativism) that are NOT defined by the fact that they are the "status quo" or recently were so. They may happen to BE the status quo or recently have been the status quo, but that doesn't define them. Most conservatives (as many as liberals) would not defend something simply because it was status quo, and thus you cannot attack "conservativism" as such. You can only attack the individual policies, and just as much as the fact that they are the status quo doesn't make them right, it ALSO doesn't make them wrong or closeminded. If I had always believed 2+2=4, and you told me 2+2=5, I'm not being "closeminded" because I don't believe you

	17-02-2004 04:10									#250
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: What is the function of judging? Why apply value to it?

These judgements are reflections of my emotions (which are not rational, and still would not be even if I did have free will). From these emotions, I can form an ethical basis to determine what sorts of social interactions are good and bad. And I can promote these ethical ideas through my actions and through talking with others - which changes behavior. Is there any reason why I shouldn't do that?

quote: Personally, I disagree with gravity, and find it immoral. You don't judge that which is inevitable.

I can not talk with gravity and convince it not to impose constraints on people since gravity is not intelligent.

	17-02-2004 04:13									#251
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Skywalker, you are incorrect. Conservativism from its roots is a theory which favors tradition over radical change. Conservativism believes in gradual change, where traditions are not uprooted, but perhaps altered slowly. Traditions are the accumulation of history's wisdom, as Edmund Burke, the father of modern conservatism, would say. Therefore it makes no sense to overturn it simply because something new is around. They would rather support the status quo unless it can be proven than the new thing is better.

	17-02-2004 04:14									#252
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Skywalker:

Not because of your fond / nonexistant memories from the past. But because of the certitudes you have accumulated, and these certitudes do have an origin way older than you. You may have developed some certitudes on your own (and you'll continue to do so), but most of your knowledge and feelings come from your education, like anybody.

The main difference is that you mostly accept the world "as it is already". Even if we look at schmooism, it is very close from the American system of today, except that schmooism isn't full of corruption and pork.

"Duh" is a word you use very often in arguments, referring either to common sense (you'll notice "common sense" is almost inevitably summoned by conservatives), or to something you believe should be obvious to everybody.

In this regard, you'd be a bad academic, because you seem to believe the truth lies in the already known, rather than the unknown.

Now, I am nervous, sleepy, and I talk out of my rump, so you may disregard this whole post

	17-02-2004 04:43									#253
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Skywalker, you are incorrect. Conservativism from its roots is a theory which favors tradition over radical change. Conservativism believes in gradual change, where traditions are not uprooted, but perhaps altered slowly. Traditions are the accumulation of history's wisdom, as Edmund Burke, the father of modern conservatism, would say. Therefore it makes no sense to overturn it simply because something new is around. They would rather support the status quo unless it can be proven than the new thing is better.

That's not conservativism, that logic - don't replace something with something that isn't better. However, conservativism is used to refer to a set of policies, and the fact that I agree with some of those policies does not make me "conservative" in the sense that I have blind faith in the status quo (or indeed attach any importance to it).

	17-02-2004 04:46									#254
	Full PM-box? Change here!

The point is that I, and (most likely) many other conservatives do not hold that a position is good because it has some relation to the status quo (in fact, it's pointless to do so). By saying "don't replace the current system with one that we don't know is better", I'm not endorsing the status quo, I'm just saying that inaction is better than an action that, given what we no of it, provide no benefit.

	17-02-2004 04:53									#255
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: That's not conservativism, that logic - don't replace something with something that isn't better.

You're not getting it. In politics you aren't really sure what is better. It is don't totally replace something that works with something we aren't sure will be better.

quote: By saying "don't replace the current system with one that we don't know is better", I'm not endorsing the status quo, I'm just saying that inaction is better than an action that, given what we no of it, provide no benefit.

Like you said here... but it's still supporting the status quo more than change. Every political change has some leap of faith involved in it.

	17-02-2004 04:59									#256
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I'm not supporting the status quo, I'm just not expending the effort to change it. Just like I might not change some method in a program I wrote, not because I thought the way it is currently written is good or better, but because it a) works already and b) probably wouldn't be worth the effort to change it.

	17-02-2004 05:08									#257
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Read Edmund Burke, especially 'Reflections on the Revolution in France'. Since he is the father of modern conservatism, he'd basically defined the term .

quote: I'm not supporting the status quo, I'm just not expending the effort to change it. Just like I might not change some method in a program I wrote, not because I thought the way it is currently written is good or better, but because it a) works already and b) probably wouldn't be worth the effort to change it.

By doing so, you ARE supporting the status quo. What if someone argues that the new method may be better? You'd back the status quo because it works already and it is too much effort to change it. Why are you so against being known as backing the status quo? It is only a 'bad thing' for Communists (who as radicals are Conservatives' natural opposition)

	17-02-2004 05:09									#258
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Yeah, Imran's right. Burke believed if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

	17-02-2004 05:20									#259
	Remove this text

quote: By doing so, you ARE supporting the status quo. What if someone argues that the new method may be better? You'd back the status quo because it works already and it is too much effort to change it. Why are you so against being known as backing the status quo? It is only a 'bad thing' for Communists (who as radicals are Conservatives' natural opposition)

If the other thing works better, I'm all for it. However, until it is demonstrated to do so, there is no reason to be for it. However, there is also no reason to be for the status quo.

	17-02-2004 05:28									#260
	Got spare money?

In short, Conservatives are *******s who believe genocides and starvations do not require immediate and radical intervention, but rather 'reasonable' action aimed at protecting a system that works for 10% of humans.

	17-02-2004 05:33									#261
	Support Apolyton

quote: If the other thing works better, I'm all for it. However, until it is demonstrated to do so, there is no reason to be for it.

Which is consider for the status quo. You have to be demonstrated the other thing works better and then it should be gradually introduced. You don't want to 'rock the boat'.

	17-02-2004 05:34									#262
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: If the other thing works better, I'm all for it. However, until it is demonstrated to do so, there is no reason to be for it. Which is consider for the status quo. You have to be demonstrated the other thing works better and then it should be gradually introduced. You don't want to 'rock the boat'.

No, I'm fine "rocking the boat". However, I'm not arguing FOR implementing this thing (because it has already been implemented), I'm arguing AGAINST implementing something that I don't have any idea is any better than what is currently implemented.

	17-02-2004 05:36									#263
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Oncle Boris In short, Conservatives are *******s who believe genocides and starvations do not require immediate and radical intervention, but rather 'reasonable' action aimed at protecting a system that works for 10% of humans.

Can you read? Obviously a system without genocide and starvation is better than one with them, therefore we should implement such a system (assuming it exists and we are capable of doing so).

	17-02-2004 05:41									#264
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by skywalker Can you read? Obviously a system without genocide and starvation is better than one with them, therefore we should implement such a system (assuming it exists and we are capable of doing so).

Really? What about America cuts its military spending in half (which means its military budget will be THREE times as large as the second largest) and start manufacturing medications for Africa?

What about the Tobin tax? And what about joining the Hague Court for crimes against humanity?
Even then, not beating up those demonstrating in favor of this would be a nice start.

	17-02-2004 05:46									#265
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

1. Such policy would be global policy, not national policy.

2. IF I thought what you are proposing would have the desired effects, then yes, I would support it. The disagreement lies not in the goals, but in which manner of execution will actually work.

EDIT: this, in fact is what I'm talking about wrt what a "conservative" is. Conservatives (generally) have the same GOALS as liberals, but merely disagree on the most effective way to achieve those goals.

	17-02-2004 05:47									#266
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Actually, Imran, I tend to side with you in this argument. Conservatives are naturally inclined to move cautiously due to the potential of unexpected consequences.

Liberals tend to be incautious, advocating radical change that can have (and have had, in the case of communism) many unforseen consequences, most of which are not good.

	17-02-2004 05:48									#267
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

And Ned takes a rational argument and turns reinterprets it into random, bigoted nonsense.

	17-02-2004 05:49									#268
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: I'm arguing AGAINST implementing something that I don't have any idea is any better than what is currently implemented.

In essense, for the status quo . I don't understand why you are so opposed to this.

	17-02-2004 05:50									#269
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

A vote against Kerry is not necessarily a vote for Bush, I'll put it that way

	17-02-2004 05:51									#270
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by skywalker 1. Such policy would be global policy, not national policy. 2. IF I thought what you are proposing would have the desired effects, then yes, I would support it. The disagreement lies not in the goals, but in which manner of execution will actually work.

Yeah sure. It's been a no-no for all Repukes and Democrats since the end of the Cold War. But when it comes to the NAFTA (which ruined Mexico) all senators get viagracally excited, and start hiring all sorts of advisors and negociators to do it as fast as possible.