Monday, March 02, 2009 |
 |
Asking the Right Question |
 |
By Greg Perkins @ 12:08 AM   
 
That's great! Unfortunately, it is hilarious because what it refers to is so widespread.
The lesson to be taken from this "sign of insanity" is a key epistemological principle in Objectivism: that arbitrary notions -- ideas with no basis in reality -- must be rejected if you want your mind to actually be useful in pursuing life here on earth.
A familiar application can be seen in our justice system: When someone brings a baseless charge before a court, it is rightly dismissed as beneath consideration (and could even earn penalties for wasting the court's time). Chaos would reign if this were not the standing practice, with spurious claims sapping precious resources and inviting injustice. Well, the same should hold in the fact-finding forum of your own mind: if someone brings a baseless idea before a rational mind, it ought to be dismissed as beneath consideration or argument -- as "not even wrong."
As Leonard Peikoff discussed in his lecture series presenting "The Philosophy of Objectivism":
An arbitrary claim has no cognitive status whatever. According to Objectivism, such a claim is not to be regarded as true or as false. If it is arbitrary, it is entitled to no epistemological assessment at all; it is simply to be dismissed as though it hadn’t come up ... The truth is established by reference to a body of evidence and within a context; the false is pronounced false because it contradicts the evidence. The arbitrary, however, has no relation to evidence, facts, or context. It is the human equivalent of [noises produced by] a parrot ... sounds without any tie to reality, without content or significance.
In a sense, therefore, the arbitrary is even worse than the false. The false at least has a relation (albeit a negative one) to reality; it has reached the field of human cognition, although it represents an error -- but in that sense it is closer to reality than the brazenly arbitrary.
...
It is not your responsibility to refute someone’s arbitrary assertion -- to try to find or imagine arguments that will show that his assertion is false. It is a fundamental error on your part even to try to do this. The rational procedure in regard to an arbitrary assertion is to dismiss it out of hand, merely identifying it as arbitrary, and as such inadmissible and undiscussable. This can be a subtle and tricky topic, and gaining clarity on it represents an important mental upgrade. For further exploration I recommend Peikoff's excellent book, Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand, where he reorganized, systematized, and strengthened the material of those lectures.
[HT: Pharyngula]Labels: Epistemology, Humor
| | |  E-mail Greg Perkins PermaLink ( )  Comments (New Page) |
|
| |
Subscribe to NoodleFood Blog Posts  via Feed Reader  via E-mail
Subscribe to NoodleCast Podcasts  M4A via iTunes (MP3) via Feed Reader via E-mail
|
|
Tuesday, December 16, 2008 |
|
’Twas the Night After Single Payer |
|
By Gina Liggett @ 12:01 AM
'Twas the night after Single Payer, when all through the land
Not a creature had health care that could be called grand;
The ERs were stuffed with those seeking care,
In hopes Dr. Daschle soon would be there;
The patients were all nestled sick in their beds,
Hallucinating that sugar-plums danced in their heads;
And doctors at their post, and nurses at their station,
Had just hunkered down for a long Administration,
When on the Rose Garden lawn there arose such a clatter,
I turned on CNN to see what was the matter.
Away to the screen it flew like a flash,
Camera shutters were clicking, Dr. Daschle with his sash.
TV lights shined in faces hailing the plan
Gave the lustre of "quality" for each woman and man,
When, what to my wondering eyes be endured,
But a huge new department, and forty-eight million more insured,
With a powerful new driver, two roles to fulfill,
I knew in a moment it would be government overkill.
Regulations not treatments his ideas they came,
New restrictions, new rules, and he called them by name;
"Now, Daschle! now, Dollar! now, Payer and Taxin'!
On, Common! on Cure-all! on, Daunting and Blighted!
To the top of the White House! it will hit the wall!
Now cash away! cash away! cash away all!"
As dry heaves that before an intestinal flare,
With patients on the wait list, what do they care?
So up in the bureaucracy the coursers they flew,
Through the cabinets of paperwork, and Dr. Daschle too.
And then, in a news conference, I heard more restrictions
The limits and taxing and fewer prescriptions.
As I called 911, one day writhing in pain,
The response that I got could only be called insane.
He was dressed in his scrubs, and checked my citizen's ID,
And the equipment malfunctioned, but the diagnosis was free;
A bundle of supplies, the treatment room disordered,
But they lacked what was needed, what the Dr. had ordered.
His eyes--how they glazed! dark circles how weary!
His cheeks were so sallow, his job was so dreary!
Another patient in line dehydrated like wheat,
Uncontrolled diabetes, his blood sugar too sweet;
The stump of a leg infected for weeks,
It was surgical care that this patient seeks;
He had Universal Insurance and a sad-looking face,
Because it only covered some gauze and an Ace.
He was pale and sweaty, a sickly young man,
And I cried when I saw him, in spite of his free-coverage plan.
A wink of the bureaucrat and a nod of her head,
Said, with Single Payer I had nothing to dread;
She spoke no more words, but took her first break,
Civil servants remember their rules are at stake.
And the Doctor came back, his fingers rubbing his eyes,
And he gave me a med and some vague replies;
He sprang to his computer, the new high-tech efficiency
Sent my records to D.C. for some clerk to see.
But I heard him exclaim, ere he walked out of sight,
"Single Payer for all has become a nightmarish fright!"Labels: Health Care, Humor
| | | E-mail Gina Liggett PermaLink () Comments (New Page) |
|
| |
Subscribe to NoodleFood Blog Posts via Feed Reader via E-mail
Subscribe to NoodleCast Podcasts M4A via iTunes (MP3) via Feed Reader via E-mail
|
|
|
| | |
|
