Another view:
Nature forces all forms of life to compete for survival. What works best survives best.
Likewise, ideas compete for survival. What works best survives best.
The idea that it is good for one’s ideas to be tested means that those less good can be jettisoned and the better enlisted. For best performance, it is good that bad ideas be shot down. Fly with the best if you can.
But, what if people around you are more interested in protecting favored ideas and consider it an infraction if challenged? You then know that regarding intellectual growth, those minds are handicapped. They will resist, and/or find offensive your efforts to test ideas. For the best use of your brain you are not flying among the best of company.
This is also true of one’s Country. At one time, “America” guaranteed a freedom of speech. This protected a process of “the running argument”. (Interestingly, this is also synonymous with the process we call science.) When a country’s system of government does not protect a liberty to participate in honest debate but instead becomes righteously dogmatic about its ideas not being challenged, it is no longer performing at its best potential.
“Social Justice”, as opposed to “Individual Justice”, has become the Left’s religion. Schools, Universities, the major press, big tech, all have embraced its feelings of moral certitude. Certain in the belief that their goal is superior, Democrats are at ease with: “The end justifies the means”. This allowed, indeed, required them to structure the election (a flood of mail-in ballots) such that opportunities for “fixing the count” enhanced the probability that their “morality” would prevail. It will be the patterns of how voting was conducted and how votes correlate with voting groups elsewhere that will provide a statistical proof of fraud. The quality of this Country’s ability to continue the “running argument” now hinges on the courts.
The Octogenarians 
Another view:
Nature forces all forms of life to compete for survival. What works best survives best.
Likewise, ideas compete for survival. What works best survives best.
The idea that it is good for one’s ideas to be tested means that those less good can be jettisoned and the better enlisted. For best performance, it is good that bad ideas be shot down. Fly with the best if you can.
But, what if people around you are more interested in protecting favored ideas and consider it an infraction if challenged? You then know that regarding intellectual growth, those minds are handicapped. They will resist, and/or find offensive your efforts to test ideas. For the best use of your brain you are not flying among the best of company.
This is also true of one’s Country. At one time, “America” guaranteed a freedom of speech. This protected a process of “the running argument”. (Interestingly, this is also synonymous with the process we call science.) When a country’s system of government does not protect a liberty to participate in honest debate but instead becomes righteously dogmatic about its ideas not being challenged, it is no longer performing at its best potential.
“Social Justice”, as opposed to “Individual Justice”, has become the Left’s religion. Schools, Universities, the major press, big tech, all have embraced its feelings of moral certitude. Certain in the belief that their goal is superior, Democrats are at ease with: “The end justifies the means”. This allowed, indeed, required them to structure the election (a flood of mail-in ballots) such that opportunities for “fixing the count” enhanced the probability that their “morality” would prevail. It will be the patterns of how voting was conducted and how votes correlate with voting groups elsewhere that will provide a statistical proof of fraud. The quality of this Country’s ability to continue the “running argument” now hinges on the courts.
Reblogged this on daedal2207's Blog and commented:
We are ever closer to the fire.