usmbguest5318
Gold Member
I've given up asking questions. l merely float on a tsunami of acceptance of anything life throws at me... and marvel stupidly.
-- Terry Gilliam
Discussion Structure:-- Terry Gilliam
This thread is part one of a two-part discussion/debate.
- In Part I -- affirmative arguments -- which is this thread, members are bid to identify what "we" should be worried about.
- In part-two -- negative (counter) arguments -- which is a separate thread, members are bid to offer a counterargument/rebuttal to one member's post that is found in this thread. Pick any one post that appeals to you and present your counterargument to it. (Once this thread is created, I have to wait about 30 seconds to create the "Part II" thread; however, that shouldn't be a problem, because it'll take you that long to finish reading this post, to say nothing of writing your affirmative post.)
- Part I -- Affirmative: Humanity should be worried that big experiments won't happen.
Part II -- Negative: Humanity should not be worried that big experiments won't happen. - Part I -- Affirmative: American citizens should be worried about the Is-Ought Fallacy of science and morality.
Part II -- Negative: American citizens should not be worried about the Is-Ought Fallacy of science and morality.
Things to notice:
- The title question does not ask what "we" should be most worried about. Thus you need only identify a thing that "we" should be worried about. If you want to qualify your affirmative thesis statement with a superlative like "the most," that's on you, but be aware that doing so runs the risk of making it far easier to rebut your affirmative thesis statement. Words matter; choose yours carefully.
- In Part I, because is the the place for affirmative posts, you don't get to attack, refute, rebut or counter-argue anyone's post. You may chose any one post you want from Part I and refute it in Part II.
- Definition of "we" for the purpose of Parts I and II -- You may construe "we" to mean either of the following, but only one of them (not both) and nothing other than the following:
- Option 1 --> "We" means all of humanity.
- Option 2 --> "We" means the citizenry of the U.S.
- If you happen not to be a U.S. citizen and you prefer to, you may specify that "we" means the citizenry of own country instead of the the citizenry of the U.S.
Thread Discussion Topic and Rules:This thread doesn't have a specific topic; however, the title's normative inquiry is what members must address in accordance each with the following guidelines (in other words, if you don't want to follow every guideline, don't post in the thread):
Part I FAQ:- Identify one thing, it can be anything -- a place, a person, a thing, an idea, a concept, a trend, etc. -- that you genuinely believe is what we, humanity as a whole, or we, the citizenry of U.S. as a whole, should be worried about.
- Be sure to make clear which definition of "we" (see above) you intend for your remarks.
- There are no restrictions on what you may identify as the thing about which to be worried, but keep in mind that this is not a humor thread.
- The first sentence of your prose must begin as follows: "We should be worried about...."
- Note that I said "your prose." A "flavor" quote, such as the one that begins this post, is not "your prose."
- Using neutral language, explain why you think the one thing you identified is what "we" should be worried about.
- Each participant in Parts I and II will get two posts as follows:
- Your explanatory prose can be as long or as short as you feel it needs to be, but make that decision carefully because...
- You get only one post in this thread and that post is your affirmative post.
- "Clarification Exception" --> If you need to post to ask for a clarification of the rules, you can do that. That is the only exception to the rules. Do not abuse that exception by asking for clarification and posting any other kind of comment that is not strictly a rule clarification question.
I'm going to trust that you folks can approach the thread with integrity; however, if I think you are abusing the "clarification exception," I will ask to have your post deleted. - "Forgetfulness exception" --> If you forgot to say something in your post, you can either
- edit your post, provided nobody's posted a rebuttal to it in Part II.
- Quote yourself, not somebody else, and provide an update.
- Deal with it in your response to a rebuttal to your post in Part II.
- I get to post more than once in this thread, but only for the purpose of providing rule clarifications, and because my first post is this one which contains only the rules. (I have yet to figure out what one thing I want to identify as a thing we should be worried about.)
- "Clarification Exception" --> If you need to post to ask for a clarification of the rules, you can do that. That is the only exception to the rules. Do not abuse that exception by asking for clarification and posting any other kind of comment that is not strictly a rule clarification question.
- Can I simply state what I think we should worry about without explaining why?
- No. If that's all you're willing to do, don't post.
- Can I, in Part I, quote or refer to another member's post?
- No. That's what Part II is for.
- What if nobody rebuts my Part I post?
- Well, they just don't. and you don't get to post in Part II.
- If I don't post in Part I, can I still rebut another member's post in Part II?
- No. If you haven't put your own ideas "out there" to be challenged, you don't get to challenge someone else's.
- What if I think there are multiple things we should worry about?
- Pick one, discuss it in this thread, and discuss the rest of them in some thread other than this one or Part II.
Sample Part I Post (DO NOT RESPOND TO THE SAMPLE -- Among other things, I'm not going to defend it.):
Below is a sample response to the title question. It is not my response and it is not one that you may rebut in Part II. It is provided only so members who may be confused can get a sense of what they are bid to do in Part I.
We Should be Worried about Politics.
Most of the smart people I know want nothing to do with politics. We avoid it like the plague. Is this because we feel that politics isn't where anything significant happens? Or because we're too taken up with what we're doing, be it Quantum Physics or Statistical Genomics or Generative Music? Or because we're too polite to get into arguments with people? Or because we just think that things will work out fine if we let them be -- that The Invisible Hand or The Technosphere will mysteriously sort them out?
Whatever the reasons for our quiescence, politics is still being done -- just not by us. It's politics that gave us Iraq and Afghanistan and a few hundred thousand casualties. It's politics that's bleeding the poorer nations for the debts of their former dictators. It's politics that allows special interests to run the country. It's politics that helped the banks wreck the economy. It's politics that prohibits gay marriage and stem cell research but nurtures Gaza and Guantanamo.
But we don't do politics. We expect other people to do it for us, and grumble when they get it wrong. We feel that our responsibility stops at the ballot box, if we even get that far. After that we're as laissez-faire as we can get away with.
What we should worry about is that while we're laissez-ing, someone else is faire-ing.
-- Brian Eno
Most of the smart people I know want nothing to do with politics. We avoid it like the plague. Is this because we feel that politics isn't where anything significant happens? Or because we're too taken up with what we're doing, be it Quantum Physics or Statistical Genomics or Generative Music? Or because we're too polite to get into arguments with people? Or because we just think that things will work out fine if we let them be -- that The Invisible Hand or The Technosphere will mysteriously sort them out?
Whatever the reasons for our quiescence, politics is still being done -- just not by us. It's politics that gave us Iraq and Afghanistan and a few hundred thousand casualties. It's politics that's bleeding the poorer nations for the debts of their former dictators. It's politics that allows special interests to run the country. It's politics that helped the banks wreck the economy. It's politics that prohibits gay marriage and stem cell research but nurtures Gaza and Guantanamo.
But we don't do politics. We expect other people to do it for us, and grumble when they get it wrong. We feel that our responsibility stops at the ballot box, if we even get that far. After that we're as laissez-faire as we can get away with.
What we should worry about is that while we're laissez-ing, someone else is faire-ing.
-- Brian Eno