Essays: Global climate hypothesis |
There some important issues on which we cannot make practical progress because they have been taken up as bones of contention between the polarized partisans….
I don’t much want to write about the issues listed above, but I see no choice. If I am arguing that reducing our polarized partisanship could help us to address our problems more productively, I must try to produce at least a glimpse of how that might occur. So I have no choice.
In trying the essays here, I write not as an expert or authority on any of the problems, about which there is a great deal to know. I write as an ordinary citizen who reads a bit, and who has formed impressions of these problems. I am trying to form a citizen’s opinion about the problems.
So here’s the question: Does resisting polarized partisanship help me to form a sounder citizen’s opinion about those problems and how we might address them? I bet that will be difficult enough.
Here are abstracts of my essays:
“Global climate hypothesis.” I explore the question, How could we produce such greatly differing opinions about this matter? Turns out, that’s easy as pie. When we consider our differing economic, cultural, ideological, and political situations, and consider our polarized partisanship, and consider some principles for communicating in the midst of polarization, it soon becomes clear that reaching an agreement about the matter will be an achievement. And it’s not clear that we are trying to reach agreement–as distinct from trying to use the issue as a weapon against each other.