5 ms·

Wisdom and collective decision making are not the same thing. Wisdom is not a shifting changing quantum, nor is it a set of rules. Wisdom at its best has always

Wisdom and collective decision making are not the same thing. Wisdom is not a shifting changing quantum, nor is it a set of rules. Wisdom at its best has always insisted on clearly defining the parameters within which we are to play and within which our lives can be best enjoyed. The fool at his best will doubt the goodness of the goads of wisdom and will insist on his ability to define those parameters for himself leading him to folly and ruin. The tendency of wisdom is to be absolute. The hubris of the fool is to say there is no absolute. If anyone would be wise, let him start with Proverbs, quoting from the beginning of chapter one: "Their purpose is to teach people wisdom and discipline, to help them understand the insights of the wise. Their purpose is to teach people to live disciplined and successful lives, to help them do what is right, just, and fair. These proverbs will give insight to the simple, knowledge and discernment to the young. Let the wise listen to these proverbs and become even wiser. Let those with understanding receive guidance by exploring the meaning in these proverbs and parables, the words of the wise and their riddles. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline. Listen, my son, to your father's instruction and do not forsake your mother's teaching. They will be a garland to grace your head and a chain to adorn your neck." - Proverbs, http://bit.ly/aJpmva http://bit.ly/aJpmva

wladimir 15y ago
No no no. My idea of wisdom is that it comes with age, higher-level patterns one finds out for themselves. What you call wisdom is simply obedience to a set of norms set by others. There are many claiming that their words are wisdom, so you can only make that call for yourself, from life experience. After you gain wisdom you can use that to teach others to live "good" lives, but that does not imply any static absolute. A good life for you might be a sucky life for someone else.
etherael 15y ago
This is the worst kind of poisonous nonsense, appeals to authority and the sanctity of the known falsehoods of religion. Wisdom may be hard to define, but it is easy to define what is not wisdom; allowing provably bad sources to make your choices and define the parameters of your existence for you.
- jorangreef 15y ago
  Words like "poisonous nonsense", "appeals to authority", "known falsehoods", "provably bad sources" are polemic. In fact, the book of Proverbs is as sure in history as the Greek classics. There is wisdom to be found in both. You would be better arguing in terms of textual criticism, historicity of events, than polemic. This kind of liberalist thinking that we are free to say anything so long as it is liberal not does not seem very liberal to me. If you are into Christopher Hitchens, you may also enjoy his brother, Peter Hitchens, also a journalist and a former atheist. He has what looks to be a good book out: "The Rage Against God". He warns against the kind of atheistic state that his brother advocated, drawing on recent history: Stalin, Hitler, Mao. That is the kind of state that uses words like "poisonous nonsense".
  - etherael 15y ago
    A polemic is an argument leaning toward attacking a person, I do not know you at all and make no claim to be able to attack you and expressly disclaim any desire to engage in polemic or ad hominem. Some things are simply accurately described with negative labels. Religion itself, as well as the ideal of moral absolutes defined therein being the sole source of wisdom for the world is just as accurately described by these words as fascism or North Korea's implementation of their Juche ideology. Some things simply really are that bad. Religion is one of them. If after all the water that has passed under the bridge of this particular debate has not managed to sway your opinion at this stage of the game I am well aware that my simply stating it is unlikely to do so now. However this does not change the fact of the matter that all the labels that I used to describe the position you put forward are simple truths. For the record, I am an anarcho capitalist, not a "liberal", and I do not take my positions wholesale from anybody else, I think about them extensively and decide for myself.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]

wladimir 15y ago

No no no. My idea of wisdom is that it comes with age, higher-level patterns one finds out for themselves. What you call wisdom is simply obedience to a set of norms set by others. There are many claiming that their words are wisdom, so you can only make that call for yourself, from life experience. After you gain wisdom you can use that to teach others to live "good" lives, but that does not imply any static absolute. A good life for you might be a sucky life for someone else.

etherael 15y ago

This is the worst kind of poisonous nonsense, appeals to authority and the sanctity of the known falsehoods of religion. Wisdom may be hard to define, but it is easy to define what is not wisdom; allowing provably bad sources to make your choices and define the parameters of your existence for you.

jorangreef 15y ago
Words like "poisonous nonsense", "appeals to authority", "known falsehoods", "provably bad sources" are polemic. In fact, the book of Proverbs is as sure in history as the Greek classics. There is wisdom to be found in both. You would be better arguing in terms of textual criticism, historicity of events, than polemic. This kind of liberalist thinking that we are free to say anything so long as it is liberal not does not seem very liberal to me. If you are into Christopher Hitchens, you may also enjoy his brother, Peter Hitchens, also a journalist and a former atheist. He has what looks to be a good book out: "The Rage Against God". He warns against the kind of atheistic state that his brother advocated, drawing on recent history: Stalin, Hitler, Mao. That is the kind of state that uses words like "poisonous nonsense".
- etherael 15y ago
  A polemic is an argument leaning toward attacking a person, I do not know you at all and make no claim to be able to attack you and expressly disclaim any desire to engage in polemic or ad hominem. Some things are simply accurately described with negative labels. Religion itself, as well as the ideal of moral absolutes defined therein being the sole source of wisdom for the world is just as accurately described by these words as fascism or North Korea's implementation of their Juche ideology. Some things simply really are that bad. Religion is one of them. If after all the water that has passed under the bridge of this particular debate has not managed to sway your opinion at this stage of the game I am well aware that my simply stating it is unlikely to do so now. However this does not change the fact of the matter that all the labels that I used to describe the position you put forward are simple truths. For the record, I am an anarcho capitalist, not a "liberal", and I do not take my positions wholesale from anybody else, I think about them extensively and decide for myself.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]