Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
Wright has always struck me as the type of person who is formulating a response while he hears the response you are giving him.Maybe that's unfair, but he comes across that way in diavlogs with Ann.He doesn't listen and if he processes information, it's not apparent. This seems systemic to liberals and unreflective cons.
It's not really that hard Bob. Just try to make good arguments, but maybe we ask too much. Still, I think you could do with a little practice. Just start by assuming you are not the smartest guy ever.
Bob may suffer that deep belief that a lot of liberals have (and a lot of people, frankly, share): People are no good.His take on evolution from my limited understanding is that selfishness is not only evolutionary hardwired or close to it, but that our natural inclinations are much the same and must be overcome (we lived in tribal bands, our empathy must be increased along with our moral principles to some non-zero state).It's reasonable to be suspicious of the dangers of political theology, and earthly church authority and corruption (original sin starts from a presumption that people are not good), but he seems to ignore the dangers of why he attracts so many progressives, strict materialists (that bundle of Leftists from Europe), atheists, social democrats and socialists, real scientists but also believers in the Church of Reason and scientism.It's why a lot of liberals turn to the next evolutionary theory, sufficiently abstract non religious moral principles, new age and neuroscience etc as enough to guide humanity forward, choose leaders, and make policy and declare where our rights come from.I often suspect it's a misplaced religious impulse or some deeper reaction against authority and hierarchy in a constant quest for justice and fairness that unites many on the Left. They really want to be good people, and want their theories to work, especially as they get slowly mugged by reality, life, and experience.That said, Bob is a pretty fair minded guy, and makes a concerted effort to understand other points of view, which is always appreciated.
Just don't go all Sally Fields Oscar #2 on us.
OK, I'll give it a try....The Moral Animal is a worthwhile book.There. That wasn't so hard.What the hell happened to you?(Oops. Sorry!)
God, what an ass."I wake up at night thinking about this, Ann."Bob is a smart man, no doubt. I enjoy the way he flips things around, though sometimes he does it in that stupid liberal way of "You can't prove it." Dumb arguments to avoid conceding.By the way, I do approve of your discussion with Bob here and above. Don't let them push you around.Ironically, while I really like Lowry's discourse, I've caught him cutting off women in particular. There is no need for deference to that man. Or any man, and I speak for myself. You've earned the right to rub their nose in their own shit (like a cat you are trying to train).
I don't like Wright's attitude because he's stubbornly partisan and as far as I know has only ever been on one side. Lest anyone accuse me of partisanship, I'd point out that I voted consistently D for 24 years (6 elections) which is more than I've given to the R's. I sincerely doubt that the likes of Robert Wright have ever had such a change of mind. People who change their minds and thinking from time to time are nimble and thoughtful. Those who don't are predictable and obvious.
Why doesn't he ask for something that has a remote chance of happening?Like the Jets winning the Super Bowl or Lindsey Lohan becoming a nun.The man is delusional.
MadMan took mine, but I think bag nails it.Wright is partial to the sort of justifications Alan Colmes favors.Always a bad idea.
I've always found Bob smart, likable, and entertaining. Especially when a blogger like Ann or Mickey Kaus gets under his skin.
I care about his feelings just as much as he cares about mine.Ann works at her analysis and she shows that she'd like to hear from him, but he's dismissive and borders on rude. He's just too cool for the room. Who needs that? He intellectually never left Jr High.
Agree with Meade entirely. Some people find those who sharply or mockingly disagree with them rude. I admire good arguments whether they're for my side or not. Revenant the commenter is someone I always read even though I'm often on the other side. Rush Limbaugh is the absolute king of snark and mock. If you truly hate a mocking style of argument and you're a fan of Rush, you've got some serious self-reflection ahead of you.
But I actually came to make a different point.One of Ann's fiercest debates with Bob was over Glenn Beck. Bob thought that Fox News should disassociate from Beck given his toxic views. Ann accused Bob of being anti-free speech. Bob said he wasn't because he was advocating a private restriction - not a governmental one. Ann said being in favor of free speech was a more expansive concept.Now, listen to Ann talk about Orson Scott Card starting at the 2:40 mark. Ann says:I don't know how much you should cave into bullies, but there's also such thing as having a boycott and creating political pressure for something that you want. I DON'T THINK IT'S A FREE SPEECH ISSUE IF SOME PRIVATE COMPANY LIKE DC COMICS WANTS TO PUT OUT AN ANTHOLOGY IF THEY HAVE SOMEONE IN THERE WHO WAS FAMOUS FOR BEING A RACIST. Granted, as the conversation continues, you see Ann has mixed feeling about the Orson Scott Card boycott describing it as "unfortunate," but her tolerance for censorship through private boycott seems highly dependent on the issue involved.
The Nutty Perfessor is always tolerant of restrictions on free speech if it is service of the protection of the protected classes of gay, blacks and women.It is the essence of political correctness and affirmative action.It is why you can't make a commercial about the "Obama phone"or a video that attacks Muslims orgod forbid anything against same sex marriage.Haven't you been paying attention?
Post a Comment