Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday September 27 2017, @10:15AM   Printer-friendly
from the No-Way! dept.

What was it that one learned through a great books curriculum? Certainly not "conservatism" in any contemporary American sense of the term. We were not taught to become American patriots, or religious pietists, or to worship what Rudyard Kipling called "the Gods of the Market Place." We were not instructed in the evils of Marxism, or the glories of capitalism, or even the superiority of Western civilization.

As I think about it, I'm not sure we were taught anything at all. What we did was read books that raised serious questions about the human condition, and which invited us to attempt to ask serious questions of our own. Education, in this sense, wasn't a "teaching" with any fixed lesson. It was an exercise in interrogation.

To listen and understand; to question and disagree; to treat no proposition as sacred and no objection as impious; to be willing to entertain unpopular ideas and cultivate the habits of an open mind — this is what I was encouraged to do by my teachers at the University of Chicago.

It's what used to be called a liberal education.

The University of Chicago showed us something else: that every great idea is really just a spectacular disagreement with some other great idea.

Bret Stephens's speech warrants a full read. It makes valuable points that we all need to hear, even on SN.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Disagree) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday September 27 2017, @02:10PM (8 children)

    by bzipitidoo (4388) on Wednesday September 27 2017, @02:10PM (#573803) Journal

    The left IS liberal. Every movement has some corrupt actors who care nothing for the principles of the movement and seek to use the genuine adherents for personal gain. Authoritarians hiding amongst liberals doesn't taint liberal principles, any more than fake Christians mouthing all the psalms and hymns and putting in face time at church but behaving in very unchristian ways taints Christianity. See Newt Gingrich for just one example out of dozens.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=2, Informative=1, Disagree=2, Total=5
    Extra 'Disagree' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2, Disagree) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 27 2017, @05:01PM (6 children)

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday September 27 2017, @05:01PM (#573883) Homepage Journal

    I think you might want to check your philosophies. If they're pro-"blah" but anti-liberty they are not liberal. Period.

    You cannot, for instance, be a socialist and a liberal. No, not even a Democratic Socialist. To a liberal, the good of the many makes not one bit of difference when the price is one individual's liberty.

    Neither can you be a Feminist and a liberal. Thinking of people as homogenous groups is decidedly anti-liberty. People are an amazingly broad spectrum of individuals thus all liberty is either individual or does not exist.

    Lastly, you cannot be intolerant of intolerance and be a liberal. You either believe in the liberty to think and speak as you will, no matter your opinion, or you do not.

    No, my friend, the left are not even remotely liberal anymore and have not been for a very long time. Call them progressive if you like. Nobody's ever specified what they're progressing towards, so it's meaningless enough to not be inaccurate.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 27 2017, @06:44PM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 27 2017, @06:44PM (#573949)

      Yes, way to go! There's that binary thinking again that TFA so finely lambasts.

      So, to take my cue from the article:

      Most importantly, they are never based on a misunderstanding. On the contrary, the disagreements arise from perfect comprehension; from having chewed over the ideas of your intellectual opponent so thoroughly that you can properly spit them out.

      Please, demonstrate your ability to comprehend another's position before presenting your disagreement for all to see.

      • (Score: 2, Disagree) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 27 2017, @07:36PM (2 children)

        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday September 27 2017, @07:36PM (#573975) Homepage Journal

        Liberty is a boolean issue. You either have a certain kind of liberty or you don't; there is no gray area between true and false. You don't believe there is either. Not really. You just want to chip away at my liberties stealthily by convincing me there is.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 27 2017, @07:48PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 27 2017, @07:48PM (#573986)

          We're comin' to gitcha! Best fly off varmint.

        • (Score: 2, Disagree) by chromas on Wednesday September 27 2017, @08:00PM

          by chromas (34) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 27 2017, @08:00PM (#573999) Journal

          But but, liberty's on a spectrum!!

    • (Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 27 2017, @08:01PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 27 2017, @08:01PM (#574001)

      And you cannot be a TMB and be a liberal, because being a TMB is incompatible with understanding what liberty is, and instead mistakes for it a vicious idiopathic egoism that most leave behind after primary education.

      • (Score: 2, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 27 2017, @09:40PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 27 2017, @09:40PM (#574052)

        Ya, the whole concept that our government is in place in part to guarantee the freedom of citizens is totally lost on him. If there was no government then everyone would work out voluntary agreements right? No way that could go bad, it isn't like history has a bajillion examples of it! /s

  • (Score: 2, Disagree) by crafoo on Thursday September 28 2017, @01:24AM

    by crafoo (6639) on Thursday September 28 2017, @01:24AM (#574141)

    Ah yes. The well worn, No True Scotsman argument. Do you realize how ridiculous this sounds? I think most leftists have good intentions they just don't actually know how to go about effecting change in an honest way. Somehow, they really believe the ends justifies the means, IN THEIR PARTICULAR CASE. Unlike every other case in history. This time it's OK guys!