Monday, October 25, 2004
Good idea or right idea?
What's the difference between a good idea and a right idea? In the world of discourse, an idea has to be both good and right. It has to be a right idea in that you're convinced of it, and it has to be a good idea in that you can convince someone else of it.
For example: Rebecca is the local standardbearer for veganism here in blogworld. For her, veganism is a "right idea" in that "Holy crap, killing animals when you don't need to is disgusting." (Correct me if that's not quite correct, RebC) Still, such an argument only really applies to folks who are already vegan. As a result, the argument has to be made that veganism is a "good idea," in that it uses less of the world's resources, is healthier, and other various etceteras, in order to reach out to the non-vegan world.
The problem? Well, it's not wholly believable. If my understanding is correct, even if veganism was not healthier or more efficient, "Right idea" vegans would still be vegans. The fact that all the evidence in the world says "veganism good" seems like it may be a little more than coincidence.
Too subtle? Look at the presidential election. Not only do people make things up to support their guy, they'll interpret any detail as being a positive reflection on their guy. Do we believe it? I hope not. Some people do, it seems, but I think most people don't.
But it begs the question, who exactly do you listen to? Someone without an opinion on an issue? It might be nice, I guess, but most people don't have opinions on issues because they don't care about the issue, and so they won't have anything to say for you to listen to. Do you listen to both/all sides of the issue? You can try, I guess, but then all you're left with are two positions that have been made completely unconvincing by each other.
Try F1. Maybe that'll work.
. . .
|
. . .
|
