Our modern society relies on the division of labor of 300 million people. Okay, let's refine that to 10 million highly educated people as the source of data/theories.
Think of the value of the information that can be produced by so many people?
Our decentralized society organically processes that information quite successfully. Politics tries to centralize it.
So, is global warming a threat or not? I don't think it is. I think that the data shows CO2 is rising conclusively, temperatures sort of have been in an upward trend consistent with historical expectations, and really that's all we conclusively know. But that doesn't stop HIGHLY EDUCATED liberals from calling anti-carbon tax activists 'flat-earthers'. The thing is, they are convinced that they're right, because they are sure that they have DATA.
What about guns and crime? More guns equals less crime, oh, except according to David Horowitz who says that data is all lies. So, the H.E.L. (highly educated liberals) say: guns bad, we have the DATA.
What about fiscal spending and stimulus. Paul Krugman. Nobel Prize. DATA.
Neocons have their studies and data, and so do we in the liberty movement.
So what is it? Which is it? How do we begin to have these discussions?
And that's before the common sense angle. I've found H.E.L., when you confront their DATA, tend to mentally shut down. First they try and prove why your data is flawed. After that, it's an emotional shouting match.
I don't know what it is. They generally don't believe in God so maybe their worldview is very fragile. But many believers suffer from the "my worldview's collapsing, shut up now before I yell louder" breakdown.
Sigh. I offer... my sympathy.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: