A person insists on holding a position absurd , contrary to the most elementary logic and in open defiance of tons of empirical evidence, it could simply be a manifestation of his own stupidity . It is also possible that a psychological obstacle stop you arrive at conclusions incompatible with their worldview; in other words, that in his personal battle between reason and comforting fantasies, delivered at an unconscious level, why lose out. More often, however, which it explains such behavior is mere dishonesty .
The parallels between the discussion by the size of the blocks and other debates that have left their mark on history are more than mere coincidences .
XIX century creationism versus evolutionism.
XX century centrally planned economy versus the free market.
Siglo XXI (P2P): consensus technocratic versus consensus emerging .
On one side we have the recognition of spontaneous order that emerges from the interaction between agents not entirely controllable and predictable -the recognition of the constant alignment and realignment of forces beyond the stranglehold of a chain of command, even coercive power that be conferred on the authority.
On the other hand we submission to vertically imposed order , fear of free exchange of goods and ideas, strict homogeneity of independent -so thought of sensible reality as dependent on the consensus of " experts " -. From this perspective, we order that the constituent elements of the natural and social world respond and comply with mandates from an authority. Consequently, all that is needed to solve our problems is that a few enlightened reach an agreement , signed some papers on our behalf, and enforce his will.
But does it ever has been solved a real problem while ignoring logic and empirical evidence - that is, ignoring the only method that allows us to distinguish the true from the false - ? Give more power to creationists, or socialist (across the ideological spectrum, from communists to Nazis), has only served to better hide any glimmer of truth that could illuminate the senselessness of his doctrines.
This time is no different. In fact there has never been, nor is there, nor will there be a genuine debate with supporters of "mandobediente" model because your goal is not to test the validity of the various arguments but maintain or increase its coercive power. The censorship which promptly come whenever they have the power to do so reveals his fear of free competition of ideas, distinctive feature of incompetent and dishonest .
Creationism was disgraced when John Paul II himself declared that evolution is "more than a hypothesis". Intellectual prestige of the planners of the economy fell with the Berlin Wall. The fall of the technocrats of the XXI century will not take so long, thanks in part to the nature of which prevents internet isolate people from alternative sources of information- and partly to the nature of Bitcoin , which makes economically viable opposition the consensus Nakamoto -.
related entries
The parallels between the discussion by the size of the blocks and other debates that have left their mark on history are more than mere coincidences .
XIX century creationism versus evolutionism.
XX century centrally planned economy versus the free market.
Siglo XXI (P2P): consensus technocratic versus consensus emerging .
On one side we have the recognition of spontaneous order that emerges from the interaction between agents not entirely controllable and predictable -the recognition of the constant alignment and realignment of forces beyond the stranglehold of a chain of command, even coercive power that be conferred on the authority.
On the other hand we submission to vertically imposed order , fear of free exchange of goods and ideas, strict homogeneity of independent -so thought of sensible reality as dependent on the consensus of " experts " -. From this perspective, we order that the constituent elements of the natural and social world respond and comply with mandates from an authority. Consequently, all that is needed to solve our problems is that a few enlightened reach an agreement , signed some papers on our behalf, and enforce his will.
But does it ever has been solved a real problem while ignoring logic and empirical evidence - that is, ignoring the only method that allows us to distinguish the true from the false - ? Give more power to creationists, or socialist (across the ideological spectrum, from communists to Nazis), has only served to better hide any glimmer of truth that could illuminate the senselessness of his doctrines.
This time is no different. In fact there has never been, nor is there, nor will there be a genuine debate with supporters of "mandobediente" model because your goal is not to test the validity of the various arguments but maintain or increase its coercive power. The censorship which promptly come whenever they have the power to do so reveals his fear of free competition of ideas, distinctive feature of incompetent and dishonest .
Creationism was disgraced when John Paul II himself declared that evolution is "more than a hypothesis". Intellectual prestige of the planners of the economy fell with the Berlin Wall. The fall of the technocrats of the XXI century will not take so long, thanks in part to the nature of which prevents internet isolate people from alternative sources of information- and partly to the nature of Bitcoin , which makes economically viable opposition the consensus Nakamoto -.
related entries