Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cognitive Dissonance defined More

Cognitive Dissonance defined

Comments Filter:

    • Well, yeah... when you only hear monotone, you are not really expected to perceive the lack of harmony among the notes. It's a tiny bit like describing chromatic variation to the color blind. Your continued admiration for Reagan only shows that indeed you have learned nothing over the last five years. Your problem is with Obama, not what he is doing. You are still putting the personality ahead of all else.

      • Actually, you go on far more about Reagan than I. At times it is difficult to remember that I am the one with the problem.

        • The only one with a problem is a person who could possibly admire such a man. I mean, yeah, he was pretty funny on those Dean Martin Roasts, but that's as far as I can take it.

          • Among the harder things to do in life is get past the personality cult and after the actual figure.
            My overarching beef with Reagan is that irrespective of the great ideas he'd read and understood, the follow-through was not there. You can go to the Reagan Dinner at CPAC (and I did this year) and see the base that helped elect him ("FINALLY the GOP nominated a conservative!") still doing victory laps over the triumph of 1980. 34 years on, the American Conservative Union is still looking for another hit [youtube.com]. And

            • My overarching beef with Reagan is that irrespective of the great ideas he'd read and understood, the follow-through was not there.

              You mean you admire him because he talks the talk? Well golly gee! I'm Saint Patrick, and my walking stick should start sprouting any minute now...

              • No, I meant follow-through past the individual. We understand that Michelangelo was a great artist, and don't really expect a sequel.
                Among the premises of our political system is the notion that there is a Rule of Law, and officers carrying out offices, irrespective of the name on the doorplate. That is, we should not be having personality cults. That such occur (Reagan among them) is a sign of immaturity.

                • But he did follow through. 30 years of trickle down is what brought us here. We are living Reagan/Thatcher's legacy. Obama is a continuation of that legacy, more of our tax money, not to mention our stolen pensions going to big business. But maybe it's really Carter's legacy. After all, he's the one who signed the deregulation bill that Reagan exploited so well. And the airlines.. oh my, it appears the democrats have done more effective deregulating than the republicans ever have. Head assplodes! The world

                  • History is such that somebody has to be on the ballot. Somebody gets the credit/blame for whatever went on during their time in the office, whether or not their decisions actually affected anything.
                    How is one to discuss history, and mention names, without the accusation of 'personality cult', then?

                    • The issue is that you focus on superficial personality exclusively. You make no attempt to connect dots, to find motivation. You don't dare to peek behind the facade, and you dismiss out of hand and disparage those that do. You are showing fear of the truth that could break down everything you have been told. Powerful force fear is, overwhelming to many... What are ya? Chicken?

                    • Very wild leaps on your part. My actual opinion is that our goal must be to lead ourselves, grow up, minimize government dependency, and make the actual bozos in office interchangeable. Then your utopian vision of random selection for office holders would be tenable.

                    • Then your utopian vision of random selection for office holders would be tenable.

                      You have yet to show how it is any less tenable than today's situation. You are merely defending political and economic fiefdom and its aristocratic scaffolding. You fear being a mere equal. You take it as an affront to your "liberties".

                    • The whole point of having any requirements for office (age & residence, but also laws pertaining to getting on a ballot) is to filter out the completely unready. You're flinging poo at Sarah Palin, while advocating for a system that is statistically certain to put far worse in office. Your butt: it look big.

                    • ...filter out the completely unready.

                      I'll take "unready" over corrupt any day. At least there's a chance of some good coming from it.

                    • You're never going to rid the system of corruption, short of the Second Coming of Christ.
                      We should instead work to minimize both corruption and unreadiness, through greater citizen involvement.
                      Next, you accuse me of being trapped in some sort of box. Again.

Slashdot Top Deals

Math is like love -- a simple idea but it can get complicated. -- R. Drabek

Close