Do Conservatives Think They Have A Monopoly On Truth ?

[kaz]

Conservatism or Liberty?

Moving to more general considerations, conservatism rests on a claim of privileged access to truth, whether through revelation or some sort of "practical reason" to derive rules of personal and interpersonal conduct—which really seems to boil down to a reverse engineering to justify personal preferences.

Admittedly, this is dissatisfying for those who claim to have a monopoly on truth and want to impose it through central planning. But humility calls for a prudent rejection of social engineering, as we simply lack the knowledge to impose better outcomes on others. Conservatism may very well be right in its assertions, but it very well might be wrong. There may very well be an eternal law—but our knowledge thereof is another question entirely. Confident claims of knowledge in the public square or the classroom are one thing, but using them as a grounding for coercive power is another entirely.

******************************

Can't argue with his POV.

I see it in many conservatives.

However, I am interested in what others think.

How many lies has the nominal leader of the GOP been caught telling in the last year and a half?

Conservatives don't even really have a tenuous grasp of the truth, much less a monopoly.

Yes, we hear it all the time.

Only problem is that you define what is a lie and what isn't.

Go fuck yourself.

I love how whenever the conservatives on this site can't really refute what you said they post a profanity-laced insult as if that will hide their abject failure to address the subject.

It would be funny if it wasn't just sad.

A standard is something you apply to your own side first, liar

 

[kaz]

There is no monopoly on truth.....libs choose to believe lies or simply have lost the capacity to delineate fact from fiction...…..

To leftists, truth is what they want to be true

 

[Meister]

Conservatism or Liberty?

Moving to more general considerations, conservatism rests on a claim of privileged access to truth, whether through revelation or some sort of "practical reason" to derive rules of personal and interpersonal conduct—which really seems to boil down to a reverse engineering to justify personal preferences.

Admittedly, this is dissatisfying for those who claim to have a monopoly on truth and want to impose it through central planning. But humility calls for a prudent rejection of social engineering, as we simply lack the knowledge to impose better outcomes on others. Conservatism may very well be right in its assertions, but it very well might be wrong. There may very well be an eternal law—but our knowledge thereof is another question entirely. Confident claims of knowledge in the public square or the classroom are one thing, but using them as a grounding for coercive power is another entirely.

******************************

Can't argue with his POV.

I see it in many conservatives.

However, I am interested in what others think.

What I think? I don't trust any politician and what they say no matter which party affiliation they may have.
They all make promises then break their promises. I will admit that even though Trump has lied, he has also kept
many of his promises that he made during the campaign. But, yes he lies, just as Obama has his lies.
Why even bring this up with a slanted premise? The liberals act like the lies fall on the lap of the conservatives,
and the conservatives act like the lies fall on the lap of liberals. THEY'RE POLITICIANS! THEY LIE

 

[Meister]

What a hilarious thread.
You alleged conservatives could give a shit about truth, look at who your leader is, a pathological liar! And you so-called lovers of the truth, never, ever call him on it. You don't care that he lies to you daily and not one peep out of your folks.
Consider this thread, ONE BIG FAIL!!
Next.

Next? I bet you were stone cold silent when Obama was doing his lying. I know, I know, that was different

 

[Doc1]

Conservatism or Liberty?

Moving to more general considerations, conservatism rests on a claim of privileged access to truth, whether through revelation or some sort of "practical reason" to derive rules of personal and interpersonal conduct—which really seems to boil down to a reverse engineering to justify personal preferences.

Admittedly, this is dissatisfying for those who claim to have a monopoly on truth and want to impose it through central planning. But humility calls for a prudent rejection of social engineering, as we simply lack the knowledge to impose better outcomes on others. Conservatism may very well be right in its assertions, but it very well might be wrong. There may very well be an eternal law—but our knowledge thereof is another question entirely. Confident claims of knowledge in the public square or the classroom are one thing, but using them as a grounding for coercive power is another entirely.

******************************

Can't argue with his POV.

I see it in many conservatives.

However, I am interested in what others think.

You don't WANT to argue with his viewpoint because you agree with it. He starts with a biased slant and then seeks "justify" it. In doing so he conflates "Conservatives" with "Progressives". No "Conservative" wants Central Planning that is a purely Socialist/Communist construct. THEY begin with the premise that they and they alone know best how to run our lives. In short your guy has inverted the beliefs of the two groups in order to "prove" his own biases.

 

[kiwiman127]

What a hilarious thread.
You alleged conservatives could give a shit about truth, look at who your leader is, a pathological liar! And you so-called lovers of the truth, never, ever call him on it. You don't care that he lies to you daily and not one peep out of your folks.
Consider this thread, ONE BIG FAIL!!
Next.

Next? I bet you were stone cold silent when Obama was doing his lying. I know, I know, that was different

Not exactly. I never voted for Obama.
Speaking of lying. why are you so "stone cold silent" about Trump's pathological lying?

 

[Meister]

What a hilarious thread.
You alleged conservatives could give a shit about truth, look at who your leader is, a pathological liar! And you so-called lovers of the truth, never, ever call him on it. You don't care that he lies to you daily and not one peep out of your folks.
Consider this thread, ONE BIG FAIL!!
Next.

Next? I bet you were stone cold silent when Obama was doing his lying. I know, I know, that was different

Not exactly. I never voted for Obama.
Speaking of lying. why are you so "stone cold silent" about Trump's pathological lying?

Hahahaha! why don't you trying reading post 63 and come back and apologize to me.
Also, I never said you voted for Obama, comprehend what I did say.

 

[kiwiman127]

What an idiot.
All False statements involving Barack Obama | PolitiFact
All False statements involving Donald Trump | PolitiFact

It seems, some people think it's not possible to be neither a liberal or a Trumpster. Considering the largest voting block is the Independents, you narrow-minded, in-your-own-little-world inhabitants really lack a true picture of reality.
Considering I thought Obamacare was not the answer and when he stated "you can keep your own doctor", that bothered me.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

There is no monopoly on truth.....libs choose to believe lies or simply have lost the capacity to delineate fact from fiction...…..

To leftists, truth is what they want to be true

O.K.

That is a general assertion from the right. I get that.

And, frankly, I expect it from the left.

Let me ask if you honestly feel like conservatives (of which I am one) don't often play it loose with the truth.

My feeling is that we do.

If we were more exacting in our communication and if we avoided the bullshit propaganda, I think we'd wipe out the left.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Conservatism or Liberty?

Moving to more general considerations, conservatism rests on a claim of privileged access to truth, whether through revelation or some sort of "practical reason" to derive rules of personal and interpersonal conduct—which really seems to boil down to a reverse engineering to justify personal preferences.

Admittedly, this is dissatisfying for those who claim to have a monopoly on truth and want to impose it through central planning. But humility calls for a prudent rejection of social engineering, as we simply lack the knowledge to impose better outcomes on others. Conservatism may very well be right in its assertions, but it very well might be wrong. There may very well be an eternal law—but our knowledge thereof is another question entirely. Confident claims of knowledge in the public square or the classroom are one thing, but using them as a grounding for coercive power is another entirely.

******************************

Can't argue with his POV.

I see it in many conservatives.

However, I am interested in what others think.

What I think? I don't trust any politician and what they say no matter which party affiliation they may have.
They all make promises then break their promises. I will admit that even though Trump has lied, he has also kept
many of his promises that he made during the campaign. But, yes he lies, just as Obama has his lies.
Why even bring this up with a slanted premise? The liberals act like the lies fall on the lap of the conservatives,
and the conservatives act like the lies fall on the lap of liberals. THEY'RE POLITICIANS! THEY LIE

O.K.

This isn't just about politicians.

It's about leadership and information outside of government too.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Conservatism or Liberty?

Moving to more general considerations, conservatism rests on a claim of privileged access to truth, whether through revelation or some sort of "practical reason" to derive rules of personal and interpersonal conduct—which really seems to boil down to a reverse engineering to justify personal preferences.

Admittedly, this is dissatisfying for those who claim to have a monopoly on truth and want to impose it through central planning. But humility calls for a prudent rejection of social engineering, as we simply lack the knowledge to impose better outcomes on others. Conservatism may very well be right in its assertions, but it very well might be wrong. There may very well be an eternal law—but our knowledge thereof is another question entirely. Confident claims of knowledge in the public square or the classroom are one thing, but using them as a grounding for coercive power is another entirely.

******************************

Can't argue with his POV.

I see it in many conservatives.

However, I am interested in what others think.

You don't WANT to argue with his viewpoint because you agree with it. He starts with a biased slant and then seeks "justify" it. In doing so he conflates "Conservatives" with "Progressives". No "Conservative" wants Central Planning that is a purely Socialist/Communist construct. THEY begin with the premise that they and they alone know best how to run our lives. In short your guy has inverted the beliefs of the two groups in order to "prove" his own biases.

I get that.

I am asking if you agree or disagree.

I am all for decentralization.

But, it's hard to sell GWB as a conservative (and many say he was one....how I don't know), when he acted like a left winger with the checkbook.

The left might be able to produce some places where they think conservatives actually used government to try and force their point of view.

Maybe....

If they do, it will be interesting to examine the rationale behind such an approach.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is false: "humility calls for a prudent rejection of social engineering," for man needs social organization and guidance if we are to live in villages in peace, with ourselves and our neighbors.

Any who suggest we don't need the Rule of Law but rather the Rule of Man are a danger to humanity.

 

[kaz]

There is no monopoly on truth.....libs choose to believe lies or simply have lost the capacity to delineate fact from fiction...…..

To leftists, truth is what they want to be true

O.K.

That is a general assertion from the right. I get that.

And, frankly, I expect it from the left.

Let me ask if you honestly feel like conservatives (of which I am one) don't often play it loose with the truth.

My feeling is that we do.

If we were more exacting in our communication and if we avoided the bullshit propaganda, I think we'd wipe out the left.

I'm a libertarian. I research constantly what both sides say. I find generally conservatives definitely spin. They tend to flat out lie less than leftists though. I'm hesitant to believe either without researching on my own

 

[Meister]

What an idiot.
All False statements involving Barack Obama | PolitiFact
All False statements involving Donald Trump | PolitiFact

It seems, some people think it's not possible to be neither a liberal or a Trumpster. Considering the largest voting block is the Independents, you narrow-minded, in-your-own-little-world inhabitants really lack a true picture of reality.
Considering I thought Obamacare was not the answer and when he stated "you can keep your own doctor", that bothered me.

Good grief!

 

[Doc1]

Conservatism or Liberty?

Moving to more general considerations, conservatism rests on a claim of privileged access to truth, whether through revelation or some sort of "practical reason" to derive rules of personal and interpersonal conduct—which really seems to boil down to a reverse engineering to justify personal preferences.

Admittedly, this is dissatisfying for those who claim to have a monopoly on truth and want to impose it through central planning. But humility calls for a prudent rejection of social engineering, as we simply lack the knowledge to impose better outcomes on others. Conservatism may very well be right in its assertions, but it very well might be wrong. There may very well be an eternal law—but our knowledge thereof is another question entirely. Confident claims of knowledge in the public square or the classroom are one thing, but using them as a grounding for coercive power is another entirely.

******************************

Can't argue with his POV.

I see it in many conservatives.

However, I am interested in what others think.

You don't WANT to argue with his viewpoint because you agree with it. He starts with a biased slant and then seeks "justify" it. In doing so he conflates "Conservatives" with "Progressives". No "Conservative" wants Central Planning that is a purely Socialist/Communist construct. THEY begin with the premise that they and they alone know best how to run our lives. In short your guy has inverted the beliefs of the two groups in order to "prove" his own biases.

I get that.

I am asking if you agree or disagree.

I am all for decentralization.

But, it's hard to sell GWB as a conservative (and many say he was one....how I don't know), when he acted like a left winger with the checkbook.

The left might be able to produce some places where they think conservatives actually used government to try and force their point of view.

Maybe....

If they do, it will be interesting to examine the rationale behind such an approach.

I disagree with his premise. GW was no Conservative.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Conservatism or Liberty?

Moving to more general considerations, conservatism rests on a claim of privileged access to truth, whether through revelation or some sort of "practical reason" to derive rules of personal and interpersonal conduct—which really seems to boil down to a reverse engineering to justify personal preferences.

Admittedly, this is dissatisfying for those who claim to have a monopoly on truth and want to impose it through central planning. But humility calls for a prudent rejection of social engineering, as we simply lack the knowledge to impose better outcomes on others. Conservatism may very well be right in its assertions, but it very well might be wrong. There may very well be an eternal law—but our knowledge thereof is another question entirely. Confident claims of knowledge in the public square or the classroom are one thing, but using them as a grounding for coercive power is another entirely.

******************************

Can't argue with his POV.

I see it in many conservatives.

However, I am interested in what others think.

You don't WANT to argue with his viewpoint because you agree with it. He starts with a biased slant and then seeks "justify" it. In doing so he conflates "Conservatives" with "Progressives". No "Conservative" wants Central Planning that is a purely Socialist/Communist construct. THEY begin with the premise that they and they alone know best how to run our lives. In short your guy has inverted the beliefs of the two groups in order to "prove" his own biases.

I get that.

I am asking if you agree or disagree.

I am all for decentralization.

But, it's hard to sell GWB as a conservative (and many say he was one....how I don't know), when he acted like a left winger with the checkbook.

The left might be able to produce some places where they think conservatives actually used government to try and force their point of view.

Maybe....

If they do, it will be interesting to examine the rationale behind such an approach.

I disagree with his premise. GW was no Conservative.

That was my example....and I 100% totally agree.

GWB was a mess.

 

[deanrd]

Liberals can tell the truth. They just choose not to.

There you go. Another conservative lie.

 

[Crepitus]

Conservatism or Liberty?

Moving to more general considerations, conservatism rests on a claim of privileged access to truth, whether through revelation or some sort of "practical reason" to derive rules of personal and interpersonal conduct—which really seems to boil down to a reverse engineering to justify personal preferences.

Admittedly, this is dissatisfying for those who claim to have a monopoly on truth and want to impose it through central planning. But humility calls for a prudent rejection of social engineering, as we simply lack the knowledge to impose better outcomes on others. Conservatism may very well be right in its assertions, but it very well might be wrong. There may very well be an eternal law—but our knowledge thereof is another question entirely. Confident claims of knowledge in the public square or the classroom are one thing, but using them as a grounding for coercive power is another entirely.

******************************

Can't argue with his POV.

I see it in many conservatives.

However, I am interested in what others think.

How many lies has the nominal leader of the GOP been caught telling in the last year and a half?

Conservatives don't even really have a tenuous grasp of the truth, much less a monopoly.

Liberals don't either. It's an open question as to who is worse, and IMHO not worth the argument cuz nobody is going to agree on the answer.

Regardless, the op is a load of horseshit.

You are typing without thinking....which is normal for you.

The OP is asking a question.

You are the one who if full of shit.

I answered the question.

 

[Crepitus]

Conservatism or Liberty?

Moving to more general considerations, conservatism rests on a claim of privileged access to truth, whether through revelation or some sort of "practical reason" to derive rules of personal and interpersonal conduct—which really seems to boil down to a reverse engineering to justify personal preferences.

Admittedly, this is dissatisfying for those who claim to have a monopoly on truth and want to impose it through central planning. But humility calls for a prudent rejection of social engineering, as we simply lack the knowledge to impose better outcomes on others. Conservatism may very well be right in its assertions, but it very well might be wrong. There may very well be an eternal law—but our knowledge thereof is another question entirely. Confident claims of knowledge in the public square or the classroom are one thing, but using them as a grounding for coercive power is another entirely.

******************************

Can't argue with his POV.

I see it in many conservatives.

However, I am interested in what others think.

How many lies has the nominal leader of the GOP been caught telling in the last year and a half?

Conservatives don't even really have a tenuous grasp of the truth, much less a monopoly.

Yes, we hear it all the time.

Only problem is that you define what is a lie and what isn't.

Go fuck yourself.

I love how whenever the conservatives on this site can't really refute what you said they post a profanity-laced insult as if that will hide their abject failure to address the subject.

It would be funny if it wasn't just sad.

A standard is something you apply to your own side first, liar

Lol, what makes you think I didn't?

 

[Unkotare]

Conservatism or Liberty?

Moving to more general considerations, conservatism rests on a claim of privileged access to truth, whether through revelation or some sort of "practical reason" to derive rules of personal and interpersonal conduct—which really seems to boil down to a reverse engineering to justify personal preferences.

Admittedly, this is dissatisfying for those who claim to have a monopoly on truth and want to impose it through central planning. But humility calls for a prudent rejection of social engineering, as we simply lack the knowledge to impose better outcomes on others. Conservatism may very well be right in its assertions, but it very well might be wrong. There may very well be an eternal law—but our knowledge thereof is another question entirely. Confident claims of knowledge in the public square or the classroom are one thing, but using them as a grounding for coercive power is another entirely.

******************************

Can't argue with his POV.

I see it in many conservatives.

However, I am interested in what others think.

False premise - troll thread