Skip to main content

Truth by Poll - VOTE NOW

I think it's time that someone takes a stand against the riddiculous notion that a poll of opinion has any relevance to the truth.

VOTE NOW - Do you think Scott Peterson is guilty?
VOTE NOW - Are we winning in Iraq?
VOTE NOW - Do Aliens want to eat your brain and plant their evil seed in your womb?
VOTE NOW - Is Bin Laden alive or dead?

When everyone believed that the world was flat it was exactly the same shape as it is now. Things are true or not true. People on trial are guilty or not guilty, and incidently, were guilty even *before* they were convicted... "innocent until proven guilty" is a legal form, not a reflection of the truth.

We do not create truth by our belief, not even about God. God exists or doesn't exist quite apart from our belief or disbelief.

The one way that we do create truth through belief is when we believe things about our culture or ourselves. Our belief is self-fulfilling to an extent. Someone who believes they are a good person is likely to try to behave accordingly. Believing in freedom and liberty is necessary prior to gaining freedom and liberty. Believing that you can succeed often leads to success.

"Are we winning in Iraq?" isn't subject to opinion. We could be winning even if everyone said no. We could be losing even if everyone said yes.

If there is an element that relates opinion about war in Iraq to truth it is to the fact that people who believe they are losing stop trying to win. Students who believe they are stupid don't study. People who see the glass ceiling don't advance beyond it. People who are accustomed to slavery don't seek freedom.

And people who believe the US is evil no matter what we do will not push to accomplish good in the world.

Comments

Omni said…
Don't you tell who's winning a war by which side has killed more people and destroyed more property? How else COULD you define it? The only way that America can lose a war is if we quit and go home.

(nothin' to see here)
12:16 AM
Synova said…
Hi omni!

Wow, my first comment... I'm not alone all alone after all. :-)

I think that you're right that we could only lose a war if we quit and go home.

Though winning has to be a little more than just wrecking more stuff, doesn't it?
1:14 AM
Omni said…
Not as far as I know; once you've killed enough people and wrecked enough stuff that the enemy gives up or is unable to continue fighting, you win... what else is there? They don't have to love you or adopt your way of life for you to win; once the fighting is over, there's a winner and a loser, and if you're the one who killed and destroyed more, you're the winner... it's nice to think that there's something more exalted involved in being a winner, but if there is then no war has ever been won, because beating the other guy into submission is all there's ever been.

I'm honored to be your 1st commenter. :-)
1:29 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...
Post a Comment
Read more

Don't Look Down by Crusie and Mayer

Not really a review, just wanted to say that I enjoyed this book, _Don't Look Down_ by Jennifer Crusie and Bob Mayer. I went to Amazon to get the link and noticed that it's getting trashed in the reviews by people who have been fans of Crusie's romance novels. I can see why they were upset but I hope she continues to collaborate with Mayer because all I can say is "your loss is my gain." I'm also going to be looking for Mayer's books written as Robert Doherty to check them out. _Don't Look Down_ is a silly novel that had me laughing or trying not to let the kids see I was crying... The laughs weren't belly laughs and the tears weren't heart wrenching sobs... It was just fun. And it *was* a romance. With guns. And knives. And Wonder Woman action figures with matching "wonder wear" underwear. And the items the international terrorist was shipping to the Russian mob boss? Pre-colombian jade penises. At least two people get e...
11 comments
Read more

How "Representation" In Fiction Becomes Toxic

  Some things sound so obviously good that they don't need to be examined.  One of those things is the idea of Representation in fiction; movies, television or books.  Entertainment where some people are conspicuously absent would seem to be an obvious problem, right?  A person doesn't have to be "woke" or any sort of feminist to occasionally watch an old television show and realize (for example) that all the scientists and astronauts in an old movie are men. It's as glaring an anachronism these days as watching a show where everyone is chain smoking cigarettes. Entertainment should reflect the diverse nature of real life and society because, in the end, fiction has to be even more real than real life.  If nothing else, it makes that entertainment more interesting to introduce characters with a variety of backgrounds and challenges. And so we're told that diverse fiction is BETTER fiction. The way that this rather obvious truth is often framed, often discussed...
4 comments
Read more