![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
rotschnjak.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsIf we say about the western model of democracy, I always believe that the most important thing in it there is a luxury to be an opponent. It’s really very important thing. You can provoke other by not easy questions, and they ought to argument, why you are not right: the discussion led us to the truth. The other ideologies (such as communism) restrict this right by own axioms and some institutions of oppositional suppression.
But sometimes, if I try to be an opponent in modern communities (I believe, that it is necessary role) and fulfill the oppositional function, many of my interlocutors become aggressive and try not to prove own rightness, but to outrage the author. And such process I can observe almost everywhere. And I suppose, it is a real problem. Our society becomes more and more tolerant to some physical and mental peculiarities, such as autism or sexual inclinations. But the tolerance in relation to ideas was not so real.
They don’t understand that somebody must be an opponent always. Why it is important – it’s good to show in the film “12 Angry Men” by Sydney Lumet. It plays the role of a brake for a car that allows following the road bent in curves. If something is strongly definitely for you, you are most likely wrong.
I believe strongly in Hegelian dialectic, and the opposition is the serious part of development. Namely the institute of strong opposition allowed West to win the Cold War, and to generate many good ideas. But today this institute is slowly devaluated. This is the especial culture and especial mental possibility. If this culture disappeared among the masses, it disappeared very easy in the world generally.
But sometimes, if I try to be an opponent in modern communities (I believe, that it is necessary role) and fulfill the oppositional function, many of my interlocutors become aggressive and try not to prove own rightness, but to outrage the author. And such process I can observe almost everywhere. And I suppose, it is a real problem. Our society becomes more and more tolerant to some physical and mental peculiarities, such as autism or sexual inclinations. But the tolerance in relation to ideas was not so real.
They don’t understand that somebody must be an opponent always. Why it is important – it’s good to show in the film “12 Angry Men” by Sydney Lumet. It plays the role of a brake for a car that allows following the road bent in curves. If something is strongly definitely for you, you are most likely wrong.
I believe strongly in Hegelian dialectic, and the opposition is the serious part of development. Namely the institute of strong opposition allowed West to win the Cold War, and to generate many good ideas. But today this institute is slowly devaluated. This is the especial culture and especial mental possibility. If this culture disappeared among the masses, it disappeared very easy in the world generally.
(no subject)
Date: 6/10/13 20:03 (UTC)spam outburstprolific creativity on your part?(no subject)
Date: 6/10/13 20:22 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/10/13 20:27 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/10/13 20:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/10/13 02:00 (UTC)One- people are often "attacked" for a few different reasons. Yes it can be to shut them down if the people don't like or are afraid of their idea. That does happen. But it can also be because the person is an easy target due to poorly thought out ideas, or just plain ticking a lot of people off through being rude or insulting. I'm not saying you're one nor the other, just that it can happen for a lot of reasons.
Two. Welcome to the internet. : P Its a nice place if you grow a thick hide and spikes.
(no subject)
Date: 7/10/13 23:47 (UTC)And I'm not sure Hegelian Dialectics (as much as I like using it in the Humanities) really has much to offer the scientific method, unless of course your antithesis has evidence.