This misses most of the substance of RC and, I think, is off base in  its
main contention, but nonetheless a thoughtful essay.
BR
 
 
 
 
 
_Centrist  Guy_ (http://centristguy.wordpress.com/) 
…I guess I'd call it Rustbelt Centrism.


 
_Divorcing Oneself from “Radical”  Centrism_ 
(http://centristguy.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/divorcing-oneself-from-radical-centrism/)
 
_April 21, 2013_ 
(http://centristguy.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/divorcing-oneself-from-radical-centrism/)
 

 
I spent about a decade in the thrall of “Radical” Centrism due to the  
promise of objectivity when making political decisions. What finally dislodged  
me from my trance was in realizing that, regarding politics, there’s 
actually at  least two levels of objectivity.  
#1. On the first level, there’s the identification stage. Let’s say you’re 
 given a simple “should we do this?” question that results in a yes-or-no 
answer.  Like a good pragmatist, you consider the subject beforehand, and 
then conceive  of all possible changes that would occur as a result of the 
action. If you  identify the changes, and they’re tangible, then you could make 
a case for  having gained objective knowledge. Yes, you could still get 
into some obnoxious  philosophical argument about the value of something 
particular metaphysical  quality. For the sake of getting things done, though, 
let’
s tentatively accept  that if you have done the legwork and have identified 
that doing action Z to  object A causes B, C, and D, then you have some 
objective knowledge. 
A good number of ideologies attempt to convince voters to stop here,  
expecting that the simple statement of facts make the conclusions obvious. 
“Duh,  
don’t liberals/conservatives know that doing X will lead to Y? We should to 
be  doing Z.” It is in this normative word “should” that we get to: 
#2. The second level involves making an “objective decision” based on that 
 knowledge. Conservatives and liberals argue back and forth about having 
captured  objectivity and accuse the other side of being wrong. David Hume 
stated that you  can’t infer an “ought” from an “is”– essentially, you can’t 
bundle a series of  facts (the ones you’ve collected in #1) and make a 
normative statement based on  that information. “Is” to “ought” is an 
uncrossable bridge. There is nothing  about the statement, “the traffic light 
is red”
 that, in itself, tells you to do  something. Rather, it is your desire to 
be a law abiding citizen that causes you  to stop rather than run the light. 
You see a red light and you weigh “hm, I  could run this and get home two 
minutes earlier” against “I do not want to get  pulled over and get a $50 
ticket”. Dominant ideologies in the United States  depend upon your normative 
connections to facts to push their “objectivity”. But  that’s OK. 
Normatives are required for systemic rationality. 
When you notice this, you realize that ideologies rely on a series of,  
basically, commandments against your conscience and inclinations. “Radical”  
Centrism is much the same in that it appeals to individuals who have some  
inclination towards a common set of principles or vision. 
…or an inclination AGAINST a set of dominant set of principles and visions. 
 This is where things get dangerous. Radical Centrism rallies against the 
false  dilemma (left vs right), but itself gains adherents by creating a 
second false  dilemma (centrism vs left/right). 
But I’ve seen the shadows on the cave wall and, while I’ll continue to  
advocate for the same vision as it aligns with my inclinations, I’ll be more  
open about my normative vision for the country, as openness is a value I  
appreciate. The United States is a pluralistic, democratic country which pits  
interest vs. interest– the benefit of which is that, rather than banging my 
 fists on the table and demanding recognition of my correctness, I can 
instead  concentrate on creating normative bridges that appeal to  others.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to