Worried Yet?

  • national debt

« So Much for Enumeration for Purposes of Taxes | Main | A RSE Team Challenge! »



Great post, Eric! Thanks!

The fallacy of "no choice" is indeed becoming popular--and it's as false a statement as can be made. There are always other choices--the question is, whether you're willing to face up to them, or limit yourself only to the choices which seem easy today (but which may end up being disastrous tomorrow).

I agree, Laura. You excellently sum up an important implication of Eric's post.

There is so much in the post, I simply had to come back to it several times.

Rather than commenting at length on Eric's post right now, I will let it be a source of inspiration for a post of my own.

Reading the post triggered the thought in me that the "no choice" paradigm embodies a manifolded prism of dishonesty.

For instance, "no choice" may imply a compliment to one self. Like: "Come on, if you think it through, can any reasonable person take a decision different from the one I took."

Once leaders (a) set out on the path of accumulating "unintended negative consequences," and (b) get people to believe in that path - (a) and (b) describe our political system -, they thereby position themselves as as "heroes" whose "wisdom" and "moral integrity" leave them "no choice."

This is the art of appearing perfect in an imperfect world. By making the world far more imperfect than it needs to be, they appear heroically perfect.

This is an instance of rationalising the irrationality produced by the naive rationalism that dominates the thinking of Western man. What do I mean by that? I'll explain in the post that Eric is inspiring me to write.

Heh. Another example just popped up over at the Daily Bell:

"The argument is made that Bush had NO CHOICE when it came to federal spending because of the aftermath of 9/11."



The comments to this entry are closed.

Follow Us On Facebook!

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter