I see your point, Cedric. Sometimes you do need to take a stand on issues. That is especially the case where there are no clearly definitive "right" positions. For example, if the courts in the State of California rule that the state has supremacy over the parents in deciding on the education of the children in that state, you have to take a stand if you believe the state is wrong. You can debate it for as long as you like to see how many sides there are to the issue. You can examine it from every aspect of political philosophy. But the fact is you will be spinning your wheels because it will come down to how you feel about the state usurping your right as a parent. In New York State, Hillary Clinton is proposing that the state take over all private day care, even incorporated centers with licensed employees. These issues, in my humble opinion, are actionable items where people will take a stand and defend their position. That does not suggest that one cannot fully inform one's self and have all of the facts. One should and must to the extent possible. But then one needs to take a stand and there is nothing inherently wrong with impatience as long as it is not intolerance. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cedric Chang" To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 9:29 PM Subject: Re: [OT] Education reform: > > >> On Mar 12, 2008, at 1:31 PM, Gerhard Fiedler wrote: >> >> Cedric Chang wrote: >> >>> Difficult or not, I draw a line and act on it. I get annoyed by >>> people >>> who point out how difficult it is to make judgments or make choices. >> >> You may get annoyed for the wrong reasons and by the wrong people. >> Being >> annoyed usually gets very quickly in the way of understanding >> what's going >> on. >> >>> ( I think they use this difficulty to avoid doing anything ) >> >> And you may think wrong -- exactly because you're getting annoyed. >> That's >> not a good state for clear thinking. > > I think you are over-stating my annoyance... It is not like I throw > myself around the room. ; or foam at the mouth. >> >>> And my primary axiom is to preserve the maximum freedom for the >>> maximum >>> number of people. >> >> How will you ever have a chance of getting near that axiom (or >> goal) if you >> get so annoyed by other people that your chance of understanding >> them (and >> what they think is their freedom) seems rather small? Without that >> understanding, you may end up trying to preserve your own, personal >> freedom, rather than the maximum freedom for the maximum number of >> people. >> It takes a lot of patience, understanding and sensibility to do >> anything >> for a larger number of people. > > Not really, you just let them do what they want. I used to be a > control freak ; I have largely moved away from that. It is really > easy when you quit worrying about what other people are doing as long > as they do not infringe on your space or others. That is a lot of > space. > > >> FWIW, and in case you didn't understand this, my post was a reply to >> Russell who stated (his believe?) that "corruption is bad" is a >> "self-evident truth". In order for that to make sense, one has to >> objectively define what is corruption. "Objectively define" means the >> definition may not depend on subjective criteria like intention. >> Good luck >> with that. > Rather than worry about defining something "objectively" versus > "subjectively" , I just take all my life experience and choose > positions and draw lines in the sand and I ignore "self-evident > truth" as a waste of time ; I freely laugh at "experts" and I use my > personal judgement on a global level, not on a case-by-case basis. I > am not one who thinks much of "relativism". >> >> (It's rather easy to use one's own personal judgment on a case-by-case >> basis. No definition necessary; you just judge however you want, do >> whatever you want, and that's it. > > Which is the way it should be > >> But "self-evident truth" sets a somewhat >> higher standard WRT definition of what exactly is true here.) >> >> Gerhard > > > cc > > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > > > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist