30 Oct '16 07:13>
When reading a lot of the posts (and God be damned, there's a lot of posts about American politics on this site) here, I keep thinking of the Dutch term: "Voortschrijnend inzicht".
It translates roughly as "Enhanced insights" or "Developing insight / wisdom" or "empirical knowledge".
What it means is: You make a choice (or a law) and after 30 years of experience you come to the conclusion that a better choice should be made.
Ergo: Every choice you make is based on the information you have at the time. And with more information, you adjust your choices accordingly.
I'm wondering (seriously) if the people on this site (and I'm basically asking our American cousins, but the question is open to everyone) agree with the concept.
It means that just because we as a nation (your nation, my nation) or me as an individual (you, not the State) made a choice, doesn't mean to say the choice shouldn't be adapted when new information comes to light.
For example:
The war in Iraq was based upon the assumption Saddam had nuclear weapons. In hindsight this doesn't seem to have been the truth. This means the intelligence services were completely wrong or influenced. Now we know this, does this mean we should take that into account when judging the information they give us?
For example:
A constitution is created with the information at hand (say 300 years ago). With more information and greater technology, does it stand to reason that the constitution should be adapted to the new reality?
I wonder what you think.
It translates roughly as "Enhanced insights" or "Developing insight / wisdom" or "empirical knowledge".
What it means is: You make a choice (or a law) and after 30 years of experience you come to the conclusion that a better choice should be made.
Ergo: Every choice you make is based on the information you have at the time. And with more information, you adjust your choices accordingly.
I'm wondering (seriously) if the people on this site (and I'm basically asking our American cousins, but the question is open to everyone) agree with the concept.
It means that just because we as a nation (your nation, my nation) or me as an individual (you, not the State) made a choice, doesn't mean to say the choice shouldn't be adapted when new information comes to light.
For example:
The war in Iraq was based upon the assumption Saddam had nuclear weapons. In hindsight this doesn't seem to have been the truth. This means the intelligence services were completely wrong or influenced. Now we know this, does this mean we should take that into account when judging the information they give us?
For example:
A constitution is created with the information at hand (say 300 years ago). With more information and greater technology, does it stand to reason that the constitution should be adapted to the new reality?
I wonder what you think.