View Poll Results: Mmm?

Voters
2. You may not vote on this poll
  • I'm a liberal, liberals are coherentists.

    0 0%
  • I'm a liberal, liberals are foundationalists.

    1 50.00%
  • I'm not a liberal, liberals are coherentists.

    0 0%
  • I'm not a liberal, liberals are foundationalists.

    1 50.00%
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 71

Thread: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    One of the problems I have a lot when debating with liberals is their very sense of justice seems to be backwards. They seem to believe that something is justified only if it's surrounded by compatible circumstances, ignoring the value of something itself.

    The first belief is called coherentism. The second belief is called foundationalism.

    Obviously, coherentism is circular because it begs to know why something coheres in the first place. You can't have a puzzle without puzzle pieces.

    A liberal response typically goes that it doesn't matter what the particular puzzle pieces are. It just matters that they fit together.

    The problem, of course, is that raises the question, "How do we know what fits in the first place?"

    Liberals typically claim that "what fits" spontaneously emerges among dynamic interactions between people.

    Unfortunately, liberals don't seem to care that spontaneous emergence doesn't necessarily yield compatible solutions. It's at this point that we see that liberals are tyrants. They don't care if slim minorities fall through the cracks of society. They just care about the big picture as long as the minority is too insignificant to be bothered. This is why liberals love free speech and democracy - they love how people can be intimidated from appeals to absurdity, and they love to employ mob justice in forsakening independents who don't conform. To boot, they can claim that they tried by giving people a shot to fit in, so they don't have anymore due diligence to be responsible for.

    Ironically, this appeal to democratic popular sovereignty is how liberals become elitists. For example, lets say liberals claim that 1% of society is a tolerable insignificant minority that can be allowed to fall through the cracks for any particular issue. Given a society which has multiple issues...

    99% * 99% = 98%
    98% * 99% = 97%
    97% * 99% = 96%

    If society multiplies 69 issues, this leads to only 50% of society being compatible across the board.

    If society multiplies 229 issues, this leads to only 10% of society being compatible across the board.

    If society multiplies 458 issues, this leads to 1% of society being compatible across the board.

    Issues don't have to be big matters here. We don't have to be talking about abortion, gay marriage, gun rights, income equality, environmental protection, or labor reform.

    They can be simple things. Things like, "When should people be allowed to play music into the night?" or "Where should a road be built?" or "Should we teach school curriculum this way or that way?"

    The point is liberal coherentism doesn't actually include all people. It just includes most people, and when "most people" gets repeated over and over, this leads to a very small minority actually being compatible with what society stands for.

    It also leads to social tyranny because those who are more compatible over more issues are treated as superior to those who are less compatible.

  2. #2
    Dungeon Master
    Somewhere in Babylon
    Jetboogieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Babylon...
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,295
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktoria View Post
    It's at this point that we see that liberals are tyrants.
    And it's at this point I can stop reading your stupid post.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    And it's at this point I can stop reading your stupid post.
    It's at this point I can stop believing you know what "stupid" means.

  4. #4
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Its not black and white, somethings can be argued to have absolute foundation, somethings cannot. I consider myself to be an anarchist in the sense that authority (be it from property or state or anything else), MUST be justified to the parties involved as necessary.

    Now that is in a sence coherentism, but also the foundation of it is the idea that freedom is important and that humans are equal in rights.

    In economics you find out what works best.

    The rest of your post is just strawmen,

  5. #5
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    And it's at this point I can stop reading your stupid post.
    You got that far? Kudos...
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    authority (be it from property or state or anything else), MUST be justified to the parties involved as necessary.
    Can you explain how parties find authority justified in the first place?

  7. #7
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,160

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Why do you never include a "I was unwilling to waste precious minutes of my life trying to wade through senseless babbling" option? This is why I can never vote in your polls.

  8. #8
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Can you explain how parties find authority justified in the first place?
    For example, one could argue that a parents authority over children can be justified in the sense that its necessary for the survival and growth of the kid, (I suppose in that case that is a different tyoe of authority where the consent isn't given, but it can be argued to be necesary), or say the authority of a doctor over a patient, its given.

    My point is the question is a false dictomy.

    My beef with conservatives is not that they are foundationalists, its that they present asserssions as axioms, i.e. they call things foundations which are not, and the call things foundations which cannot be justified as such.

    Hell I would argue that conservatives are more coherentist, except they masquerade these "norms" that people should cohere to ass foundational elements, i.e. an assersion pretending to be an axiom, most of the so called "foundations" are simply the result of power accumulation, tradition and so on.

  9. #9
    Global Moderator
    Bodhidarma approves bigly
    Andalublue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Granada, España
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 01:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    26,111

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    This is a weird and batty stew of straw men arguments and logical fallacies parading around in faux-intellectual verbiage. You make a sweeping and fallacious assertion about all liberals thus:
    They seem to believe that something is justified only if it's surrounded by compatible circumstances
    And then extrapolate that 'observation' to assume they all ascribe to a coherentist view of truth and justice. It's blather and nonsense that really merits no further discussion.
    "The crisis will end when fear changes sides" - Pablo Iglesias Turrión

    "Austerity is used as a cover to reconfigure society and increase inequality and injustice." - Jeremy Corbyn

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    For example, one could argue that a parents authority over children can be justified in the sense that its necessary for the survival and growth of the kid, (I suppose in that case that is a different tyoe of authority where the consent isn't given, but it can be argued to be necesary), or say the authority of a doctor over a patient, its given.
    OK, so you're saying concrete necessity?

    What happens when multiple parties have conflicting concrete necessities, or we're talking about concrete luxuries instead?

    My beef with conservatives is not that they are foundationalists, its that they present asserssions as axioms, i.e. they call things foundations which are not, and the call things foundations which cannot be justified as such.

    Hell I would argue that conservatives are more coherentist, except they masquerade these "norms" that people should cohere to ass foundational elements, i.e. an assersion pretending to be an axiom, most of the so called "foundations" are simply the result of power accumulation, tradition and so on.
    Oh, I agree. Many conservative depend on virtue ethics instead of categorical judgment for defining right and wrong.

    You don't want to call those axioms though. They're maxims.

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •