Morning Highlights

Good morning to all.

  • Education has the three “R’s”. Apparently ecclessia has three “P’s” at Between Two Worlds.
  • Media and fairness, a wordcount analysis of the Democratic debates at Newsbusters.
  • Athens, St. Paul, and blogging considered at The Christian Mind.
  • An piece discussed on (overstating) the importance of roasted brown beans and hot water at The Scoop.
  • With that in mind, investigative reporting of addiction to same at The Chicago Boyz.
  • Visions and dreams of men long gone at biblicalia.
  • Goings on in Afghan via the Fourth Rail.
  • Metrics and living up (or down) to expectations by Mark Byron.
  • On rape and abortion at Sacramentum Vitae.
  • The horror courtesy of the Hatemongers.
  • Paine, Hitchens and the Age of Reason by Siris.
  • The Jewish Atheist shows narratives on the right (as viewed/perceived by the left). The oddest part of this is that it demonstrates one of the narratives (mistaken I deem) held by of the left is that they, unlike the right, do not utilize narrative in their worldview. A more realistic view is that everyone uses narrative to form worldview.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

4 comments

  1. The oddest part of this is that it demonstrates one of the narratives (mistaken I deem) held by of the left is that they, unlike the right, do not utilize narrative in their worldview.

    I think the left absolutely uses narrative in their worldview. The civil rights movement, the 60s movement, the mystique of JFK and RFK, Clinton as philosopher-king, etc. I didn’t mean to imply otherwise.

    It’s sometimes hard to see the other side’s narratives though, which is why I thought the article I posted was so interesting. And when you have a situation with Iraq, where the facts and the (left) narrative seem to align so well (and I think I’m relatively good at sifting facts from narrative — it’s not like I’m a party line leftist) it becomes that much harder to understand where the right is coming from.

  2. Mark says:

    JA,
    So what you’re saying is that the narratives you (and the left) use are closer to reality than those on the right. And of course, that’s exactly what the right says too. As it was famously said (Descartes?), “Common sense is the only thing equitably distributed, as each of us thinks we have more than our neighbor.” The notion that each of us is “relatively good at sifting fact from fiction” is … just that expression. I too think I’m just as good at sifting. The point is, each side with its narratives thinks that their narrative is closer to reality than the other narratives, otherwise we’d all switch.

    This is also where confirmation bias comes in to play as well.

  3. I was referring to the irrational vs. rational in each party. My point was that the essay was a good explanation for the rational leftists about the irrational rightists, not that rational rightists and irrational leftists don’t exist.

  4. Mark says:

    JA,
    I’d venture that many of those that are viewed irrational as viewed from the “other” side are more rational than we suppose.