Originally posted by sh76From reading your post I have perceived the following:
I love political debates and around the extended family dinner table, I'll take virtually any position just to keep the debate going. Usually this means taking the liberal position, as the society I hang out in tends to be very conservative, especially on social issues and foreign policy.
BTW, whodey, I for one am willing to change my political beliefs and h ce) as I see the kinds of facist-like excesses that sort of thinking can lead to.
etc.
1. You have an association with religious thought, but for the most part have never really been engaged with your faith as a vital and intergal part of your life. You think that there probably is a God but just leave it at that.
2. This apathy toward such things as gay marriage and abortion are then understandable. After all, there is no reason to oppose gay marriage other than religious grounds. Abortion is not as cut and dry, however. It is more of a question of when life begins. Having said that, statistically I would guess that those of faith are more inclined to think that conceptions are not "mistakes".
3. Your change in stance regarding natural rights is probably not much of a deviation from your original world view neither is the above mentioned. Afer all, you probably think there is a higher power giving us natural rights, but for the most part think that this "higher power" is unknowable at best. I do find it interesting, however, that Marauder believes in natural rights but not a higher power. To me, the two seem intertwined.
4. As far as socialism goes, you are not opposed to it, only, you only favor your perceived practicality associtated with it. Again, no major change seen here unless you had an underlying belief that socialism was inherently flawed system no matter the form. My guess is that you did not.
In short, I see your world view being tweeked, not changed in any dramatic fashion. You have just become more in tuned with your underlying belief systems.
Originally posted by SleepyguyLike?
Ron Paul 2012 !!! 🙂
I pretty much only weigh in on political discussions with people I know well, or in one on one situations. Participating here at RHP has helped me challenge and test my own beliefs, and like sh76 I've changed a few of them.
Originally posted by whodeyInteresting post. I have to think about it more before I respond. For now, I'll just say that I think No1's position is based on biological/evolutionary ingrained sense of rights and freedoms that are part and parcel with human nature. I don't see God as being necessary for that position.
From reading your post I have perceived the following:
1. You have an association with religious thought, but for the most part have never really been engaged with your faith as a vital and intergal part of your life. You think that there probably is a God but just leave it at that.
2. This apathy toward such things as gay marriage and abortion are t ...[text shortened]... y dramatic fashion. You have just become more in tuned with your underlying belief systems.
Originally posted by sh76I wasn't being serious about Paul, just pulling your leg a little 🙂
I can't support Paul because complete economic anarchy is impractical and almost as dangerous as socialism and because his lala land isolationism is silly. But I will say this for the man: He's not afraid to tell it like he sees it.
Originally posted by whodeyThe first that leaps to mind is gay marriage. I was reflexively opposed to the govt overriding the will of the majority on that issue. Discussions (primarily with Nemesio) altered my perception of the issue.
Like?
Also in general my understanding of the philosophical underpinnings of natural rights has been greatly enhanced from discussions here and the reading I've undertaken as a result. Has my "world view" changed? No.
Originally posted by whodeyThis is very different from what you posted earlier. Are you trying to distance yourself from your earlier posts?
I find that people often shy away from political debates. This is often due to not wanting to offend other people and/or a lack of knowledge about politics.
Originally posted by whodey
otherwise they are faced with a crisis of sorts as they admit to themselves that they need a new belief system...There are those rare and inexplicable moments, however, where people actually tear down and rebuild a particular belief system.
Personally, I know that some of my individual political opinions derive from systemic ideologies, so a change in one of those systemic ideological assumptions would cause me to have a revolutionary shift in perspective on several issues, just as a change in perspective about an individual political issue would cause me to question my systemic ideological assumptions in the first place.
With that said, many of my political opinions are the products of more nuanced intellectual consideration (a case-by-case basis), because systemic ideologies are difficult to define under all circumstances. As a result, at least in my opinion, shifts in perspective about individual political issues tend to be more evolutionary than revolutionary. I would imagine that for most people, as well, changes in political perspective are not typically systemic.
Originally posted by Wajoma
The reason, primarily for me is to test my ideas, the goal ultimately is to be right, to know what is true. [...] Outside of RHP most people I know [...] aren't interested in politics one way or the other
I don’t have as lofty a goal as you ascribe to, per se, but I agree that even if it is only for my own self-satisfaction, I enjoy engaging in debates on RHP to practice articulating my beliefs and moving beyond a self-reported, stereotypical, and subjective label of what I believe. As you say, I find that most people are either completely indifferent to politics altogether or are only interested in knowing which party I typically align with (rather than assessing my specific knowledge of and interest in political issues) before drawing assumptions about me as a person.
Originally posted by SleepyguyI promise promise promise not to completely redirect the momentum of this thread (and hope others will agree), but I would be interested for you to explain what you mean here more clearly.
I was reflexively opposed to the govt overriding the will of the majority on that issue.
Originally posted by SleepyguyBelieve it or not, my position on gay marriage has shifted as well. Primarily I realized that the US is a secular country and as such it will eventually embrace gay marriage as have other secular countries. At one time I considered allowing them to marry, only, call it something else with the same rights as heterosexuals. That way you could appease both sides as gays get the rights they desire and those on the other side of the issue still maintain the term marriage for men and women. However, gays would inevitably see this as a put down and never go for it even though their rights are not being violated. In short, it is not just a fight for rights, its a fight for legitimacy within a given society.
The first that leaps to mind is gay marriage. I was reflexively opposed to the govt overriding the will of the majority on that issue. Discussions (primarily with Nemesio) altered my perception of the issue.
Also in general my understanding of the philosophical underpinnings of natural rights has been greatly enhanced from discussions here and the reading I've undertaken as a result. Has my "world view" changed? No.
Then Whodey got to thinking. Why is the state invovled in anyones right to marry? Why is the state involved in the bedrooms of private citizens whatsoever? This would make the issue go away for ever as well as appeal to my right winged fantasies of as little government involvement in our lives as humanly possible. For me its a win/win resolution.
Originally posted by wittywonkaPut another way, we mostly have a natural progression towards certain stances on various issues based on our core world views. Our choices in regards to stances on issues can then only become different if we change those core world views. This is the revolution you speak of and for which you seem to not have experienced as most people seem to have not. The truth is we often pat ourselves on the back for being open minded but nothing could be further from the truth. We are all on a road to somewhere and this can only change if we purposfully change destinations.
As a result, at least in my opinion, shifts in perspective about individual political issues tend to be more evolutionary than revolutionary. I would imagine that for most people, as well, changes in political perspective are not typically systemic.[/b]