Russell rule could help citizens see through lies

[dArKeR]

By C. V.Chen ???

Wednesday, Apr 28, 2004,Page 8

The British philosopher Bertrand Russell once said, "In studying a philosopher, the right attitude is neither reverence nor contempt, but first a kind of hypothetical sympathy, until it is possible to know what it feels like to believe in his theories, and only then a revival of the critical attitude."

To put it in more concrete terms, we should approach viewpoints we disagree with by first identifying those parts we are able to agree with, or in which we believe. It is only then that we can resume our critical stance.

That is to say, once we have abandoned our own previous opinions, we are able to undertake criticism based on the state of mind in which we could judge our own opinions with humility. If we learn to assess what what we believe in and seek a more sympathetic understanding of why others' opinions differ from ours, we are finally in a position to begin our criticism.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/04/28/2003138413

Do you honestly believe aWol could understand one sentence in this article?

It's funny how today I came up with this idea I was going to post, then forgot about it, then this story remided me.

Why shouldn't all those seeking elected and appointed office have to take an IQ, world knowledge, common sense, and a competence test? Why do us serf's have to submit to this from the age of 10. Why shouldn't our elected officials have performance reviews like the rest of us serfs?

[MissMarple]

1. Sounds like a" walk in his moccasins" kind of thing.

His point is well taken. To see things from another's point of view is so necessary. I do have great difficulty in seeing that view when the premise is so illogical it defies understanding in the light of human compassion. Earlier, there have been posts about a superficial, upscale "bubba" in Sugarland, Texas. Sadly to say, I can almost understand, but I can't quite get there. The only thing I can come up with is that they (the bubbas in the article, and appologies to other bubbas) must be very afraid. No guts, no glory, no honor.

It is a sad state of affairs. Trying to live in an illusion of "Pleasantville" may be understandable at one level, but it is at best unrealistic, and mostly selfish and immature. Should I say callous.? So hey, give a dollar to the homeless lady.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x509966

[dArKeR]

2. Starting in Junior High through college we had debate assignments

where the topic was randomly assigned and sometimes purposely opposite of our reality view point. Of course we were graded on how well we defended the assigned topic. Don't they do this in school anymore?

[Miss Authoritiva]

3. All you need is a bumper sticker and a dream.

"Why shouldn't all those seeking elected and appointed office have to take an IQ, world knowledge, common sense, and a competence test?"

Probably no one would ever seek office again! We'd have to draft people to serve as our representatives. I don't know how it is in other states, but in mine the most rigorously tested and licensed people are hairstylists. If you want to run for local, state, or federal office, all you need is a bumper sticker and a dream.

I think we all knew -- including those who voted for Bush -- pretty much what we were getting: the poster boy for social promotion. Why do so many people seem so surprised?