Filed under: philosophy | Tags: Barack Obama, debates, John McCain, McCain, Obama, politics, presidential debates, the debate
It was obvious from last night’s debate that the republican right has hit a new level of now cartoon quality incoherence. Obama was rational, collected, calm, and yet passionate at the same time with questions answered directly, on-context, with cutting articulation.
McCain was inarticulate, panting, stumbling, responded with an alarming number of non-sequiturs, and evaded more questions than he answered with the same mind numbing ‘let me tell you a story, son’ type of emotionalism, not to mention, cue-card boiler plate catch phrases.
With extreme frequency Obama actually had to correct the near-senility of an out of touch aging McCain time and time again with the (to McCain) shameful statement: “Well, that’s just not true.”
A friend of mine made an interesting observation as well: McCain hardly ever, in not never, peered up to look directly at his opponent, whereas Obama did nothing but direct focused rational attention toward McCain.
McCain’s lack of eye-contact or direct gaze, is I believe, one of the scientifically demonstrated characteristics of a person who is lying: the other one I know, is of smiles which disappear within what is almost the same instant they are initiated, among, I’m sure a whole host of other sheer give aways.
Keep in mind McCain is the same guy who is quoted as saying: “Well we know Al Qaeda is being trained in Iran,” only to be corrected on the spot by an advisor to rearrange his statement to a criminal level: “I’m sorry we know extremists are being trained in Iran.”
Obama is obviously the level of intelligence we need in a president, and need it badly. McCain made it even more obvious last night the nature of his dim wit and low level of knowledge, especially after a failed attempt to call off the debates knowing the latter two are all too true.
Obama is the president we need to pull us out of the republican’s war profiteering agenda to conquer the world and use the public as a rag to wipe off on.
Support Obama, support change, support intelligibility and reason.
Filed under: epistemology, ethics, personal, philosophy, politics, psychology | Tags: America, common sense, culture, feminism, intellectuals, intelligentsia, modern medicine, moon landing, objectivism, personal, philosophy, politically correct, rationality, science, subjective, subjectivist, women
It is no longer merely the vogue to ignore common sense, but now only sufficient to jettison the concept altogether.
I don’t know, there must be some other world that people are talking about when they make certain claims about things which fly in the face of the most commonly repeatable observations.
All I know, is that I must not be living in that world.
There are two phrases I hear from so-called ‘cultured Americans’ all the time:
1) ‘You never know.’
2) ‘Correlation does not equal causality.’
These are the two darling favorites among intellectuals today, though I hear them all the time in ‘mainstream’ society as well.
Abstract studies, mostly the realms of Psychology, Sociology, Philosophy, Economics, etc., that is, the so-called ‘humanities,’ must be studied mostly through repeatable patterning by independent correlation.
This is to be contrasted from the ‘hard’ or so-called ‘positive’ sciences such as Physics, Chemistry or Math, which operate on empiric direct causality more than they do correlation.
Though, true, correlation does not equal causality, it is also true that ‘correlation can mean a probability for causation.’ In other words, there are many instances in which a correlation denotes probability for a cause, often great probability.
It is this probability subjectivism and its consequent ‘new vogue’ have thrown out the window, and it is this probability that is the basis of common sense.
Filed under: philosophy
This is a continuation of the original blog, go back to Parts I & II to understand anything whatsoever:
These excuses however much they ranged, had one thing in common: they tended to be things that could never quite be acknowledged or confirmed as blatant contradictions.
Filed under: philosophy
This is a continuation of the original blog, go back to Part I to read the one previous:
I also know the pattern with this friend being drunk, and can think of no instance in a period of 13 years, where he has done anything reprehensible in the face of women.
Filed under: philosophy | Tags: advice, ayn rand, conformity, friendship, ideas, objec, objectivism, personal, philosophy, pratical, psychology, relationships
–Note: Keep in mind that this is the recollection of personally experienced things about friends and much of it is just that: personal.
That is to say that it includes seemingly minor things i.e. friend-drama, which are major when experienced by the person experiencing them or anyone else who has had similar experiences, but might seem menial to anyone else.
What’s interesting about this kind of blog entry though I think, is that one can see philosophical principles in action, and as they might apply to their own life or anybody’s for that matter, but in a practical, everyday-philosophy sort of way.–
Filed under: philosophy
This is a video a friend of mine sent to me on John McCain from http://bravenewfilms.org/
Surprisingly, I was shocked.
As a brief analysis, it is true that on one hand, every political candidate can be caught in even blatant contradictions all the time. What is markedly different, however, and I think at least more unique to our new era in the 2000’s, is the fact that these are not merely blatant contradictions, about say, just anything, but outstandingly glaring and even criminal inconsistencies on the most important issues.
In the video you will see McCain actually say “We know Al Qaeda is training in Iran…” then completely change his statement while his cronies are correcting him, to then state: “No, it is extremists training in Iran.” In short, the right has resorted to just outright lying to everyone and is now not afraid to admit it.
Much of it IS in plain view, and I think this is the second thing more unique to our time: the explicitness of hypocrisy as publicly immune. That is–people just don’t care, especially conservatives, of whom I intend to deal with personally by removing, disengaging, and disowning any so-called ‘friend’ who acts in accordance with neo-conservative ‘principles,’ or even votes for McCain or the ‘right.’
