Keevan_Colton wrote:Let's take for example the idea of enforcing strict standards of evidence and reasoning in political debates. This doesnt work for one very important reason, 90% of politics is all about opinions.
I take issue with this. You are correct: politics is more nuanced than science because political opinions rely on both facts and value systems. You are incorrect, however, in concluding that because politics relies
in part on subjective values, we should cease to enforce the application of logic and rules of evidence in debates; a political opinion which is based on a false understanding of the world (say, a libertarian who thinks the American Dream is actually true) is no more valid in argument than young-earth creationism.
Science at least has the virtue of relying on results and testable predictions. Politics is just about shouting rhetoric over and over again until Goebbels himself would consider it a bit much.
No, it doesn't have to be that way here. Politics
can be about shouting rhetoric
ad nauseam until Pavlov would salivate, or it can be about taking value systems and a correct model of how the world works, constructing various ideal versions of society, and debating, based on the results of this construction, which versions are preferable and which are not.
We've banned people certainly, but we still have those that oppose socialized healthcare despite every fact available showing it's superior in terms of cost effectiveness and level of coverage. If we had someone that pulled the same shit with cold fusion we'd ban them.
And you know what? Part of debating about politics is
illuminating underlying value differences. If some people value shorter waits and triage by ability to pay instead of by medical need, let them. If they're not honest enough to acknowledge that "fuck the poor" is a direct consequence of their value system,
then we can ban them, but we can enforce rules of evidence and reason without entirely throwing out the subjective evidence.
Gun control? We've had people admit time and again that what they really want is the ability to shoot criminals on sight...but it's okay because they believe in it.
If folk want a bullshit free forum, take everything related to politics and shitcan it now.
You are basing your opinion, it seems, on an absurd black-and-white fallacy: that either you entirely throw out politics or you entirely throw out subjectivity. In fact, the truth can lie in the middle.
