Difference between revisions of "User:Woozle"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Subpages: link to new DI subpage)
(→‎Subpages: opinionated businesses)
Line 10: Line 10:
 
==Subpages==
 
==Subpages==
 
* '''My [[/Position Statement|Position Statement]]''' on a number of issues
 
* '''My [[/Position Statement|Position Statement]]''' on a number of issues
 +
* [[/opinionated businesses]]: should businesses have opinions on things, and how far can they go with them? (As I was typing this, I kinda lost enthusiasm for the whole thing... don't know why. Note: any discussion of larger business ethics should mention companies like Working Assets which make political positions part of their sales pitch.)
 
* [[/Discovery Institute]]: proof they aren't really trying (and I hope this doesn't give them any ideas...)
 
* [[/Discovery Institute]]: proof they aren't really trying (and I hope this doesn't give them any ideas...)
 
* [[/JLF]]: my interactions with the [[John Locke Foundation]] (mainly on the Right Angles Blog)
 
* [[/JLF]]: my interactions with the [[John Locke Foundation]] (mainly on the Right Angles Blog)

Revision as of 14:11, 26 May 2008

I originally created Issuepedia as a way of dealing with the confusion (shall we say) I and a lot of other people felt after the 2004 presidential election. How could a man be so clearly dishonest and still get elected? Or were we the ones who were wrong, and he actually wasn't that bad?

Issuepedia's first project, then, was to collect information relating to George W. Bush, his past performance, his views, the views of his party, the issues upon which I and my friends are at odds with his party, and so on. If we were right, this would make it clear to his supporters just what he was supporting. If we were wrong, it would become clear as the facts accumulated. This methodology could then be used to help resolve (or at least understand) all kinds of contentious issues.

The methodology seems to work quite well; the main problem has been a lack of interest from anyone else. As such, it is still of use to me, as it serves as a filing place for facts and cross-references which I otherwise would be unable to remember, thus making it possible for me to have a reasonable grasp on the issues I've been studying. Hopefully others will soon see the value of it. I have ideas for publicity campaigns ("Issuepedia: no more sound bites"), and will get around to working on that eventually.

My central home page is on The Hypertwins Wiki. Visit early and often. ^_^

Subpages

  • My Position Statement on a number of issues
  • /opinionated businesses: should businesses have opinions on things, and how far can they go with them? (As I was typing this, I kinda lost enthusiasm for the whole thing... don't know why. Note: any discussion of larger business ethics should mention companies like Working Assets which make political positions part of their sales pitch.)
  • /Discovery Institute: proof they aren't really trying (and I hope this doesn't give them any ideas...)
  • /JLF: my interactions with the John Locke Foundation (mainly on the Right Angles Blog)
  • /annoy a liberal: answers to a popular conservative bumper-sticker
  • /Darwin's Dangerous Idea: eventually to be organized into critique page
  • /2007-07-03 chat on the subject of why atheists might avoid trying to de-theize their friends
  • At its best, religion seems to provide a shield against cynicism. This seems to be the real reason why any intelligent people become religious at all; they care about other people, so they want to be "good", and in their experience only religion offers any guidance on that topic. This seems worth an essay, or at least some discussion inside an existing essay.

Dated Writings

Questions

  • 2006-12-21 Does anyone have any information about the demonstrations OSC mentions here? If they actually took place as described, then they're dispicable – but we heard much the same about Vietnam soldiers being spat at, and my understanding is that that was later revealed to be propaganda and not something that actually happened. ("The anti-war sentiments gave reason to those that believed returning soldiers were 'spat on' or otherwise abused." is all I can find in Wikipedia.)
    • The documentary "Sir! No Sir! [W]" examines the anti-war activites of American GIs during the Vietnam war period, has an interview where the spitting on GIs at airports is repudiated as fabrication. The person being interviewed had done research and published a book or article on exactly this topic. What worries me about Orson Scott Card's article regarding the egg throwing is that he has not talked to the family directly rather someone (the soldier on the plane) who knows someone (the brother of the soldier that died). Nor does he supplies the names of the soldiers, so fact checking could be done. It more diligence on his part would confirm these events. Jsrrts 17:43, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Dialogues

Petitions I've Signed

(a partial list)

Notes to Myself

Morality Quiz Notes

A deadly natural disaster (hurricane, tsunami, whatever) is about to strike. A man goes swimming in the ocean, despite all warnings to leave town and especially to stay away from the water. He is arrested by the police. Is this right, or wrong? (Source: http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110007328)

Same natural disaster. A teenage boy steals a bus, picks up refugees, and drives them to safety. He is arrested. Is this right or wrong? What should the boy have done? What should the police have done?

...I wanted to have a scenario involving missionaries, but I find it difficult to phrase in a neutral-ish way since the concept of missionarying bothers me all by itself.

2007-02-25 update: Although I came up with those questions independently (in 2005 or 06), they are very similar to the questions used in the surveys described in The Authoritarians.

Links to File

Retrieved from "https://issuepedia.org/mw/index.php?title=User:Woozle&oldid=10585"